Yeah, Cook, you're rubbish. What do you know about anything?
OK, so you're England's best batsman; you've been scoring centuries against India since 2006; you've scored more Test runs than anyone else that has played since you made your debut; and more centuries than anyone; you've turned this series round so that, what many people were saying would be a losing series, now looks nailed-on as a win; and you have won more Tests as captain than you have lost...
...and you took the decision to field, (at The Oval!) when winning the toss; stuck with Robson (not out), Woakes (3 wickets) and Jordan (3 wickets) when lots of people were saying they should be replaced...
...and your fielding decisions (like having Bell, close in, with a helmet, at fourth slip) have been really clever...
...but - and this is obviously the only important thing - you kept Woakes on to try and tried to let him get a fourth wicket.
So, yeah, you're rubbish, Cook.
yes, you are a rubbish captain !! - just because they've won 2 Tests against a team who have played the worst i've possibly seen from a Test playing nation desnt suddenly make you a good captain!!! Yes, kept Woakes on to try to get another wicket, but failed ! - so, is that good captaincy?
Yes, Cook , you are a very good batsman.But you are a rubbish captain.
Oh, and by the way, it was Root at 4th slip/gully with the helmet on.
England bowled India out for 148 and are 62-0. The weather is set fair. What end-of-play scoreline would have satisfied you?
Thats not the point. The point is that he had them on the ropes at 79-8, and let them get to 140something by making some odd decisions.
When you have your foot on the throat, dont let off.
Try doing that to Oz next year or South Africa next Winter.
Yeah, Cook, you're rubbish. What do you know about anything?
OK, so you're England's best batsman; you've been scoring centuries against India since 2006; you've scored more Test runs than anyone else that has played since you made your debut; and more centuries than anyone; you've turned this series round so that, what many people were saying would be a losing series, now looks nailed-on as a win; and you have won more Tests as captain than you have lost...
...and you took the decision to field, (at The Oval!) when winning the toss; stuck with Robson (not out), Woakes (3 wickets) and Jordan (3 wickets) when lots of people were saying they should be replaced...
...and your fielding decisions (like having Bell, close in, with a helmet, at fourth slip) have been really clever...
...but - and this is obviously the only important thing - you kept Woakes on to try and tried to let him get a fourth wicket.
So, yeah, you're rubbish, Cook.
yes, you are a rubbish captain !! - just because they've won 2 Tests against a team who have played the worst i've possibly seen from a Test playing nation desnt suddenly make you a good captain!!! Yes, kept Woakes on to try to get another wicket, but failed ! - so, is that good captaincy?
Yes, Cook , you are a very good batsman.But you are a rubbish captain.
Oh, and by the way, it was Root at 4th slip/gully with the helmet on.
England bowled India out for 148 and are 62-0. The weather is set fair. What end-of-play scoreline would have satisfied you?
Thats not the point. The point is that he had them on the ropes at 79-8, and let them get to 140something by making some odd decisions.
When you have your foot on the throat, dont let off.
Try doing that to Oz next year or South Africa next Winter.
The close of play score is not the point? Wow!
Not in this instance, no, it isnt. India are such an abysmal side that probably even Kent would beat them at the moment - its a given. However, what is important is the way that Cook reacts to difficult (or maybe even easy) situations and the way he deals with those. In the last 2 tests he hasnt had to make any difficult decisions because India have made them for him by imploding - England could have been captained by Mickey Mouse and they would have still won - however, what i saw today was not very good (in my opinion), and the 60odd that India got for the last 2 wickets would no doubt have been 80 or 100 extra runs if it had been Oz or South Africa - and that could be the difference of winning or losing - and they're the teams we should be aiming for and worrying about.
Yeah, Cook, you're rubbish. What do you know about anything?
OK, so you're England's best batsman; you've been scoring centuries against India since 2006; you've scored more Test runs than anyone else that has played since you made your debut; and more centuries than anyone; you've turned this series round so that, what many people were saying would be a losing series, now looks nailed-on as a win; and you have won more Tests as captain than you have lost...
...and you took the decision to field, (at The Oval!) when winning the toss; stuck with Robson (not out), Woakes (3 wickets) and Jordan (3 wickets) when lots of people were saying they should be replaced...
