Years ago I can remember Boycott ans Alan Butcher opening for England and bringing up a 50 partnership on the stroke of lunch. How times change.
DHOTY ;-)
Sorry Chizz No idea what that means.
I'm casting doubt over whether that really happened. In a gentle, joshing, not-meaning-to-be-offensive way. I don't think they ever made a fifty partnership in Tests.
Years ago I can remember Boycott ans Alan Butcher opening for England and bringing up a 50 partnership on the stroke of lunch. How times change.
DHOTY ;-)
Sorry Chizz No idea what that means.
I'm casting doubt over whether that really happened. In a gentle, joshing, not-meaning-to-be-offensive way. I don't think they ever made a fifty partnership in Tests.
Years ago I can remember Boycott ans Alan Butcher opening for England and bringing up a 50 partnership on the stroke of lunch. How times change.
DHOTY ;-)
Sorry Chizz No idea what that means.
I'm casting doubt over whether that really happened. In a gentle, joshing, not-meaning-to-be-offensive way. I don't think they ever made a fifty partnership in Tests.
From memory it was Alan Butchers test debut.
My memory could be playing tricks though.
Just googled it. It was a Test trial in 1976.
Was that a thing? How did that work, was it like an A team v B team match?
Years ago I can remember Boycott ans Alan Butcher opening for England and bringing up a 50 partnership on the stroke of lunch. How times change.
DHOTY ;-)
Sorry Chizz No idea what that means.
I'm casting doubt over whether that really happened. In a gentle, joshing, not-meaning-to-be-offensive way. I don't think they ever made a fifty partnership in Tests.
From memory it was Alan Butchers test debut.
My memory could be playing tricks though.
Just googled it. It was a Test trial in 1976.
Was that a thing? How did that work, was it like an A team v B team match?
No idea mate. I remember watching the match but how many Test trials were played back then I have no idea.
Years ago I can remember Boycott ans Alan Butcher opening for England and bringing up a 50 partnership on the stroke of lunch. How times change.
DHOTY ;-)
Sorry Chizz No idea what that means.
I'm casting doubt over whether that really happened. In a gentle, joshing, not-meaning-to-be-offensive way. I don't think they ever made a fifty partnership in Tests.
From memory it was Alan Butchers test debut.
My memory could be playing tricks though.
Just googled it. It was a Test trial in 1976.
Was that a thing? How did that work, was it like an A team v B team match?
No idea mate. I remember watching the match but how many Test trials were played back then I have no idea.
I've often thought test trials would be a good idea, especially at the end of the season when the tour teams are being finalised.
Crawley said during the week that he's not bothered about his batting average for England. Well I suggest he should be. He currently only averages 34 which isn’t particularly good and as soon as another Engish opener performs well in county cricket his position will not be guaranteed.
He only averaged 27 this time last year.
Pope Stokes butler bairatow ali
all not to dissimilar records
then look at sibley Burns lees plus numerous others over the last decade. Crawley isn’t a Strauss or cook but he is also a lot better than many more who have opened in recent times
Crawley said during the week that he's not bothered about his batting average for England. Well I suggest he should be. He currently only averages 34 which isn’t particularly good and as soon as another Engish opener performs well in county cricket his position will not be guaranteed.
He only averaged 27 this time last year.
Pope Stokes butler bairatow ali
all not to dissimilar records
then look at sibley Burns lees plus numerous others over the last decade. Crawley isn’t a Strauss or cook but he is also a lot better than many more who have opened in recent times
Crawley 's dad is a mate of mine and there's nothing more I'd like than him having a long and successful career. Having said that I still believe he has to improve his average.
Crawley said during the week that he's not bothered about his batting average for England. Well I suggest he should be. He currently only averages 34 which isn’t particularly good and as soon as another Engish opener performs well in county cricket his position will not be guaranteed.
He only averaged 27 this time last year.
Pope Stokes butler bairatow ali
all not to dissimilar records
then look at sibley Burns lees plus numerous others over the last decade. Crawley isn’t a Strauss or cook but he is also a lot better than many more who have opened in recent times
Crawley 's dad is a mate of mine and there's nothing more I'd like than him having a long and successful career. Having said that I still believe he has to improve his average.
Yep, he does. 34 isn’t great but his average is increasing
Crawley said during the week that he's not bothered about his batting average for England. Well I suggest he should be. He currently only averages 34 which isn’t particularly good and as soon as another Engish opener performs well in county cricket his position will not be guaranteed.
He only averaged 27 this time last year.
Pope Stokes butler bairatow ali
all not to dissimilar records
then look at sibley Burns lees plus numerous others over the last decade. Crawley isn’t a Strauss or cook but he is also a lot better than many more who have opened in recent times
Crawley 's dad is a mate of mine and there's nothing more I'd like than him having a long and successful career. Having said that I still believe he has to improve his average.
Yep, he does. 34 isn’t great but his average is increasing
Not been following today's play, but is England's 416 in a day a sensational bit of Bazball batting, or have England left runs out there by being too cavalier?
Not an issue in this series, but if we are to win the Ashes down under, we'll need scores of 500 plus.
Not been following today's play, but is England's 416 in a day a sensational bit of Bazball batting, or have England left runs out there by being too cavalier?
Not been following today's play, but is England's 416 in a day a sensational bit of Bazball batting, or have England left runs out there by being too cavalier?
Not an issue in this series, but if we are to win the Ashes down under, we'll need scores of 500 plus.
