Cricket fred

[Which Tyler]

So this appeared in the village overnight

[Banquo]

So this appeared in the village overnight

[Puja]

So this appeared in the village overnight

Image isn't showing up for me - could you describe?

Puja

[WaspInWales]

So this appeared in the village overnight

Image isn't showing up for me - could you describe?

Puja

Someone has prefixed a sign post of Stokes Lane with Sir Ben [emoji23]

Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk

[WaspInWales]

Catching up on the highlights. That innings was unbelievable. Truly unbelievable. Even better was Nathan ‘end careers’ Lyon getting smacked around the ground then sh!tting his pants for the runout. The Aussies went to pieces under pressure.
Biggest question of the day is what was going on with Vaughan’s cuffs.

Lyons would have the slim defence he got Stokes out lbw with Stokes taking a big old heave at the ball. Sadly the Aussies had wasted their last review on a lbw which not only pitched outside leg but almost pitched on the wrong wicket. Hardly the only moment of luck for Stokes as he went on the rampage

I would imagine Lyons is also coping flak for not having a mystery ball, because it's just that easy to be more akin to a Warne or Murali. And of course he's having to put up too with the idea he's significantly increased his lead as the bowler in test history to have conceded the most 6s

That was part of the glory of Stokes's innings - he had no right to score as he did and, every time, luck was with him. Some of his sixes he didn't catch properly and the entirety of the ground held their breath watching it fly, death or glory, before erupting in a wall of noise when it just cleared the fielder on the boundary. It was like a football game - everyone leaping to their feet in unison as it clears the diving player.

I'd be fuming with Paine if I were Aussie though. That review was utterly pointless and to have it rubbed in his face with Lyon having got Stokes out was incredible. Does anyone know if Stokes got a tickle on the ball as I don't think anyone checked ultra-edge and that's the only thing that would've saved him.

Puja

I don't think ultra edge showed a nick.

I hope the Aussies are sick as the proverbial parrots today.

Haven't had a look at the Sydney Morning Herald yet. It's always good for a laugh whenever England beat Australia at any sport [emoji16]

Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk

[Puja]

Lyons would have the slim defence he got Stokes out lbw with Stokes taking a big old heave at the ball. Sadly the Aussies had wasted their last review on a lbw which not only pitched outside leg but almost pitched on the wrong wicket. Hardly the only moment of luck for Stokes as he went on the rampage

I would imagine Lyons is also coping flak for not having a mystery ball, because it's just that easy to be more akin to a Warne or Murali. And of course he's having to put up too with the idea he's significantly increased his lead as the bowler in test history to have conceded the most 6s

That was part of the glory of Stokes's innings - he had no right to score as he did and, every time, luck was with him. Some of his sixes he didn't catch properly and the entirety of the ground held their breath watching it fly, death or glory, before erupting in a wall of noise when it just cleared the fielder on the boundary. It was like a football game - everyone leaping to their feet in unison as it clears the diving player.

I'd be fuming with Paine if I were Aussie though. That review was utterly pointless and to have it rubbed in his face with Lyon having got Stokes out was incredible. Does anyone know if Stokes got a tickle on the ball as I don't think anyone checked ultra-edge and that's the only thing that would've saved him.

Puja

I don't think ultra edge showed a nick.

I hope the Aussies are sick as the proverbial parrots today.

Haven't had a look at the Sydney Morning Herald yet. It's always good for a laugh whenever England beat Australia at any sport [emoji16]

Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk

The SMH are being annoyingly even-handed. It's one part vilifying Paine's decision-making and one part genuine congratulations.

Puja

[WaspInWales]

That was part of the glory of Stokes's innings - he had no right to score as he did and, every time, luck was with him. Some of his sixes he didn't catch properly and the entirety of the ground held their breath watching it fly, death or glory, before erupting in a wall of noise when it just cleared the fielder on the boundary. It was like a football game - everyone leaping to their feet in unison as it clears the diving player.

I'd be fuming with Paine if I were Aussie though. That review was utterly pointless and to have it rubbed in his face with Lyon having got Stokes out was incredible. Does anyone know if Stokes got a tickle on the ball as I don't think anyone checked ultra-edge and that's the only thing that would've saved him.

Puja

I don't think ultra edge showed a nick.

I hope the Aussies are sick as the proverbial parrots today.

Haven't had a look at the Sydney Morning Herald yet. It's always good for a laugh whenever England beat Australia at any sport [emoji16]

Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk

The SMH are being annoyingly even-handed. It's one part vilifying Paine's decision-making and one part genuine congratulations.

Puja

Yeah, just had a look and I'm a bit disappointed tbh.