...and your fielding decisions (like having Bell, close in, with a helmet, at fourth slip) have been really clever...
...but - and this is obviously the only important thing - you kept Woakes on to try and tried to let him get a fourth wicket.
So, yeah, you're rubbish, Cook.
yes, you are a rubbish captain !! - just because they've won 2 Tests against a team who have played the worst i've possibly seen from a Test playing nation desnt suddenly make you a good captain!!! Yes, kept Woakes on to try to get another wicket, but failed ! - so, is that good captaincy?
Yes, Cook , you are a very good batsman.But you are a rubbish captain.
Oh, and by the way, it was Root at 4th slip/gully with the helmet on.
England bowled India out for 148 and are 62-0. The weather is set fair. What end-of-play scoreline would have satisfied you?
Thats not the point. The point is that he had them on the ropes at 79-8, and let them get to 140something by making some odd decisions.
When you have your foot on the throat, dont let off.
Try doing that to Oz next year or South Africa next Winter.
The close of play score is not the point? Wow!
Not in this instance, no, it isnt. India are such an abysmal side that probably even Kent would beat them at the moment - its a given. However, what is important is the way that Cook reacts to difficult (or maybe even easy) situations and the way he deals with those. In the last 2 tests he hasnt had to make any difficult decisions because India have made them for him by imploding - England could have been captained by Mickey Mouse and they would have still won - however, what i saw today was not very good (in my opinion), and the 60odd that India got for the last 2 wickets would no doubt have been 80 or 100 extra runs if it had been Oz or South Africa - and that could be the difference of winning or losing - and they're the teams we should be aiming for and worrying about.
Blimey! I can't find anything that I don't disagree with. Suffice it to say that I hope (and believe) he goes on to be England's greatest ever batsman and most successful ever captain; and that Charlton don't win too many games 8-1 this season!
Unfair to say woakes was erratic, he bowled well. Apart from that you're right it may have ended quicker with broad and Anderson at the tail but who cares? It was and is all but risk free giving jordan especially, some overs and therefore some much needed confidence. Cook is not the best captain we've had, he's also far from the worst and a damn sight better than any other option at the moment. Root is too young, bell had temperament and confidence issues too.
Unfair to say woakes was erratic, he bowled well. Apart from that you're right it may have ended quicker with broad and Anderson at the tail but who cares? It was and is all but risk free giving jordan especially, some overs and therefore some much needed confidence. Cook is not the best captain we've had, he's also far from the worst and a damn sight better than any other option at the moment. Root is too young, bell had temperament and confidence issues too.
Yeah, Cook, you're rubbish. What do you know about anything?
OK, so you're England's best batsman; you've been scoring centuries against India since 2006; you've scored more Test runs than anyone else that has played since you made your debut; and more centuries than anyone; you've turned this series round so that, what many people were saying would be a losing series, now looks nailed-on as a win; and you have won more Tests as captain than you have lost...
...and you took the decision to field, (at The Oval!) when winning the toss; stuck with Robson (not out), Woakes (3 wickets) and Jordan (3 wickets) when lots of people were saying they should be replaced...
...and your fielding decisions (like having Bell, close in, with a helmet, at fourth slip) have been really clever...
...but - and this is obviously the only important thing - you kept Woakes on to try and tried to let him get a fourth wicket.
So, yeah, you're rubbish, Cook.
yes, you are a rubbish captain !! - just because they've won 2 Tests against a team who have played the worst i've possibly seen from a Test playing nation desnt suddenly make you a good captain!!! Yes, kept Woakes on to try to get another wicket, but failed ! - so, is that good captaincy?
Yes, Cook , you are a very good batsman.But you are a rubbish captain.
Oh, and by the way, it was Root at 4th slip/gully with the helmet on.
England bowled India out for 148 and are 62-0. The weather is set fair. What end-of-play scoreline would have satisfied you?
Thats not the point. The point is that he had them on the ropes at 79-8, and let them get to 140something by making some odd decisions.
When you have your foot on the throat, dont let off.
Try doing that to Oz next year or South Africa next Winter.
The close of play score is not the point? Wow!
