Riviera said: that we should generally bat first, I pointed this out weeks ago but was lampooned. Scoreboard pressure works wonders. However no international captain would have batted first yesterday in those conditions.
Really don't understand this modern day attitude of always chasing. In the seventies, Kent won about 8 trophies with the policy of batting first, runs on the board then strangle the oppo by taking wickets and building the run rate up and up. If you bat first and lose wickets you have to time to rebuild but when your chasing at 6 and 7 an over and lose wickets it becomes more difficult to keep up and desperation sets in.
I wasn't aware of the conditions yesterday at the toss, just thought he has only done it again,but with Australia then 120 for no wicket, then we certainly 't make the most it. Yes i understand that on occasions with pitch conditions and the weather to field first is the best option but when batting conditions are good why give away the big advantage of winning the toss straight back to the opponents giving them the upper hand. To be successful and actually win a tournament you have to be a little adaptable and play each game on its merits rather than being this one trick pony
Riviera said: that we should generally bat first, I pointed this out weeks ago but was lampooned. Scoreboard pressure works wonders. However no international captain would have batted first yesterday in those conditions.
Really don't understand this modern day attitude of always chasing. In the seventies, Kent won about 8 trophies with the policy of batting first, runs on the board then strangle the oppo by taking wickets and building the run rate up and up. If you bat first and lose wickets you have to time to rebuild but when your chasing at 6 and 7 an over and lose wickets it becomes more difficult to keep up and desperation sets in.
I wasn't aware of the conditions yesterday at the toss, just thought he has only done it again,but with Australia then 120 for no wicket, then we certainly 't make the most it. Yes i understand that on occasions with pitch conditions and the weather to field first is the best option but when batting conditions are good why give away the big advantage of winning the toss straight back to the opponents giving them the upper hand. To be successful and actually win a tournament you have to be a little adaptable and play each game on its merits rather than being this one trick pony
To be fair, it was pretty murky on Tuesday morning, classic "insert the opposition weather". If we had bowled better (and had a little bit of luck) Australia would have made fewer runs and the decision to bowl would have looked ok.
I'm afraid this England team is making the same mistake as many have before. Since Duncan Fletcher and through Flower, Moores and now Baylis the management teams are to big, everything is over analysed to the nth degree. They come up with plans, pigeonhole players and everything becomes too rigid and inflexible. So "A" and "B" must always open the batting, C and T must always bowl at the death and G and W can play ODI but not Tests. Jeremy Coney spoke very well on TMS between the innings today, he said the players should work out what to do based on their own cricket skills, knowledge and experience and not rely on a load of charts presented by a fella with a clipboard and a white coat. Cricket is cricket whether played in the street, beach or Test ground and every game should be played as an individual match with players using their individual skills to the best of their abilities.
Interesting point @Riviera I read a similar discussion about driverless cars, and if you drive less, due to automation, and only are made to make a decision in a split second when it's all gone wrong ... Disaster.
Remember Ashton agar? Nearly got a ton and won a test. There was so much about using video to devise a plan. As if Stuart broad and Jimmy Anderson werent capable of figuring it out... Are they so stuck to a game plan?
the witless gutless careless nature of the defeat is bad enough - it is compounded by everybody in the setup sticking to the 'we've got one plan, one skill set, when that comes off nobody can get near us' mantra, the utter stupidity of that apparent to anybody except them of course balls to it, I'll stick to the WWC, until FIFA's dog & pony VAR bunfight completely ruins that as well, at least the England Women's football team is almost entirely made up of English players, rather than the retinue of foreign mercenaries riding the ECB's tawdry gravy train
the witless gutless careless nature of the defeat is bad enough - it is compounded by everybody in the setup sticking to the 'we've got one plan, one skill set, when that comes off nobody can get near us' mantra, the utter stupidity of that apparent to anybody except them of course balls to it, I'll stick to the WWC, until FIFA's dog & pony VAR bunfight completely ruins that as well, at least the England Women's football team is almost entirely made up of English players, rather than the retinue of foreign mercenaries riding the ECB's tawdry gravy train
India has produced top class batsmen and spinners for years. Now that they are producing top class pace bowlers, the Indian team is now VERY formidable
If I were forced to choose, I'd back India to beat Australia in the final. When the competition started I thought it would be an England v India final & too close to call. There are still about 6 countries that could win the cup including England.
If I were forced to choose, I'd back India to beat Australia in the final. When the competition started I thought it would be an England v India final & too close to call. There are still about 6 countries that could win the cup including England.
Have a sneaky feeling that we could get a repeat of the 92 world cup where Pakistan after looking dead and buried early on the group stage came from nowhere to finish 4th in the group and ended up winning it.
If I were forced to choose, I'd back India to beat Australia in the final. When the competition started I thought it would be an England v India final & too close to call. There are still about 6 countries that could win the cup including England.
Have a sneaky feeling that we could get a repeat of the 92 world cup where Pakistan after looking dead and buried early on the group stage came from nowhere to finish 4th in the group and ended up winning it.
