RHC's Cricket Thread

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
oh oh alli has pulled his groin. He looks to have decide to go full lovren now and get as many as he can before getting out as he can't run.
 
moreinjuredthanowen said:
its not test cricket, not for the past 100 years. I'd contend for the most of the last 100 years strike rates of a run a ball were not common even in ODI never mind tests.

Yes its limited overs cricket to swing away at everything, especially with the extremely restricted lines bowlers are forced to use.

Test cricket has a lot more freedom for bowling and so you can't just swing in the slot with some premeditated shots all the time and you can't just play at every ball as they will vary unexpectedly.

If a ball rises over a set height, or the ball is even a fraction wide then you are dings as a bowler. they really can't ply seam or bouncers or wehtever so are restricted to messing about with pace and such to try and get you.
Click to expand...

You’ve over complicated my post. If you play a shot and get it wrong you generwlly get out. No matter what form how aggressive you are etc. that’s not changed.

Your post seemed to make out like before ‘bazball’ people weren’t getting out when they played a shot and got it wrong. That’s just not accurate. What was happening was we were getting out when shot was wrong but also we’re playing negatively that we weren’t getting as many runs from the average and poor balls.

Traditional cricket
good balls get you out
Average balls get left or a single
bad balls go for 4

now
good balls still get you out
average balls for got 4s and 2s
and bal balls go for 4’s and 6’s

So still getting out at the same rate just score 40 from the balls between them rather than leaving them and only getting 15 runs.

we’ll still lose 5 wickets in 50 overs but we’ll be 250-5 rather than 150-5
 
You also by being aggressive force the field back as opponents don’t want to keep leakigng runs, which means less slips/gulleys so those odd egdes or airey cuts don’t go to fielders and make your own bit of luck.
 
InBiscanWeTrust said:
You’ve over complicated my post. If you play a shot and get it wrong you generwlly get out. No matter what form how aggressive you are etc. that’s not changed.

Your post seemed to make out like before ‘bazball’ people weren’t getting out when they played a shot and got it wrong. That’s just not accurate. What was happening was we were getting out when shot was wrong but also we’re playing negatively that we weren’t getting as many runs from the average and poor balls.

Traditional cricket
good balls get you out
Average balls get left or a single
bad balls go for 4

now
good balls still get you out
average balls for got 4s and 2s
and bal balls go for 4’s and 6’s

So still getting out at the same rate just score 40 from the balls between them rather than leaving them and only getting 15 runs.

we’ll still lose 5 wickets in 50 overs but we’ll be 250-5 rather than 150-5
Click to expand...

Thats fair enough but you've also over complicated my post then.

theres a massive difference between a lad like brook going out with the intent to swing hit bat no matter what ball comes. T(hats his way of playing so teams will suss areas he is weaker at and get him playing at stuff he really should leave) and say crawley in pre bazball who might leave stuff then swing at a drive and edge it when he'd no need to swing at all. where hes picked the length wrong and shouldnt be driving.

My point was we are sending out duckett and crawley and pope and brook to do exactly what they are doing score fast and don't worry baout being there long.

As i said. Duckett got 41. That's all he needs to get us. some folk seme to then critique on him getting out before 50 or 100 and i just don't see the point.

Brook is now on 67. absolutely marvelous. he's made up for crawley getting out early and thats great. swing away.

Alli is up at 3 and stood then until he's done something and now is swinging away and up to 30. again, thats more than enough form him.

We are out to score quick so if someone hits 100 its actually amazing against test bowling. theres too many ways to trap a player so they have to have really done well.


I would say however the scoring rates are down to the field set. This morning there was singles everywhere if wants so england took them. thats good play also.
 
just bazzball.

swinging away at times, not really taking a little time even to get set.

Brook made up for root, alli did well and won't be seen for rest of test.

two more have failed so knock 60 to 80 off the end score. I'm laughing at the bbc website claling this a total collapse.

Wood and woakes will slash away again and either score some or not.
 
wood has done ok for us.

woakes did ok.

Plenty to have a bowl at if Anderson can finally get the ball to move.

yes 283 is about 100 above par but **** it... bazzball innit.
 
It looks like Australia have seen what's happened yesterday and gone away and had a thought about it and are now playing to just wear down England seamers as there's no spin to come and then they will open up when they feel like it.

they are not even trying to score quickly.

This is the difference between stupidity (players for England walking out thinking its a 50 overs game and swinging away before even seeing what's going on) and positive test cricket.

Australia are being really negative here but know they have 4 days here. they've already won the ashes and will win series if they draw.

brook was out talking about if he tried to survive he is just ****.

No. wrong attitude. surviving is not what you are being asked about. picking the ball and then being positive on the balls to be positive with is what people are talking about.

If we compare a few things that's gone on.

David warner is a good example. A LOT of inside edges and hitting his own stumps. he's playing poorly as an opener with a bat that's not very straight. he's wide open to lots of little issues that get you out.

Brook was dropped, a full on drop on 5. he is in the end scoring fast, a run a ball but he is wide open to get himself out. we will see over all how many times he scored a 50 and how many time he gets out.

I am judging this approach as 350 is a pretty much good score for 10 players who are taking very little care of their wicket. you go hard and get your 30 or 40 runs and if you don't get out you score fast. That for me is what i see, attack every ball.

The difference between what i saw "sometimes" from England under root early as captain where a run rate of 4 an over was seen a few times is positivity to score is also married with actually looking at the ball delivered and calling to leave, defend or attack.
 
In about an hour Australia have added 20 runs. about half are byes.

this is anti-bazzball.

Broad has the ball moving 2 yards in swing and complaining about the ball and Anderson can't get a thing.

Bowl at the stumps lads. they won't play unless you do.
 
InBiscanWeTrust said:
Because in golf the lowest score wins. And in cricket the highest score wins. Not too difficukt
Click to expand...

par is par though.

I've always wonders why it was used in different sports or to describe how someone is feeling

"how are you."

"oh I'm a bit below par mate."

I'm like... so you are doing good then.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back