Not in this instance, no, it isnt. India are such an abysmal side that probably even Kent would beat them at the moment - its a given. However, what is important is the way that Cook reacts to difficult (or maybe even easy) situations and the way he deals with those. In the last 2 tests he hasnt had to make any difficult decisions because India have made them for him by imploding - England could have been captained by Mickey Mouse and they would have still won - however, what i saw today was not very good (in my opinion), and the 60odd that India got for the last 2 wickets would no doubt have been 80 or 100 extra runs if it had been Oz or South Africa - and that could be the difference of winning or losing - and they're the teams we should be aiming for and worrying about.
Blimey! I can't find anything that I don't disagree with. Suffice it to say that I hope (and believe) he goes on to be England's greatest ever batsman and most successful ever captain; and that Charlton don't win too many games 8-1 this season!
Blimey, a double negative AND a negative in th same sentence!, so, i read that as you dont agree with anything(why didnt you just say that, instead of beating around the bush). So, you dont agree that.... 1) India are abysmal 2) Oz and SA are the teams we should be aiming for 3) Cook's decision today at 79-8 was poor and 4) Mickey Mouse could have captained England and we would have still beaten India in last 2 Tests.??
Yeah, Cook, you're rubbish. What do you know about anything?
OK, so you're England's best batsman; you've been scoring centuries against India since 2006; you've scored more Test runs than anyone else that has played since you made your debut; and more centuries than anyone; you've turned this series round so that, what many people were saying would be a losing series, now looks nailed-on as a win; and you have won more Tests as captain than you have lost...
...and you took the decision to field, (at The Oval!) when winning the toss; stuck with Robson (not out), Woakes (3 wickets) and Jordan (3 wickets) when lots of people were saying they should be replaced...
...and your fielding decisions (like having Bell, close in, with a helmet, at fourth slip) have been really clever...
...but - and this is obviously the only important thing - you kept Woakes on to try and tried to let him get a fourth wicket.
So, yeah, you're rubbish, Cook.
yes, you are a rubbish captain !! - just because they've won 2 Tests against a team who have played the worst i've possibly seen from a Test playing nation desnt suddenly make you a good captain!!! Yes, kept Woakes on to try to get another wicket, but failed ! - so, is that good captaincy?
Yes, Cook , you are a very good batsman.But you are a rubbish captain.
Oh, and by the way, it was Root at 4th slip/gully with the helmet on.
England bowled India out for 148 and are 62-0. The weather is set fair. What end-of-play scoreline would have satisfied you?
Thats not the point. The point is that he had them on the ropes at 79-8, and let them get to 140something by making some odd decisions.
When you have your foot on the throat, dont let off.
Try doing that to Oz next year or South Africa next Winter.
The close of play score is not the point? Wow!
Not in this instance, no, it isnt. India are such an abysmal side that probably even Kent would beat them at the moment - its a given. However, what is important is the way that Cook reacts to difficult (or maybe even easy) situations and the way he deals with those. In the last 2 tests he hasnt had to make any difficult decisions because India have made them for him by imploding - England could have been captained by Mickey Mouse and they would have still won - however, what i saw today was not very good (in my opinion), and the 60odd that India got for the last 2 wickets would no doubt have been 80 or 100 extra runs if it had been Oz or South Africa - and that could be the difference of winning or losing - and they're the teams we should be aiming for and worrying about.
Blimey! I can't find anything that I don't disagree with. Suffice it to say that I hope (and believe) he goes on to be England's greatest ever batsman and most successful ever captain; and that Charlton don't win too many games 8-1 this season!
Blimey, a double negative AND a negative in th same sentence!, so, i read that as you dont agree with anything(why didnt you just say that, instead of beating around the bush). So, you dont agree that.... 1) India are abysmal 2) Oz and SA are the teams we should be aiming for 3) Cook's decision today at 79-8 was poor and 4) Mickey Mouse could have captained England and we would have still beaten India in last 2 Tests.??
Oh well, some people.
1. India were made to play abysmally - credit to Cook and his team. 2. Australia and South Africa *are* teams we should be aiming at, but not while we're playing India. 3. Cook's decisions which resulted in India being bowled out for less than 150 (yes, less than 150!) are more important than any one, single decision. 4. Mickey Mouse has too few fingers and therefore would have probably dropped Binny off Anderson with the score at 44/5.
for the future of the English team it was important that the second string bowlers got some good bowling time to gain experience ready to,play the better teams like Oz and SA. Whether we skittle India out for 90 or 150 will make no difference to the outcome of this match. Cook is not the best Captain but he's the best we have so Mr P give him a chance.
