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!
Think we should declare now to save the embarrassment.

Hopefully the new coach appoints a new captain, as I feel Root needs to get back to focusing on his batting. Would like to see his average compared between prior to being appointed captain.

Also, would be nice to see us drop out 1 day specialists in favour of the guys doing well in the county game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Number 1 Jasper
Probably the last we’ll see of Roy. Shame, he was looking good until that absolute ripper from Cummins.

Anyway, here’s Stokes!
 
Australia retain the Ashes. Completely deserved. England need to shake up their test team. Roy and Buttler are ODI players. Bairstow should be dropped for Foakes - better keeper and Bairstow is out of form.
 
It isn't a great Australian team. But it does contain three absolutely wonderful players. And they've totally outplayed us.

Had it not been for a special Stokes innings, we'd be 3-0 down here and facing a 4-0 horror show on home soil.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OddRiverOakWizards
Deserved win

Each time Australia go out to bad it feels like we have to take 10 wickets. We generally have to create all 10.

Each time England go out to bat it feels like they have to take about 4 wickets and we'll give away about 6 wickets through careless or over-ambitious batting
 
  • Like
Reactions: ......loading......
Batting and bowling averages, when ignoring those who have only played once in this series so far:

Batting

Smith 134.2
Stokes 59.0
Labuschagne 58.2
Burns 40.4
Root 30.9
Woakes 28.0
Head 27.3
Siddle 26.5
Denly 25.5
Bairstow 25.4
Wade 25.1
Pattinson 23.0
Paine 22.6
Khawaja 20.3
Lyon 18.0
Buttler 16.3
Roy 13.8
Cummins 12.4
Leach 12.0
Harris 11.5
Bancroft 11.0
Warner 9.9
Broad 9.8
Archer 7.2

Bowling

Hazlewood 16.9
Cummins 17.4
Archer 19.9
Labuschange 25.0
Broad 26.6
Woakes 29.9
Leach 30.4
Pattinson 33.4
Siddle 36.4
Lyon 36.7
Stokes 45.3

Just to illustrate the point about Smith, Cummins and Hazlewood. And then pretty much everyone else. Some of those Aussies batting averages make ours look ok - Warner is Broad's bunny to such a degree, that they have the same batting average; and that despite Broad not being able to hold a bat for about five years now.

Stokes, Burns, Archer, Broad and - at a push - Woakes can be happy with what they've done. And Labuschange for Australia. But the rest of them, for both sides, poor. The three Aussies though have just been on a different level.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ......loading......, ChilcoSaint and OddRiverOakWizards
You have to say Australia are just that bit better but it doesn't feel so sour at least this side are sportsmanly!

I wonder if they regret swapping Woakes for Overton. Also wonder if Curran may get a game at his home at The Oval?
 
OddRiverOakWizards said:
You have to say Australia are just that bit better but it doesn't feel so sour at least this side are sportsmanly!

I wonder if they regret swapping Woakes for Overton. Also wonder if Curran may get a game at his home at The Oval?
Click to expand...

I imagine one of those two will come in for Overton. Not sure which (had it not been at the Oval, I'm sure Woakes would be restored. But at home, as you say, they might favour Curran. And given that Hants play Surrey this week, I'd be for that! Likewise Pope getting a game.)

Deep down I'm sure they'll accept that picking Overton was a mistake. But to some degree I can understand their thinking. Archer's pace has been the only thing which has even slightly troubled Smith, so lets pick Overton to go with double pace. Broad and Archer can deal with the rest. I very much saw it as a Smith-specific selection (otherwise it made absolutely no sense to me). Unfortunately it didn't work, Overton wasn't a trouble for Smith, and the result was that once Broad and Archer had run themselves into the ground we had nothing left. Stokes really needs to be thought of as a 5th bowler, not a 4th bowler. One top spell in the 3rd test yes, but horrendously expensive throughout the rest of the series.
 
st_brendy said:
I imagine one of those two will come in for Overton. Not sure which (had it not been at the Oval, I'm sure Woakes would be restored. But at home, as you say, they might favour Curran. And given that Hants play Surrey this week, I'd be for that! Likewise Pope getting a game.)

Deep down I'm sure they'll accept that picking Overton was a mistake. But to some degree I can understand their thinking. Archer's pace has been the only thing which has even slightly troubled Smith, so lets pick Overton to go with double pace. Broad and Archer can deal with the rest. I very much saw it as a Smith-specific selection (otherwise it made absolutely no sense to me). Unfortunately it didn't work, Overton wasn't a trouble for Smith, and the result was that once Broad and Archer had run themselves into the ground we had nothing left. Stokes really needs to be thought of as a 5th bowler, not a 4th bowler. One top spell in the 3rd test yes, but horrendously expensive throughout the rest of the series.
Click to expand...

England bowled well in spells but we leaked runs so quickly. I mean look at yesterday Australia 44-4 and then at a hundred so quickly. Yes, Smith has magnificent but we never kept it tight unlike Hazlewood and Cummins who went at a maximum of 2.4 an over not 4+!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Number 1 Jasper
OddRiverOakWizards said:
England bowled well in spells but we leaked runs so quickly. I mean look at yesterday Australia 44-4 and then at a hundred so quickly. Yes, Smith has magnificent but we never kept it tight unlike Hazlewood and Cummins who went at a maximum of 2.4 an over not 4+!
Click to expand...

I agree with the general point but I'm not sure we can use yesterday's Aus 2nd innings as a credible example, they were always going to come out to bat aggressively, aiming for quick runs in a fixed period of time regardless of wickets lost.

For me the bigger worry was the one we had them about 122-8 and let them carry on to 284 all out..... second innings 487..... we need to know when to tighten up and go for scoreboard pressure
 
  • Like
Reactions: OddRiverOakWizards and Number 1 Jasper
Smith was the major player in the Australian team, but he didn't bowl out our players. England underperformed, but it could have been closer....we probably would have won the rained off Test and nearly held out in the latest one...although we didn't deserve to. Always looks bad for a captain to lose the Ashes, but in general I am against knee jerk reactions...the major things to consider are what the team think of Root and what are the alternatives.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OddRiverOakWizards
I think it came down to their best batsman being better than our best batsman and their attack being one better than ours (with Anderson out, was always likely).

Across the rest, some of ours didn’t perform and neither did some of theirs.

Not much in it really.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OddRiverOakWizards
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back