• 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

Parkside said:
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.
Click to expand...
Yeah we all have said that, in the previous posts mate.

We all confused why Root does not play his natural game as that suits him better and he needs to go back to it all agree.

No problem critical in this game of course as long as the acceptance is the approach has been a undoubted success and we should not be even considering dropping Root as that would be ludicrous and completely the wrong message
 

Mackem Attack said:
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.
Click to expand...
That’s a absolute fair point and agree, but would be absolutely ludicrous and completely the wrong message to drop Root or a chunk of players because of it like you suggested
 
SAFC11 said:
Plans worked retired hurt :cool:
Click to expand...
Well with Jaiswal and Ashwin gone, I reckon if another 3-4 Indian players have to leave the pitch, we have an outside chance of saving the game.

That, or unexpected torrential rain for the next couple of days and the draw’s in the bag 👍
 
At least we're exciting to watch while getting trounced in India nowadays.

Root was probably the one player who didn't have to alter his game for Bazball. He used to score at a decent lick anyway playing classic orthodox shots with little effort and minimum risk.
 
Poor first innings by us out supposed big players with blade in hand have been awful Root & Bairstow have offered nothing wasted a great knock by Duckett.
 
So many soft dismissals Root, Duckett, Stokes & Foakes wickers where gift wrapped down a bowler reminds of the test at Lords after the Aussies lost Lyon and we threw the test away in an afternoon.

I don’t think I can remember Root looking so out of touch can’t buy a run.
 
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

Two events with no correlation whatsoever. We don't rotate because we are winning, we aren't winning because we don't rotate.
Click to expand...

Disagree entirely - if one single reverse sweep had top edged he would have been deemed irresponsible.
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...

Playing the long game. Bairstow and Pope were out to defensive shots and Stokes looked all at sea trying to defend Kuldeep. He could have been out anytime. There seems to be this thought when one approach fails another one would automatically succeed. Particularly when we have seen with our own eyes how poor our batsmen are playing conventional test match cricket
 
rentaghost said:
Disagree entirely - if one single reverse sweep had top edged he would have been deemed irresponsible.

Playing the long game. Bairstow and Pope were out to defensive shots and Stokes looked all at sea trying to defend Kuldeep. He could have been out anytime. There seems to be this thought when one approach fails another one would automatically succeed. Particularly when we have seen with our own eyes how poor our batsmen are playing conventional test match cricket
Click to expand...
No he wouldn’t as it’s a shot with a proportionate risk reward. Unless you have no perception of the game at all, you’d know this. Any shot can go wrong, it’s about keeping the odds in your favour. If stokes plays that shot without a man in the deep fine, but he doesn’t. If root plays his when set without 2 slips in play against a part time bowler, fine, but he doesn’t.
 
rentaghost said:
Disagree entirely - if one single reverse sweep had top edged he would have been deemed irresponsible.

Playing the long game. Bairstow and Pope were out to defensive shots and Stokes looked all at sea trying to defend Kuldeep. He could have been out anytime. There seems to be this thought when one approach fails another one would automatically succeed. Particularly when we have seen with our own eyes how poor our batsmen are playing conventional test match cricket
Click to expand...
I do think which you do reading between the lines is that people ok when it working but jump all over it when it not.

It’s no where near as black and white as some posters make out ‘ just bad the day’

If it only it was that easy!!

Like you say who says a more less attacking and less risky approach would have worked?

It certainly hasn’t it the past, think some posters not grasping that concept

Although some posters are right mind, on occasions this team has gone to far with the approach.

But I will continually bang the drum taking everything into account it’s one undoubtedly the best way for England to approach it in general and results have proven that
 
Last edited:
Mackem Attack said:
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...
It was an awful day but I do hate the modern short term in some of this “worst ever” language. I doubt it even comes remotely close if you try and analyse it objectively.

Worst under McCullum? probably. Worst ever, nonsense. Worst in the last two years? Probably not even that. The third day of Root’s last test, when we let the West Indies last two wickets add 120 before subsiding to 8 down on our way to only matching that 120 for our entire second innings and losing by ten wickets surely beats it given the opposition. And that was less than two years ago.

