Cricket fred

[Banquo]

It was awesome having McGrath at Wuss, and those memories help assuage time spent watching Ahktar.

Pakistan did mange some restriction to the run flow against England, but didn't do it pushing the batters back, and didn't do it with a field cutting off the singles. Also part of the run saving might have been England moving from having a hit and a hope to thinking the win was on and not wanting to throw away a surprise chance for a win.

As I implied, your dogmatism has few equals - . England did change their strategy I agree- one reason being that boundaries were harder to get off Abbas. This started with your comment that Pakistan have a group of seamers and leggies who go chasing wickets, and what they'd give for someone who'd tie down an end- and in my view they have (in Abbas) , and he was in my view put on to tie down an end- you disagree, crack on.

[Digby]

It was awesome having McGrath at Wuss, and those memories help assuage time spent watching Ahktar.

Pakistan did mange some restriction to the run flow against England, but didn't do it pushing the batters back, and didn't do it with a field cutting off the singles. Also part of the run saving might have been England moving from having a hit and a hope to thinking the win was on and not wanting to throw away a surprise chance for a win.

As I implied, your dogmatism has few equals - . England did change their strategy I agree- one reason being that boundaries were harder to get off Abbas. This started with your comment that Pakistan have a group of seamers and leggies who go chasing wickets, and what they'd give for someone who'd tie down an end- and in my view they have (in Abbas) , and he was in my view put on to tie down an end- you disagree, crack on.

Yes, because Pakistan defended with plenty of men covering out in the deep, too many imo, thus the idea there's another way to go about trying to squeeze the runs and find a different way to apply pressure . You can do it the way Pakistan did it, merely it seems harder

[Banquo]

It was awesome having McGrath at Wuss, and those memories help assuage time spent watching Ahktar.

Pakistan did mange some restriction to the run flow against England, but didn't do it pushing the batters back, and didn't do it with a field cutting off the singles. Also part of the run saving might have been England moving from having a hit and a hope to thinking the win was on and not wanting to throw away a surprise chance for a win.

As I implied, your dogmatism has few equals - . England did change their strategy I agree- one reason being that boundaries were harder to get off Abbas. This started with your comment that Pakistan have a group of seamers and leggies who go chasing wickets, and what they'd give for someone who'd tie down an end- and in my view they have (in Abbas) , and he was in my view put on to tie down an end- you disagree, crack on.

Yes, because Pakistan defended with plenty of men covering out in the deep, too many imo, thus the idea there's another way to go about trying to squeeze the runs and find a different way to apply pressure . You can do it the way Pakistan did it, merely it seems harder

which is a different debate and question. You still appear to be contending that Abbas is not someone who can tie down an end, but whatever, frankly.

[Digby]

As I implied, your dogmatism has few equals - . England did change their strategy I agree- one reason being that boundaries were harder to get off Abbas. This started with your comment that Pakistan have a group of seamers and leggies who go chasing wickets, and what they'd give for someone who'd tie down an end- and in my view they have (in Abbas) , and he was in my view put on to tie down an end- you disagree, crack on.

Yes, because Pakistan defended with plenty of men covering out in the deep, too many imo, thus the idea there's another way to go about trying to squeeze the runs and find a different way to apply pressure . You can do it the way Pakistan did it, merely it seems harder

which is a different debate and question. You still appear to be contending that Abbas is not someone who can tie down an end, but whatever, frankly.

My comment wasn't so much they didn't tie down an end or ends, but more how they went about trying to do that is a harder model to enact.

[Banquo]

Yes, because Pakistan defended with plenty of men covering out in the deep, too many imo, thus the idea there's another way to go about trying to squeeze the runs and find a different way to apply pressure . You can do it the way Pakistan did it, merely it seems harder

which is a different debate and question. You still appear to be contending that Abbas is not someone who can tie down an end, but whatever, frankly.

My comment wasn't so much they didn't tie down an end or ends, but more how they went about trying to do that is a harder model to enact.

which is a different point, so cool.

[Digby]

which is a different debate and question. You still appear to be contending that Abbas is not someone who can tie down an end, but whatever, frankly.

My comment wasn't so much they didn't tie down an end or ends, but more how they went about trying to do that is a harder model to enact.

which is a different point, so cool.

I thought it was the point I made, well that McGrath said in that there were different ways to go about applying pressure on the run scoring front.

Additionally I noted something along the lines of what the've have given for a Hoggard and/or Giles, I didn't as I recall note if that was in the sense of augmenting what they had or otherwise

[Puja]

Right, so. Moving away from the same two posts being repeated ad infinitum - Ollie Robinson anyone? I haven't seen any county cricket so I know very little of him except that he used to play openside for Bristol.

Puja

[fivepointer]

Only seen Robinson bowl on youtube clips. Looks lively pace.
1st class record is 244 wkts at 21.8
Seems unlikely to get a game today but is obviously someone they are looking at seriously.

[Banquo]

My comment wasn't so much they didn't tie down an end or ends, but more how they went about trying to do that is a harder model to enact.

which is a different point, so cool.

I thought it was the point I made, well that McGrath said in that there were different ways to go about applying pressure on the run scoring front.

Additionally I noted something along the lines of what the've have given for a Hoggard and/or Giles, I didn't as I recall note if that was in the sense of augmenting what they had or otherwise

for fear of aggravating a mod, this was the circular argument we were having....
You-
.......And Pakistan have a group of seamers who go hunting wickets and 2 leggies who don't tie down an end, what they'd have given for a Hoggard or Giles today.......
Me-
Abbas demonstrably ties down an end.

[Digby]

which is a different point, so cool.

