Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
ICC Cricket World Cup 2019
Comments
-
Interesting! Even with the First Test less than three weeks away?Gravesend_Addick said:
I'd rather risk a 70% fit Bairstow than either of Moeen or Vince to be honestChizz said:Will England be unchanged for the Final?
The only doubt seems to be Bairstow. His obvious replacement is Moeen Ali, who can tee-off with licence and could take the game away from NZ - especially in tandem with Roy - in ten overs. Otherwise, the team picks itself. Doesn't it?0 -
Yes. It's a world cup finalChizz said:
Interesting! Even with the First Test less than three weeks away?Gravesend_Addick said:
I'd rather risk a 70% fit Bairstow than either of Moeen or Vince to be honestChizz said:Will England be unchanged for the Final?
The only doubt seems to be Bairstow. His obvious replacement is Moeen Ali, who can tee-off with licence and could take the game away from NZ - especially in tandem with Roy - in ten overs. Otherwise, the team picks itself. Doesn't it?9 -
There may be an issue if England have TWO players who can't field properly (Bairstow and Roy). We wouldn't be able to sub either with an existing conditionGravesend_Addick said:
I'd rather risk a 70% fit Bairstow than either of Moeen or Vince to be honestChizz said:Will England be unchanged for the Final?
The only doubt seems to be Bairstow. His obvious replacement is Moeen Ali, who can tee-off with licence and could take the game away from NZ - especially in tandem with Roy - in ten overs. Otherwise, the team picks itself. Doesn't it?1 -
Picking Vince ahead of Ali would be ludicrous imo1
-
I would have the extra bowling option of Ali with him batting at 7 and ask Buttler to do what he has done time and time again opening in T20s round the world. I would also promote Woakes to 6 because the lad can bat (his first class average is more than 35) but, unlike Ali, he can also adapt to the circumstances he finds himself in.4
-
So Roy gets fined 30% of his match fee for his outburst.
Fine, thems the rules.
Umpire who made the mistake? Ah go on then, take your place in the final.
Nah, that’s wrong.
Still, Bumble replied to my tweet just now so I’m too happy to care about it.
Come on England
3 -
Vince cannot play. At least with Ali the style doesn't change even if the quality isn't the same. Would definitely go Curran or Ali over Vince.1
-
You'd replace Bairstow with Curran?cafcfan1990 said:Vince cannot play. At least with Ali the style doesn't change even if the quality isn't the same. Would definitely go Curran or Ali over Vince.0 -
#hellosailorKBslittlesis said:So Roy gets fined 30% of his match fee for his outburst.
Fine, thems the rules.
Umpire who made the mistake? Ah go on then, take your place in the final.
Nah, that’s wrong.
Still, Bumble replied to my tweet just now so I’m too happy to care about it.
Come on England0 -
If the criteria for someone not earning a place in the final is making a mistake, perhaps both Bairstow and Roy should both miss the final for their appalling review of Bairstow's dismissal?KBslittlesis said:So Roy gets fined 30% of his match fee for his outburst.
Fine, thems the rules.
Umpire who made the mistake? Ah go on then, take your place in the final.
Nah, that’s wrong.
Still, Bumble replied to my tweet just now so I’m too happy to care about it.
Come on England
In real time it is exceptionally difficult to judge whether a player gloved the ball at 85mph-90mph. It's not quite so hard to decide whether there is enough evidence to review a ball that has hit a batsman half way up and in front of all three stumps is worth reviewing. And had Bairstow and Roy not made that mistake Roy wouldn't have had to have had his outburst.0 - Sponsored links:
-
Let's hope Erasmus remembers he owes us one!!KBslittlesis said:So Roy gets fined 30% of his match fee for his outburst.
Fine, thems the rules.
Umpire who made the mistake? Ah go on then, take your place in the final.
Nah, that’s wrong.
Still, Bumble replied to my tweet just now so I’m too happy to care about it.
Come on England0 -
Weegie Addick said:
Let's hope Erasmus remembers he owes us one!!KBslittlesis said:So Roy gets fined 30% of his match fee for his outburst.
Fine, thems the rules.
Umpire who made the mistake? Ah go on then, take your place in the final.
Nah, that’s wrong.
Still, Bumble replied to my tweet just now so I’m too happy to care about it.
