Sri Lanka in England 2011

[cricket_icon]

top notch bowling from tremlett. but it begs the question...can the english bowlers only truly play at their best when the pitch is helpful and the conditions even more? we can't forget Lords

 

[Highlander999]

It's glorious sunshine here. Has been for weeks. England should just decide to host their matches in mainland Europe

TBF mate it has been beautiful weather these last 2 days in Scotland, they should host them up here

 

[barmyarmy]

Hopefully we can still push on and maybe force victory, if not then a draw is enough. Maybe the one thing will come out of this Test, besides maybe a series clinching win/draw, is a rethink of the make-up of the side. We certainly can't afford passengers when the Indians arrive.

I'd hope long-term we might unearth a part-time spinner as good or maybe better than Hick. If we had a Hick type in our side could we not then look at playing four seamers on pitches that cry out for it?

So you want a spinner who can't bat at international level? Maybe Monty Panesar?

 

[sifter132]

I'd be gobsmacked if Broad was being picked just for his batting. Sure it's a bonus, but not anywhere near the Ashley Giles 2005/2006 type of selection shenanigans. Broad's being picked because he's higher up the pecking order than the other bowlers ie. he's the incumbent and the more senior player. That's all. And yeah he's not really doing the job with the ball, but hey - that will eventually drop him down that pecking order. Just be patient...

As for whether a paceman MUST bowl 7 overs straight, I'm with you. I can remember times when it would've been considered akin to attempted murder on the captain's part - generally involving someone returning from injury. Does anyone sustain their pace for that long?

Lots of guys sustain their pace for that long. Maybe not the super express bowlers who come off a long run eg. Akhtar and Tait, but I've seen Brett Lee bowl 7 overs quite regularly in his time..., and James Anderson certainly should be able to. And yeah it's not a law or anything, but by crickey if my fast bowler couldn't bowl a 7 over spell without either falling over from fatigue or doing himself an injury I'd be really questioning his fitness (and consequently his place in the team). As a captain you'd hate having a guy like that. What if his first 5 overs were great and he's really causing some trouble? But no, he's not fit enough or too frail to manage 7 overs. You've just thrown away a good spell and it might cost you a lot of runs if your replacement bowler can't replicate the pressure. 7 overs is reasonable because your typical 2 hour session has around 28-30 overs and you generally play 4 bowlers which means your spell will be around 7 overs. Some guys like having 2 spells a session sure, but most will only get one.

I don't know why snicko takes so long. They say it's to sync the audio and visual but you only really need the audio. Should take about 10 seconds.

I'd be a supporter of this Why take 5 minutes to make it picture perfect? Just switch the audio to waves and run it until the noise should have occurred - wouldn't be hard to find, about 0.5 second after the bowler grunts and slams his foot down. It would make those precious Indians who are demanding absolute perfection in the DRS happy at least...

 

[Owzat]

I'd be gobsmacked if Broad was being picked just for his batting. Sure it's a bonus, but not anywhere near the Ashley Giles 2005/2006 type of selection shenanigans.

Giles is nowhere near as capable a batsman as Broad so I'm not sure where you are coming from there. Giles averaged a smidge over 20 with the bat, and that I believe increased slightly with some 50s towards the end of his career and some consistent 10s-20s with a few not outs.

Giles was picked because he was a SLA who could bat a bit, slotted in nicely at eight and was a passenger far too much (didn't bowl or didn't take wickets)

Lots of guys sustain their pace for that long. Maybe not the super express bowlers who come off a long run eg. Akhtar and Tait, but I've seen Brett Lee bowl 7 overs quite regularly in his time..., and James Anderson certainly should be able to. And yeah it's not a law or anything, but by crickey if my fast bowler couldn't bowl a 7 over spell without either falling over from fatigue or doing himself an injury I'd be really questioning his fitness (and consequently his place in the team). As a captain you'd hate having a guy like that. What if his first 5 overs were great and he's really causing some trouble? But no, he's not fit enough or too frail to manage 7 overs. You've just thrown away a good spell and it might cost you a lot of runs if your replacement bowler can't replicate the pressure. 7 overs is reasonable because your typical 2 hour session has around 28-30 overs and you generally play 4 bowlers which means your spell will be around 7 overs. Some guys like having 2 spells a session sure, but most will only get one.

