I see no point in Jimmy bowling 29 overs of military medium (based on what i've seen on Sky) in the 2nd XI game - imo there is far more to be gained by him coming in full pelt v Aussies. It would prove his fitness and also possibly put doubts into the technique of the likes of Khawaja and Smith prior to the 4th Test . Playing the 2nd team of Derby is only likely to play these guys into some form, which has been sorta shown by the overnight score.
Yes, there's lots to gain from Anderson bowling full throttle against the Aussies this week. For the Aussies.
As it is, they're not being tested at all. They are facing an attack that comprises a 36 year old who took 8 wickets last month and none so far this; and three other bowlers who have 23 wickets between them in their careers.
For purely selfish (ie England supporter) reasons, it's far better for Australia to be facing pie-chuckers prior to a Test match than to be tested properly with the world's third best fast bowler.
I dont get that at all. How can facing Jimmy at full pace and getting their batsmen out help the Aussies ??!! As i said before, its not as if they've never seen him bowl before! You'd prefer them to face pie-chuckers ?? What benefit is that to us?
Let's put it another way for you.
If the football season started next week, would Charlton be better prepared by playing their last psf against Aston Villa or Forest Green Rovers ?
Your logic suggests Charlton having an easy game v FGR is the best preparation.
Even though you are replying to me,I'm assuming this is aimed at Chizz?
No, your good self. You're suggesting the best for England is for Anderson to play the Aussies at Derby and make it hard for them. You're saying it's bad for England, if the Aussies have a really easy warm up game.
I agree with Chizz. Why give the Aussies the opportunity to practice against a top bowler?
Practice against a top bowler? He is more likely to get them out than be tonked. If he is being tonked then you just pull him out of the attack and send him back to Lancs and he doesnt get picked for the Test. It would serve 2 purposes - not just possibly undermining the Aussie batting but also prove to the selectors that he is match fit - after all, you can have a situation where he is passed match fit after bowling medium pace in a second XI game, but gets to the test match and cronks out when he cranks it up to the max. Let me ask you.....do you think its wise for Derby to play pie-chuckers and then Harris,Khawaja and Smith score centuries ? Does that mean they will be lesser players when they get to the 4th Test?......... playing against Test match quality? Of course it doesnt. It was a chance to get over on the Ozzies and it wasnt taken - my only thought is that the selectors believe he either a) inst fit enough or b) they dont want to change the side.
I'll agree to disagree. Like I said before Charlton started their friendlies nice and easy against Welling. But as the season got closer they wanted & needed to be pushed harder, so finished by playing a tough game v Villa. By your logic Charlton should have finished their psf's v Welling so we could maybe score loads of goals.
So, i've answered your questions, how about you answer mine?......
"Let me ask you.....do you think its wise for Derby to play pie-chuckers and then Harris,Khawaja and Smith score centuries ? Does that mean they will be lesser players when they get to the 4th Test?......... playing against Test match quality? Of course it doesnt."
I'll agree to disagree. Like I said before Charlton started their friendlies nice and easy against Welling. But as the season got closer they wanted & needed to be pushed harder, so finished by playing a tough game v Villa. By your logic Charlton should have finished their psf's v Welling so we could maybe score loads of goals.
Totally irrelevant comparison. And i think you've got Chizz and my opinions mixed up.
So, i've answered your questions, how about you answer mine?......
"Let me ask you.....do you think its wise for Derby to play pie-chuckers and then Harris,Khawaja and Smith score centuries ? Does that mean they will be lesser players when they get to the 4th Test?......... playing against Test match quality? Of course it doesnt."
I just did above (edited). As I said I disagree with your opinion. I think the Aussies having an easy warm up game is of less value to them. If you continued your logic to admittedly an exaggerated point, would you say the Aussies would be even better off playing Surrey 2nds or 3rds, so they can score double centuries ?