Come on England
Erasmus was not the umpire who gave Roy out1 -
Curran for Bairstow is a natural replacement. Never know when you're going to need the sixth seamer2
-
Stalker alert! ;-)Chizz said:
#hellosailorKBslittlesis said:So Roy gets fined 30% of his match fee for his outburst.
Fine, thems the rules.
Umpire who made the mistake? Ah go on then, take your place in the final.
Nah, that’s wrong.
Still, Bumble replied to my tweet just now so I’m too happy to care about it.
Come on England3 -
But making those kind of decisions is his job.Addick Addict said:
If the criteria for someone not earning a place in the final is making a mistake, perhaps both Bairstow and Roy should both miss the final for their appalling review of Bairstow's dismissal?KBslittlesis said:So Roy gets fined 30% of his match fee for his outburst.
Fine, thems the rules.
Umpire who made the mistake? Ah go on then, take your place in the final.
Nah, that’s wrong.
Still, Bumble replied to my tweet just now so I’m too happy to care about it.
Come on England
In real time it is exceptionally difficult to judge whether a player gloved the ball at 85mph-90mph. It's not quite so hard to decide whether there is enough evidence to review a ball that has hit a batsman half way up and in front of all three stumps is worth reviewing. And had Bairstow and Roy not made that mistake Roy wouldn't have had to have had his outburst.
It’s the point of him being there.
Whereas the players review is optional. A bad decision I grant you. But optional none the less.
0 -
*Deep breath*
Sometimes it's good to see ourselves as others see us. So, with that in mind, I thought it would be interesting to see how the Melbourne Age were reflecting on Australia's semi-final defeat.
In short, it's a good thing that Australia lost, because they can concentrate on the Ashes; Jason Roy should be banned from appearing in the World Cup Final, but Bancroft, Smith and Warner were hard done by with their bans for cheating; their red ball players should be very confident ahead of the Ashes, thanks to their performances in the World Cup; there are too many white-ball players in the England Test team; but Australia will win the Ashes because - wait for it - they lost the World Cup and the women have almost won the Ashes.
And, a quick reminder: it's the English that whinge, apparently.
https://www.theage.com.au/sport/cricket/ashes-lessons-to-be-learned-from-australia-s-meek-world-cup-exit-20190712-p526lz.html
6 -
When we lost Roy earlier in the tournament we looked vulnerable. Bairstow and Row are key players and New Zealand have theirs too. We know if they don't get Bairstow and Roy out quickly, we probably win. Personally I think it would be 50/50, but is maybe 60/40 in England's favour, due to home advantage. The toss may change all that though in an instant.1
-
Hi Black...decided to have a butchers about the threads (as am at work) and note its the same people being the same pedantic fools and argue with everyone on almost every thread. Is there not a subject invented they are not experts on.blackpool72 said:
Let's leave it there shall we and look forward to what should be a good final.Chizz said:
Nor I yoursCovered End said:
I don't wish to get drawn into your trolling.Chizz said:
Thanks for that. I did say "good try" when he gave a good, but wrong, answer to the question I asked of @blackpool72Covered End said:
The bad news is Riviera correctly answered your question and not unexpectedly you didn't have the good grace to say well done.Chizz said:
The prize goes to @JohnnyJoeyDeeDee - Mike Denness was, of course, neither Australian nor English. And the point was to illustrate to @blackpool72 how vanishingly rare it is for a captain to withdraw an appeal after the fact. The Port of Spain debacle was one example and MS Dhoni withdrawing his appeal for a run out against Ian Bell at Trent Bridge in 2011. The latter incident was one in which former England captains Nasser Hussain and Michael Vaughan both agreed that they would also have appealed. In both these examples, the umpire's correct decision was overturned during a break in play.JohnnyJoeyDeeDee said:
Mike Denness England captain was Scottish I think that's the pointStu_of_Kunming said:
He's going to suggest you didn't see it, bloke loves using semantics to win an argument rather than accepting he's wrong.Riviera said:
I have, time and again. Stop playing games and tell me how my answer is wrong.Chizz said:
Read the question againRiviera said:
But I'm not wrong. You need to explain if you think I am. I answered your question correctly. I can do no more.Chizz said:
Read it again. I have full confidence you'll be able to work out why you were wrong.Riviera said:
Well I'm afraid I do as the answer to your question is 100% correct.Chizz said:
Good try. But I am sure you don't need me to explain why your answer is wrong.Riviera said:
Mike Denness, Port of Spain, 1974.Chizz said:
Nope. When did you last see an Australian or English captain withdraw an appeal after a player has been given out? Say, in the last 100 years.blackpool72 said:Roy could clearly be seen saying to Finch what are you doing.
