Cricket fred

Post Reply
Big D
Posts: 5608
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:49 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Big D »

Stom wrote:
Big D wrote:
Puja wrote:
Cheeky, but not exactly wrong...

Archer would be above Anderson in the batting order, no? He's viewed as an all-rounder. Hell of a deep batting order that though. Could be key.

Puja
Yes, Archer will probably bat higher, arguably above Ali given Ali's recent form.
I doubt it. Ali will bat 8. They'll back him.
They will back him. Not sure why they will have him ahead of Woakes who apparently averages 40 in England (that may be over a certain time period as I just caught that on radio). But that is probably what they will do.
Big D
Posts: 5608
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:49 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Big D »

Archer left out.

Stokes listed at 5 with YJB and Buttler at 6 and 7.
User avatar
Puja
Posts: 17833
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:16 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Puja »

Big D wrote:Archer left out.

Stokes listed at 5 with YJB and Buttler at 6 and 7.
Makes sense - Archer's just back from injury and with little recent history of first class cricket. Combine that with Anderson only just back from injury and you can see why they didn't want to take a chance by having two half-fit fast bowlers. Broad looked in the mood against Ireland and he does raise his game for the Ashes.

Puja
Backist Monk
User avatar
Stom
Posts: 5846
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 10:57 am

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Stom »

Big D wrote:Archer left out.

Stokes listed at 5 with YJB and Buttler at 6 and 7.
Granuiad had it different: Buttler at 5, Stokes 6, Bairstow 7. I think that makes sense.
Big D
Posts: 5608
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:49 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Big D »

Stom wrote:
Big D wrote:Archer left out.

Stokes listed at 5 with YJB and Buttler at 6 and 7.
Granuiad had it different: Buttler at 5, Stokes 6, Bairstow 7. I think that makes sense.
I blame the twitter account of TMS and agree with you about it making sense.
User avatar
Stom
Posts: 5846
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 10:57 am

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Stom »

Big D wrote:
Stom wrote:
Big D wrote:Archer left out.

Stokes listed at 5 with YJB and Buttler at 6 and 7.
Granuiad had it different: Buttler at 5, Stokes 6, Bairstow 7. I think that makes sense.
I blame the twitter account of TMS and agree with you about it making sense.
Apart from Burns, who is so far out of form he might as well be orbiting Neptune, I like that team. Denly at 4, though, means he needs runs. We've got 101 batsmen who play middle order. Not many top 3.

Sibley has been mentioned, what's happened to Livingstone?
User avatar
Puja
Posts: 17833
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:16 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Puja »

Amyone else feel that, unless the pitch is screaming for another decision, that the correct call for both teams is to bowl first? Momentum is vital in an Ashes series and neither side will be keen to open with subjecting their batsmen to the other side's bowlers and losing the initiative.

Puja
Backist Monk
User avatar
Galfon
Posts: 4297
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 8:07 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Galfon »

Yes, there is always life in the pitch on the first morning and with some cloud knocking about and the relative strengths of bowlers over batters with both teams, this would be a good strategy to get one over early doors.
The rider would be it could only be a 3 day contest if the weather turns up, so to keep up the 11-up winning run at the Edge they'd need to get a move on. :)
Banquo
Posts: 19350
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Banquo »

good news for Root, the pressure of putting someone in often affects the bowling side! Plus Starc is out.
User avatar
Puja
Posts: 17833
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:16 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Puja »

Banquo wrote:good news for Root, the pressure of putting someone in often affects the bowling side! Plus Starc is out.
Agreed. You can't help but think that's a tactical error by Paine - he's talking about what the pitch will do on day 5, but I'm not sure the test will go beyond lunch on day 4. First session is going to be utterly crucial - if Australia go in with less than 2 wickets down, then it'll break England's spirits early.

Siddle has a history of being annoyingly good in these conditions, but I am happy not to see Starc, given the weakness of our batting lineup to fast, aggressive bowling.

Puja
Backist Monk
Banquo
Posts: 19350
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Banquo »

doh, good bowling,but golden chance to remove warner on review missed
Banquo
Posts: 19350
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Banquo »

Broad 0 for 2 on reviews, doh! jeez.
Banquo
Posts: 19350
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Banquo »

phew relief all round
Banquo
Posts: 19350
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Banquo »

lol no review by warner. Broad reaping benefit of JImmy being a miser.
Big D
Posts: 5608
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:49 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Big D »

Good start this.

Getting Smith soon would be massive.
User avatar
Which Tyler
Posts: 9362
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 8:43 pm
Location: Tewkesbury
Contact:

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Which Tyler »

Puja wrote:if Australia go in with less than 2 wickets down, then it'll break England's spirits early.
What about 4 down before lunch?
Banquo
Posts: 19350
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Banquo »

Big D wrote:Good start this.

Getting Smith soon would be massive.
yep. Though Head is no mug. Shame he isn't called Richard.
Banquo
Posts: 19350
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Banquo »

talk about letting em off the hook; Stokes and Moeen crap bowling. Suspect Anderson is struggling?
User avatar
Puja
Posts: 17833
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:16 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Puja »

Which Tyler wrote:
Puja wrote:if Australia go in with less than 2 wickets down, then it'll break England's spirits early.
What about 4 down before lunch?
This has aged well.

Puja
Backist Monk
Banquo
Posts: 19350
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Banquo »

Puja wrote:
Which Tyler wrote:
Puja wrote:if Australia go in with less than 2 wickets down, then it'll break England's spirits early.
What about 4 down before lunch?
This has aged well.

Puja
Think Oz will be happy tbh; Stokes has been terrible. As Boycs says, going in with Jimmy looks like a bad risk to have taken if he can't bowl north of 15 overs.
User avatar
Puja
Posts: 17833
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:16 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Puja »

Banquo wrote:
Puja wrote:
Which Tyler wrote: What about 4 down before lunch?
This has aged well.

Puja
Think Oz will be happy tbh; Stokes has been terrible. As Boycs says, going in with Jimmy looks like a bad risk to have taken if he can't bowl north of 15 overs.
And now he's gone off for a scan. It's a reasonable gamble to have made given his importance to the team, but with Ali and Stokes both looking toothless, it'll be a hard test.

Who was it who suggested dropping Burns and picking an extra bowler? We could use Curran right about now and he'd probably do better with the bat.

Puja
Backist Monk
Banquo
Posts: 19350
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Banquo »

Puja wrote:
Banquo wrote:
Puja wrote:
This has aged well.

Puja
Think Oz will be happy tbh; Stokes has been terrible. As Boycs says, going in with Jimmy looks like a bad risk to have taken if he can't bowl north of 15 overs.
And now he's gone off for a scan. It's a reasonable gamble to have made given his importance to the team, but with Ali and Stokes both looking toothless, it'll be a hard test.

Who was it who suggested dropping Burns and picking an extra bowler? We could use Curran right about now and he'd probably do better with the bat.

Puja
Clearly too big a risk on a calf- that's a really bad call. Suspect the team knew it, and that's when heads dropped. Stokes needs to get his act together big time now.
Banquo
Posts: 19350
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Banquo »

Phew.
Banquo
Posts: 19350
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Banquo »

doh. Close!
Banquo
Posts: 19350
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Banquo »

review city arizona
Post Reply