If you listen to Nasser, he says that form can come back in 1 innings, even 1 shot. Giving these guys easy runs is not a good idea. Batting is all about confidence and rhythm, why give them the chance to get both ? if you have them on the ropes, and you have the logical opportunity to keep the foot on the throat, then why not take it?
So, i've answered your questions, how about you answer mine?......
"Let me ask you.....do you think its wise for Derby to play pie-chuckers and then Harris,Khawaja and Smith score centuries ? Does that mean they will be lesser players when they get to the 4th Test?......... playing against Test match quality? Of course it doesnt."
I just did above (edited). As I said I disagree with your opinion. I think the Aussies having an easy warm up game is of less value to them. If you continued your logic to admittedly an exaggerated point, would you say the Aussies would be even better off playing Surrey 2nds or 3rds, so they can score double centuries ?
You havnt answered the question, all you've done is bring up some sort of odd Charlton friendly analogy. Its a simple question.
If its not important to Australia, then why do you think they have the likes of Harris and Khawaja playing (ie the batters who appear to be out of form)?
So, i've answered your questions, how about you answer mine?......
"Let me ask you.....do you think its wise for Derby to play pie-chuckers and then Harris,Khawaja and Smith score centuries ? Does that mean they will be lesser players when they get to the 4th Test?......... playing against Test match quality? Of course it doesnt."
I just did above (edited). As I said I disagree with your opinion. I think the Aussies having an easy warm up game is of less value to them. If you continued your logic to admittedly an exaggerated point, would you say the Aussies would be even better off playing Surrey 2nds or 3rds, so they can score double centuries ?
You havnt answered the question, all you've done is bring up some sort of odd Charlton friendly analogy. Its a simple question.
Sorry, but I've said I disagree a number of times. I don't see how that is not answering your question, unless you want me to type out the whole question and say I disagree.
You may be right, who knows ? I'm not saying you're wrong. No one knows for sure.
So, i've answered your questions, how about you answer mine?......
"Let me ask you.....do you think its wise for Derby to play pie-chuckers and then Harris,Khawaja and Smith score centuries ? Does that mean they will be lesser players when they get to the 4th Test?......... playing against Test match quality? Of course it doesnt."
This was the question, can easily be answered with a yes or no.
So, i've answered your questions, how about you answer mine?......
"Let me ask you.....do you think its wise for Derby to play pie-chuckers and then Harris,Khawaja and Smith score centuries ? Does that mean they will be lesser players when they get to the 4th Test?......... playing against Test match quality? Of course it doesnt."
This was the question, can easily be answered with a yes or no.
I've told you numerous times. I do not feel Australia will necessarily benefit by playing against pie chuckers. I think they would be better off playing against tougher opposition. Sportsman usually improve their game and raise their game playing at a higher level, not a lower level. This really isn't important to me and as I've said, you may be right, we'll have to see.
Pres mate it's well established thought in cricket that giving the touring side a weak opposition for their warm up matches is a good way to disrupt their preparations.
Infact for the last few years it's been cited as a reason England struggle to adapt to foreign conditions. We continuously play contrived 3 day games against 2nd rate opposition so the batmesn are never tested and bowlers never have to actually work to adapt to the conditions. You're then thrown into a yest match in conditions you havent adapted to and haven't been tested in.
Aus have actually tried to do their prep better this year and have had theirs side in the country throughout the world cup.
I personally wouldn't have a problem with Jimmy playing that game but it does go against the accepted view and I think he would get as much out of the Lancs 2s game. It's all about overs in his legs.
Pres mate it's well established thought in cricket that giving the touring side a weak opposition for their warm up matches is a good way to disrupt their preparations.
Infact for the last few years it's been cited as a reason England struggle to adapt to foreign conditions. We continuously play contrived 3 day games against 2nd rate opposition so the batmesn are never tested and bowlers never have to actually work to adapt to the conditions. You're then thrown into a yest match in conditions you havent adapted to and haven't been tested in.
Aus have actually tried to do their prep better this year and have had theirs side in the country throughout the world cup.