Finch could have retracted his appeal as he new Roy didn't touch the ball.
Finch is as guilty as anyone if you ask me.
Next question.
Have you been hit on the head again tonight?
There are probably other examples of umpires' decisions being overturned, but I can't think of any (can anyone else?). But I think there are probably many more cases where a player, knowing a decision is wrong, has decided not to advise the umpire to change his mind (Broad clipping a ball into and out of the wicketkeeper's hands, watching the slip catch it and resting on his bat as the umpire called "not out"; Atherton's "when in Rome, dear boy"; almost every Australian batsman pre-Adam Gilchrist).
So, I would absolve Arron Finch of any blame in yesterday's incident. He wouldn't have had a better view than the umpire, so there is no way he should carry any responsibility to see an umpire's verdict being overturned in those circumstances.
The good news is that we won. And the icing is that Roy probably has even more motivation to make a hundred in the next game, by which time, all of this will have been (almost) forgotten.
I don't know why you think it makes you look good, because I'm confident that the vast majority of readers think the opposite.
It's not meant to "make me look good"! I was merely contradicting a point Blackpool made. I don't think any blame should be put on Arron Finch for not withdrawing his appeal, in part, because it's so very rare to do that. Do you agree with me that blaming Finch for what was, in effect, a mistake made by the umpire and exacerbated by the England batsmen was not the right thing to do? Or do you think Finch was culpable?
Lets hope Sunday isn't after the Lord Mayors show.
3 -
I concur.Gravesend_Addick said:
I'd rather risk a 70% fit Bairstow than either of Moeen or Vince to be honestChizz said:Will England be unchanged for the Final?
The only doubt seems to be Bairstow. His obvious replacement is Moeen Ali, who can tee-off with licence and could take the game away from NZ - especially in tandem with Roy - in ten overs. Otherwise, the team picks itself. Doesn't it?1 -
It's a big risk though, isn't it? If he plays and breaks down, would we automatically be able to field a substitute fielder?golfaddick said:
I concur.Gravesend_Addick said:
I'd rather risk a 70% fit Bairstow than either of Moeen or Vince to be honestChizz said:Will England be unchanged for the Final?
The only doubt seems to be Bairstow. His obvious replacement is Moeen Ali, who can tee-off with licence and could take the game away from NZ - especially in tandem with Roy - in ten overs. Otherwise, the team picks itself. Doesn't it?0 - Sponsored links:
-
Do we know how fit he is? I am assuming he s fit enough to play. I'm not seeing and injury doubt headlines on BBC site! If he isn't, we need an explosive player added - not necessarily to open, but in the line up. An in form Moeen would be a shoe in, but he is not in form at all.0
-
I think Bairstow will be fit enough to play. But I'd be happier if he avoided the football warm ups today and tomorrowMuttleyCAFC said:Do we know how fit he is? I am assuming he s fit enough to play. I'm not seeing and injury doubt headlines on BBC site! If he isn't, we need an explosive player added - not necessarily to open, but in the line up. An in form Moeen would be a shoe in, but he is not in form at all.0 -
My take on Smith and Warner ?Chizz said:*Deep breath*
Sometimes it's good to see ourselves as others see us. So, with that in mind, I thought it would be interesting to see how the Melbourne Age were reflecting on Australia's semi-final defeat.
In short, it's a good thing that Australia lost, because they can concentrate on the Ashes; Jason Roy should be banned from appearing in the World Cup Final, but Bancroft, Smith and Warner were hard done by with their bans for cheating; their red ball players should be very confident ahead of the Ashes, thanks to their performances in the World Cup; there are too many white-ball players in the England Test team; but Australia will win the Ashes because - wait for it - they lost the World Cup and the women have almost won the Ashes.
And, a quick reminder: it's the English that whinge, apparently.
https://www.theage.com.au/sport/cricket/ashes-lessons-to-be-learned-from-australia-s-meek-world-cup-exit-20190712-p526lz.html
They are pantomime villians who happen to be world Class Cricketers.
