Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

England Cricket 2022

11718202223146

Comments

  • edited March 2022
    Mahmood's 49 was the equal 3rd highest score for a number 11 for England in the history of Test cricket - he is joint 3rd with Andrew Caddick (49* v Australia in 2001) and behind John Snow (59* v West Indies in 1966) and of course Jimmy Anderson's 81 v India in 2014. That was also Mahmood's top score in any form of the pro game.

    It is a testament to the fact that we no longer have that many players that do not know one end of the bat from the other (Parkinson might be one of them with a top score of 21* from 64 professional innings) that 5 of the top 8 scores for a number 11 have taken place in the last 21 years. One of the others was William Attewell with 43* against Australia - in 1892 - which would have stood as a record for 74 years until Snow's 59* in 1966.
    https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/australia-tour-of-england-and-scotland-2013-531603/england-vs-australia-1st-test-566932/full-scorecard

    The Ashton Agar 98 immediately springs to mind, even if him coming in at number 11 wasn't a fair reflection of his ability!

    Looking at the scorecard, I'd forgotten that Root had a brief spell as an opener for England
  • edited March 2022
    Mahmood's 49 was the equal 3rd highest score for a number 11 for England in the history of Test cricket - he is joint 3rd with Andrew Caddick (49* v Australia in 2001) and behind John Snow (59* v West Indies in 1966) and of course Jimmy Anderson's 81 v India in 2014. That was also Mahmood's top score in any form of the pro game.

    It is a testament to the fact that we no longer have that many players that do not know one end of the bat from the other (Parkinson might be one of them with a top score of 21* from 64 professional innings) that 5 of the top 8 scores for a number 11 have taken place in the last 21 years. One of the others was William Attewell with 43* against Australia - in 1892 - which would have stood as a record for 74 years until Snow's 59* in 1966.
    https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/australia-tour-of-england-and-scotland-2013-531603/england-vs-australia-1st-test-566932/full-scorecard

    The Ashton Agar 98 immediately springs to mind, even if him coming in at number 11 wasn't a fair reflection of his ability!

    Looking at the scorecard, I'd forgotten that Root had a brief spell as an opener for England
    Seb has become friends with Ashton's brother, Wes, out in Australia. He's also seen him first hand playing club cricket. To say Wes is a different player off the pitch to on it is an understatement. Wes is built like a brick outhouse and he said to the other English lad, Nathan, in Seb's team, after bowling him a bouncer, that he was going to "fxxxing rip his face off" . Nathan spoke to Seb afterwards and said "I was genuinely convinced that he was going to do it too!!!". But they'll all meet in a bar and have a laugh and happily share a drink and Wes has even helped Seb to get some merchandise from Wes's sponsor.
  • Not since 1885, 137 years ago, have England's top 2 scorers in a test match been numbers 10 and 11! 
  • Lees showing more commitment in the field than most of the Windies fielders yesterday, who tended to just stick a boot out and hope for the best
  • Genuinely can’t see where a wicket is coming from. Our bowling attack has to be up there with the worst over the last 20 years. 
  • Genuinely can’t see where a wicket is coming from. Our bowling attack has to be up there with the worst over the last 20 years. 
    Worst in last 50 years?
    I can't remember worse, but presume someone is about to remind me.
  • If it continues like this, then Fisher's stock will rise through not being involved...
  • edited March 2022
    Genuinely can’t see where a wicket is coming from. Our bowling attack has to be up there with the worst over the last 20 years. 
    Agree, though it was a good toss to win and a bad toss to lose if you are going to give your wicket up which a few of our top order definitely did. 

    Sometimes batsman need to be selfish and I don't mean the Boycott type of selfish. I mean for the good of the team. Yesterday Crawley was doing really well in conditions which were not easy. It was totally foreign to him to be on 7 off 35 balls but that is exactly what the situation demanded until conditions became easier which they, undoubtedly, did over the course of the day. In throwing his hands at a ball that wasn't a half volley he opened the floodgates for what was to follow. I'm certainly not blaming him for some of the other dismissals but it did mean Root coming in relatively early. 

    Less really is more on occasions.
  • Genuinely can’t see where a wicket is coming from. Our bowling attack has to be up there with the worst over the last 20 years. 
    Agree, though it was a good toss to win and a bad toss to lose if you are going to give your wicket up which a few of our top order definitely did. 

    Sometimes batsman need to be selfish and I don't mean the Boycott type of selfish. I mean for the good of the team. Yesterday Crawley was doing really well in conditions which were not easy. It was totally foreign to him to be on 7 off 35 balls but that is exactly what the situation demanded until conditions became easier which they, undoubtedly, did over the course of the day. In throwing his hands at a ball that wasn't a half volley in opened the floodgates for what was to follow. I'm certainly not blaming him for some of the other dismissals but it did mean Root coming in relatively early. 

    Less really is more on occasions.
    My opinion is that all of our players are more interested in getting bat on ball and having a decent strike rate. The idea of doing what Brathwaite did in the last test is completely foreign. You won’t see this England team put up a first innings score of 500+ and win by an innings. West Indies definitely bowled very well and deserve credit and it is obviously early in the international careers of Lees, Crawley, Pope, Foakes etc. but then, do we have to question the coaching? 
  • This is underlining why WI won't have been too unhappy at the tail wagging yesterday. The pitch has become a road. If they don't score 500 it's their own silly fault 
  • Sponsored links:


  • A road with uneven bounce...
  • Genuinely can’t see where a wicket is coming from. Our bowling attack has to be up there with the worst over the last 20 years. 
    Agree, though it was a good toss to win and a bad toss to lose if you are going to give your wicket up which a few of our top order definitely did. 

