• The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state and are still being worked on. Normal posting/reading should now be possible.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

India v England 3rd Test Rajkot


This morning reminds me of the time during the summer when Lyon went off, not to return, and England monumentally failed to capitalise
 
When it goes wrong like this, it sadly, looks absolutely shambolic.
I dunno what Root was thinking, he needs run, he scores quick enough without daft shots like that, Bairstow?...Time to go I think
 
Dreadful don't even look like creating a chance. So unthreatening we have already swapped to short ball tactic on a slow pitch with low bounce, and our injury prone fast bowler having to flog himself in 30 degree heat with a day's rest
 
Trying to cling onto the fact that last time we fucked up this badly at Lords, we responded really well in the next few tests.
 
Mackem Attack said:
I think you think you’re a great philosopher who’s decided that mindset is greater than anything. End of the day, it’s a sport and you need your best 11 players on the pitch. On form, Root is probably our worst player of the 11, and rightly so he’ll be questioned until he improves
Click to expand...
Well one thing is absolutely certain and even you can’t dispute is the change of mindset of this team since McCullum and Stokes took over has been a massive success and vast improvement on the bad old days when we got stuffed dropping players left right and centre
 
rentaghost said:
What I will say is that it’s not quite as simple as you make out. Root apart we have batsmen selected who aren’t great technicians defensively. We have tried a lot of those who have been abject failures. Bazball sometimes becomes horribly unstuck when teams can manage to dry up the runs. After Roots indefensible brain fart Bumrah and particularly Kuldeep were bowling very well, runs were drying up, there was spin and variable bounce and they looked to me that they were going to get out to him. Duckett was trying to do what he does and get bat to ball to relieve pressure and was out. Bairstow was out LBW and suddenly we are 5 down. It was poor but shot selection and game awareness is an easy thing to say when attacking players get out. They would argue that playing there natural game and playing attacking shots to relieve pressure when bowlers are bowling well is good game awareness. It only isn’t when they get out 😉
Click to expand...
Couldn't disagree more. They are more than capable of batting responsibly and have shown in the past. Duckett managed it perfectly fine yesterday for instance
Fleagle said:
It’s really hard to argue the first innings at Lord’s didn’t produce a lesson learned. England came back from that low to make a bloody good fight of that game and win two of the next three to draw a series they would probably have won but for rain. And they didn’t do it by doubling down but by moderating a tad.

Hopefully we see more of that after this morning.

Also what both Lords and today had in common is an opponent seriously on the ropes. It’s always a debate in any sport as to whether you go all out for the kill then and risk taking a sucker punch or jab away and wear your opponent into submission. I think this team would always do the former.
Click to expand...
Was this lesson learned? The very next time a similar situation presents itself, they do almost exactly the same thing again. I would argue they didn't learn a bloody thing, hence this being one of the worst days of test cricket we've ever produced
Voice of fair play said:
Well one thing is absolutely certain and even you can’t dispute is the change of mindset of this team since McCullum and Stokes took over has been a massive success and vast improvement on the bad old days when we got stuffed dropping players left right and centre
Click to expand...
Two events with no correlation whatsoever. We don't rotate because we are winning, we aren't winning because we don't rotate.
 
Last edited:
Mackem Attack said:
Couldn't disagree more. They are more than capable of batting responsibly and have shown in the past. Duckett managed it perfectly fine yesterday for instance

Was this lesson learned? The very next time a similar situation presents itself, they do almost exactly the same thing again. I would argue they didn't learn a bloody thing, hence this being one of the worst days of test cricket we've ever produced
Click to expand...
I actually think your point of having more game awareness is a very good one, and most if not all would agree especially in this particular game.

Its the lack of balance in your argument that I fully disagree with, Lords and here are two examples of it backfiring.

What about the countless examples of it been a success first test in Pakistan winning 3 0 there, the brilliant final innings chases in previous summers against India and New Zealand.

If you think we going with this approach to get the correct balance everytime between attack and defence guess we all want that but you naive very naive to expect that

It’s clearly a risky way to approach test cricket but it’s a risky way that in the main has proved very successful that’s not in dispute.

You can’t as a management team give a message to go out and attack and then drop them to teach them a lesson when they do what you asked them to do what kind of a message would that be!
 
Last edited:
Voice of fair play said:
Well one thing is absolutely certain and even you can’t dispute is the change of mindset of this team since McCullum and Stokes took over has been a massive success and vast improvement on the bad old days when we got stuffed dropping players left right and centre
Click to expand...
The positive attitude is to be applauded but you should still take account of the state of the game and individuals strengths and weaknesses and adapt accordingly. There was no need to play risk cricket yesterday,it was time to consolidate on a flat pitch. Nor should Root, who was a world class batsman, be made to feel he's got to score at more than a run a ball. He'd get runs at a good rate playing what was his normal rate. Bazball and the new regime shouldn't be beyond criticism.
 
Voice of fair play said:
I actually think your point of having more game awareness is a very good one, and most if not all would agree especially in this particular game.

Its the lack of balance in your argument that I fully disagree with, Lords and here are two examples of it backfiring.

What about the countless examples of it been a success first test in Pakistan winning 3 0 there, the brilliant final innings chases in previous summers against India and New Zealand.

If you think we going with this approach to get the correct balance everytime between attack and defence guess we all want that but you naive very naive to expect that

It’s clearly a risky way to approach test cricket but it’s a risky way that in the main has proved very successful that’s not in dispute.

You can’t as a management team give a message to go out and attack and then drop them to teach them a lesson when they do what you asked them to do what kind of a message would that be!
Click to expand...
There are only two examples of the other team being down a bowler. Lords and here. Both needed us to play the long game and wait for their depleted attack to tire, and capitalise when India would have been forced to bowl part timers (of which they don’t really have any, so would have been batters). Same as against Australia, Starc and Cummins could only bowl a finite number of overs and they’ll have tired and started bowling smith and whatever other trash they had. Then you take advantage then.

The other examples are completely different. Against a full bowling attack it’s a different game and yes you have to go hard against some bowlers at some point. But that wasn’t the situation at lords and isn’t the situation today.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top