Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
England Cricket 2024
Comments
-
150-6 (42)0
-
At the very least you’re using a false equivalence to further your argument.Addick Addict said:
I haven't "conveniently" left out anything. But we always seem to be looking for excuses when we don't bat well. Gower has just pointed out that, all bar Duckett, played the wrong shots to the wrong ball.fenaddick said:
That India NZ test also featured 2 innings of 400+ and 1 110/2which you’re conveniently leaving out. India batted poorly on a pitch where runs were to be had and most of the wickets were taken by seamers.Addick Addict said:
Because he played the wrong shots. Babar has been dropped for getting low scores and he was the world number one at one point. They all make mistakes.golfaddick said:
I just like to see a fair test between bat & ball. Not a 150 all out and over within 3 days.......nor 700/5 and drawn after 5 days.Addick Addict said:
Please stop this agenda. As McCullum says, all teams prepare wickets to suit their bowlers. Why do we produce green seamers instead of bunsen burners? Did you complain when England bowled Australia out for 60 and Broad took 8-15? Or every other occasion when we have skittled the opposition because of having the likes of Anderson and Broad? Pakistan and India bowl and bat better on their wickets. We do the same on ours. That is Test cricket.golfaddick said:Ah, I bet the West Indies would love to take the Sabina Park wicket from 1998 with them wherever they go.
Nothing like a home grown strip when you want to win a deciding Test.
A pitch on day one should give the team batting first a chance to get between 300 & 400. The best batsman in the world has struggled to get into double figures in his last 2 innings.
I agree about low scored but India were 46 all out against NZ. Let's see how many Pakistan make. But, when all is said and done, Pakistan have to bat last. So, we should be in the driving seat even if this ends up a two and a half day Test. And we've had plenty of them under McCullum. It's just that we've been the ones winning.
I agree that teams can prepare wickets to suit themselves but there’s a limit to that where it stops being about the cricket. Stokes and Mccullum are hardly going to criticise before the test starts or risk being reprimanded and Athers is still broadcasting to the nation of Pakistan so will understandably be being careful with his words.
So, once and for all, I will ask you and the others saying that this pitch is unfair. Do we or do we not have a massive advantage in winning the toss if this wicket is as bad as we are saying?
Of course both teams play on the same pitch and the toss can go either way, I’d be making the same points if Pakistan were in exactly the same predicament as England. It just makes for poor cricket in my opinion.
0 -
.0
-
Answer theses questions Golfie -golfaddick said:
This.fenaddick said:Addick Addict said:
Because he played the wrong shots. Babar has been dropped for getting low scores and he was the world number one at one point. They all make mistakes.golfaddick said:
I just like to see a fair test between bat & ball. Not a 150 all out and over within 3 days.......nor 700/5 and drawn after 5 days.Addick Addict said:
Please stop this agenda. As McCullum says, all teams prepare wickets to suit their bowlers. Why do we produce green seamers instead of bunsen burners? Did you complain when England bowled Australia out for 60 and Broad took 8-15? Or every other occasion when we have skittled the opposition because of having the likes of Anderson and Broad? Pakistan and India bowl and bat better on their wickets. We do the same on ours. That is Test cricket.golfaddick said:Ah, I bet the West Indies would love to take the Sabina Park wicket from 1998 with them wherever they go.
Nothing like a home grown strip when you want to win a deciding Test.
A pitch on day one should give the team batting first a chance to get between 300 & 400. The best batsman in the world has struggled to get into double figures in his last 2 innings.
I agree about low scored but India were 46 all out against NZ. Let's see how many Pakistan make. But, when all is said and done, Pakistan have to bat last. So, we should be in the driving seat even if this ends up a two and a half day Test. And we've had plenty of them under McCullum. It's just that we've been the ones winning.
I agree that teams can prepare wickets to suit themselves but there’s a limit to that where it stops being about the cricket. Stokes and Mccullum are hardly going to criticise before the test starts or risk being reprimanded and Athers is still broadcasting to the nation of Pakistan so will understandably be being careful with his words.
(1) Do we or do we not have a massive advantage in winning the toss if this wicket is as bad as we are saying?
(2) Could five of our six dismissals been avoided?