And even as someone who likes his test cricket to be measured in its aggression, and to leave the unfettered hit and giggle to the pyjamas, that day was painful. Fewer than 200 runs by both sides and an England run rate of 1.6. This team is NOT worse than that.
 
Mackem Attack said:
No he wouldn’t as it’s a shot with a proportionate risk reward. Unless you have no perception of the game at all, you’d know this. Any shot can go wrong, it’s about keeping the odds in your favour. If stokes plays that shot without a man in the deep fine, but he doesn’t. If root plays his when set without 2 slips in play against a part time bowler, fine, but he doesn’t.
Click to expand...
Going down the 'I know best and you know fuck all route' in a game that has more shades of grey than any other doesn't do you any favours. For the record I have played and captained cricket team at a good level since I was 14 year old and appreciate the views of many on here who have a superb insight some who have played at a high level and others who have not.

Roots shot was reckless and made no sense whatsoever. I was watching that game today and I saw Kuldeep bowling superbly against Duckett who doesn't have a defensive technique to speak of and couldnt get his sweep going as the bounce seemed more uneven than yesterday and Stokes who does but was being beaten both sides of the bat. They looked like they could be out any time - runs had dried up Stokes was beaten playing defensively between bat and pad it just went over the top. These players didn't think they were playing reckless shots, they thought that they needed to put pressure back on the bowler as they were likely to get out. They would have seen it as the calculated gamble you speak of and would have felt the odds were in their favour to execute those shots correctly. They didn't and yes they deserve criticising for getting the balance wrong but you in particular are going way overboard on an approach that has seem us play some magnificent cricket but by its very nature will get it badly wrong on occasions.
 
rentaghost said:
Going down the 'I know best and you know fuck all route' in a game that has more shades of grey than any other doesn't do you any favours. For the record I have played and captained cricket team at a good level since I was 14 year old and appreciate the views of many on here who have a superb insight some who have played at a high level and others who have not.

Roots shot was reckless and made no sense whatsoever. I was watching that game today and I saw Kuldeep bowling superbly against Duckett who doesn't have a defensive technique to speak of and couldnt get his sweep going as the bounce seemed more uneven than yesterday and Stokes who does but was being beaten both sides of the bat. They looked like they could be out any time - runs had dried up Stokes was beaten playing defensively between bat and pad it just went over the top. These players didn't think they were playing reckless shots, they thought that they needed to put pressure back on the bowler as they were likely to get out. They would have seen it as the calculated gamble you speak of and would have felt the odds were in their favour to execute those shots correctly. They didn't and yes they deserve criticising for getting the balance wrong but you in particular are going way overboard on an approach that has seem us play some magnificent cricket but by its very nature will get it badly wrong on occasions.
Click to expand...
Taking on the fielder only an over orso after lunch isn't reckless now. I am amazed.

Good on you for playing cricket, how many tours of India have you done? If none, then I'm not sure of the relevance.

Not sure why you have such a problem with other people having a differing opinion to yourself - I've stated mine yet you cannot accept it as such. Very odd behaviour that you probably need to improve on in life. Enjoy your weekend.
 
Mackem Attack said:
Taking on the fielder only an over orso after lunch isn't reckless now. I am amazed.

Good on you for playing cricket, how many tours of India have you done? If none, then I'm not sure of the relevance.

Not sure why you have such a problem with other people having a differing opinion to yourself - I've stated mine yet you cannot accept it as such. Very odd behaviour that you probably need to improve on in life. Enjoy your weekend.
Click to expand...
In fairness it was you who went down the 'you know fuck all' route and me acknowledging the fantastic breadth of knowledge on this board.

A self awareness coaching course might also improve your life chances

Enjoy your weekend also!
 
rentaghost said:
In fairness it was you who went down the 'you know fuck all' route and me acknowledging the fantastic breadth of knowledge on this board.

A self awareness coaching course might also improve your life chances

Enjoy your weekend also!
Click to expand...
Merely stated a fact that I'm sure a cricketing expert such as yourself wouldn't dispute around risk-reward ratios
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top