Yeah, Cook, you're rubbish. What do you know about anything?
OK, so you're England's best batsman; you've been scoring centuries against India since 2006; you've scored more Test runs than anyone else that has played since you made your debut; and more centuries than anyone; you've turned this series round so that, what many people were saying would be a losing series, now looks nailed-on as a win; and you have won more Tests as captain than you have lost...
...and you took the decision to field, (at The Oval!) when winning the toss; stuck with Robson (not out), Woakes (3 wickets) and Jordan (3 wickets) when lots of people were saying they should be replaced...
...and your fielding decisions (like having Bell, close in, with a helmet, at fourth slip) have been really clever...
...but - and this is obviously the only important thing - you kept Woakes on to try and tried to let him get a fourth wicket.
So, yeah, you're rubbish, Cook.
yes, you are a rubbish captain !! - just because they've won 2 Tests against a team who have played the worst i've possibly seen from a Test playing nation desnt suddenly make you a good captain!!! Yes, kept Woakes on to try to get another wicket, but failed ! - so, is that good captaincy?
Yes, Cook , you are a very good batsman.But you are a rubbish captain.
Oh, and by the way, it was Root at 4th slip/gully with the helmet on.
England bowled India out for 148 and are 62-0. The weather is set fair. What end-of-play scoreline would have satisfied you?
Thats not the point. The point is that he had them on the ropes at 79-8, and let them get to 140something by making some odd decisions.
When you have your foot on the throat, dont let off.
Try doing that to Oz next year or South Africa next Winter.
The close of play score is not the point? Wow!
Not in this instance, no, it isnt. India are such an abysmal side that probably even Kent would beat them at the moment - its a given. However, what is important is the way that Cook reacts to difficult (or maybe even easy) situations and the way he deals with those. In the last 2 tests he hasnt had to make any difficult decisions because India have made them for him by imploding - England could have been captained by Mickey Mouse and they would have still won - however, what i saw today was not very good (in my opinion), and the 60odd that India got for the last 2 wickets would no doubt have been 80 or 100 extra runs if it had been Oz or South Africa - and that could be the difference of winning or losing - and they're the teams we should be aiming for and worrying about.
Blimey! I can't find anything that I don't disagree with. Suffice it to say that I hope (and believe) he goes on to be England's greatest ever batsman and most successful ever captain; and that Charlton don't win too many games 8-1 this season!
Blimey, a double negative AND a negative in th same sentence!, so, i read that as you dont agree with anything(why didnt you just say that, instead of beating around the bush). So, you dont agree that.... 1) India are abysmal 2) Oz and SA are the teams we should be aiming for 3) Cook's decision today at 79-8 was poor and 4) Mickey Mouse could have captained England and we would have still beaten India in last 2 Tests.??
Oh well, some people.
1. India were made to play abysmally - credit to Cook and his team. 2. Australia and South Africa *are* teams we should be aiming at, but not while we're playing India. 3. Cook's decisions which resulted in India being bowled out for less than 150 (yes, less than 150!) are more important than any one, single decision. 4. Mickey Mouse has too few fingers and therefore would have probably dropped Binny off Anderson with the score at 44/5.
Funny isn't it. My opinion is that the president has some sort of impulse to belittle other posters. I might be wrong but I think not. He thinks he's a English teacher but makes so many fundamental grammatical errors in his posts..I think he's an arrogant knob, but there again, I might be wrong (stranger things have happened.)
Yeah, Cook, you're rubbish. What do you know about anything?
OK, so you're England's best batsman; you've been scoring centuries against India since 2006; you've scored more Test runs than anyone else that has played since you made your debut; and more centuries than anyone; you've turned this series round so that, what many people were saying would be a losing series, now looks nailed-on as a win; and you have won more Tests as captain than you have lost...
...and you took the decision to field, (at The Oval!) when winning the toss; stuck with Robson (not out), Woakes (3 wickets) and Jordan (3 wickets) when lots of people were saying they should be replaced...
...and your fielding decisions (like having Bell, close in, with a helmet, at fourth slip) have been really clever...
