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
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
Come on England, so many voices of doom on this thread
I'm not sure about "voices of doom". More realists. If Charlton Athletic had been on a run of one win in 16 matches and were then in the cricketing equivalent of being 3-0 down (114-9) after 20 minutes, I'm not too sure any of us would have been too confident of us doing a "Golfie".
That said, I did post after the last Test that I believed there were reasons for optimism - but, at 3-0 down, I was also ready to admit that I got most of those comments totally wrong!
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
Fast becoming the worst ever prediction ever
It wasn't a prediction. They've batted like morons, which I allowed for
Anyone think that there are parallels between this series and the Pakistan v Australia series? Home side prepares a dead pitch for the first two games and then one that is a bit more fruity for the third in the hope, perhaps, that they win the toss and that advantage might lead them to win the series. Australia won the toss and went on to win that 3rd Test. West Indies won the toss here, on a pitch that was green and at 114-9 probably thought that they were on their way to winning the series too.
If it isn't a coincidence then why were the decks in both of the first two Tests of both series so bat friendly and the ones in the final Test so different? I would hate to think that this has got anything to do with the World Test Championship.
Come on England, so many voices of doom on this thread
I'm not sure about "voices of doom". More realists. If Charlton Athletic had been on a run of one win in 16 matches and were then in the cricketing equivalent of being 3-0 down (114-9) after 20 minutes, I'm not too sure any of us would have been too confident of us doing a "Golfie".
That said, I did post after the last Test that I believed there were reasons for optimism - but, at 3-0 down, I was also ready to admit that I got most of those comments totally wrong!
L was not including you in that comment, your comments are fair, you talk a lot of sense about cricket.
Quite impressive that the Windies still have all 3 reviews left. Brathwaite for example walked off without reviewing his LBW, despite being his team's captain and best batsman
Seems to have followed the exact same pattern as yesterday, its not even been about the pitch - it's the ball. I think that extra 27 that the openers got will be the difference in the score when all is said and done. Both sides lacking class though to be totally honest
The objective for England's openers/top 4 is very clear off the back of the last two days. Get that tail out (obviously) then defend defend defend - take as many overs out of that ball as poss and then make hay when it softens around 40 overs. Real test of patience this.
The objective for England's openers/top 4 is very clear off the back of the last two days. Get that tail out (obviously) then defend defend defend - take as many overs out of that ball as poss and then make hay when it softens around 40 overs. Real test of patience this.
Send Jack Leach out to defend for 40 overs. Have Root and Crawley come out at numbers 7 and 8!
The objective for England's openers/top 4 is very clear off the back of the last two days. Get that tail out (obviously) then defend defend defend - take as many overs out of that ball as poss and then make hay when it softens around 40 overs. Real test of patience this.
Send Jack Leach out to defend for 40 overs. Have Root and Crawley come out at numbers 7 and 8!
Always thought this should be a strategy. It seems the best batsmen get the worse conditions (new ball) and the tail enders come in when the ball is old & the pitch dead.
Why not alternate & have openers in with the late middle order or with a tail ender or 2. Save Root until the ball is old & not moving about.
The objective for England's openers/top 4 is very clear off the back of the last two days. Get that tail out (obviously) then defend defend defend - take as many overs out of that ball as poss and then make hay when it softens around 40 overs. Real test of patience this.
Send Jack Leach out to defend for 40 overs. Have Root and Crawley come out at numbers 7 and 8!
Always thought this should be a strategy. It seems the best batsmen get the worse conditions (new ball) and the tail enders come in when the ball is old & the pitch dead.
Why not alternate & have openers in with the late middle order or with a tail ender or 2. Save Root until the ball is old & not moving about.
I was half joking, but I think that says more about our openers than anything to be honest... they are not good enough - don't think we have had any for a decade and is the root (no pun) of our batting issues. To borrow a charlton argument ; What is going on in training??
When we've had top 3 players who've just stuck around without scoring a lot of runs, they've been dropped for not scoring and putting pressure on the bowlers or for not making the big scores. Sibley was dropped for example for being too slow, while Denly would occupy the crease for a long time without making a big score.
Both though are much better at protecting the middle order stroke makers than say Crawley or having to push Root up to 3.
The objective for England's openers/top 4 is very clear off the back of the last two days. Get that tail out (obviously) then defend defend defend - take as many overs out of that ball as poss and then make hay when it softens around 40 overs. Real test of patience this.
Send Jack Leach out to defend for 40 overs. Have Root and Crawley come out at numbers 7 and 8!
Always thought this should be a strategy. It seems the best batsmen get the worse conditions (new ball) and the tail enders come in when the ball is old & the pitch dead.
Why not alternate & have openers in with the late middle order or with a tail ender or 2. Save Root until the ball is old & not moving about.
I was half joking, but I think that says more about our openers than anything to be honest... they are not good enough - don't think we have had any for a decade and is the root (no pun) of our batting issues. To borrow a charlton argument ; What is going on in training??
Sadly it's ingrained. It is virtually impossible for someone to change the technique of a year old who has got to that level hitting the ball a certain way. Look at Lees - he's having to fight so hard to force himself to have the bat face in the right starting place and to have the bat then coming down straight. The majority of the time the bat face still closes which is why he ends up "mole killing" and/or all timing goes. Burns is the same - his head alignment is wrong at times and he is forced to do something that makes him look like an alien playing cricket because he is left eye dominant. His hands also tend to get too far in front of him and he is constantly fighting that.
These are all aspects of batting that should have been recognised and sorted at age group county level. But they aren't. Because a lot of age group cricket coaches expect the finished article. And runs in the book at that level make them, in the coaches' eyes, that finished article. Those players then go back to their clubs and the coaches there are either scared to change that technique or don't have the knowledge to do so. The footage below of The Little Master demonstrates how simple he keeps things and how, even when he's flicking the ball through the leg side, his head is in line with the ball. He didn't learn that when he turned up to play Test cricket. He probably started learning it at the age of four or five.
Comments
128-7
That said, I did post after the last Test that I believed there were reasons for optimism - but, at 3-0 down, I was also ready to admit that I got most of those comments totally wrong!
If it isn't a coincidence then why were the decks in both of the first two Tests of both series so bat friendly and the ones in the final Test so different? I would hate to think that this has got anything to do with the World Test Championship.
Why not alternate & have openers in with the late middle order or with a tail ender or 2. Save Root until the ball is old & not moving about.
Both though are much better at protecting the middle order stroke makers than say Crawley or having to push Root up to 3.
These are all aspects of batting that should have been recognised and sorted at age group county level. But they aren't. Because a lot of age group cricket coaches expect the finished article. And runs in the book at that level make them, in the coaches' eyes, that finished article. Those players then go back to their clubs and the coaches there are either scared to change that technique or don't have the knowledge to do so. The footage below of The Little Master demonstrates how simple he keeps things and how, even when he's flicking the ball through the leg side, his head is in line with the ball. He didn't learn that when he turned up to play Test cricket. He probably started learning it at the age of four or five.