0 -
But losing the toss is the very thing that people were saying was the reason that we lost the last Test! How many of the six batsmen that were dismissed played the wrong shot. Both Atherton and Gower say all but Duckett.fenaddick said:
At the very least you’re using a false equivalence to further your argument.Addick Addict said:
I haven't "conveniently" left out anything. But we always seem to be looking for excuses when we don't bat well. Gower has just pointed out that, all bar Duckett, played the wrong shots to the wrong ball.fenaddick said:
That India NZ test also featured 2 innings of 400+ and 1 110/2which you’re conveniently leaving out. India batted poorly on a pitch where runs were to be had and most of the wickets were taken by seamers.Addick Addict said:
Because he played the wrong shots. Babar has been dropped for getting low scores and he was the world number one at one point. They all make mistakes.golfaddick said:
I just like to see a fair test between bat & ball. Not a 150 all out and over within 3 days.......nor 700/5 and drawn after 5 days.Addick Addict said:
Please stop this agenda. As McCullum says, all teams prepare wickets to suit their bowlers. Why do we produce green seamers instead of bunsen burners? Did you complain when England bowled Australia out for 60 and Broad took 8-15? Or every other occasion when we have skittled the opposition because of having the likes of Anderson and Broad? Pakistan and India bowl and bat better on their wickets. We do the same on ours. That is Test cricket.golfaddick said:Ah, I bet the West Indies would love to take the Sabina Park wicket from 1998 with them wherever they go.
Nothing like a home grown strip when you want to win a deciding Test.
A pitch on day one should give the team batting first a chance to get between 300 & 400. The best batsman in the world has struggled to get into double figures in his last 2 innings.
I agree about low scored but India were 46 all out against NZ. Let's see how many Pakistan make. But, when all is said and done, Pakistan have to bat last. So, we should be in the driving seat even if this ends up a two and a half day Test. And we've had plenty of them under McCullum. It's just that we've been the ones winning.
I agree that teams can prepare wickets to suit themselves but there’s a limit to that where it stops being about the cricket. Stokes and Mccullum are hardly going to criticise before the test starts or risk being reprimanded and Athers is still broadcasting to the nation of Pakistan so will understandably be being careful with his words.
So, once and for all, I will ask you and the others saying that this pitch is unfair. Do we or do we not have a massive advantage in winning the toss if this wicket is as bad as we are saying?
Of course both teams play on the same pitch and the toss can go either way, I’d be making the same points if Pakistan were in exactly the same predicament as England. It just makes for poor cricket in my opinion.0 -
I’m not talking about the last test! And you can still play the wrong shot on a rubbish wicket, the two aren’t mutually exclusive.Addick Addict said:
But losing the toss is the very thing that people were saying was the reason that we lost the last Test! How many of the six batsmen that were dismissed played the wrong shot. Both Atherton and Gower say all but five.fenaddick said:
At the very least you’re using a false equivalence to further your argument.Addick Addict said:
I haven't "conveniently" left out anything. But we always seem to be looking for excuses when we don't bat well. Gower has just pointed out that, all bar Duckett, played the wrong shots to the wrong ball.fenaddick said:
That India NZ test also featured 2 innings of 400+ and 1 110/2which you’re conveniently leaving out. India batted poorly on a pitch where runs were to be had and most of the wickets were taken by seamers.Addick Addict said:
Because he played the wrong shots. Babar has been dropped for getting low scores and he was the world number one at one point. They all make mistakes.golfaddick said:
I just like to see a fair test between bat & ball. Not a 150 all out and over within 3 days.......nor 700/5 and drawn after 5 days.Addick Addict said:
Please stop this agenda. As McCullum says, all teams prepare wickets to suit their bowlers. Why do we produce green seamers instead of bunsen burners? Did you complain when England bowled Australia out for 60 and Broad took 8-15? Or every other occasion when we have skittled the opposition because of having the likes of Anderson and Broad? Pakistan and India bowl and bat better on their wickets. We do the same on ours. That is Test cricket.golfaddick said:Ah, I bet the West Indies would love to take the Sabina Park wicket from 1998 with them wherever they go.
Nothing like a home grown strip when you want to win a deciding Test.