    Sometimes batsman need to be selfish and I don't mean the Boycott type of selfish. I mean for the good of the team. Yesterday Crawley was doing really well in conditions which were not easy. It was totally foreign to him to be on 7 off 35 balls but that is exactly what the situation demanded until conditions became easier which they, undoubtedly, did over the course of the day. In throwing his hands at a ball that wasn't a half volley in opened the floodgates for what was to follow. I'm certainly not blaming him for some of the other dismissals but it did mean Root coming in relatively early. 

    Less really is more on occasions.
    My opinion is that all of our players are more interested in getting bat on ball and having a decent strike rate. The idea of doing what Brathwaite did in the last test is completely foreign. You won’t see this England team put up a first innings score of 500+ and win by an innings. West Indies definitely bowled very well and deserve credit and it is obviously early in the international careers of Lees, Crawley, Pope, Foakes etc. but then, do we have to question the coaching? 
    Unfortunately, the responsibility for that, as I can saying, is white ball and specifically T20. When your default is to hit the ball, it is incredibly hard to switch to "Test" mode. In fat, with some players, it is so far ingrained that they stop recognising what a good ball looks like. Ramprakash said as much about Buttler.

    I've also been saying, batting for other batsmen around the world is based on a sound technique and hitting the ball is just an extension of that. How many Indian batsmen, be they Test or T20, "enjoy" a technique that anywhere near resembles Burns, Lees, Ballance or Sibley? One could certainly argue that the Aussies, Smith and Labushagne, have their foibles but the fundamentals are spot on - upon delivery the bat does come down straight.

    Those kids who cannot play 360 are excluded from a relatively early age by some counties now. Those that do might. ultimately, find that they miss those with solid techniques.
  • Wicket to Stokes who then goes off. He has a heavy strapping on his knee and doesn't look comfortable which was the fear in going in with a three man seam and two spin attack.
  • Watching Campbell against the short ball is grim viewing
  • Leuth said:
    This is underlining why WI won't have been too unhappy at the tail wagging yesterday. The pitch has become a road. If they don't score 500 it's their own silly fault 
    Not sure they will make 300 tbh 
  • edited March 2022
    Watching Campbell against the short ball is grim viewing
    It is the modern way with a lot of batsman - they don't watch the ball or make an early decision as to whether to pull or duck/sway. Which is why so many more get hit nowadays than they did prior to helmets being employed because self preservation meant that you had to.
  • A road with uneven bounce...
    Let's not bring potholes into the conversation!
  • A wicket to Mahmood from another that keeps low. Game on!!!

    One thing I'm not really comfortable with is this "assumptive close" that bowlers seem to adopt these days - the one where they appeal and run away in celebration of a wicket even without looking at the umpire's decision. It might well be out but this is clearly designed to put more pressure on the umpire to give it. And in my experience some bowlers would make the worst umpires in the world because they don't ask all the questions about where it pitched, height, whether the batsman hit it etc etc.
  • And Campbell goes too 

    69-3
  • 71-3 at tea
  • Sponsored links:


  • Leuth said:
    This is underlining why WI won't have been too unhappy at the tail wagging yesterday. The pitch has become a road. If they don't score 500 it's their own silly fault 
    That might not age well

    It's a bumpy road for sure but if England's bowlers are sent out to bowl floaty full stuff or half track filth to no slips and 3 on the hook, wicket-taking is relying on batsmen's errors.  Heaven forbid we should try aiming at the stumps on a goodish length, like that would never work!!  Project reset clearly still lacks anyone with basic knowledge of new ball bowling.
    Captain Cretin still hasn't a Betty Boo on what to review - burn baby burn...
  • I was surprised that Sam Curran has no centuries to his name in any format (a couple of 90s only), suggesting that in red ball cricket he's no better than a 7 or 8 at the moment, meaning that he has to justify his place in the team as a front line bowler.

    To be fair, I believe that a lot of Curran's innings have been batting at 7 and below. To improve he needs to move up the order - Canters will be able to tell us whether he is good enough to bat at 5 where he will get more of an opportunity to boost his average. As we saw last season, The Oval saw record scores which benefited those in the top 5, principally Pope, Amla, Burns and Smith. The other thing I'm absolutely staggered to discover is that I cannot see that either of the Currans played a single CC game last season. How is Sam going to improve with the bat in red ball if all he plays is white ball?
    Curran batted at 5 in the first innings against Sussex scoring 33* and presumably as some sort of reward got to open in the second innings - and was out for a duck.
  • Woakes figures in the series are now 74-19-186-2. Stokes figures, by comparison, are 83-23-154-6
  • Woakes figures in the series are now 74-19-186-2. Stokes figures, by comparison, are 83-23-154-6
    Make that 74.3-19-186-3
  • Woakes figures in the series are now 74-19-186-2. Stokes figures, by comparison, are 83-23-154-6
    Make that 74.3-19-186-3
    Well played. 
  • Woakes figures in the series are now 74-19-186-2. Stokes figures, by comparison, are 83-23-154-6
    Make that 74.3-19-186-3
    Can you slag off Alex Gilbey's scoring record for Charlton, tomorrow at 4:15 please  ;)
  • Woakes figures in the series are now 74-19-186-2. Stokes figures, by comparison, are 83-23-154-6
    Make that 74.3-19-186-3
    Make that 75-19-187-4
  • Woakes again!
    82-5
  • Woakes figures in the series are now 74-19-186-2. Stokes figures, by comparison, are 83-23-154-6
    Make that 74.3-19-186-3
    Can you slag off Alex Gilbey's scoring record for Charlton, tomorrow at 4:15 please  ;)
    How very dare you! I was merely posting two sets of comparative figures!

    PS Gilbey 2 goals in 30 appearances this season. Washington 10 goals in 27.
  • WI collapse occurring? 32-5 since the opening stand...
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!