Think I'm gonna send them an email to complain [emoji23]

Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk

[Galfon]

Smith is expected to play in the 4th. test up the road starting Thur. 4th (Old Traff. Is a different arena these days and will be another noisy one).
The series will go down as Smith's or Stokes's Ashes - sure there's a cheesy headline in there somewhere...
A slight shift to Eng. one suspects after Leeds but Aus. are scrappers and will come back full on.

[Stom]

All depends on if our openers can score some runs and if we can get Smith out cheaply.

[canta_brian]

When is the team announced?

[Mellsblue]

All depends on if our openers can score some runs and if we can get Smith out cheaply.

So you think we’ll lose?!?!?

[Stom]

All depends on if our openers can score some runs and if we can get Smith out cheaply.

So you think we’ll lose?!?!?

I think it's going to be tight, no matter what.

Aus are as bad as we are, we're just more prone to collapses.

Best case scenario, Roy finally gets his start and kicks on for a half century while Burns shuffles around for another 50. Then Root comes in when the ball's a little old and can finally get a 100. That gives Stokes, Bairstow, and Buttler a chance to show what they can do.

Bowling wise, will Anderson be fit? If so, who do you drop?

On bowling performance, you drop Woakes, but that weakens the batting.

So do you drop Denly? lol.

Yeah, Anderson, Broad, Archer, Stokes looks a good pace unit.

I'd back them to skittle 9 of the Aussie 11. That just leaves Smith and Smith Jr.

Archer will have to bounce them out again. Though Smith Jr. does get hit a lot anyway...

[Puja]

All depends on if our openers can score some runs and if we can get Smith out cheaply.

So you think we’ll lose?!?!?

I think it's going to be tight, no matter what.

Aus are as bad as we are, we're just more prone to collapses.

Best case scenario, Roy finally gets his start and kicks on for a half century while Burns shuffles around for another 50. Then Root comes in when the ball's a little old and can finally get a 100. That gives Stokes, Bairstow, and Buttler a chance to show what they can do.

Bowling wise, will Anderson be fit? If so, who do you drop?

On bowling performance, you drop Woakes, but that weakens the batting.

So do you drop Denly? lol.

Yeah, Anderson, Broad, Archer, Stokes looks a good pace unit.

I'd back them to skittle 9 of the Aussie 11. That just leaves Smith and Smith Jr.

Archer will have to bounce them out again. Though Smith Jr. does get hit a lot anyway...

Our batting is ridiculously deep anyway - while he wasn't trusted with facing balls because the stakes were so high, Leach is a pretty solid batsman for a tailender and would be the 8 or 9 in a few other sides around the world. Jimmy's value in the bowling far outweighs the runs Woakes can bring.

I'd be dropping Roy and replace him with... eh, not sure. Roy categorically hasn't made it - it was a neat experiment and worth a try, but he wasn't able to bring his confidence from the one-day game across and he just hasn't got the technique or the ability to open in test cricket. No clue who to replace him with. Shift Denly up and then bring in Sibly or Northeast? Curran? Not a clue.

Puja

[Banquo]

Denly to open and stick Roy in his normal red ball position of 4; as Denly is actually an opener, it kinda makes sense. I'd still like Root to bat lower down tho.

On the 8,9,10,11 debate, its trickier than it appears- it would be a lot easier to drop Woakes if the top 3 were even slightly reliable.

[Stom]

So you think we’ll lose?!?!?

I think it's going to be tight, no matter what.

Aus are as bad as we are, we're just more prone to collapses.

Best case scenario, Roy finally gets his start and kicks on for a half century while Burns shuffles around for another 50. Then Root comes in when the ball's a little old and can finally get a 100. That gives Stokes, Bairstow, and Buttler a chance to show what they can do.

Bowling wise, will Anderson be fit? If so, who do you drop?

On bowling performance, you drop Woakes, but that weakens the batting.

So do you drop Denly? lol.

Yeah, Anderson, Broad, Archer, Stokes looks a good pace unit.

I'd back them to skittle 9 of the Aussie 11. That just leaves Smith and Smith Jr.

Archer will have to bounce them out again. Though Smith Jr. does get hit a lot anyway...

Our batting is ridiculously deep anyway - while he wasn't trusted with facing balls because the stakes were so high, Leach is a pretty solid batsman for a tailender and would be the 8 or 9 in a few other sides around the world. Jimmy's value in the bowling far outweighs the runs Woakes can bring.

I'd be dropping Roy and replace him with... eh, not sure. Roy categorically hasn't made it - it was a neat experiment and worth a try, but he wasn't able to bring his confidence from the one-day game across and he just hasn't got the technique or the ability to open in test cricket. No clue who to replace him with. Shift Denly up and then bring in Sibly or Northeast? Curran? Not a clue.

