RugbyRebels

Ffs

Gotta feel for Root. That was one hell of a delivery. The look of disbelief on his face was something else!

WaspInWales wrote:Gotta feel for Root. That was one hell of a delivery. The look of disbelief on his face was something else!

It was an absoloute snorter - and it was very dark around here at that time.He would have to have made a mistake to stop that.
(No mistakes from Moeen today - 121* off 60 balls in T20 for Wuss. - good to see his confidence returning. )

Puja wrote:

Banquo wrote:what might have been.....Stuart Broad's opening spells in this series have brought him 14 wickets at 12.9.

If we'd had Anderson fit, this could've been a very different series. Broad and Anderson opening, with Archer first change, and suddenly the only easy runs are coming from 4th bowler Stokes and even he's dangerous. As it is, we're making Archer open and Stokes first change, which is one too high for both of them as things stand.

Puja

Archer has done bloody well as an opening bowler. 16 wickets at 19 in three tests is excellent. Our stats for batting are terrible.

WaspInWales wrote:Gotta feel for Root. That was one hell of a delivery. The look of disbelief on his face was something else!

Yep, top bowling, that would have done for most batsmen

Banquo wrote:

Puja wrote:

Banquo wrote:what might have been.....Stuart Broad's opening spells in this series have brought him 14 wickets at 12.9.

If we'd had Anderson fit, this could've been a very different series. Broad and Anderson opening, with Archer first change, and suddenly the only easy runs are coming from 4th bowler Stokes and even he's dangerous. As it is, we're making Archer open and Stokes first change, which is one too high for both of them as things stand.

Puja

Archer has done bloody well as an opening bowler. 16 wickets at 19 in three tests is excellent. Our stats for batting are terrible.

Is he seriously 19 runs per wicket even after his first innings figures here?

Regardless, you're right that I'm probably being a bit harsh, but he's occasionally looked a bit lost when we've asked him to be the main man in periods when nothing's happening and Smith is on a roll. I'd have preferred him to have a bit less pressure on him to begin with and not have the responsibility of everyone looking to him.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Puja wrote:
If we'd had Anderson fit, this could've been a very different series. Broad and Anderson opening, with Archer first change, and suddenly the only easy runs are coming from 4th bowler Stokes and even he's dangerous. As it is, we're making Archer open and Stokes first change, which is one too high for both of them as things stand.

Puja

Archer has done bloody well as an opening bowler. 16 wickets at 19 in three tests is excellent. Our stats for batting are terrible.

Is he seriously 19 runs per wicket even after his first innings figures here?

Regardless, you're right that I'm probably being a bit harsh, but he's occasionally looked a bit lost when we've asked him to be the main man in periods when nothing's happening and Smith is on a roll. I'd have preferred him to have a bit less pressure on him to begin with and not have the responsibility of everyone looking to him.

Puja

He's been exceptional given the pressure and his experience. He was a little iffy first innings here, but that was a collective clusterfck. Even when not bowling dangerously he's not been leaking runs. IF not overbowled, and he looked a bit that way, he will be a ferocious opening bowler for years- he is definitely a new ball man. The best and most experienced bowlers in the world have tried and failed with Smith- he's a phenomenon, and if you take out his first 10 tests, almost Bradmen-esque in average terms; mind, I think over after over of Archer yorkers mixed up with bouncers might have been worth a go.

edit- prior to the this test he had 13 wickets at 13, run rate of 2.34. After first innings it was 13 at something like 20.5, and now is 16 at 19 with an economy rate of 2.73 (both average and economy rate are way ahead of the other bowlers).

Archer has to have the new ball, he's going to be the one people will least want to bat against. Giving it to either Broad or Anderson ahead of him would be like having a choice to put May or Nowell clear with 60m to go and choosing Nowell

Digby wrote:Archer has to have the new ball, he's going to be the one people will least want to bat against. Giving it to either Broad or Anderson ahead of him would be like having a choice to put May or Nowell clear with 60m to go and choosing Nowell

Strikes me as a bit more like the choice between Watson and Cokanasiga - yes the latter is far more naturally exciting, but the former's experience, nous, and not-small talent should win out. Plus, in cricket, we get to have all three of them playing.