Could have gone either way. Windies dropped a number of catches & 2 missed stumping. Stokes & Brook were guilty of giving their wickets away. Could have been all out for 300 or 450 for 6 at close.
Bashir c Holder (2nd slip) b A Joseph 5 416 All Out
Take into account how awful the WI fielding and catching were, that score's about 150 light of where England should have got to on an absolute road against moderate bowling. All too familiar story of bazball = freedom to toss your wicket away in the lamest possible fashion. Zak got a decent ball, Bashir's a proper no.11, Pope can be excused but the rest of them tossed it away. WI's batting resources aren't too threatening but they'll be confident of avoiding the follow on and coasting into no worse than a draw with the expected rain interruptions to come. England's position at the bottom of the test championship is the true measure of the Stokes/McCullum "project."
Bashir c Holder (2nd slip) b A Joseph 5 416 All Out
Take into account how awful the WI fielding and catching were, that score's about 150 light of where England should have got to on an absolute road against moderate bowling. All too familiar story of bazball = freedom to toss your wicket away in the lamest possible fashion. Zak got a decent ball, Bashir's a proper no.11, Pope can be excused but the rest of them tossed it away. WI's batting resources aren't too threatening but they'll be confident of avoiding the follow on and coasting into no worse than a draw with the expected rain interruptions to come. England's position at the bottom of the test championship is the true measure of the Stokes/McCullum "project."
For the avoidance of any doubt, do you mean, by your final sentence, that you consider England to be the worst team in the world?
Not been following today's play, but is England's 416 in a day a sensational bit of Bazball batting, or have England left runs out there by being too cavalier?
Not an issue in this series, but if we are to win the Ashes down under, we'll need scores of 500 plus.
Not been following today's play, but is England's 416 in a day a sensational bit of Bazball batting, or have England left runs out there by being too cavalier?
Not an issue in this series, but if we are to win the Ashes down under, we'll need scores of 500 plus.
I think today's scorecard answers my question.
We did it in the first Test too. In our two Innings, 8 players have reached 50 (11 got to 36) and only one of them have turned that into a ton. On docile tracks, that isn't good enough. As you suggest, getting a quick 375-400 all out against Australia in a day and we will end up doing what we did before - giving them enough time to score sufficient runs to take the game away from us. West Indies have finished on 351-5 and just 65 behind with three days to go. If they can do that, then Australia can too. Better too. We should also remember the other by-product of us scoring quickly for not that great a score - our bowlers having to be in the middle for longer with little respite. Over the course of a Series that does mount up.
Not been following today's play, but is England's 416 in a day a sensational bit of Bazball batting, or have England left runs out there by being too cavalier?
Not an issue in this series, but if we are to win the Ashes down under, we'll need scores of 500 plus.
I think today's scorecard answers my question.
We did it in the first Test too. In our two Innings, 8 players have reached 50 (11 got to 36) and only one of them have turned that into a ton. On docile tracks, that isn't good enough. As you suggest, getting a quick 375-400 all out against Australia in a day and we will end up doing what we did before - giving them enough time to score sufficient runs to take the game away from us. West Indies have finished on 351-5 and just 65 behind with three days to go. If they can do that, then Australia can too. Better too. We should also remember the other by-product of us scoring quickly for not that great a score - our bowlers having to be in the middle for longer with little respite. Over the course of a Series that does mount up.
And with their better bowling and catching, we wouldn't made 400 against Australia anyway. An exciting 320 batting first won't win many games down under.
It's good for the series that we have a contest in this match, but if England are serious about winning the World Test Championship, then these are the sorts of opponents we need to really pummel.
Comments
My memory could be playing tricks though.
Pope c Hodge (2nd slip) b A Joseph 121
It was a Test trial in 1976.
I remember watching the match but how many Test trials were played back then I have no idea.
Pope
Stokes
butler
bairatow
ali
all not to dissimilar records
then look at sibley
Burns
lees
plus numerous others over the last decade. Crawley isn’t a Strauss or cook but he is also a lot better than many more who have opened in recent times
Stokes c sub B Hodge 69 (caught on the boundary slogging)
Smith c Holder (slogging) b Hodge 36
408-9
416 All Out
Having said that I still believe he has to improve his average.
Not an issue in this series, but if we are to win the Ashes down under, we'll need scores of 500 plus.
All too familiar story of bazball = freedom to toss your wicket away in the lamest possible fashion. Zak got a decent ball, Bashir's a proper no.11, Pope can be excused but the rest of them tossed it away.
WI's batting resources aren't too threatening but they'll be confident of avoiding the follow on and coasting into no worse than a draw with the expected rain interruptions to come.
England's position at the bottom of the test championship is the true measure of the Stokes/McCullum "project."
I think today's scorecard answers my question.
Hodge lbw Woakes 120
We did it in the first Test too. In our two Innings, 8 players have reached 50 (11 got to 36) and only one of them have turned that into a ton. On docile tracks, that isn't good enough. As you suggest, getting a quick 375-400 all out against Australia in a day and we will end up doing what we did before - giving them enough time to score sufficient runs to take the game away from us. West Indies have finished on 351-5 and just 65 behind with three days to go. If they can do that, then Australia can too. Better too. We should also remember the other by-product of us scoring quickly for not that great a score - our bowlers having to be in the middle for longer with little respite. Over the course of a Series that does mount up.
It's good for the series that we have a contest in this match, but if England are serious about winning the World Test Championship, then these are the sorts of opponents we need to really pummel.