I personally would have a problem with Jimmy playing that game but it does go against the accepted view and I think he would get as much out of the Lancs 2s game. It's all about overs in his legs.
Maybe mate, but i see no point in Jimmy bowling 29 overs of medium pace against 2nd XI when he could be really testing his fitness by bowling full whack against Oz- and possibly getting people out. When England won the Ashes in Oz it was mainly because they had good quality preparation against good teams (tbh, even the second Xi's in Oz are strong) - however, in the same circumstance, Oz would have had no qualms about getting the likes of Johnson or Clark or Hogg or Lillee or Thomson or whoever to play in these games in order to get one over on the Poms. Here we have a situation where you would think that the Ozzies might be at a low ebb, and we also have a chance to prove the fitness of our leading bowler. We've taken the foot off their throat.
Whatever the 'well established thoughts' are - its a no-brainer to me. So, giving Khawaja,Harris,Smith easy centuries is good for England.?_
Pres mate it's well established thought in cricket that giving the touring side a weak opposition for their warm up matches is a good way to disrupt their preparations.
Infact for the last few years it's been cited as a reason England struggle to adapt to foreign conditions. We continuously play contrived 3 day games against 2nd rate opposition so the batmesn are never tested and bowlers never have to actually work to adapt to the conditions. You're then thrown into a yest match in conditions you havent adapted to and haven't been tested in.
Aus have actually tried to do their prep better this year and have had theirs side in the country throughout the world cup.
I personally would have a problem with Jimmy playing that game but it does go against the accepted view and I think he would get as much out of the Lancs 2s game. It's all about overs in his legs.
I thought Australia playing against themselves was a brilliant idea which England should copy on their next Ashes tour. Split the England squad into 2 teams, bulked out with England A players, and have a proper warm up match
Pres mate it's well established thought in cricket that giving the touring side a weak opposition for their warm up matches is a good way to disrupt their preparations.
Infact for the last few years it's been cited as a reason England struggle to adapt to foreign conditions. We continuously play contrived 3 day games against 2nd rate opposition so the batmesn are never tested and bowlers never have to actually work to adapt to the conditions. You're then thrown into a yest match in conditions you havent adapted to and haven't been tested in.
Aus have actually tried to do their prep better this year and have had theirs side in the country throughout the world cup.
I personally would have a problem with Jimmy playing that game but it does go against the accepted view and I think he would get as much out of the Lancs 2s game. It's all about overs in his legs.
I thought Australia playing against themselves was a brilliant idea which England should copy on their next Ashes tour. Split the England squad into 2 teams, bulked out with England A players, and have a proper warm up match
That was one way where Oz undermined England, when they arranged Aus A games v England before the Tests and they normally beat us. Now, Aus A isnt quite Derby second XI .
and in the meantime, those English batsmen that are out of form and whose techniques need polishing and improving will presumably be spending time in the nets .. good, but nothing like as good as spending time in the 'real' middle against even 2nd Xl bowlers
Australia's fringe players have a "proper" 3 day red ball match to practice "Test match" style batting and bowling
By contrast Sam Curran goes back to Surrey between Tests to play T20s...
"So, giving Khawaja,Harris,Smith easy centuries is good for England.?_"
Noone seems able to answer this question.
Yes it might well be. We don't know for sure. Everyone that answered all disagreed with you. I suppose you could carry on asking all night, hoping someone will agree. I'm off to bed.
At some point, someone might ask why anyone would think Anderson's bowling speed would be limited in the match he's playing in, but he would strain himself to get wickets for Derbys.
Stick Archer in for Derby and really undermine them or send them a pie chucker anyone could get runs against . close the nets down so they can’t play themselves back in to form in there against their own pie men
"So, giving Khawaja,Harris,Smith easy centuries is good for England.?_"
Noone seems able to answer this question.
Yes it might well be. We don't know for sure. Everyone that answered all disagreed with you. I suppose you could carry on asking all night, hoping someone will agree. I'm off to bed.