Puja

While I would agree on Roy, you can't bin him after half a chance.

But you can shuffle and I also don't see why Denly couldn't play 2, allowing Roy to come in at 3 or 4.

But then our middle order is a little too attacking. I'd honestly be looking to drop Buttler and bring in another barnacle player. Problem is, there aren't many of them.

As has been mentioned, there's Sibley. Otherwise, there may be another chance in the offing for Ballance...

[Puja]

I think it's going to be tight, no matter what.

Aus are as bad as we are, we're just more prone to collapses.

Best case scenario, Roy finally gets his start and kicks on for a half century while Burns shuffles around for another 50. Then Root comes in when the ball's a little old and can finally get a 100. That gives Stokes, Bairstow, and Buttler a chance to show what they can do.

Bowling wise, will Anderson be fit? If so, who do you drop?

On bowling performance, you drop Woakes, but that weakens the batting.

So do you drop Denly? lol.

Yeah, Anderson, Broad, Archer, Stokes looks a good pace unit.

I'd back them to skittle 9 of the Aussie 11. That just leaves Smith and Smith Jr.

Archer will have to bounce them out again. Though Smith Jr. does get hit a lot anyway...

Our batting is ridiculously deep anyway - while he wasn't trusted with facing balls because the stakes were so high, Leach is a pretty solid batsman for a tailender and would be the 8 or 9 in a few other sides around the world. Jimmy's value in the bowling far outweighs the runs Woakes can bring.

I'd be dropping Roy and replace him with... eh, not sure. Roy categorically hasn't made it - it was a neat experiment and worth a try, but he wasn't able to bring his confidence from the one-day game across and he just hasn't got the technique or the ability to open in test cricket. No clue who to replace him with. Shift Denly up and then bring in Sibly or Northeast? Curran? Not a clue.

Puja

While I would agree on Roy, you can't bin him after half a chance.

But you can shuffle and I also don't see why Denly couldn't play 2, allowing Roy to come in at 3 or 4.

But then our middle order is a little too attacking. I'd honestly be looking to drop Buttler and bring in another barnacle player. Problem is, there aren't many of them.

As has been mentioned, there's Sibley. Otherwise, there may be another chance in the offing for Ballance...

I don't see why you can't bin Roy. His selection was a gamble in the first place - he has no real first class pedigree, especially not as an opener, and his selection was solely about seeing whether he could transfer his form and confidence from white ball to red. He's had 6 innings and it's not happening; there's not even the hint of a sign that he belongs at this level in this form of the game. It's not like a player who has proven himself in County, who deserves an extended chance because we know that he's got the skills in his repertoire. It was a gamble, didn't pay off, don't see the value in throwing good money after bad.

Puja

[fivepointer]

I feel sorry for Roy. He shouldnt have been asked to do a job he has hardly carried out at County level. It is just bad selection that sees him doing a job he isnt equipped to do.
Could he come off down the order? Strong school of opinion that says he could do. A swap with Denly makes sense and is worth a shot, otherwise you are back to bringing in someone new again.
If Anderson is fit he comes in for Woakes. Its Jimmy's home ground and while Woakes has bowled reasonably he has done little with the bat, so the argument that he bolsters the batting isnt a strong one.

[Banquo]

Our batting is ridiculously deep anyway - while he wasn't trusted with facing balls because the stakes were so high, Leach is a pretty solid batsman for a tailender and would be the 8 or 9 in a few other sides around the world. Jimmy's value in the bowling far outweighs the runs Woakes can bring.

I'd be dropping Roy and replace him with... eh, not sure. Roy categorically hasn't made it - it was a neat experiment and worth a try, but he wasn't able to bring his confidence from the one-day game across and he just hasn't got the technique or the ability to open in test cricket. No clue who to replace him with. Shift Denly up and then bring in Sibly or Northeast? Curran? Not a clue.

Puja

While I would agree on Roy, you can't bin him after half a chance.

But you can shuffle and I also don't see why Denly couldn't play 2, allowing Roy to come in at 3 or 4.

But then our middle order is a little too attacking. I'd honestly be looking to drop Buttler and bring in another barnacle player. Problem is, there aren't many of them.

As has been mentioned, there's Sibley. Otherwise, there may be another chance in the offing for Ballance...

