well in a 4 man attack there is an obvious reason.....Digby wrote:And they're doing it at 3 runs an over too which is spot on. I'm with Boycott on this, why hit the slow bowler out of the attack just so you get to face more pace bowlingBanquo wrote:Key to this is scoring off Lyon- if he can be milked it gives Paine big problems as he can't just rotate the pace bowlers.
Cricket fred
-
- Posts: 19353
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: Cicket fred
-
- Posts: 5608
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:49 pm
Re: Cicket fred
Because during overs 60-80 the ball is soft and the quicks aren't as dangerous whilst tiring them out.Digby wrote:And they're doing it at 3 runs an over too which is spot on. I'm with Boycott on this, why hit the slow bowler out of the attack just so you get to face more pace bowlingBanquo wrote:Key to this is scoring off Lyon- if he can be milked it gives Paine big problems as he can't just rotate the pace bowlers.
Pattinson is an injury waiting to happen. Get as many miles in him as possible.
-
- Posts: 19353
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: Cicket fred
Good grindage so far, not easy out there. Slow and turny.
- Puja
- Posts: 17834
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:16 pm
Re: Cicket fred
Burns into the 80s, but it's a long way from being as good an innings as it sounds. He's edged streakily through the slips at least three times, incorrectly given not out to an LBW shout, loads of play and misses, inside edges somehow missing his stumps, and he didn't have a clue what was happening off Lyon's bowling early on.
Maybe he needs a run of luck to build confidence and unlock his potential. If so, he certainly won't get much luckier than he has today.
Puja
Maybe he needs a run of luck to build confidence and unlock his potential. If so, he certainly won't get much luckier than he has today.
Puja
Backist Monk
-
- Posts: 19353
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: Cicket fred
or, good for him, ballsy knock in challenging conditions, under a lot of pressure.Puja wrote:Burns into the 80s, but it's a long way from being as good an innings as it sounds. He's edged streakily through the slips at least three times, incorrectly given not out to an LBW shout, loads of play and misses, inside edges somehow missing his stumps, and he didn't have a clue what was happening off Lyon's bowling early on.
Maybe he needs a run of luck to build confidence and unlock his potential. If so, he certainly won't get much luckier than he has today.
Puja
-
- Posts: 13436
- Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:17 am
Re: Cicket fred
How many times does it actually work Vs giving away some daft wickets? Unless you need to be scoring at 4+ then trundling along at 3 runs an over not taking extra risk is fine by me. Similar if a batsman is given the ball don't hit him out of the attack, it should be much easier to face Smith than Siddle so let them give Smith 7 overs if they're willingBanquo wrote:well in a 4 man attack there is an obvious reason.....Digby wrote:And they're doing it at 3 runs an over too which is spot on. I'm with Boycott on this, why hit the slow bowler out of the attack just so you get to face more pace bowlingBanquo wrote:Key to this is scoring off Lyon- if he can be milked it gives Paine big problems as he can't just rotate the pace bowlers.
-
- Posts: 19353
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: Cicket fred
I'd think the risk for a quality batsman like Root is pretty minimal, and the reward pretty high if you want to get a big score; plus you can see that Paine was already uncomfortable with Lyon shipping over 3 an over. You saw how England suffered by having only 4 bowlers and Ali not able to tie an end down. I think the logic is quite compelling- if you have a champ like Warne, I'd agree that hitting him out of the attack is tricky (but then you'd probably rather face a seamer than him in his pomp).Digby wrote:How many times does it actually work Vs giving away some daft wickets? Unless you need to be scoring at 4+ then trundling along at 3 runs an over not taking extra risk is fine by me. Similar if a batsman is given the ball don't hit him out of the attack, it should be much easier to face Smith than Siddle so let them give Smith 7 overs if they're willingBanquo wrote:well in a 4 man attack there is an obvious reason.....Digby wrote:
And they're doing it at 3 runs an over too which is spot on. I'm with Boycott on this, why hit the slow bowler out of the attack just so you get to face more pace bowling
Boycs was probably thinking about facing 4 West Indian quicks, plus an occasional spinner.