I think the point is kinda being lost in the mists here, I've never said a bowler shouldn't be able to bowl seven overs in a row, some might even bowl eight or nine, my point was it is stupid when you have a bowler who is returning from injury without any cricket under his belt.

But I'd say any genuine quick bowler going full pelt for seven overs would also be questionable in terms of sense. They'd need a longer rest and their effectiveness or maybe efficiency would be doubtful. It makes no sense.

I think England are doing it simply because they picked Broad, he was pants and with only three quicks in the side they didn't want to have to bring on Swann, so the only option they left themselves was (over)bowling Anderson. When you have only four bowlers and aren't using the spinner, you bowl your bowlers in shorter bursts. It is hard with having to have two out of three on at the same time, but that's the price you pay when you pick a spinner and conditions favour seamers.

 

[Ollie_H]

didn't take wickets

Thing is Giles 'role' was not to take wickets but it was to hold up an end whilst the seamers rotated and he tried to create some pressure.

Giles, Panesar and Swann have all really had different roles. Giles to hold up an end, Swann as an attacking threat to take wickets and then Monty was a mix between the two depending on the situation.

 

[Aditya]

Expecting Strauss to score big in this inning. A century or even a double century. Am I expecting too much from him?

 

[barmyarmy]

@Ollie - Giles' role wasn't to take wickets because he couldn't do it. More necessity than a master plan.

 

[Aditya]

Expecting Strauss to score big in this inning. A century or even a double century. Am I expecting too much from him?

Or rather get out for 3.

 

[Haarithan]

Athers (I think) just pointed out how Strauss struggles against left arm fast bowlers , he just doesn't know when to leave a delivery (as against Bollinger in Adelaide 2010) , on the other hand , attempts a delivery that he should be leaving (as against Amir in July 2010) . And not to mention that its his 5th single digit score in his last 13 innings that consists of 2 ducks and 9 innings with scores less than or equal to 20 .

And again.... now its 6 single digit scores in 14 innings with 2 ducks and 10 innings with scores less than or equal to 20. Good show skipper!

 

[barmyarmy]

He's just whetting his appetite for the Indian bowlers.

 

[Adarsh]

He's just whetting his appetite for the Indian bowlers.

Given his track record against Zaheer, that mightn't be a good strategy .

On a separate note, firstly, let me say that the Sky Sports cricket commentary folks are great, especially Nasser, Atherton, Gower n Bumble (Botham...well, no). However, when I compare this with the Aussie, SA or Indian commentators, I find that sometimes far too much attention is paid on technique. For example, Strauss getting out, and they spend the next 30 minutes analyzing why he got out. He just got out ! Let it go ! Move on, talk about the game situation, talk about cake, talk about other things !

 

[barmyarmy]

And in the news today England will have to play several cash-cow matches against the West Indies to make money for Sky. Don't we just love them? (looks at Sky ad above as he type...).

 

[Sureshot]

It's glorious sunshine here. Has been for weeks. England should just decide to host their matches in mainland Europe

Only over the last week or two has the area (I'm about an hour from Rose Bowl) come out of a drought! I'm quite welcoming for the rain.

England need 400, then try and bowl them out cheaply again, it's the only scenario I can see that will yield a result. Tomorrow should be good for a full days play and today is being kind so far, but those clouds look evil and we're going to get some break in play today I reckon.

A lot depends on how long the likes of Morgan, KP and Prior bat, the guys who can score quickly.

All goes well, lead of 150 tonight, bat morning session tomorrow and then declare.

 

[0601731]

Where is Lassanna "I blame IPL" Dias???