How times change, Rodney Marsh and Dennis Lillee have a bet on England to win a test match when Botham and Dilley are at the wicket trying to save an innings defeat.
135-7 still 92 shy of making the Aussies bat again. £10 at 500/1 ! This was the third test at Leeds in 1981.
So the bull and smudger get a year's suspension and Lillee and Marsh got a fine.
The only way we could get Smith out was from a freak run out, the ball was heading for his bails and then in a quirk of fate he open his legs and smashed his stumps instead.
Nature's justice I would say.
Now on to the Kiwi's.
2 -
Smith led a charmed life in his innings. He almost chopped one onto his stumps, being saved by the ball hitting his back leg rather that his off stump.soapboxsam said:
My take on Smith and Warner ?Chizz said:*Deep breath*
Sometimes it's good to see ourselves as others see us. So, with that in mind, I thought it would be interesting to see how the Melbourne Age were reflecting on Australia's semi-final defeat.
In short, it's a good thing that Australia lost, because they can concentrate on the Ashes; Jason Roy should be banned from appearing in the World Cup Final, but Bancroft, Smith and Warner were hard done by with their bans for cheating; their red ball players should be very confident ahead of the Ashes, thanks to their performances in the World Cup; there are too many white-ball players in the England Test team; but Australia will win the Ashes because - wait for it - they lost the World Cup and the women have almost won the Ashes.
And, a quick reminder: it's the English that whinge, apparently.
https://www.theage.com.au/sport/cricket/ashes-lessons-to-be-learned-from-australia-s-meek-world-cup-exit-20190712-p526lz.html
They are pantomime villians who happen to be world Class Cricketers.
How times change, Rodney Marsh and Dennis Lillee have a bet on England to win a test match when Botham and Dilley are at the wicket trying to save an innings defeat.
135-7 still 92 shy of making the Aussies bat again. £10 at 500/1 ! This was the third test at Leeds in 1981.
So the bull and smudger get a year's suspension and Lillee and Marsh got a fine.
The only way we could get Smith out was from a freak run out, the ball was heading for his bails and then in a quirk of fate he open his legs and smashed his stumps instead.
Nature's justice I would say.
Now on to the Kiwi's.
As for Bairstow. He pulled up after slipping turning for a 2nd run. Physio came out and massaged his thigh for 5 mins. He batted on after that with seemingly no real ill-affect. Nothing to do with his previous ankle injury & I expect him to be fit & playing tomorrow2 -
Good news.
He is not going to miss playing in a final because of a niggle.
I didn't see the game, but someone on Cricindia was mentioning about Smith's LBW being like an Indian LBW - but he was out Run Out - can anyone shed some light on this? Was there an LBW where we didn't have any reviews or something?
0 -
Smith's timing all during the innings was erratic. The point being it took a run out to get him out.golfaddick said:
Smith led a charmed life in his innings. He almost chopped one onto his stumps, being saved by the ball hitting his back leg rather that his off stump.soapboxsam said:
My take on Smith and Warner ?Chizz said:*Deep breath*
Sometimes it's good to see ourselves as others see us. So, with that in mind, I thought it would be interesting to see how the Melbourne Age were reflecting on Australia's semi-final defeat.
In short, it's a good thing that Australia lost, because they can concentrate on the Ashes; Jason Roy should be banned from appearing in the World Cup Final, but Bancroft, Smith and Warner were hard done by with their bans for cheating; their red ball players should be very confident ahead of the Ashes, thanks to their performances in the World Cup; there are too many white-ball players in the England Test team; but Australia will win the Ashes because - wait for it - they lost the World Cup and the women have almost won the Ashes.
And, a quick reminder: it's the English that whinge, apparently.
https://www.theage.com.au/sport/cricket/ashes-lessons-to-be-learned-from-australia-s-meek-world-cup-exit-20190712-p526lz.html
They are pantomime villians who happen to be world Class Cricketers.
How times change, Rodney Marsh and Dennis Lillee have a bet on England to win a test match when Botham and Dilley are at the wicket trying to save an innings defeat.
135-7 still 92 shy of making the Aussies bat again. £10 at 500/1 ! This was the third test at Leeds in 1981.
So the bull and smudger get a year's suspension and Lillee and Marsh got a fine.