A pitch on day one should give the team batting first a chance to get between 300 & 400. The best batsman in the world has struggled to get into double figures in his last 2 innings.
I agree about low scored but India were 46 all out against NZ. Let's see how many Pakistan make. But, when all is said and done, Pakistan have to bat last. So, we should be in the driving seat even if this ends up a two and a half day Test. And we've had plenty of them under McCullum. It's just that we've been the ones winning.
I agree that teams can prepare wickets to suit themselves but there’s a limit to that where it stops being about the cricket. Stokes and Mccullum are hardly going to criticise before the test starts or risk being reprimanded and Athers is still broadcasting to the nation of Pakistan so will understandably be being careful with his words.
So, once and for all, I will ask you and the others saying that this pitch is unfair. Do we or do we not have a massive advantage in winning the toss if this wicket is as bad as we are saying?
Of course both teams play on the same pitch and the toss can go either way, I’d be making the same points if Pakistan were in exactly the same predicament as England. It just makes for poor cricket in my opinion.
We’re never going to agree on this one which is totally ok. Rather than clog the thread up let’s agree to disagree and hope that Smith, Atkinson and Ahmed can add a decent number of runs to the total!0 -
We can agree on that. Duckett and Crawley put on 56. Smith and Atkinson have put on 40 to date. This isn't the minefield that some think it is.fenaddick said:
I’m not talking about the last test! And you can still play the wrong shot on a rubbish wicket, the two aren’t mutually exclusive.Addick Addict said:
But losing the toss is the very thing that people were saying was the reason that we lost the last Test! How many of the six batsmen that were dismissed played the wrong shot. Both Atherton and Gower say all but five.fenaddick said:
At the very least you’re using a false equivalence to further your argument.Addick Addict said:
I haven't "conveniently" left out anything. But we always seem to be looking for excuses when we don't bat well. Gower has just pointed out that, all bar Duckett, played the wrong shots to the wrong ball.fenaddick said:
That India NZ test also featured 2 innings of 400+ and 1 110/2which you’re conveniently leaving out. India batted poorly on a pitch where runs were to be had and most of the wickets were taken by seamers.Addick Addict said:
Because he played the wrong shots. Babar has been dropped for getting low scores and he was the world number one at one point. They all make mistakes.golfaddick said:
I just like to see a fair test between bat & ball. Not a 150 all out and over within 3 days.......nor 700/5 and drawn after 5 days.Addick Addict said:
Please stop this agenda. As McCullum says, all teams prepare wickets to suit their bowlers. Why do we produce green seamers instead of bunsen burners? Did you complain when England bowled Australia out for 60 and Broad took 8-15? Or every other occasion when we have skittled the opposition because of having the likes of Anderson and Broad? Pakistan and India bowl and bat better on their wickets. We do the same on ours. That is Test cricket.golfaddick said:Ah, I bet the West Indies would love to take the Sabina Park wicket from 1998 with them wherever they go.
Nothing like a home grown strip when you want to win a deciding Test.
A pitch on day one should give the team batting first a chance to get between 300 & 400. The best batsman in the world has struggled to get into double figures in his last 2 innings.
I agree about low scored but India were 46 all out against NZ. Let's see how many Pakistan make. But, when all is said and done, Pakistan have to bat last. So, we should be in the driving seat even if this ends up a two and a half day Test. And we've had plenty of them under McCullum. It's just that we've been the ones winning.
I agree that teams can prepare wickets to suit themselves but there’s a limit to that where it stops being about the cricket. Stokes and Mccullum are hardly going to criticise before the test starts or risk being reprimanded and Athers is still broadcasting to the nation of Pakistan so will understandably be being careful with his words.
So, once and for all, I will ask you and the others saying that this pitch is unfair. Do we or do we not have a massive advantage in winning the toss if this wicket is as bad as we are saying?
Of course both teams play on the same pitch and the toss can go either way, I’d be making the same points if Pakistan were in exactly the same predicament as England. It just makes for poor cricket in my opinion.
