Haarithan - Sangakarra doesn't play "WKB" in the longer format of the game
That reply seems to make most sense in reply to my KP nuts comment. It's great he got a double hundred but last time I checked one score could only win one match, whereas six single figures scores including two ducks could easily lose you a handful of Tests.
Point is it puts pressure on the other batsmen, especially if KP doesn't drop down the order even ONE place. He comes into the crease in poor nick, no regard for playing for the team it seems, and against a new ball which may not happen so much these days with a number four, but can happen. Hick should have been a 4/5 depending on his own form and the pitch, KP I'd say the same or rest him.
Put another way, how about we leave him out for the next Test or maybe two and let him get some form back for his county and maybe work on his technique to SLAs and maybe even generally work on his technique. I think the flat pitches tend to hide some serious problems and by the time someone realises there is a serious problem it can have been costly
I think he has the SLA hex on him and it is in his mind. Problem with KP is I think he's as likely to play a stupid shot to try and reverse the dominance and I'm not sure that's the way to go.
Fair enough summation. England probably shouldn't have been 22/3 mind, silly shot by KP and the others were out to balls they should have blocked. You can make some allowance for the slope at Lords, but they were experienced batsmen and it's Strauss' home ground (in theory mainly as he plays more for England than Middlesex)
That said, England could have lost other wickets but for balls dropping short. Not utterly convinced by this "one hand on the bat" theory, think it's more to do with how hard the batsman plays at it and the hand coming off the bat is merely a sign the grip on the bat and force of the stroke are not hard.
Still, (some) England batsmen showed resolve and I think the partnerships since we were 22/3 show the pitch is a pretty good one - 108, 71, 101 and an unbeaten 40 partnership. While I appreciate the new ball might account for early wickets before the pitch becomes the bigger factor, were any of the batsmen undone by prodigious swing or seam movement? Nope, the balls they all got out to were pretty straight and not really that good. You certainly wouldn't expect to get out to the ball KP, if anything you could say the better balls the lankans bowled didn't get much reward.
That reply seems to make most sense in reply to my KP nuts comment. It's great he got a double hundred but last time I checked one score could only win one match, whereas six single figures scores including two ducks could easily lose you a handful of Tests.
Point is it puts pressure on the other batsmen, especially if KP doesn't drop down the order even ONE place. He comes into the crease in poor nick, no regard for playing for the team it seems, and against a new ball which may not happen so much these days with a number four, but can happen. Hick should have been a 4/5 depending on his own form and the pitch, KP I'd say the same or rest him.
Put another way, how about we leave him out for the next Test or maybe two and let him get some form back for his county and maybe work on his technique to SLAs and maybe even generally work on his technique. I think the flat pitches tend to hide some serious problems and by the time someone realises there is a serious problem it can have been costly
I think he has the SLA hex on him and it is in his mind. Problem with KP is I think he's as likely to play a stupid shot to try and reverse the dominance and I'm not sure that's the way to go.
Fair enough summation. England probably shouldn't have been 22/3 mind, silly shot by KP and the others were out to balls they should have blocked. You can make some allowance for the slope at Lords, but they were experienced batsmen and it's Strauss' home ground (in theory mainly as he plays more for England than Middlesex)
That said, England could have lost other wickets but for balls dropping short. Not utterly convinced by this "one hand on the bat" theory, think it's more to do with how hard the batsman plays at it and the hand coming off the bat is merely a sign the grip on the bat and force of the stroke are not hard.
Still, (some) England batsmen showed resolve and I think the partnerships since we were 22/3 show the pitch is a pretty good one - 108, 71, 101 and an unbeaten 40 partnership. While I appreciate the new ball might account for early wickets before the pitch becomes the bigger factor, were any of the batsmen undone by prodigious swing or seam movement? Nope, the balls they all got out to were pretty straight and not really that good. You certainly wouldn't expect to get out to the ball KP, if anything you could say the better balls the lankans bowled didn't get much reward.
