Pope bowled for 29, think @cantersaddick has to take responsibility for that
That's called evidence based forecasting. Once Pope reaches 25 in tests he either gets out before 30 or gets a ton. Very little in between. the best predictor of future performance is past performance.
Don't shoot the messenger (analyst)! I take responsibility for nothing!
I do think that Duckett's habitual sweeping and then, as a result, forcing the Pakistan spinners to bowl lengths they don't want to, is making this pitch look easier than it actually is.
Is it fair to say, Crawley always follows a good score with a bad one?
Can't recall he him producing back to back good scores at International level?
76 and 73 v India in Feb 2024 42 and 60 v India in Feb 2024 (followed by a 79 in the next innings) 44 in the second innings at Leeds followed by 189 in the first innings in Manchester last year v Australia 69*, 122 and 50 in consecutive innings v S Africa, and Pakistan in 2022 53 and 267 v Pakistan in Southampton in 2020
Is it fair to say, Crawley always follows a good score with a bad one?
Can't recall he him producing back to back good scores at International level?
76 and 73 v India in Feb 2024 42 and 60 v India in Feb 2024 (followed by a 79 in the next innings) 44 in the second innings at Leeds followed by 189 in the first innings in Manchester last year v Australia 69*, 122 and 50 in consecutive innings v S Africa, and Pakistan in 2022 53 and 267 v Pakistan in Southampton in 2020
Is it fair to say, Crawley always follows a good score with a bad one?
Can't recall he him producing back to back good scores at International level?
76 and 73 v India in Feb 2024 42 and 60 v India in Feb 2024 (followed by a 79 in the next innings) 44 in the second innings at Leeds followed by 189 in the first innings in Manchester last year v Australia 69*, 122 and 50 in consecutive innings v S Africa, and Pakistan in 2022 53 and 267 v Pakistan in Southampton in 2020
Clearly, I’ve been proved wrong.
Not completely! I think Crawley would want many more consecutive significant scores. In fact, the fact he's done it a few times should mean that he's able to do it more often.
With Crawley, I think the current England set up (ie McCullum, Stokes and, to an extent, Key) are tolerant of a number of "failures" as long as he produces significant winning scores from time to time.
Can I add, Alex Hartley is maybe the worst cricket commentator of all time. I say this as someone who's usually in favour of there being more women commentators (Urooj Mumtaz in the Test earlier being excellent for example)
Oh that's Lydia Greenway lmao. I was thinking she didn't sound quite right. She's also bad
You were right to question yourself - one's a Lancastrian and the other's from, down the road, Orpington!
Fine. When I spotted some semi-articulate magnanimity towards the WI, I realised it couldn't be Hartley actually
Alex Hartley can be quite flippant when doing live commentary but when being serious she hasn't held back with her criticism of the English women players for their fitness and despite beating the Windies 14 times in a row before yesterday they panic when Sophie Ecclestone isn't on her top spinning game or in crunch games against the Aussies who she says have a higher level of fitness.
Back to the men's game and Brydon Carse deserved that wicket.
I've just read the BBC write-up of their interview with Alex Hartley. She really went in two-footed on the current England team, basically saying they're carrying too many players who aren't up to international fitness levels. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/articles/cpw5l84z4w4o
Which may be slightly unfair, as Australia are really the only women's team who show the fitness levels she's looking for. The women's game is still catching up rapidly with the men and has quite a way to go.
A point made by one of the BBC's online text-commentators, who suggests the issue is that England don't face pressure situations often enough, as they're so much better than most other teams, but that performance under pressure was one of the things the Hundred was supposed to bring to the team and it clearly isn't working yet. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/articles/c93p425jndlo
Personally, although the shambles yesterday was spectacular and one player in particular clearly went to pieces, they would still have gone through if it hadn't been for the unimpressive nature of the win over Bangladesh. And that wasn't pressure, so perhaps Alex Hartley has a point about fitness.
Looking at the ICC rankings, Crawley is currently a respectable 24th (ahead of Pope), and his score will have declined because of not playing 3 Tests due to his injury.
Indeed the Sri Lanka series showed that England currently have no alternative "Bazball" openers for Duckett and Crawley
How comes there’s no bugger there? sorry if already been asked.
late change of venue, poor recent form and the fact that outside of England tests are generally poorly attended worldwide anyway. Most of the people there for the first test were admitted for free
Perhaps Pakistan haven't got it totally wrong with their seven spinners. Two seamers and six spinners would have been enough but we have to accept that we went in with just the one experienced frontline spinner. Bashir has to turn up in the second innings if we are going to give ourselves a chance of winning.
I do think that Duckett's habitual sweeping and then, as a result, forcing the Pakistan spinners to bowl lengths they don't want to, is making this pitch look easier than it actually is.
Even more so the case now. The rest haven't been able to get in long enough to put that sort of pressure back on Pakistan and now they are in the position of being able to crowd the bat.
These aren't the conditions to Bazball at full tilt tomorrow, but equally we can't just sit there and defend to the spinners, as we need to put pressure on them and force Pakistan to plug gaps in the field.
Comments
🤦🏻♂️ Unfortunately the former !
Don't shoot the messenger (analyst)! I take responsibility for nothing!
Can't recall he him producing back to back good scores at International level?
42 and 60 v India in Feb 2024 (followed by a 79 in the next innings)
44 in the second innings at Leeds followed by 189 in the first innings in Manchester last year v Australia
69*, 122 and 50 in consecutive innings v S Africa, and Pakistan in 2022
53 and 267 v Pakistan in Southampton in 2020
With Crawley, I think the current England set up (ie McCullum, Stokes and, to an extent, Key) are tolerant of a number of "failures" as long as he produces significant winning scores from time to time.
199-2 (39)
Root 29* (45)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/articles/cpw5l84z4w4o
Which may be slightly unfair, as Australia are really the only women's team who show the fitness levels she's looking for. The women's game is still catching up rapidly with the men and has quite a way to go.
A point made by one of the BBC's online text-commentators, who suggests the issue is that England don't face pressure situations often enough, as they're so much better than most other teams, but that performance under pressure was one of the things the Hundred was supposed to bring to the team and it clearly isn't working yet.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/articles/c93p425jndlo
Personally, although the shambles yesterday was spectacular and one player in particular clearly went to pieces, they would still have gone through if it hadn't been for the unimpressive nature of the win over Bangladesh. And that wasn't pressure, so perhaps Alex Hartley has a point about fitness.
Looking at the ICC rankings, Crawley is currently a respectable 24th (ahead of Pope), and his score will have declined because of not playing 3 Tests due to his injury.
Indeed the Sri Lanka series showed that England currently have no alternative "Bazball" openers for Duckett and Crawley
211-3 (41.3)
224-4 (43.1)
sorry if already been asked.
225-5
225-6
Smith 12* (33)
Carse 2* (19)
6.15am - then we are 245/7
6.45am - then we are 260 all out
7.30am - then we are all out & Pakistan are 45/1 and have a 150+ lead.