I thought it was the point I made, well that McGrath said in that there were different ways to go about applying pressure on the run scoring front.

Additionally I noted something along the lines of what the've have given for a Hoggard and/or Giles, I didn't as I recall note if that was in the sense of augmenting what they had or otherwise

for fear of aggravating a mod, this was the circular argument we were having....
You-
.......And Pakistan have a group of seamers who go hunting wickets and 2 leggies who don't tie down an end, what they'd have given for a Hoggard or Giles today.......
Me-
Abbas demonstrably ties down an end.

Meh, you're picking part of a quote there, after (from memory rather than checking) noting the Mcgrath comment on possible routes to slow scoring, and you're chosing not to consider that might merely have been having a bowler like a Hoggard or Giles to augment a bowler like Abbas.

Seeing as I was pushed on Abbas I did comment and would still he'd sit more in a camp of those who'd chase wickets rather than those who'd bowl to limit the batters supporting their other bowlers and/or a shift in strategy

And again I take the point Abbas can tie down an end, but how you go about it and the fields you set aren't irrelevant in all this, at least not to my way of thinking. Others likely take little but comfort they don't have to share my way of thinking.

[Big D]

Would be good if Jimmy rips through them.

[Banquo]

I thought it was the point I made, well that McGrath said in that there were different ways to go about applying pressure on the run scoring front.

Additionally I noted something along the lines of what the've have given for a Hoggard and/or Giles, I didn't as I recall note if that was in the sense of augmenting what they had or otherwise

for fear of aggravating a mod, this was the circular argument we were having....
You-
.......And Pakistan have a group of seamers who go hunting wickets and 2 leggies who don't tie down an end, what they'd have given for a Hoggard or Giles today.......
Me-
Abbas demonstrably ties down an end.

Meh, you're picking part of a quote there, after (from memory rather than checking) noting the Mcgrath comment on possible routes to slow scoring, and you're chosing not to consider that might merely have been having a bowler like a Hoggard or Giles to augment a bowler like Abbas.

Seeing as I was pushed on Abbas I did comment and would still he'd sit more in a camp of those who'd chase wickets rather than those who'd bowl to limit the batters supporting their other bowlers and/or a shift in strategy

And again I take the point Abbas can tie down an end, but how you go about it and the fields you set aren't irrelevant in all this, at least not to my way of thinking. Others likely take little but comfort they don't have to share my way of thinking.

I just think you are just wrong about having no bowler to tie down an end. I get all the rest, hence picking you up on that part.

[Banquo]

Would be good if Jimmy rips through them.

he's 100% so far

[Banquo]

need to catch better but good position anyway.

[Banquo]

Have to be impressed with Anderson. He did look a bit old and tired at OT, but he's in his 23rd over and bowling very good fast medium pace (84+ mph) swing and seam with some at 88 mph....good stuff.

[Banquo]

Not v impressed with bowling to Rizwan, pants by Curran. Really frustrating- lost concentration before the new ball, now pants from Woakes. Shipping valuable runs too softly.

....and it continues with Woakes bowling garbage, frankly. Bad cricket as Warne says, from england

[Banquo]

Break at the right time for England. Root-drift set in there and Curran and Woakes were dire.

[Banquo]

Quelle surprise, go back to bowling normally and hey presto.....

[Banquo]

This could get ugly.

[Digby]

Not sure how much cricket we can fit in now, do the teams conspire to even try and force a finish with back to back declarations, or do England just put their series lead in the back pocket? Interest of the game Vs interest of England

[Banquo]

Glad Crawley is looking to take his opportunity. Crawley, Root, Pope, Stokes, Buttler has a decent ring to it 3-7....just need the openers to stay in for a bit longer , Burns is having a rotten series so far.

[Banquo]

Pressure on Buttler yet again!

[Puja]

Pressure on Buttler yet again!

Appears to be doing pretty well with it - onto 24 at tea and not looking too troubled. His wicketkeeping's still not good enough, but he's justifying his position with his batting right now (although a quick loss of his wicket after the interval will change that opinion).

Puja

[Banquo]

Pressure on Buttler yet again!

Appears to be doing pretty well with it - onto 24 at tea and not looking too troubled. His wicketkeeping's still not good enough, but he's justifying his position with his batting right now (although a quick loss of his wicket after the interval will change that opinion).

Puja

I think his lack of keeping ability is a little overstated, he's as good as Bairstow (better standing back, not as good standing up). Not as good as Foakes. That said he shouldn't be at 6, but he's knuckling down. They certainly are investing a lot in him though!

Cracking ton from creepy.

[Puja]

Pressure on Buttler yet again!

Appears to be doing pretty well with it - onto 24 at tea and not looking too troubled. His wicketkeeping's still not good enough, but he's justifying his position with his batting right now (although a quick loss of his wicket after the interval will change that opinion).

Puja

I think his lack of keeping ability is a little overstated, he's as good as Bairstow (better standing back, not as good standing up). Not as good as Foakes. That said he shouldn't be at 6, but he's knuckling down. They certainly are investing a lot in him though!

Cracking ton from creepy.

He's had a fair old run of mistakes this series and comparing him to Bairstow's keeping is not a compliment! Still, he has shown great improvement in his keeping and his batting is back to being good enough to keep him in the team regardless of the occasional wobble. 50 up while I'm typing!

Crawley looks an absolute belter - he just has such good technique. I'd want to keep him at 3 for the moment rather than even discuss him opening - he just brings a lot of other players down to a more comfortable position (Root at 4, Pope at 5, Stokes at 6, Buttler at 7), and Burns will regather form sooner or later.

Puja