One of Broad, Archer or Leach will top score!!! In England´´s defence, Headingley has never been the easiest of pitches to play on.
My sincerest apologies Ides!.....although being from the Smoke I thought you might've loved ALL the Capital's Counties.... I'd forgotten about Hells and I believe that Fran has links to Cardiff too. Does anyone ever need an Essex man though?...
Looks like Chilcs and other watchers like Tom have decided that it might be more fun having a dental appointment than watching England bat. They can comeback now as England start bowling again. What Oz have been up to for the past two years to lose Test series against the likes of India, and I think South Africa, I do not know, but it seems as soon as they roll up on British soil, they start playing like world beaters. It is as if, England are intimidated by Oz.
https://www.bbc.com/sport/cricket/49449547 I wonder how many takers there will be? I hope Hazim Hemeed finds a county prepared to take him on, and my hope is that he comes good.
10-1 already. What has happened so far begs the question about the state of the wicket as much as the quality of the bowling, and a lack of it in the batting department.
For me it's more a reflection of the state of cricket in general, players just don't seem able to get into a Test mindset, they're playing such rash shots.
I clearly picked the right day to have a boozy lunch at a friend’s place! No phones allowed at the table, so it was a bit of a shock when I got home and turned the TV on and saw Jofra bowling!!!
I’ve had dental appointments that have lasted longer than that England innings. The above statement may be subject to a little exaggeration, but you get my drift.
I was, and still am, so disappointed in him (and presumably Bayliss) bowing to media pressure to move him up to three. He's never hidden the fact that he prefers to bat 4. And moreover, given the constant fallacy of our at least one opener, our no.3 is effectively a de facto opener. Root is our best batsmen, and we've shot him in the foot by putting him up to 3. I was listening to Jeremy Coney during the week, commentating on the Hampshire match, and he was talking about playing with the great Richard Hadlee. Whatever Hadlee wanted, NZ gave him: when to bowl, what end to bowl, who to bowl at; the lot. He was their best bowler, so it was sensible to give him the best conditions in which to thrive. We've gone and done the total opposite, and seemingly all because the media keep on saying how you put your best batsman at 3. I've never agreed with moving Root. Root's batting has fallen away, and his captaincy and fielding is suffering as a result. Steve Smith bats at 4, by the way.
How is that linked to Joe Root batting at three? Joe Root might be better at four, but I highly doubt it would be so influential so as to turn a (possible) 4-1 defeat into a 2-1 victory.
Denly, Roy, Buttler. I'm not fussed who we drop. I'm not convinced that any of those three are good enough for test cricket. Other than maybe on a flat wicket, against an older ball. We moved away from Vince and Malan too early. Yes they didn't cash in regularly enough - Vince especially - but nor did Ian Bell. He took at least four years to settle down as a test batsman, but he was given the chance. And it ultimately paid off. (Although if Thorpe hadn't thrown his toys out the pram and immediately retired, after being left out of the first test in 2005, maybe Bell's England career wouldn't have even lasted until the end of that series!)
