Today he took 22 balls to score his 1st run. Before the start of the 1st test, he said he will go back to playing is "natural" game, and play aggressively again like he used to. And he did on the 1st test. Didnt work out, so he went back to defense? Its been almost 8 years, and he still cant figure out his game plan. He is double minded..
Bangladesh tour of England, May-July 2010
- Thread starter drainpipe32
- Start date
I would imagine half and half. On the one hand noone hates entertaining, shot-playing batsmen, but on the other hand you want to see your team win.
While Swann did take five wickets, I was a little disappointed with his bowling. Sure he took wickets EVENTUALLY, and he and Shazhad ran through the Bangles to finish them off for 90 runs having been 126/0, but a number of those wickets were unconvincing - not least the 'missing leg' LBW to wrap up the innings, didn't need dorkeye to tell that was dubious. Way too much help from the batsmen, the captain was just being lined up to be got out, the gate Islam left leaves more questions over his selection and where his bat and pads were, but I guess the ball was turning but that's no excuse for making it easy for the spinner.
And why didn't Strauss turn to (pun intended)KP? Bad enough playing only one spinner, not to use a part-timer when 100+ runs for no wicket is unforgiveable.
Decent debut by Shazhad, although it was mostly knocking over out of form Ashraful and lower order wickets.
I expect Strauss to enforce the follow-on, personally I wouldn't. I would knock up another 250-300 runs by somewhere between tea and close of play before letting Bangladesh face near 500 to win in two days. Sadly a number of captains would fret that, if a side did bat the whole two days, they might get close to winning even though the target was 500+. A number, including fans, prefer to enforce the follow-on and know what they need to score ie go for the minimal number of runs needed to win. I guess the latter shows a lack of confidence that will cost England wins in the future, when delaying declarations or indeed enforcing a follow-on and conceding 350-450 runs and facing a nasty 150-250 chase - or worse.
Cook should be keenest to bat again, the Bangles might crumble for less than 300 again but I reckon doing the right thing is more important than trying to get through to the win asap. If that were the aussies or even Pakistan then the right thing to do would be bat again. You should enforce the follow-on if :
- Time is an issue. It isn't, unless there is significant rain (0-1)
- There is a chance you can win by batting only once. This is slim (0-2)
- Your bowlers are (relatively) fresh. This is the case (1-2)
The principle reason for batting again, for me if not overall, is that with 500+ as a target you don't have to worry about fields in terms of conceding runs. If you enforce the follow-on then, as the innings progresses and the team closes in on leading, your fields will get more and more defensive. Four slips become three become two become one and chances go begging. With 500+ to bowl out you would only start worrying about fields and runs when the opposition get to 300 and only then if that is like 300/4 or 300/5 which is unlikely. I seem to recall a farcical situation in the past 12-24 months where people/media were talking up an unlikely win batting last against England when the batting side were something like 300 for 3-5 wickets and needed 200 to win. That was still some way off, England did win in the end, but the fact they were batting last seemed to be negated by fear
So go on England, bat again, give some of those who didn't score runs in the 1st innings/Test a chance to get some runs under their belts. Give yourselves 500+ to bowl at and don't worry so much about finishing the Test quickly. You've been a very ordinary 5/10 or 6/10 so far in this series, neither have Bangladesh made it a close contest nor have you made it comprehensive. Workmanlike and making superiority count is about the best description of this series win, assuming the unthinkable doesn't happen
Themer
Chairman of Selectors
I don't understand why you'd want us to bat again Owzat when the pitch and conditions are highly in the bowlers favour and there being a big chance of rain.
TumTum
International Cricketer
That ball clearly bounced.
Aussie Team
Panel of Selectors
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2009
- Online Cricket Games Owned
Wow Finn had impressed England selector's..
You could see this coming. Go home right NOW!
MacLovin added 1 Minutes and 30 Seconds later...
MacLovin added 1 Minutes and 30 Seconds later...
I blame him!
Themer
Chairman of Selectors
Off his fingers.
And listens to his coach.
MacLovin added 19 Minutes and 5 Seconds later...
I'd drop Shakib and Assdafling.
Shakib is pissing me off. His attitude, his game plan, his field set, his bowling changes, he BATTING!! I mean he tried to scoop a ball in a test match, when his team lost 4 wickets in like 5 overs! Even the scoop maker doesnt play the scoop shot in test. And whats with his Riyad hate. He never lets him bowl, gives him only 2-3 over spell. Over and over again its been happening. I mean is he afraid that Riyad might take over his kingdom? His attitude changed so much after he became the captain.
Ashfling was a better captain. Only reason he was fired (or resigned before they could fire him) because his bat didnt talk. Other then, bowling changes, field positions, game plan was lot better then Shakib.
Themer
Chairman of Selectors
It isn't a good idea to drop your best bowler especially after he just got a fiver.
: He need to fix his ████. 5er wont cut.
