The 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!
Not too concerned about Overton going out - he is night watchman after all.

If we can get these 2 in with a 25 over ball on this flat pitch we have a decent chance of a draw. As much as we let the Aussies off with poor fielding/bowling and as good as Smith was - this pitch really doesn't offer that much.
 
Good man Burns. England picked him after he peaked in my opinion. He should have been in the team about 3 years ago. He's been dominating county attacks for Surrey for a while. The selectors were too scared about his technique when they should have been concentrated on his positive mindset. Horrible technique but it's his technique and that's what counts if he can trust it. Its good that he's still good enough to make valuable runs at this level and still should be for 5 more years or so. A slight shame they waited so long to pick the guy however.
 
"Not far off here lads" says Warner. I feel like Burns probably just thought **** off in his head and carried on going about his day. Sledging is so funny and so good in cricket.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChilcoSaint
Saint John said:
Good man Burns. England picked him after he peaked in my opinion. He should have been in the team about 3 years ago. He's been dominating county attacks for Surrey for a while. The selectors were too scared about his technique when they should have been concentrated on his positive mindset. Horrible technique but it's his technique and that's what counts if he can trust it. Its good that he's still good enough to make valuable runs at this level and still should be for 5 more years or so. A slight shame they waited so long to pick the guy however.
Click to expand...
Yes, if batsmen were picked on technique, Smith wouldn’t be around and we would already have won the Ashes!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Saint John
Saint John said:
Good man Burns. England picked him after he peaked in my opinion. He should have been in the team about 3 years ago. He's been dominating county attacks for Surrey for a while. The selectors were too scared about his technique when they should have been concentrated on his positive mindset. Horrible technique but it's his technique and that's what counts if he can trust it. Its good that he's still good enough to make valuable runs at this level and still should be for 5 more years or so. A slight shame they waited so long to pick the guy however.
Click to expand...

It's amazing what happens when you pick someone for test cricket based on their red ball ability, than on their white ball ability.

Roy and Buttler have done nothing at domestic level in red ball cricket (albeit not that Buttler gets much of a chance, to be fair to him). Whereas Burns has, as you say, being dominating county attacks for years now. And look at the difference.

Even Denly you could argue is being picked because of his white ball form (but at domestic level, not international level). He was a huge asset as an allrounder for Kent last season in white ball cricket, and it was arguably that spin option which saw him go to SL over the winter - and almost accidentally stay in the test team thereafter. (We do like to take a county batter who bowls some spin to test matches in Asia: Samit then Ansari then Dawson then Denly all in the last few years.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Saint John
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back