...but - and this is obviously the only important thing - you kept Woakes on to try and tried to let him get a fourth wicket.
So, yeah, you're rubbish, Cook.
yes, you are a rubbish captain !! - just because they've won 2 Tests against a team who have played the worst i've possibly seen from a Test playing nation desnt suddenly make you a good captain!!! Yes, kept Woakes on to try to get another wicket, but failed ! - so, is that good captaincy?
Yes, Cook , you are a very good batsman.But you are a rubbish captain.
Oh, and by the way, it was Root at 4th slip/gully with the helmet on.
England bowled India out for 148 and are 62-0. The weather is set fair. What end-of-play scoreline would have satisfied you?
Thats not the point. The point is that he had them on the ropes at 79-8, and let them get to 140something by making some odd decisions.
When you have your foot on the throat, dont let off.
Try doing that to Oz next year or South Africa next Winter.
The close of play score is not the point? Wow!
Not in this instance, no, it isnt. India are such an abysmal side that probably even Kent would beat them at the moment - its a given. However, what is important is the way that Cook reacts to difficult (or maybe even easy) situations and the way he deals with those. In the last 2 tests he hasnt had to make any difficult decisions because India have made them for him by imploding - England could have been captained by Mickey Mouse and they would have still won - however, what i saw today was not very good (in my opinion), and the 60odd that India got for the last 2 wickets would no doubt have been 80 or 100 extra runs if it had been Oz or South Africa - and that could be the difference of winning or losing - and they're the teams we should be aiming for and worrying about.
Blimey! I can't find anything that I don't disagree with. Suffice it to say that I hope (and believe) he goes on to be England's greatest ever batsman and most successful ever captain; and that Charlton don't win too many games 8-1 this season!
Blimey, a double negative AND a negative in th same sentence!, so, i read that as you dont agree with anything(why didnt you just say that, instead of beating around the bush). So, you dont agree that.... 1) India are abysmal 2) Oz and SA are the teams we should be aiming for 3) Cook's decision today at 79-8 was poor and 4) Mickey Mouse could have captained England and we would have still beaten India in last 2 Tests.??
Oh well, some people.
Some people indeed. It's nice you can be included in this sentiment. Give the man a break from your genius cricket brain.
Funny isn't it. My opinion is that the president has some sort of impulse to belittle other posters. I might be wrong but I think not. He thinks he's a English teacher but makes so many fundamental grammatical errors in his posts..I think he's an arrogant knob, but there again, I might be wrong (stranger things have happened.)
I know that India are 100-9, but cant help but feel that Cook is letting them off the hook a little by continuing to bowl Woakes and Jordan when he could/should have brought Jimmy and Broady on to clean up the tail - prob given them 25 runs extra so far #letshaveadigatcooktime
India 148 all out - Dhoni c Woakes b BROAD Its so easy Cook, so easy - you've just wasted 50 odd runs by poncing about with Jordan and Woakes.
I see where you are coming from but Jimmy bowled 17 overs and Stuart bowled 15.1 overs which is a reasonable days work. They can't bowl all the time.
Jordan and Woakes picked up 3 apiece too so weren't bowling badly presumably.
I think Cook was damned whichever way he went with his bowling changes. The bigger picture is we've bowled them out for under 150 and Cook had the guts to make the decision to put them in, something test captains don't do more often than not.
Len, you're missing the point. Cook had India by the jugular at 79 for 8 , but then he decides to bowl Jordan and Woakes for about 10 overs nonstop, by which time India had re-grouped and got to circa 130-9 with Dhoni starting to dictate. At that point in time(79-8), Jimmy and Broad had bowled about 13 overs each - now, 13 overs is a small work-load for a Test match bowler (if you think they should bowl 90 overs a day, then you would sortta expect your main bowler to have bowled circa 20+ overs by end of day) Yes, Jordan and Woakes picked up 3 wickets apiece, but they looked so ineffective against Dhoni, and also Jordan picked up a wicket from probably the worst ball of the day! - and their bowling was erratic to say the least. What i'm getting at, is that Cook has no concept of pushing home an advantage - its simply not in his psyche - there are so many instances of this through his period as Captain. So, what happens if we are all out for 140, and then to go on to lose by less than 50 ? Its simply unacceptable at this level to not press home your advantage- because most teams will punish you. overs.