England will beat india Sunday and progress to the final
If I were forced to choose, I'd back India to beat Australia in the final. When the competition started I thought it would be an England v India final & too close to call. There are still about 6 countries that could win the cup including England.
Have a sneaky feeling that we could get a repeat of the 92 world cup where Pakistan after looking dead and buried early on the group stage came from nowhere to finish 4th in the group and ended up winning it.
I can't see any similarities between 1992 and 2019 as far as Pakistan are concerned. For example, in 1992, Pakistan lost their first game, won their second and had their third rained off. They then lost their next two and won the following two. Whereas this year, they've... *checks results* ... *double checks* ...
Sorry, I am off to the bookies to put money on a double of Pakistan to win the world cup and Sarfaraz Ahmed to be elected as Prime Minister of Pakistan.
Bairstow really now doing himself any favours with his nonsense bleating about how the media want England to fail
"We're still in the World Cup and we're playing a great brand of cricket."
Delusional
I agree but I also heard Michael Vaughan carrying on the argument this morning . We're in the middle of a world cup & we should all be getting behind the team.
Vaughan should understand that better than anyone!
Bairstow really now doing himself any favours with his nonsense bleating about how the media want England to fail
"We're still in the World Cup and we're playing a great brand of cricket."
Delusional
I agree but I also heard Michael Vaughan carrying on the argument this morning . We're in the middle of a world cup & we should all be getting behind the team.
Vaughan should understand that better than anyone!
England: Thrashed by New Zealand and South Africa. Beaten by Sri Lanka and Australia. One wicket, penultimate-ball win in a dead rubber against West Indies. Wins against the might of Bangladesh, Canada, Kenya and Ireland.
Michael Vaughan's triumphant 2007 World Cup doesn't stand up to very close scrutiny.
Bairstow really now doing himself any favours with his nonsense bleating about how the media want England to fail
"We're still in the World Cup and we're playing a great brand of cricket."
Delusional
I agree but I also heard Michael Vaughan carrying on the argument this morning . We're in the middle of a world cup & we should all be getting behind the team.
Vaughan should understand that better than anyone!
England: Thrashed by New Zealand and South Africa. Beaten by Sri Lanka and Australia. One wicket, penultimate-ball win in a dead rubber against West Indies. Wins against the might of Bangladesh, Canada, Kenya and Ireland.
Michael Vaughan's triumphant 2007 World Cup doesn't stand up to very close scrutiny.
To be fair to Vaughn he does admit to that and has mentioned it a number of times during his recent rants.
Bairstow really now doing himself any favours with his nonsense bleating about how the media want England to fail
"We're still in the World Cup and we're playing a great brand of cricket."
Delusional
I agree but I also heard Michael Vaughan carrying on the argument this morning . We're in the middle of a world cup & we should all be getting behind the team.
Vaughan should understand that better than anyone!
England: Thrashed by New Zealand and South Africa. Beaten by Sri Lanka and Australia. One wicket, penultimate-ball win in a dead rubber against West Indies. Wins against the might of Bangladesh, Canada, Kenya and Ireland.
Michael Vaughan's triumphant 2007 World Cup doesn't stand up to very close scrutiny.
To be fair to Vaughn he does admit to that and has mentioned it a number of times during his recent rants.
And in 2007 nobody expected us to do well, especially after we were hammered 5-0 in the Ashes in the winter!
Comments
I wasn't aware of the conditions yesterday at the toss, just thought he has only done it again,but with Australia then 120 for no wicket, then we certainly 't make the most it. Yes i understand that on occasions with pitch conditions and the weather to field first is the best option but when batting conditions are good why give away the big advantage of winning the toss straight back to the opponents giving them the upper hand. To be successful and actually win a tournament you have to be a little adaptable and play each game on its merits rather than being this one trick pony
Remember Ashton agar? Nearly got a ton and won a test. There was so much about using video to devise a plan. As if Stuart broad and Jimmy Anderson werent capable of figuring it out... Are they so stuck to a game plan?
balls to it, I'll stick to the WWC, until FIFA's dog & pony VAR bunfight completely ruins that as well, at least the England Women's football team is almost entirely made up of English players, rather than the retinue of foreign mercenaries riding the ECB's tawdry gravy train
Have a good day
When the competition started I thought it would be an England v India final & too close to call.
There are still about 6 countries that could win the cup including England.
Good luck England on Sunday...
Bairstow really now doing himself any favours with his nonsense bleating about how the media want England to fail
"We're still in the World Cup and we're playing a great brand of cricket."
Delusional
Sorry, I am off to the bookies to put money on a double of Pakistan to win the world cup and Sarfaraz Ahmed to be elected as Prime Minister of Pakistan.
Vaughan should understand that better than anyone!
Michael Vaughan's triumphant 2007 World Cup doesn't stand up to very close scrutiny.
I think we need to win both games.