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.
Quite inventive, quite aggressive, quite bad. Broad's has a losing record as captain of England; Cook has a winning record. I think we can ignore any claims Broad might have on the role. And therefore, conclusively, Cook is, by a good margin, the very best possible choice of England captain. Long may that continue.
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.
Where are all the new found cricket experts? Cant all be at The Valley.
Mouthy aren't you mate. Keyboard warrior.
Thanks for the cricketing insight Rob.
Eng 240-5 Leading by 92.
I live in California so really out of touch with cricket as there is zero coverage here. I follow the cricket threads as I like to keep on top of how England are doing but I don't comment as I wouldn't have anything meaningful to say about the players as I just can't keep up with that knowledge. I hope you're ok with that.
I appreciate your passion for cricket but I think some of your responses came over as arrogant and condescending. That was what I was referencing.
Anyway, enough from me as this is a cricket thread.
Off to the Oval tomorrow, hopefully the weather will behave, and I get to see Root make another ton. I also hope India at least make a fight of it with the bat...
Off to the Oval tomorrow, hopefully the weather will behave, and I get to see Root make another ton. I also hope India at least make a fight of it with the bat...
Not much chance of that, India have thrown the towel in big time.
Where are all the new found cricket experts? Cant all be at The Valley.
Mouthy aren't you mate. Keyboard warrior.
Thanks for the cricketing insight Rob.
Eng 240-5 Leading by 92.
I live in California so really out of touch with cricket as there is zero coverage here. I follow the cricket threads as I like to keep on top of how England are doing but I don't comment as I wouldn't have anything meaningful to say about the players as I just can't keep up with that knowledge. I hope you're ok with that.
I appreciate your passion for cricket but I think some of your responses came over as arrogant and condescending. That was what I was referencing.
Anyway, enough from me as this is a cricket thread.
No probs Rob , comments noted. My intenation is not meant to be arrogant or condescending - maybe my 'passion' ,as you say, takes over sometimes !
India 9-2 at lunch and its raining. For a while Broady was on for quickest ever Test fifty when 35 off 15 balls (quickest is 24 balls) - but fell a ittle later.
A good comment fron Cricinfo (otherwise known as CricIndia)... Kush: "This is a 'complete' India team. Can't bat, bowl, field or run." (after Gambhir ran himself out!)
All too easy. Not that it matters, but neither Broad or Anderson should have been given out. Broad gloved it, with his hand nowhere near the bat and Anderson was given lbw, when the ball was going down the leg side.
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.
Quite inventive, quite aggressive, quite bad. Broad's has a losing record as captain of England; Cook has a winning record. I think we can ignore any claims Broad might have on the role. And therefore, conclusively, Cook is, by a good margin, the very best possible choice of England captain. Long may that continue.
Not so Chizz, not so i'm afraid. England have always placed importance on Test matches, and for the past decade have been pretty good at it - however, up to the Ageas Bowl match this series, we had gone 10 Test matches without a win under Cook (5 losses and 1 draw v OZ, 1 draw and 1 loss v Sri Lanka and 1 loss and 1 draw v India). England have always regarded ODI's as second (maybe even 3rd after 20/20) in terms of priority and importance.
Looking on Cricinfo Statsguru since 1st Jan 2013 the stats for England are as follows....
Tests Played 21 W 6 L 7 D 8 ODI Played 35 W 16 L 18 D 1
So, if you take the assumption Cook was in charge of all the Test matches and Broad all the ODIs (dont know if that's true or not), then Cook and Broad have similar records in terms of their win/loss ratio , however, Broad has a MUCH better record in terms of percentage wins - circa 45 per cent v 28 per cent. And yes, i am a cricket 'nut' ! Best Sport on the planet .
Where are all the new found cricket experts? Cant all be at The Valley.
Mouthy aren't you mate. Keyboard warrior.
Thanks for the cricketing insight Rob.
Eng 240-5 Leading by 92.
I live in California so really out of touch with cricket as there is zero coverage here. I follow the cricket threads as I like to keep on top of how England are doing but I don't comment as I wouldn't have anything meaningful to say about the players as I just can't keep up with that knowledge. I hope you're ok with that.
I appreciate your passion for cricket but I think some of your responses came over as arrogant and condescending. That was what I was referencing.
Anyway, enough from me as this is a cricket thread.
And Rob, in view of your comments, England have found 2 real superstars this season in Gary Ballance and Jos Buttler - 2 players who will play for England for many a year and will be HUGE internationally, and also play in all 3 formats along with this the emergance of Joe Root, and the future looks good - just need to find a quick or two and (maybe) a Test class spinner, although Moeen Ali certainly has stepped up to the late this year.
All too easy. Not that it matters, but neither Broad or Anderson should have been given out. Broad gloved it, with his hand nowhere near the bat and Anderson was given lbw, when the ball was going down the leg side.
BTW CE, i got an email from Surrey yesterday coz the Oval ballot for next year is about to open !
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.
Quite inventive, quite aggressive, quite bad. Broad's has a losing record as captain of England; Cook has a winning record. I think we can ignore any claims Broad might have on the role. And therefore, conclusively, Cook is, by a good margin, the very best possible choice of England captain. Long may that continue.
Not so Chizz, not so i'm afraid. England have always placed importance on Test matches, and for the past decade have been pretty good at it - however, up to the Ageas Bowl match this series, we had gone 10 Test matches without a win under Cook (5 losses and 1 draw v OZ, 1 draw and 1 loss v Sri Lanka and 1 loss and 1 draw v India). England have always regarded ODI's as second (maybe even 3rd after 20/20) in terms of priority and importance.
Looking on Cricinfo Statsguru since 1st Jan 2013 the stats for England are as follows....