- Puja
- Posts: 17834
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:16 pm
Re: Cicket fred
True, and I'm hoping that it is a turning point for him. However, it feels more like his luck's changed than that he's settled into international cricket.Banquo wrote:or, good for him, ballsy knock in challenging conditions, under a lot of pressure.Puja wrote:Burns into the 80s, but it's a long way from being as good an innings as it sounds. He's edged streakily through the slips at least three times, incorrectly given not out to an LBW shout, loads of play and misses, inside edges somehow missing his stumps, and he didn't have a clue what was happening off Lyon's bowling early on.
Maybe he needs a run of luck to build confidence and unlock his potential. If so, he certainly won't get much luckier than he has today.
Puja
Puja
Backist Monk
-
- Posts: 19353
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: Cicket fred
Hope so. He has a very good county record.Puja wrote:True, and I'm hoping that it is a turning point for him. However, it feels more like his luck's changed than that he's settled into international cricket.Banquo wrote:or, good for him, ballsy knock in challenging conditions, under a lot of pressure.Puja wrote:Burns into the 80s, but it's a long way from being as good an innings as it sounds. He's edged streakily through the slips at least three times, incorrectly given not out to an LBW shout, loads of play and misses, inside edges somehow missing his stumps, and he didn't have a clue what was happening off Lyon's bowling early on.
Maybe he needs a run of luck to build confidence and unlock his potential. If so, he certainly won't get much luckier than he has today.
Puja
Puja
-
- Posts: 13436
- Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:17 am
Re: Cicket fred
Banquo wrote:I'd think the risk for a quality batsman like Root is pretty minimal, and the reward pretty high if you want to get a big score; plus you can see that Paine was already uncomfortable with Lyon shipping over 3 an over. You saw how England suffered by having only 4 bowlers and Ali not able to tie an end down. I think the logic is quite compelling- if you have a champ like Warne, I'd agree that hitting him out of the attack is tricky (but then you'd probably rather face a seamer than him in his pomp).Digby wrote:How many times does it actually work Vs giving away some daft wickets? Unless you need to be scoring at 4+ then trundling along at 3 runs an over not taking extra risk is fine by me. Similar if a batsman is given the ball don't hit him out of the attack, it should be much easier to face Smith than Siddle so let them give Smith 7 overs if they're willingBanquo wrote: well in a 4 man attack there is an obvious reason.....
Boycs was probably thinking about facing 4 West Indian quicks, plus an occasional spinner.
Teams get into trouble trying to hit Ali out of the attack, and Lyons whilst no Warne is a far better bowler then Moeen.
Also Is Paine that bothered with the runs off Lyons? How many less can he reasonably expect him to go for?
-
- Posts: 19353
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: Cicket fred
He’s not exactly overbowling him. Mind he’s not bowling that well.Digby wrote:Banquo wrote:I'd think the risk for a quality batsman like Root is pretty minimal, and the reward pretty high if you want to get a big score; plus you can see that Paine was already uncomfortable with Lyon shipping over 3 an over. You saw how England suffered by having only 4 bowlers and Ali not able to tie an end down. I think the logic is quite compelling- if you have a champ like Warne, I'd agree that hitting him out of the attack is tricky (but then you'd probably rather face a seamer than him in his pomp).Digby wrote:
How many times does it actually work Vs giving away some daft wickets? Unless you need to be scoring at 4+ then trundling along at 3 runs an over not taking extra risk is fine by me. Similar if a batsman is given the ball don't hit him out of the attack, it should be much easier to face Smith than Siddle so let them give Smith 7 overs if they're willing
Boycs was probably thinking about facing 4 West Indian quicks, plus an occasional spinner.
Teams get into trouble trying to hit Ali out of the attack, and Lyons whilst no Warne is a far better bowler then Moeen.
Also Is Paine that bothered with the runs off Lyons? How many less can he reasonably expect him to go for?