What is it with your criticism of Cook? Did he roger you at public school?
Have you ever played cricket?
I think you will find that Jordan and Woakes both picked up wickets at crucial times earlier in the day, due to good captaincy. Anderson or Broad cannot bowl at that intensity for more than 7 or 8 overs before getting wheezy.
Big Dave, or 1905 as he is known on here was a 'fast' bowler back in the day, he was fecked after 7 or 8 balls.
I never dropped a catch behind the stumps off him either
Simply making a point that i dont think Cook is a very good captain- is that wrong ?
Also strange that i see names on here who dont normally comment on the cricket threads - and generally have no cricket comment in those posts. I think if you read back through my posts fully you might understand my 'tone' - then again, i dont go around calling people a 'knob' but hey-ho, i've been called worse.
Anyway, back to Cook, i think he is poor (as a captain, before Chizz jumps on me) - almost as poor as India have been in the last 3 tests. i'm sure you'll agree that beating Oz is more important than anything else - and my view is that if Cook is in charge next year then we will likely lose the series , with someone else in charge we might have a chance of winning.
for the future of the English team it was important that the second string bowlers got some good bowling time to gain experience ready to,play the better teams like Oz and SA. Whether we skittle India out for 90 or 150 will make no difference to the outcome of this match. Cook is not the best Captain but he's the best we have so Mr P give him a chance.
But, Lancy, 'whether we skittle India out for 90 or 150' COULD have made some difference. If a side is 89-8, then generally you would think its a dodgy wicket and therefore low-scoring game, therefore in the whole scheme of things 60 runs could be huge (prob not as it turns out) - i keep thinking that if it were Oz or SA bowling they would have had India out for less than 100.
for the future of the English team it was important that the second string bowlers got some good bowling time to gain experience ready to,play the better teams like Oz and SA. Whether we skittle India out for 90 or 150 will make no difference to the outcome of this match. Cook is not the best Captain but he's the best we have so Mr P give him a chance.
But, Lancy, 'whether we skittle India out for 90 or 150' COULD have made some difference. If a side is 89-8, then generally you would think its a dodgy wicket and therefore low-scoring game, therefore in the whole scheme of things 60 runs could be huge (prob not as it turns out) - i keep thinking that if it were Oz or SA bowling they would have had India out for less than 100.
Who is it that you want as captain then? I just don't see that there is a viable option. In terms of aggression and experience only broad fits the bill, I'm against bowlers as captains generally though, Morgan isn't a test batsman so doesn't have the experience and is a risk in the order, KP won't play under moores, so who is left?
India may have been poor, but that pitch did too much on the 1st day. You want a bit of assistance on the first morning, but Jimmy was bowling unplayable stuff for the 1st 2 sessions.
Simply making a point that i dont think Cook is a very good captain- is that wrong ?
Also strange that i see names on here who dont normally comment on the cricket threads - and generally have no cricket comment in those posts. I think if you read back through my posts fully you might understand my 'tone' - then again, i dont go around calling people a 'knob' but hey-ho, i've been called worse.
Anyway, back to Cook, i think he is poor (as a captain, before Chizz jumps on me) - almost as poor as India have been in the last 3 tests. i'm sure you'll agree that beating Oz is more important than anything else - and my view is that if Cook is in charge next year then we will likely lose the series , with someone else in charge we might have a chance of winning.
I'm no expert by any means but do enjoy my cricket. Suspect that dismissal may have sealed young Robson's fate for next year. Doesn't look convincing to me. Not sure who the alternative is mind you.
On the Cook debate, my view is that he is a world class batsman who struggles to combine the duties of captain and opener. His class with the bat cannot be doubted - his record is too good for that despite his occasional dips in form. His captaincy seems to me to be a little indecisive and over cautious. Nevertheless, from the available alternatives he is the only one who is all of the following: a) pretty much guaranteed his place, b) credible enough in terms of age and experience, c) fits the EVB mould, d) in the chair already. But as I say. I'm no expert.
I went yesterday. A good day, although quite a muted atmosphere I thought. Maybe it was because not many people around me were watching the game. We were surrounded by people talking a load of really boring old guff all day. If I wanted that, I could have stayed in :-)
Anyway, Cook made the right decision to bowl & England did very well. All the bowlers played their part. Jordan has a very strange run up, when you're side on (just saying).