I don't see why you can't bin Roy. His selection was a gamble in the first place - he has no real first class pedigree, especially not as an opener, and his selection was solely about seeing whether he could transfer his form and confidence from white ball to red. He's had 6 innings and it's not happening; there's not even the hint of a sign that he belongs at this level in this form of the game. It's not like a player who has proven himself in County, who deserves an extended chance because we know that he's got the skills in his repertoire. It was a gamble, didn't pay off, don't see the value in throwing good money after bad.

Puja

He averages 38 in red ball cricket in the middle order. There is a good argument for including Pope though.

[Banquo]

I feel sorry for Roy. He shouldnt have been asked to do a job he has hardly carried out at County level. It is just bad selection that sees him doing a job he isnt equipped to do.
Could he come off down the order? Strong school of opinion that says he could do. A swap with Denly makes sense and is worth a shot, otherwise you are back to bringing in someone new again.
If Anderson is fit he comes in for Woakes. Its Jimmy's home ground and while Woakes has bowled reasonably he has done little with the bat, so the argument that he bolsters the batting isnt a strong one.

One century and 4 fifties at an average of 29, including a recent unusual poor trot says otherwise; I agree it wouldn't be an argument if 1-7 was working, but it isn't. Prior to these series, our recent successes, such as they are in test cricket, have been built on lower order partnerships (and good bowling), and Woakes has done well here. I'd go with Anderson, but its kind of a shame, as two matches ago, Woakes looked to have finally established himself as a test class bowling all rounder; and I say this as someone who has been sceptical of Woakes at the top level.

[Puja]

While I would agree on Roy, you can't bin him after half a chance.

But you can shuffle and I also don't see why Denly couldn't play 2, allowing Roy to come in at 3 or 4.

But then our middle order is a little too attacking. I'd honestly be looking to drop Buttler and bring in another barnacle player. Problem is, there aren't many of them.

As has been mentioned, there's Sibley. Otherwise, there may be another chance in the offing for Ballance...

I don't see why you can't bin Roy. His selection was a gamble in the first place - he has no real first class pedigree, especially not as an opener, and his selection was solely about seeing whether he could transfer his form and confidence from white ball to red. He's had 6 innings and it's not happening; there's not even the hint of a sign that he belongs at this level in this form of the game. It's not like a player who has proven himself in County, who deserves an extended chance because we know that he's got the skills in his repertoire. It was a gamble, didn't pay off, don't see the value in throwing good money after bad.

Puja

He averages 38 in red ball cricket in the middle order. There is a good argument for including Pope though.

38 in the middle order isn't write-home-worthy material, especially with how little recent play he's had in that format. If we're picking him as a middle order batsman, then he's jumped a lot of people in the queue.

Puja

[Banquo]

I don't see why you can't bin Roy. His selection was a gamble in the first place - he has no real first class pedigree, especially not as an opener, and his selection was solely about seeing whether he could transfer his form and confidence from white ball to red. He's had 6 innings and it's not happening; there's not even the hint of a sign that he belongs at this level in this form of the game. It's not like a player who has proven himself in County, who deserves an extended chance because we know that he's got the skills in his repertoire. It was a gamble, didn't pay off, don't see the value in throwing good money after bad.

Puja

He averages 38 in red ball cricket in the middle order. There is a good argument for including Pope though.

38 in the middle order isn't write-home-worthy material, especially with how little recent play he's had in that format. If we're picking him as a middle order batsman, then he's jumped a lot of people in the queue.

Puja

Hence mentioning Pope. Who are these lots of others? Roy does have a track record of taking world class attacks apart, albeit in a different form of the game (s). I'm pointing out that contrary to your post, he has a decent track record in county cricket comparable with Vince, Malan, Westley and others who have been tried in the middle order. Ballance may stick his hand up, but he has looked totally out of his depth against great pace.

My point, like 5ps, is that Roy has been given 3 tests out of his red ball position. Denly has also been batting out of position, and that with a county average of 35.

[Puja]

He averages 38 in red ball cricket in the middle order. There is a good argument for including Pope though.

38 in the middle order isn't write-home-worthy material, especially with how little recent play he's had in that format. If we're picking him as a middle order batsman, then he's jumped a lot of people in the queue.

Puja

Hence mentioning Pope. Who are these lots of others? Roy does have a track record of taking world class attacks apart, albeit in a different form of the game (s). I'm pointing out that contrary to your post, he has a decent track record in county cricket comparable with Vince, Malan, Westley and others who have been tried in the middle order. Ballance may stick his hand up, but he has looked totally out of his depth against great pace.

My point, like 5ps, is that Roy has been given 3 tests out of his red ball position. Denly has also been batting out of position, and that with a county average of 35.

I agree that Roy has a track record of taking world class attacks in a different format, that's why he was worth the gamble, but it's clearly not transferred.