We’re never going to agree on this one which is totally ok. Rather than clog the thread up let’s agree to disagree and hope that Smith, Atkinson and Ahmed can add a decent number of runs to the total!0 -
158-6 (47) at drinks0
-
There has been a conscious decision not to play the sweep shot. That has helped. In reply to Rameez saying that the pitch seems to have "calmed down a bit", Nasser says that these two have just applied themselves and played with a straight bat. Crawley and Stokes were out driving at balls that weren't there, Root went back to one he shouldn't have done to and both Pope and Brook were out sweeping and just missing the ball.0
-
Nasser "England realised at lunch this wasn't a 100-5 pitch. You just have to apply yourself. There are no demons in this wicket. You can bat on it".0
- Sponsored links:
-
50 partnership between Smith and Atkinson0
-
Excellent and chanceless 50* (94)
183-6 (55)0 -
Realistically no way Smith should be batting so low. Would imagine whenever Stokes/Root hang up the bat (hopefully a while away) he’ll shoot up the order2
-
Atherton: "have conditions changed? I don't think so. It's just these two that have played them better". Our shot selection has been much better. These two have earned the right to take the game to Pakistan by batting together for over 20 overs.
207-6 (57)0 -
this wicket turning into a road - getting better and better.
too much advantage batting 4th on this track
need a fair contest between bat and ball4 -
He could certainly bat in the top 4 but probably shouldn't if he has the gloves especially under the McCullum regime where he could regularly be keeping for two days plus at any one time. 5 with the gloves would probably be optimum. I don't think that it's a coincidence that Smith's best innings to date has come when he is fresh and clear in mind.fenaddick said:Realistically no way Smith should be batting so low. Would imagine whenever Stokes/Root hang up the bat (hopefully a while away) he’ll shoot up the order2 -
100 partnership up0
-
I'm more concerned that the likes of Canters and Blackpool won't let us forget who these two play for!MrOneLung said:this wicket turning into a road - getting better and better.
too much advantage batting 4th on this track
need a fair contest between bat and ball3 -
Can’t argue with that one being a poor shot!0
-
Atkinson's one mistake - Noman holds the ball back and he is through with the shot too early and is caught and bowled for 39 (71)
225-7 (59.4)0 - Sponsored links:
-
5
-
Addick Addict said:
I'm more concerned that the likes of Canters and Blackpool won't let us forget who these two play for!MrOneLung said:this wicket turning into a road - getting better and better.
too much advantage batting 4th on this track
need a fair contest between bat and ball
See what I mean!!!!blackpool72 said:2 -
1) on a pitch like this I dont think there is any advantage in winning the toss. With bad batting we could have been 150 all out. Pakistan get 350 and dont need to bat again.Addick Addict said:
Answer theses questions Golfie -golfaddick said:
This.fenaddick said:Addick Addict said:
Because he played the wrong shots. Babar has been dropped for getting low scores and he was the world number one at one point. They all make mistakes.golfaddick said:
I just like to see a fair test between bat & ball. Not a 150 all out and over within 3 days.......nor 700/5 and drawn after 5 days.Addick Addict said:
Please stop this agenda. As McCullum says, all teams prepare wickets to suit their bowlers. Why do we produce green seamers instead of bunsen burners? Did you complain when England bowled Australia out for 60 and Broad took 8-15? Or every other occasion when we have skittled the opposition because of having the likes of Anderson and Broad? Pakistan and India bowl and bat better on their wickets. We do the same on ours. That is Test cricket.golfaddick said:Ah, I bet the West Indies would love to take the Sabina Park wicket from 1998 with them wherever they go.
Nothing like a home grown strip when you want to win a deciding Test.
A pitch on day one should give the team batting first a chance to get between 300 & 400. The best batsman in the world has struggled to get into double figures in his last 2 innings.
I agree about low scored but India were 46 all out against NZ. Let's see how many Pakistan make. But, when all is said and done, Pakistan have to bat last. So, we should be in the driving seat even if this ends up a two and a half day Test. And we've had plenty of them under McCullum. It's just that we've been the ones winning.
I agree that teams can prepare wickets to suit themselves but there’s a limit to that where it stops being about the cricket. Stokes and Mccullum are hardly going to criticise before the test starts or risk being reprimanded and Athers is still broadcasting to the nation of Pakistan so will understandably be being careful with his words.
(1) Do we or do we not have a massive advantage in winning the toss if this wicket is as bad as we are saying?