The only way we could get Smith out was from a freak run out, the ball was heading for his bails and then in a quirk of fate he open his legs and smashed his stumps instead.
Nature's justice I would say.
Now on to the Kiwi's.
As for Bairstow. He pulled up after slipping turning for a 2nd run. Physio came out and massaged his thigh for 5 mins. He batted on after that with seemingly no real ill-affect. Nothing to do with his previous ankle injury & I expect him to be fit & playing tomorrow
Roy and Bairstow are so important, that if they are both back in the pavillion before 10 overs have gone the whole psyche of England is affected.
Quick singles should be forgotten if both fit to play.0 -
But then you can't build an innings on just easy singles and boundaries. Especially when Root comes in, who's more of an accumulator than a sloggersoapboxsam said:
Smith's timing all during the innings was erratic. The point being it took a run out to get him out.golfaddick said:
Smith led a charmed life in his innings. He almost chopped one onto his stumps, being saved by the ball hitting his back leg rather that his off stump.soapboxsam said:
My take on Smith and Warner ?Chizz said:*Deep breath*
Sometimes it's good to see ourselves as others see us. So, with that in mind, I thought it would be interesting to see how the Melbourne Age were reflecting on Australia's semi-final defeat.
In short, it's a good thing that Australia lost, because they can concentrate on the Ashes; Jason Roy should be banned from appearing in the World Cup Final, but Bancroft, Smith and Warner were hard done by with their bans for cheating; their red ball players should be very confident ahead of the Ashes, thanks to their performances in the World Cup; there are too many white-ball players in the England Test team; but Australia will win the Ashes because - wait for it - they lost the World Cup and the women have almost won the Ashes.
And, a quick reminder: it's the English that whinge, apparently.
https://www.theage.com.au/sport/cricket/ashes-lessons-to-be-learned-from-australia-s-meek-world-cup-exit-20190712-p526lz.html
They are pantomime villians who happen to be world Class Cricketers.
How times change, Rodney Marsh and Dennis Lillee have a bet on England to win a test match when Botham and Dilley are at the wicket trying to save an innings defeat.
135-7 still 92 shy of making the Aussies bat again. £10 at 500/1 ! This was the third test at Leeds in 1981.
So the bull and smudger get a year's suspension and Lillee and Marsh got a fine.
The only way we could get Smith out was from a freak run out, the ball was heading for his bails and then in a quirk of fate he open his legs and smashed his stumps instead.
Nature's justice I would say.
Now on to the Kiwi's.
As for Bairstow. He pulled up after slipping turning for a 2nd run. Physio came out and massaged his thigh for 5 mins. He batted on after that with seemingly no real ill-affect. Nothing to do with his previous ankle injury & I expect him to be fit & playing tomorrow
Roy and Bairstow are so important, that if they are both back in the pavillion before 10 overs have gone the whole psyche of England is affected.
Quick singles should be forgotten if both fit to play.0 -
It's amazing how much cricket has moved forward in just a few years. Root is (rightly) perceived as an accumulator, rather than someone who goes out and smashes the ball all over the place, like, say, Kevin Pietersen.killerandflash said:
But then you can't build an innings on just easy singles and boundaries. Especially when Root comes in, who's more of an accumulator than a sloggersoapboxsam said:
Smith's timing all during the innings was erratic. The point being it took a run out to get him out.golfaddick said:
Smith led a charmed life in his innings. He almost chopped one onto his stumps, being saved by the ball hitting his back leg rather that his off stump.soapboxsam said:
My take on Smith and Warner ?Chizz said:*Deep breath*
Sometimes it's good to see ourselves as others see us. So, with that in mind, I thought it would be interesting to see how the Melbourne Age were reflecting on Australia's semi-final defeat.
In short, it's a good thing that Australia lost, because they can concentrate on the Ashes; Jason Roy should be banned from appearing in the World Cup Final, but Bancroft, Smith and Warner were hard done by with their bans for cheating; their red ball players should be very confident ahead of the Ashes, thanks to their performances in the World Cup; there are too many white-ball players in the England Test team; but Australia will win the Ashes because - wait for it - they lost the World Cup and the women have almost won the Ashes.
And, a quick reminder: it's the English that whinge, apparently.
https://www.theage.com.au/sport/cricket/ashes-lessons-to-be-learned-from-australia-s-meek-world-cup-exit-20190712-p526lz.html
They are pantomime villians who happen to be world Class Cricketers.