Genuine question - when was the last time he played regular first class cricket for his county? Internet isn't providing for me and I'm trying to find out how historic that 38 average is.

Puja

[Banquo]

38 in the middle order isn't write-home-worthy material, especially with how little recent play he's had in that format. If we're picking him as a middle order batsman, then he's jumped a lot of people in the queue.

Puja

Hence mentioning Pope. Who are these lots of others? Roy does have a track record of taking world class attacks apart, albeit in a different form of the game (s). I'm pointing out that contrary to your post, he has a decent track record in county cricket comparable with Vince, Malan, Westley and others who have been tried in the middle order. Ballance may stick his hand up, but he has looked totally out of his depth against great pace.

My point, like 5ps, is that Roy has been given 3 tests out of his red ball position. Denly has also been batting out of position, and that with a county average of 35.

I agree that Roy has a track record of taking world class attacks in a different format, that's why he was worth the gamble, but it's clearly not transferred.

Genuine question - when was the last time he played regular first class cricket for his county? Internet isn't providing for me and I'm trying to find out how historic that 38 average is.

Puja

You just seem to be ignoring that the gamble has been in circumstances that all the people (eg Alec Stewart) who know Roy's game said wouldn't suit him. They've asked him to open against a Dukes ball, against one of the best seam attacks in the world, on pitches that favour bowling- when all his red ball cricket has been in the middle order. That is a heap of reasons why it hasn't (yet) transferred.

No idea on the red ball question- but the point is that he has shown himself capable of a decent average in red ball cricket over 80 games. An average that has seen others get a shot in test cricket.

[Puja]

Hence mentioning Pope. Who are these lots of others? Roy does have a track record of taking world class attacks apart, albeit in a different form of the game (s). I'm pointing out that contrary to your post, he has a decent track record in county cricket comparable with Vince, Malan, Westley and others who have been tried in the middle order. Ballance may stick his hand up, but he has looked totally out of his depth against great pace.

My point, like 5ps, is that Roy has been given 3 tests out of his red ball position. Denly has also been batting out of position, and that with a county average of 35.

I agree that Roy has a track record of taking world class attacks in a different format, that's why he was worth the gamble, but it's clearly not transferred.

Genuine question - when was the last time he played regular first class cricket for his county? Internet isn't providing for me and I'm trying to find out how historic that 38 average is.

Puja

You just seem to be ignoring that the gamble has been in circumstances that all the people (eg Alec Stewart) who know Roy's game said wouldn't suit him. They've asked him to open against a Dukes ball, against one of the best seam attacks in the world, on pitches that favour bowling- when all his red ball cricket has been in the middle order. That is a heap of reasons why it hasn't (yet) transferred.

No idea on the red ball question- but the point is that he has shown himself capable of a decent average in red ball cricket over 80 games. An average that has seen others get a shot in test cricket.

Heh, while looking for his recent stats, I blundered across a pre-Ashes article where Stewart was quoted as saying he expected Roy to be in the top 3 scorers in the series if he was picked as opener. Aged poorly that one!

I get that he is out of position and opening is a very different kettle of fish to being middle-order. However, he was parachuted in because we needed an opener. If we had been searching for a no 5, I'm not sure he would've been in the discussion.

Puja

[Banquo]

I agree that Roy has a track record of taking world class attacks in a different format, that's why he was worth the gamble, but it's clearly not transferred.

Genuine question - when was the last time he played regular first class cricket for his county? Internet isn't providing for me and I'm trying to find out how historic that 38 average is.

Puja

You just seem to be ignoring that the gamble has been in circumstances that all the people (eg Alec Stewart) who know Roy's game said wouldn't suit him. They've asked him to open against a Dukes ball, against one of the best seam attacks in the world, on pitches that favour bowling- when all his red ball cricket has been in the middle order. That is a heap of reasons why it hasn't (yet) transferred.

No idea on the red ball question- but the point is that he has shown himself capable of a decent average in red ball cricket over 80 games. An average that has seen others get a shot in test cricket.

Heh, while looking for his recent stats, I blundered across a pre-Ashes article where Stewart was quoted as saying he expected Roy to be in the top 3 scorers in the series if he was picked as opener. Aged poorly that one!

I get that he is out of position and opening is a very different kettle of fish to being middle-order. However, he was parachuted in because we needed an opener. If we had been searching for a no 5, I'm not sure he would've been in the discussion.

Puja

Not what Stewart said last night on telly .

Denly is an opener, odd how he was parachuted into 4 really. Roy was parachuted in because he looked total class in ODI, and worth a punt, Why they didn't punt them the other way round is a mystery.