Tests Played 21 W 6 L 7 D 8 ODI Played 35 W 16 L 18 D 1
So, if you take the assumption Cook was in charge of all the Test matches and Broad all the ODIs (dont know if that's true or not), then Cook and Broad have similar records in terms of their win/loss ratio , however, Broad has a MUCH better record in terms of percentage wins - circa 45 per cent v 28 per cent. And yes, i am a cricket 'nut' ! Best Sport on the planet .
The_President, I'm afraid you're playing with stats, to suit your arguement. Of course a ODI will have a greater % of wins or losses, you don't get many draws ! If you want to argue on ODI v Test basis, then Cook has lost 7 out of 21 = 33%. Broad has lost 18 out of 35 = more than 50 %. You're trying to compare apples with pears there !
Anyway, the debate is over. Cook is about to win his 3rd consecutive test !
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.
Quite inventive, quite aggressive, quite bad. Broad's has a losing record as captain of England; Cook has a winning record. I think we can ignore any claims Broad might have on the role. And therefore, conclusively, Cook is, by a good margin, the very best possible choice of England captain. Long may that continue.
Not so Chizz, not so i'm afraid. England have always placed importance on Test matches, and for the past decade have been pretty good at it - however, up to the Ageas Bowl match this series, we had gone 10 Test matches without a win under Cook (5 losses and 1 draw v OZ, 1 draw and 1 loss v Sri Lanka and 1 loss and 1 draw v India). England have always regarded ODI's as second (maybe even 3rd after 20/20) in terms of priority and importance.
Looking on Cricinfo Statsguru since 1st Jan 2013 the stats for England are as follows....
Tests Played 21 W 6 L 7 D 8 ODI Played 35 W 16 L 18 D 1
So, if you take the assumption Cook was in charge of all the Test matches and Broad all the ODIs (dont know if that's true or not), then Cook and Broad have similar records in terms of their win/loss ratio , however, Broad has a MUCH better record in terms of percentage wins - circa 45 per cent v 28 per cent. And yes, i am a cricket 'nut' ! Best Sport on the planet .
The_President, I'm afraid you're playing with stats, to suit your arguement. Of course a ODI will have a greater % of wins or losses, you don't get many draws ! If you want to argue on ODI v Test basis, then Cook has lost 7 out of 21 = 33%. Broad has lost 18 out of 35 = more than 50 %. You're trying to comapre apples with pears there !
Anyway, the debate is over. Cook is about to win his 3rd consecutive test !
Granted, as in ODi's you could also be playing the likes of Holland, Ireland etc. (not that that makes much difference with England recently !) However, to counter your argument, that also means that more games are to be lost (in addition to winning) in ODI's instead of drawn which will skew the Lost Column- and your percentage analysis is based on the Lost Column ! If you balance the 2 out, there probably isnt much difference. I was simply trying to show that Chizz's comment of Cook being a winning captain and Broad a losing Captain based upon results was false, which it is.
In the first innings the writing was on the wall so he delayed bringing back his two main bowlers. If the opposition hadn't been so abject and mentally devoid of fight, it could have been an error. However India are beyond poor at the moment.
By bowling Woakes and mostly Jordan he has given them a chance to feel they belong more and be a larger of the victory.
Comments
Eng 240-5 Leading by 92.
I appreciate your passion for cricket but I think some of your responses came over as arrogant and condescending. That was what I was referencing.
Anyway, enough from me as this is a cricket thread.
I reckon we will roll them for 150 again.
My intenation is not meant to be arrogant or condescending - maybe my 'passion' ,as you say, takes over sometimes !
For a while Broady was on for quickest ever Test fifty when 35 off 15 balls (quickest is 24 balls) - but fell a ittle later.
A good comment fron Cricinfo (otherwise known as CricIndia)...
Kush: "This is a 'complete' India team. Can't bat, bowl, field or run."
(after Gambhir ran himself out!)
Broad gloved it, with his hand nowhere near the bat and Anderson was given lbw, when the ball was going down the leg side.
England have always placed importance on Test matches, and for the past decade have been pretty good at it - however, up to the Ageas Bowl match this series, we had gone 10 Test matches without a win under Cook (5 losses and 1 draw v OZ, 1 draw and 1 loss v Sri Lanka and 1 loss and 1 draw v India).
England have always regarded ODI's as second (maybe even 3rd after 20/20) in terms of priority and importance.
Looking on Cricinfo Statsguru since 1st Jan 2013 the stats for England are as follows....
Tests Played 21 W 6 L 7 D 8
ODI Played 35 W 16 L 18 D 1
So, if you take the assumption Cook was in charge of all the Test matches and Broad all the ODIs (dont know if that's true or not), then Cook and Broad have similar records in terms of their win/loss ratio , however, Broad has a MUCH better record in terms of percentage wins - circa 45 per cent v 28 per cent.
And yes, i am a cricket 'nut' ! Best Sport on the planet .
Of course a ODI will have a greater % of wins or losses, you don't get many draws !
If you want to argue on ODI v Test basis, then Cook has lost 7 out of 21 = 33%.
Broad has lost 18 out of 35 = more than 50 %.
You're trying to compare apples with pears there !
Anyway, the debate is over. Cook is about to win his 3rd consecutive test !
However, to counter your argument, that also means that more games are to be lost (in addition to winning) in ODI's instead of drawn which will skew the Lost Column- and your percentage analysis is based on the Lost Column ! If you balance the 2 out, there probably isnt much difference.
I was simply trying to show that Chizz's comment of Cook being a winning captain and Broad a losing Captain based upon results was false, which it is.
England win by Innings and 200odd,
Men against boys.
By bowling Woakes and mostly Jordan he has given them a chance to feel they belong more and be a larger of the victory.