(2) Could five of our six dismissals been avoided?
2) I haven't seen any of put dismissals si cant comment. Just from what I read on the BBC live commentary it seems we were getting out LBW to balls keeping low, which us not good in the first 2 sessions of a Test match.
But it all seems to have flattened out & there are no demons. Just bad batting from the top order.0 -
Feel sorry for Smith. Applied himself so well until that final shot where he was trying to play it more square than the previous ones he had hit for 6 and ended up just hitting it straight up and caught by the keeper. Superb 91 (119).
243-81 -
It hasn't flattened out. Bad batting as you say. We just stopped playing cross batted shots and picked our battles better. We were 56-0, then lost 6 wickets for 62. We lost 18 wickets for 162 in the last Test. Again because we didn't apply ourselves.golfaddick said:
1) on a pitch like this I dont think there is any advantage in winning the toss. With bad batting we could have been 150 all out. Pakistan get 350 and dont need to bat again.Addick Addict said:
Answer theses questions Golfie -golfaddick said:
This.fenaddick said:Addick Addict said:
Because he played the wrong shots. Babar has been dropped for getting low scores and he was the world number one at one point. They all make mistakes.golfaddick said:
I just like to see a fair test between bat & ball. Not a 150 all out and over within 3 days.......nor 700/5 and drawn after 5 days.Addick Addict said:
Please stop this agenda. As McCullum says, all teams prepare wickets to suit their bowlers. Why do we produce green seamers instead of bunsen burners? Did you complain when England bowled Australia out for 60 and Broad took 8-15? Or every other occasion when we have skittled the opposition because of having the likes of Anderson and Broad? Pakistan and India bowl and bat better on their wickets. We do the same on ours. That is Test cricket.golfaddick said:Ah, I bet the West Indies would love to take the Sabina Park wicket from 1998 with them wherever they go.
Nothing like a home grown strip when you want to win a deciding Test.
A pitch on day one should give the team batting first a chance to get between 300 & 400. The best batsman in the world has struggled to get into double figures in his last 2 innings.
I agree about low scored but India were 46 all out against NZ. Let's see how many Pakistan make. But, when all is said and done, Pakistan have to bat last. So, we should be in the driving seat even if this ends up a two and a half day Test. And we've had plenty of them under McCullum. It's just that we've been the ones winning.
I agree that teams can prepare wickets to suit themselves but there’s a limit to that where it stops being about the cricket. Stokes and Mccullum are hardly going to criticise before the test starts or risk being reprimanded and Athers is still broadcasting to the nation of Pakistan so will understandably be being careful with his words.
(1) Do we or do we not have a massive advantage in winning the toss if this wicket is as bad as we are saying?
(2) Could five of our six dismissals been avoided?
2) I haven't seen any of put dismissals si cant comment. Just from what I read on the BBC live commentary it seems we were getting out LBW to balls keeping low, which us not good in the first 2 sessions of a Test match.
But it all seems to have flattened out & there are no demons. Just bad batting from the top order.0 -
3 soft dismissal for the Surrey boys though 😉Addick Addict said:Addick Addict said:
I'm more concerned that the likes of Canters and Blackpool won't let us forget who these two play for!MrOneLung said:this wicket turning into a road - getting better and better.
too much advantage batting 4th on this track
need a fair contest between bat and ball
See what I mean!!!!blackpool72 said:
Good knock from Smith, shame he couldn’t hold back a bit but hard to criticise really1 -
244-8 (63) at tea0
-
Dont think I've seen this in years......if ever.
In the India v NZ Test 61 overs were bowled by tea.
In this Test match 63 overs were bowled by tea.
Is this a record ??0 -
From being 118 for 6 that's a pretty good recovery on this wicketAddick Addict said:244-8 (63) at tea0 -
On the second day of the Lord’s Test of 1946, India and England bowled 161 overs.golfaddick said:Dont think I've seen this in years......if ever.
In the India v NZ Test 61 overs were bowled by tea.
In this Test match 63 overs were bowled by tea.
Is this a record ??
In the Lord's Test 100 years ago, England made 200 in the first season of the second day. In that session, South Africa bowled 57 overs.0
