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!
tomw24 said:
I'm not saying it was. It was a combination of factors - didn't bowl well enough in the 2nd innings, Brook's run out, and many other factors. But I saw the last few overs and Leach went into his shell when Foakes got out when he should have done the opposite. NZ brought in the field to prevent the singles obviously so a well aimed top edge would have gone for 4. Instead he left it to number 11 Anderson to try and score the runs. Leach being defensive while Foakes was in was correct - Foakes is by far the better batsman. But when he got out with 7 needed to win he should have taken on the responsibility to get the runs. He had spent 10 overs at the crease by that stage so had his eye in and Jimmy hadn't. I'm not blaming the defeat on Leach as that would be unfair but I thought he was too negative - not how England want to play or are playing. Southee and Wagner were bowling a lot of short stuff so he could have set himself for that and gone for the hook. With fielders saving the single unless he was unlucky even a mishit would likely have landed safe. I think the situation got the better of him.
Click to expand...
If Root hadn’t had his two moments of madness, which I saw live, none of that would have mattered. NZ’s bowling attack shouldn’t have been good enough to bowl a team like England out in less than 80 overs but they produced enough good balls to do just that, except for Root and Brook. Those two wickets, the most important in the team, were just completely squandered.
You have a point about Leach I agree, but I would argue that Anderson is possibly the better batsman and should be above him in the order.
 
QDK won't be returning to the Bowl this summer, because he hasn't put himself forward for next month's 100 draft. Some of the big names who are in the draft include Starc, Boult, Babar, and Afridi.

Pretty much every Kiwi is there, because they need to over here for immediately after the 100 anyway for the Eng-NZ white ball series. I'd imagine we'll sign at least one of them, due to Fleming taking over as coach.
 
st_brendy said:
Very pleasing news.

I think he tries too hard in t20. Tries to live up to his reputation too much - whereas he has the talent to start slow, and cash in later. That said, if McDermott returns, it's difficult to see him playing much t20 this season either. (My assumption has always been that McDermott and Ellis would both return, but I'm starting to wonder maybe they won't because why we wouldn't have announced it yet. I know we still have three months until our first group game, but if they were coming back, why wait?)
Click to expand...
Both have re-signed for Hants. :) Ellis in particular I'm delighted about. Quality bowler.
 
So Hants T20 line up will look like:

Vince
McDermott
Prest or Donald
Weatherley
Whiteley
Howell
Fuller
Dawson
Wood/Wheal - I suspect these two will rotate to give Wood some rest
Crane
Ellis

That's a very well balanced and strong line up. Batting goes deep, we've got a great and varied bowling attack - got 6 genuine bowling options there as well. Hants will one of the bookies favourites to win the title looking at that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Saints_Alive and SAINTOSPREY
Crap, didn't realise Dawson ruptured his ankle ligaments playing in the PSL. Mind you he says it's 6-8 weeks out so could have been worse. On the plus side it could give Prest an opportunity to impress in the CC.
 
Bowlers did their best to keep us in that (albeit on a very helpful pitch), but ultimately it did always feel like we were about 15 runs short. Very rarely will you ever defend 117.
 
Prest has had a last minute change of heart, and put himself into tomorrow's 100 draft. (And even if he doesn't get picked, the basic fact that he's now in the draft means that he'd be eligible for being a replacement player during the tournament, eg to cover for injuries.)

I suspect it might be to do with the rumours that they'll be more flexibility this year between the 100 and the 50 over competition, in that players left out of the starting XI by their 100 side could be temporarily released back to their county. Prest did say last year that the reason he didn't put himself into the draft is because he didn't want to risk a month of just carrying the drinks. So if that will be avoided this year, it makes sense that he'd put himself forward.

It means that we'll have 11 players in the draft tomorrow: Prest, Whiteley, Wheal, Albert, Gubbins, Donald and Currie, plus Turner, Kelly, Campbell, and Petrie.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back