I think you need to open your mind to the concept that you don’t have to hit a bowler out of the attack- you can render him impotent and get him out of it, which you must agree would be a serious pain for Paine.
Change of ball made a big difference
-
- Posts: 13436
- Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:17 am
Re: Cicket fred
if England could have knocked another 15-20 runs of those Lyons overs without coughing up 1-2 wickets I'd be very happy, but I don't much trust our batsman. Spin takes longer to pick up wickets, 1st innings especially, so the more overs at 3 run an over the betterBanquo wrote:He’s not exactly overbowling him. Mind he’s not bowling that well.Digby wrote:Banquo wrote: I'd think the risk for a quality batsman like Root is pretty minimal, and the reward pretty high if you want to get a big score; plus you can see that Paine was already uncomfortable with Lyon shipping over 3 an over. You saw how England suffered by having only 4 bowlers and Ali not able to tie an end down. I think the logic is quite compelling- if you have a champ like Warne, I'd agree that hitting him out of the attack is tricky (but then you'd probably rather face a seamer than him in his pomp).
Boycs was probably thinking about facing 4 West Indian quicks, plus an occasional spinner.
Teams get into trouble trying to hit Ali out of the attack, and Lyons whilst no Warne is a far better bowler then Moeen.
Also Is Paine that bothered with the runs off Lyons? How many less can he reasonably expect him to go for?
I think you need to open your mind to the concept that you don’t have to hit a bowler out of the attack- you can render him impotent and get him out of it, which you must agree would be a serious pain for Paine.
Change of ball made a big difference
- Galfon
- Posts: 4297
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 8:07 pm
Re: Cicket fred
267 - 4, 17 adrift going into D3.
Eng. in the box seat - another 150+ a real possibility on this pitch & players to follow, then a blast in the evening maybe given the forecast.
The injuries to Archer, Anderson & Wood ( out for series ) have taken the gloss off things a bit.
Eng. in the box seat - another 150+ a real possibility on this pitch & players to follow, then a blast in the evening maybe given the forecast.
The injuries to Archer, Anderson & Wood ( out for series ) have taken the gloss off things a bit.
-
- Posts: 5928
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 3:42 pm
Re: Cicket fred
A good day but work to do.
Ball still newish and the Aussie quicks will come back refreshed tomorrow morning. You'd hope for a lead in excess of 100 but it wont be easy.
Could be another absorbing days cricket.
Ball still newish and the Aussie quicks will come back refreshed tomorrow morning. You'd hope for a lead in excess of 100 but it wont be easy.
Could be another absorbing days cricket.
- Puja
- Posts: 17834
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:16 pm
Re: Cicket fred
That's what really ought to happen. What will happen is that Burns will get out without adding to his overnight score and we'll collapse for 292 all out.Galfon wrote:267 - 4, 17 adrift going into D3.
Eng. in the box seat - another 150+ a real possibility on this pitch & players to follow, then a blast in the evening maybe given the forecast.
Puja
Backist Monk
- Mellsblue
- Posts: 14580
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 7:58 am
Re: Cicket fred
292?!?! Seems overly optimistic.Puja wrote:That's what really ought to happen. What will happen is that Burns will get out without adding to his overnight score and we'll collapse for 292 all out.Galfon wrote:267 - 4, 17 adrift going into D3.
Eng. in the box seat - another 150+ a real possibility on this pitch & players to follow, then a blast in the evening maybe given the forecast.
Puja
- Galfon
- Posts: 4297
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 8:07 pm
Re: Cicket fred
Let's try and be positive here..the Burnley Lara is bringing up the rear; he can knock up 25 on one leg on a good day.
and hard on the heels of the Taunton Tendulkar too!

Last edited by Galfon on Fri Aug 02, 2019 9:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Stom
- Posts: 5846
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 10:57 am
Re: Cicket fred
I hope one of Bairstow or Ali get a few. Or both!
Would be good to pile on 400ish.
Would be good to pile on 400ish.