How times change, Rodney Marsh and Dennis Lillee have a bet on England to win a test match when Botham and Dilley are at the wicket trying to save an innings defeat.
135-7 still 92 shy of making the Aussies bat again. £10 at 500/1 ! This was the third test at Leeds in 1981.
So the bull and smudger get a year's suspension and Lillee and Marsh got a fine.
The only way we could get Smith out was from a freak run out, the ball was heading for his bails and then in a quirk of fate he open his legs and smashed his stumps instead.
Nature's justice I would say.
Now on to the Kiwi's.
As for Bairstow. He pulled up after slipping turning for a 2nd run. Physio came out and massaged his thigh for 5 mins. He batted on after that with seemingly no real ill-affect. Nothing to do with his previous ankle injury & I expect him to be fit & playing tomorrow
Roy and Bairstow are so important, that if they are both back in the pavillion before 10 overs have gone the whole psyche of England is affected.
Quick singles should be forgotten if both fit to play.
But, when you compare their records, Root has more runs, more not outs, more fifties, more hundreds and, by a long way, more wins than Pietersen. But, most importantly, scores his runs at a better strike rate than Pietersen.
Our current "plodder" is a faster scorer than our former star hitter.2 -
Bairstow has stopped participating in the football warm-ups since the Sri Lanka tour where he got injured.0
-
Root is someone who gets lots of quick singles and twos. It's the lack of dot balls which is the key to his brisk scoring rateChizz said:
It's amazing how much cricket has moved forward in just a few years. Root is (rightly) perceived as an accumulator, rather than someone who goes out and smashes the ball all over the place, like, say, Kevin Pietersen.killerandflash said:
But then you can't build an innings on just easy singles and boundaries. Especially when Root comes in, who's more of an accumulator than a sloggersoapboxsam said:
Smith's timing all during the innings was erratic. The point being it took a run out to get him out.golfaddick said:
Smith led a charmed life in his innings. He almost chopped one onto his stumps, being saved by the ball hitting his back leg rather that his off stump.soapboxsam said:
My take on Smith and Warner ?Chizz said:*Deep breath*
Sometimes it's good to see ourselves as others see us. So, with that in mind, I thought it would be interesting to see how the Melbourne Age were reflecting on Australia's semi-final defeat.
In short, it's a good thing that Australia lost, because they can concentrate on the Ashes; Jason Roy should be banned from appearing in the World Cup Final, but Bancroft, Smith and Warner were hard done by with their bans for cheating; their red ball players should be very confident ahead of the Ashes, thanks to their performances in the World Cup; there are too many white-ball players in the England Test team; but Australia will win the Ashes because - wait for it - they lost the World Cup and the women have almost won the Ashes.
And, a quick reminder: it's the English that whinge, apparently.
https://www.theage.com.au/sport/cricket/ashes-lessons-to-be-learned-from-australia-s-meek-world-cup-exit-20190712-p526lz.html
They are pantomime villians who happen to be world Class Cricketers.
How times change, Rodney Marsh and Dennis Lillee have a bet on England to win a test match when Botham and Dilley are at the wicket trying to save an innings defeat.
135-7 still 92 shy of making the Aussies bat again. £10 at 500/1 ! This was the third test at Leeds in 1981.
So the bull and smudger get a year's suspension and Lillee and Marsh got a fine.
The only way we could get Smith out was from a freak run out, the ball was heading for his bails and then in a quirk of fate he open his legs and smashed his stumps instead.
Nature's justice I would say.
Now on to the Kiwi's.
As for Bairstow. He pulled up after slipping turning for a 2nd run. Physio came out and massaged his thigh for 5 mins. He batted on after that with seemingly no real ill-affect. Nothing to do with his previous ankle injury & I expect him to be fit & playing tomorrow
Roy and Bairstow are so important, that if they are both back in the pavillion before 10 overs have gone the whole psyche of England is affected.
Quick singles should be forgotten if both fit to play.
But, when you compare their records, Root has more runs, more not outs, more fifties, more hundreds and, by a long way, more wins than Pietersen. But, most importantly, scores his runs at a better strike rate than Pietersen.
Our current "plodder" is a faster scorer than our former star hitter.3