At some point, someone might ask why anyone would think Anderson's bowling speed would be limited in the match he's playing in, but he would strain himself to get wickets for Derbys.
Comments
It would serve 2 purposes - not just possibly undermining the Aussie batting but also prove to the selectors that he is match fit - after all, you can have a situation where he is passed match fit after bowling medium pace in a second XI game, but gets to the test match and cronks out when he cranks it up to the max.
Let me ask you.....do you think its wise for Derby to play pie-chuckers and then Harris,Khawaja and Smith score centuries ? Does that mean they will be lesser players when they get to the 4th Test?......... playing against Test match quality? Of course it doesnt.
It was a chance to get over on the Ozzies and it wasnt taken - my only thought is that the selectors believe he either a) inst fit enough or b) they dont want to change the side.
Like I said before Charlton started their friendlies nice and easy against Welling.
But as the season got closer they wanted & needed to be pushed harder, so finished by playing a tough game v Villa.
By your logic Charlton should have finished their psf's v Welling so we could maybe score loads of goals.
"Let me ask you.....do you think its wise for Derby to play pie-chuckers and then Harris,Khawaja and Smith score centuries ? Does that mean they will be lesser players when they get to the 4th Test?......... playing against Test match quality? Of course it doesnt."
And i think you've got Chizz and my opinions mixed up.
As I said I disagree with your opinion.
I think the Aussies having an easy warm up game is of less value to them.
If you continued your logic to admittedly an exaggerated point, would you say the Aussies would be even better off playing Surrey 2nds or 3rds, so they can score double centuries ?
Batting is all about confidence and rhythm, why give them the chance to get both ? if you have them on the ropes, and you have the logical opportunity to keep the foot on the throat, then why not take it?
I don't see how that is not answering your question, unless you want me to type out the whole question and say I disagree.
You may be right, who knows ?
I'm not saying you're wrong.
No one knows for sure.
I do not feel Australia will necessarily benefit by playing against pie chuckers.
I think they would be better off playing against tougher opposition.
Sportsman usually improve their game and raise their game playing at a higher level, not a lower level.
This really isn't important to me and as I've said, you may be right, we'll have to see.
Infact for the last few years it's been cited as a reason England struggle to adapt to foreign conditions. We continuously play contrived 3 day games against 2nd rate opposition so the batmesn are never tested and bowlers never have to actually work to adapt to the conditions. You're then thrown into a yest match in conditions you havent adapted to and haven't been tested in.
Aus have actually tried to do their prep better this year and have had theirs side in the country throughout the world cup.
I personally wouldn't have a problem with Jimmy playing that game but it does go against the accepted view and I think he would get as much out of the Lancs 2s game. It's all about overs in his legs.
When England won the Ashes in Oz it was mainly because they had good quality preparation against good teams (tbh, even the second Xi's in Oz are strong) - however, in the same circumstance, Oz would have had no qualms about getting the likes of Johnson or Clark or Hogg or Lillee or Thomson or whoever to play in these games in order to get one over on the Poms.
Here we have a situation where you would think that the Ozzies might be at a low ebb, and we also have a chance to prove the fitness of our leading bowler.
We've taken the foot off their throat.
Whatever the 'well established thoughts' are - its a no-brainer to me. So, giving Khawaja,Harris,Smith easy centuries is good for England.?_
By contrast Sam Curran goes back to Surrey between Tests to play T20s...
Noone seems able to answer this question.
Everyone that answered all disagreed with you.
I suppose you could carry on asking all night, hoping someone will agree.
I'm off to bed.
But not me. I'm way past caring!
or send them a pie chucker anyone could get runs against .
close the nets down so they can’t play themselves back in to form in there against their own pie men
He's whisked away by an England bowling coach who destroys his confidence by remodelling his action.
Dont worry - so did i.
Then its obvious , at 0-40 he gets whsiked off back to Lancs.
But at least he *might* have proved his fitness.
BTW, latest score 177-1 Khawaja 70 no
the good news....... Harris only got 60 something.
So am i.
Didnt matter after all