-
- Posts: 3623
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 10:46 pm
Re: Cicket fred
Did well there considering. Rode our luck quite a few times. I lost count of the number of deliveries that came within a gnat's whisker of catching an edge.
Chuffed for Burns. Just hope he and Stokes can see out a couple of sessions, then Bairstow can come in a smash a quick 50 before the tail add a few dozen.
Pretty much in the bag now
Chuffed for Burns. Just hope he and Stokes can see out a couple of sessions, then Bairstow can come in a smash a quick 50 before the tail add a few dozen.
Pretty much in the bag now

-
- Posts: 19353
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: Cicket fred
so it’s our batsmen you don’t trust, rather than the principle being wrong?Digby wrote:if England could have knocked another 15-20 runs of those Lyons overs without coughing up 1-2 wickets I'd be very happy, but I don't much trust our batsman. Spin takes longer to pick up wickets, 1st innings especially, so the more overs at 3 run an over the betterBanquo wrote:He’s not exactly overbowling him. Mind he’s not bowling that well.Digby wrote:
Teams get into trouble trying to hit Ali out of the attack, and Lyons whilst no Warne is a far better bowler then Moeen.
Also Is Paine that bothered with the runs off Lyons? How many less can he reasonably expect him to go for?
I think you need to open your mind to the concept that you don’t have to hit a bowler out of the attack- you can render him impotent and get him out of it, which you must agree would be a serious pain for Paine.
Change of ball made a big difference
- Puja
- Posts: 17834
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:16 pm
Re: Cicket fred
Burns out first over he faces on day 3.
It's not happened yet, just saving time by typing it now.
Puja
ETA. Fair play, survived two half overs without aimlessly dangling his bat outside off stump. I stand corrected. Keep at it lad!
It's not happened yet, just saving time by typing it now.
Puja
ETA. Fair play, survived two half overs without aimlessly dangling his bat outside off stump. I stand corrected. Keep at it lad!
Backist Monk
- Galfon
- Posts: 4297
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 8:07 pm
Re: Cicket fred
You'll have to pay a penance if guilty of harbingering doom without consequence...the Judge may be called upon.!
In the Brum area today..travelled through New St earlier.
conditions are sultry ..may be some movement in the air
for the better bowlers.
In the Brum area today..travelled through New St earlier.
conditions are sultry ..may be some movement in the air
for the better bowlers.
- Puja
- Posts: 17834
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:16 pm
Re: Cicket fred
I see both your points. Hitting a slow bowler out of the attack does bring the fast bowlers in, but it has the massive advantage of not letting the fielding captain have what they want. The slow bowler is easier in the short run, but knacker out the fast bowlers by not giving them rest and you end up with a much easier game all round.Banquo wrote:so it’s our batsmen you don’t trust, rather than the principle being wrong?Digby wrote:if England could have knocked another 15-20 runs of those Lyons overs without coughing up 1-2 wickets I'd be very happy, but I don't much trust our batsman. Spin takes longer to pick up wickets, 1st innings especially, so the more overs at 3 run an over the betterBanquo wrote: He’s not exactly overbowling him. Mind he’s not bowling that well.
I think you need to open your mind to the concept that you don’t have to hit a bowler out of the attack- you can render him impotent and get him out of it, which you must agree would be a serious pain for Paine.
Change of ball made a big difference
However, the point that our batsmen can't reliably be trusted to do such a thing is very, very valid. As such, we're better off milking a spinner and saving our wickets, even if it is giving the oppo fast bowlers respite.
Puja
Backist Monk
- Puja
- Posts: 17834
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:16 pm
Re: Cicket fred
Still hasn't added to his overnight score though, so my previous gloom-laden prediction is still viable. Ugh, and just played and missed again. Come on Rory!Galfon wrote:You'll have to pay a penance if guilty of harbingering doom without consequence...the Judge may be called upon.!
In the Brum area today..travelled through New St earlier.
conditions are sultry ..may be some movement in the air
for the better bowlers.
Puja
ETA. Yes! A mighty single to get him off 125. Now let's set eyes on the 150.
Backist Monk