Cook hasn't be a great captain in the past, but he's learning, he's getting more positive and I'm pleased the luck is on his side for a change. I also admire him more, for the way he's toughed it out, in the face of fierce criticism.
Robson still doesn't look the part for me as an opener and was a bit lucky last night. He's bowled now for 37, although he got more than I expected.
I watched yesterday's highlights this morning (to see the close ups) and was surprised Cook should have been out lbw, twice yesterday. Anyway, pleased he's having some good fortune and if there was DRS ......
Simply making a point that i dont think Cook is a very good captain- is that wrong ?
Also strange that i see names on here who dont normally comment on the cricket threads - and generally have no cricket comment in those posts. I think if you read back through my posts fully you might understand my 'tone' - then again, i dont go around calling people a 'knob' but hey-ho, i've been called worse.
Anyway, back to Cook, i think he is poor (as a captain, before Chizz jumps on me) - almost as poor as India have been in the last 3 tests. i'm sure you'll agree that beating Oz is more important than anything else - and my view is that if Cook is in charge next year then we will likely lose the series , with someone else in charge we might have a chance of winning.
Who?
I dont know Chizz, i dont know - as Lancy says, there arent many out there - my only thoughts in that respect is that the times i've seen Broady as captain for the ODI team he has been quite inventive and aggressive - so, maybe Broady.
I went yesterday. A good day, although quite a muted atmosphere I thought. Maybe it was because not many people around me were watching the game. We were surrounded by people talking a load of really boring old guff all day. If I wanted that, I could have stayed in :-)
Anyway, Cook made the right decision to bowl & England did very well. All the bowlers played their part. Jordan has a very strange run up, when you're side on (just saying).
Cook hasn't be a great captain in the past, but he's learning, he's getting more positive and I'm pleased the luck is on his side for a change. I also admire him more, for the way he's toughed it out, in the face of fierce criticism.
Robson still doesn't look the part for me as an opener and was a bit lucky last night. He's bowled now for 37, although he got more than I expected.
I watched yesterday's highlights this morning (to see the close ups) and was surprised Cook should have been out lbw, twice yesterday. Anyway, pleased he's having some good fortune and if there was DRS ......
84-1.
CE, didnt they have the replays on the screen? Or have India banned those as well?
I'm no expert by any means but do enjoy my cricket. Suspect that dismissal may have sealed young Robson's fate for next year. Doesn't look convincing to me. Not sure who the alternative is mind you.
On the Cook debate, my view is that he is a world class batsman who struggles to combine the duties of captain and opener. His class with the bat cannot be doubted - his record is too good for that despite his occasional dips in form. His captaincy seems to me to be a little indecisive and over cautious. Nevertheless, from the available alternatives he is the only one who is all of the following: a) pretty much guaranteed his place, b) credible enough in terms of age and experience, c) fits the EVB mould, d) in the chair already. But as I say. I'm no expert.
You're prob right SB re Robson, although there have been a few options that have emerged... Carberry or Vince (scored tons of runs, and is only 23, oh , and BTW is captain of Hampshire), Hales has scored loads too, although mainly in one-day, and also potentially bring James Taylor in and move Moeen Ali up to open with Cook.
You are also probably right re Cooks captaincy - good points made.
Eng 179-1 Cook 71 no Ballance 55 Cook dropped for the second time, two relatively easy slip chances - dont worry, i'm not having a go at Cook before anybody jumps on my back.! He's a good batter - honest !!
Lots of empty seats - epecially in the OCS stand - real shame as its a sell-out, and looks like these are corporate.
Comments
Oh well, some people.
2. Australia and South Africa *are* teams we should be aiming at, but not while we're playing India.
3. Cook's decisions which resulted in India being bowled out for less than 150 (yes, less than 150!) are more important than any one, single decision.
4. Mickey Mouse has too few fingers and therefore would have probably dropped Binny off Anderson with the score at 44/5.
It's nice you can be included in this sentiment.
Give the man a break from your genius cricket brain.
#justasking
and that what gets results.
How profound, Bananarama.