On another note, am I correct in thinking that this is now Roy's highest score this series? ...and literally in the space of me typing that sentence, he plays on. Outstanding.

Here comes the collapse.

Puja

ETA. And in fact he doesn't even play on, he's just left that big of a gap between bat and pad. Same error, over and over again.

Cummins is a hell of a bowler. Unsurprising as he is no 1 in the world I guess.

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:Archer has to have the new ball, he's going to be the one people will least want to bat against. Giving it to either Broad or Anderson ahead of him would be like having a choice to put May or Nowell clear with 60m to go and choosing Nowell

Strikes me as a bit more like the choice between Watson and Cokanasiga - yes the latter is far more naturally exciting, but the former's experience, nous, and not-small talent should win out. Plus, in cricket, we get to have all three of them playing.

On another note, am I correct in thinking that this is now Roy's highest score this series? ...and literally in the space of me typing that sentence, he plays on. Outstanding.

Here comes the collapse.

Puja

ETA. And in fact he doesn't even play on, he's just left that big of a gap between bat and pad. Same error, over and over again.

Same error Root and Bairstow made innings 1; in fact, prior to this game Roy's errors had been drives nicked to the slips.
sometimes you have to acknowledge the bowling. Though it’s fair comment about the gate left open


Having looked at this- the ball that dismissed Root was a fast leg cutter, almost unplayable; the ball that got Roy was a 90 mph off cutter/off break it moved that much. Technique looked ropy, but it would have got many batsmen.

f¥ck€d now..

Galfon wrote:f¥ck€d now..

Defeat is a’cumming

Defeat is deserved, this batting lineup shouldn't be able to draw any rewards with their technique as is

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:Archer has to have the new ball, he's going to be the one people will least want to bat against. Giving it to either Broad or Anderson ahead of him would be like having a choice to put May or Nowell clear with 60m to go and choosing Nowell

Strikes me as a bit more like the choice between Watson and Cokanasiga - yes the latter is far more naturally exciting, but the former's experience, nous, and not-small talent should win out. Plus, in cricket, we get to have all three of them playing.

On another note, am I correct in thinking that this is now Roy's highest score this series? ...and literally in the space of me typing that sentence, he plays on. Outstanding.

Here comes the collapse.

Puja

ETA. And in fact he doesn't even play on, he's just left that big of a gap between bat and pad. Same error, over and over again.

Balls over 90mph get wickets faster and cheaper. Conditions would have to be A+ for Broad and Anderson to take priority.

All things being equal I'd start with Anderson and Archer so that there's a greater disparity in the height of the bowlers arm coming over

Digby wrote:Defeat is deserved, this batting lineup shouldn't be able to draw any rewards with their technique as is

same for the aussies bar Smith, but they have better depth in strike bowlers. Smith is the key figure, but Cummins has been superb.

Denly perishes, at least he fought.

A big win beckons; those two sessions middle end of aussie innings did for us, but Aus are the better of two iffy test teams.

Buttstow is the last chance saloon ( not dissing the Leachmeister).
There's a few dark clouds bubbling up - just hoping 'what a shower!' can have a different meaning later..

Stom wrote: Overton over Curran another baffling decision.

Maybe Ed Smith knew something..!
Almost a semi-miracle getting to Tea losing just 4 wickets in 60 overs after losing 2 in the first over, at least we've not completely folded today.

FFS Buttler. Been fighting so hard. It did reverse big on him, but.....

..Archer needed to be bow-legged..
He's gone too.

Galfon wrote:..Archer needed to be bow-legged..
He's gone too.

that was very unlucky. They have fought hard, but really needed someone to bat all day.

New ball beckons..too dark, even with soopa-specs shewerly
update - all over.
Eng. can't complain, never really in this one.
A series draw is something to aim for now - maybe a few brave selections worth considering.

Good effort from Overton and Leach. We did well to take the game into the final hour but really needed a top 4 player to hang in and play a big innings.

good effort from the last few guys, left too much to do by the better batsmen and by letting Oz get away in the 1st innings. Oz probably have the edge on quality.