Funny isn't it. My opinion is that the president has some sort of impulse to belittle other posters. I might be wrong but I think not. He thinks he's a English teacher but makes so many fundamental grammatical errors in his posts..I think he's an arrogant knob, but there again, I might be wrong (stranger things have happened.)
An English teacher.
Jordan and Woakes picked up 3 apiece too so weren't bowling badly presumably.
I think Cook was damned whichever way he went with his bowling changes. The bigger picture is we've bowled them out for under 150 and Cook had the guts to make the decision to put them in, something test captains don't do more often than not.
Len, you're missing the point. Cook had India by the jugular at 79 for 8 , but then he decides to bowl Jordan and Woakes for about 10 overs nonstop, by which time India had re-grouped and got to circa 130-9 with Dhoni starting to dictate.
At that point in time(79-8), Jimmy and Broad had bowled about 13 overs each - now, 13 overs is a small work-load for a Test match bowler (if you think they should bowl 90 overs a day, then you would sortta expect your main bowler to have bowled circa 20+ overs by end of day)
Yes, Jordan and Woakes picked up 3 wickets apiece, but they looked so ineffective against Dhoni, and also Jordan picked up a wicket from probably the worst ball of the day! - and their bowling was erratic to say the least.
What i'm getting at, is that Cook has no concept of pushing home an advantage - its simply not in his psyche - there are so many instances of this through his period as Captain.
So, what happens if we are all out for 140, and then to go on to lose by less than 50 ?
Its simply unacceptable at this level to not press home your advantage- because most teams will punish you.
overs.
What is it with your criticism of Cook? Did he roger you at public school?
Have you ever played cricket?
I think you will find that Jordan and Woakes both picked up wickets at crucial times earlier in the day, due to good captaincy. Anderson or Broad cannot bowl at that intensity for more than 7 or 8 overs before getting wheezy.
Big Dave, or 1905 as he is known on here was a 'fast' bowler back in the day, he was fecked after 7 or 8 balls.
I never dropped a catch behind the stumps off him either
'If so, one is not a terribly good one.'
Simply making a point that i dont think Cook is a very good captain- is that wrong ?
Also strange that i see names on here who dont normally comment on the cricket threads - and generally have no cricket comment in those posts.
I think if you read back through my posts fully you might understand my 'tone' - then again, i dont go around calling people a 'knob' but hey-ho, i've been called worse.
Anyway, back to Cook, i think he is poor (as a captain, before Chizz jumps on me) - almost as poor as India have been in the last 3 tests. i'm sure you'll agree that beating Oz is more important than anything else - and my view is that if Cook is in charge next year then we will likely lose the series , with someone else in charge we might have a chance of winning.
On the Cook debate, my view is that he is a world class batsman who struggles to combine the duties of captain and opener. His class with the bat cannot be doubted - his record is too good for that despite his occasional dips in form. His captaincy seems to me to be a little indecisive and over cautious. Nevertheless, from the available alternatives he is the only one who is all of the following: a) pretty much guaranteed his place, b) credible enough in terms of age and experience, c) fits the EVB mould, d) in the chair already. But as I say. I'm no expert.
If I wanted that, I could have stayed in :-)
Anyway, Cook made the right decision to bowl & England did very well. All the bowlers played their part.
Jordan has a very strange run up, when you're side on (just saying).
Cook hasn't be a great captain in the past, but he's learning, he's getting more positive and I'm pleased the luck is on his side for a change. I also admire him more, for the way he's toughed it out, in the face of fierce criticism.
Robson still doesn't look the part for me as an opener and was a bit lucky last night.
He's bowled now for 37, although he got more than I expected.
I watched yesterday's highlights this morning (to see the close ups) and was surprised Cook should have been out lbw, twice yesterday. Anyway, pleased he's having some good fortune and if there was DRS ......
84-1.
Carberry or Vince (scored tons of runs, and is only 23, oh , and BTW is captain of Hampshire), Hales has scored loads too, although mainly in one-day, and also potentially bring James Taylor in and move Moeen Ali up to open with Cook.
You are also probably right re Cooks captaincy - good points made.
Cook dropped for the second time, two relatively easy slip chances - dont worry, i'm not having a go at Cook before anybody jumps on my back.! He's a good batter - honest !!
Lots of empty seats - epecially in the OCS stand - real shame as its a sell-out, and looks like these are corporate.