On Stokes, the gap tween bat and pad would be something to look at, and as Digby said those three balls will interest oppo bowlers.fivepointer wrote:Hate seeing a wicket fall to a run out in a test match when there is no requirement to chase runs. You are giving a wicket away.
Sibley made a real hash of a straightforward defensive shot and Stokes got beat by a good ball.
Cornwall is in no kind of condition to be playing at this level.
Cricket fred
-
- Posts: 19371
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: Cricket fred
- Stom
- Posts: 5847
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 10:57 am
Re: Cricket fred
I think Holder is better than decent, but yeah, I struggle to see the quality elsewhere. Ok, Dowrich looks ok, Joseph looks like he might be decent, but...Banquo wrote:I think we are making them look slightly better than they are tbh. They have no batsman averaging in the 40's, and its not that close for most, and only Roach, approaching 33 has an average under 30 as a bowler. Holder is a decent all rounder.Digby wrote:Still think the Windies are a bit negative. But they're coming off a low base and building nicely, so far it reminds me of us under Nasser, not easy to know where they suddenly find two decent batters from to take them that next step
-
- Posts: 13436
- Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:17 am
Re: Cricket fred
I liked their 4 man seam attack in the opening two games, though I think they could push a bit more for wickets. All of them look test standard, and it's been a while since I'd have said that for the Windies. You've got to start somewhere, and there aren't many better places to start than a decent seam attack, the lack of batting is a problem, and how on earth one convinces people to turn down 20/20 money to put in hard graft I've no ideaStom wrote:I think Holder is better than decent, but yeah, I struggle to see the quality elsewhere. Ok, Dowrich looks ok, Joseph looks like he might be decent, but...Banquo wrote:I think we are making them look slightly better than they are tbh. They have no batsman averaging in the 40's, and its not that close for most, and only Roach, approaching 33 has an average under 30 as a bowler. Holder is a decent all rounder.Digby wrote:Still think the Windies are a bit negative. But they're coming off a low base and building nicely, so far it reminds me of us under Nasser, not easy to know where they suddenly find two decent batters from to take them that next step
-
- Posts: 19371
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: Cricket fred
Holder was number one all rounder in the world for a while ‘tis true. We probably diverge on what decent meansStom wrote:I think Holder is better than decent, but yeah, I struggle to see the quality elsewhere. Ok, Dowrich looks ok, Joseph looks like he might be decent, but...Banquo wrote:I think we are making them look slightly better than they are tbh. They have no batsman averaging in the 40's, and its not that close for most, and only Roach, approaching 33 has an average under 30 as a bowler. Holder is a decent all rounder.Digby wrote:Still think the Windies are a bit negative. But they're coming off a low base and building nicely, so far it reminds me of us under Nasser, not easy to know where they suddenly find two decent batters from to take them that next step

- Stom
- Posts: 5847
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 10:57 am
Re: Cricket fred
Lol, as ever.Banquo wrote:Holder was number one all rounder in the world for a while ‘tis true. We probably diverge on what decent meansStom wrote:I think Holder is better than decent, but yeah, I struggle to see the quality elsewhere. Ok, Dowrich looks ok, Joseph looks like he might be decent, but...Banquo wrote: I think we are making them look slightly better than they are tbh. They have no batsman averaging in the 40's, and its not that close for most, and only Roach, approaching 33 has an average under 30 as a bowler. Holder is a decent all rounder.
I’d take him in this England team. I think he’s an excellent middle overs bowler and his batting can be excellent.
-
- Posts: 19371
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: Cricket fred
He probably should bat higher than 8, I agree. He is a very good third seamer. Probably pick him over Woakes for this test team. If Stokes were fit to bowl, would you pick Holder over one of Broad/Anderson/Archer? It'd be a tight call, cos he'd be a decent shout to be skipper, thereby freeing Root upStom wrote:Lol, as ever.Banquo wrote:Holder was number one all rounder in the world for a while ‘tis true. We probably diverge on what decent meansStom wrote:
I think Holder is better than decent, but yeah, I struggle to see the quality elsewhere. Ok, Dowrich looks ok, Joseph looks like he might be decent, but...
I’d take him in this England team. I think he’s an excellent middle overs bowler and his batting can be excellent.

- Stom
- Posts: 5847
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 10:57 am
Re: Cricket fred
I'd pick him over one of those seamers and leave the other 2 to take the new ball. I'm not 100% sold on his on-field captaincy, though.Banquo wrote:He probably should bat higher than 8, I agree. He is a very good third seamer. Probably pick him over Woakes for this test team. If Stokes were fit to bowl, would you pick Holder over one of Broad/Anderson/Archer? It'd be a tight call, cos he'd be a decent shout to be skipper, thereby freeing Root upStom wrote:Lol, as ever.Banquo wrote: Holder was number one all rounder in the world for a while ‘tis true. We probably diverge on what decent means
I’d take him in this England team. I think he’s an excellent middle overs bowler and his batting can be excellent.
It'd be the shortest tail in world cricket, lol.
-
- Posts: 13436
- Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:17 am
Re: Cricket fred
I think Holder is a little negative in the field, but he's done very well to make them much harder to beat and part of that is the extra discipline he's brought, and he's not getting many scores over 400 from his side to work against in the field so he's not being judged on an equal footing.
-
- Posts: 19371
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: Cricket fred
He's a terrific team captain. Which one would you drop?Stom wrote:I'd pick him over one of those seamers and leave the other 2 to take the new ball. I'm not 100% sold on his on-field captaincy, though.Banquo wrote:He probably should bat higher than 8, I agree. He is a very good third seamer. Probably pick him over Woakes for this test team. If Stokes were fit to bowl, would you pick Holder over one of Broad/Anderson/Archer? It'd be a tight call, cos he'd be a decent shout to be skipper, thereby freeing Root upStom wrote:
Lol, as ever.
I’d take him in this England team. I think he’s an excellent middle overs bowler and his batting can be excellent.
It'd be the shortest tail in world cricket, lol.
On the shortest tail note, Bess was at 10 for us in the last test.
-
- Posts: 19371
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: Cricket fred
Meanwhile, Windies all over us this morning. Disappointing for Pope, disappointed in Woakes. Mind, I think if we get to 350 that'd be a good score.
-
- Posts: 19371
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: Cricket fred
FFS, chucking away a great position, good innings from Buttler, but he needed to stick for another hour at least.
-
- Posts: 13436
- Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:17 am
Re: Cricket fred
Looks a tad like we were expecting rain and simply weren't ready to start
-
- Posts: 19371
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: Cricket fred
Fortunately Broad was readyDigby wrote:Looks a tad like we were expecting rain and simply weren't ready to start



-
- Posts: 13436
- Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:17 am
Re: Cricket fred
And the Windies having made such a positive start rather lost the plot, if they've been using plans they keep changing them.Banquo wrote:Fortunately Broad was readyDigby wrote:Looks a tad like we were expecting rain and simply weren't ready to start![]()
![]()
A great little support innings from Bess
-
- Posts: 19371
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: Cricket fred
He’s got a great technique. Worth investing in I thinkDigby wrote:And the Windies having made such a positive start rather lost the plot, if they've been using plans they keep changing them.Banquo wrote:Fortunately Broad was readyDigby wrote:Looks a tad like we were expecting rain and simply weren't ready to start![]()
![]()
A great little support innings from Bess
-
- Posts: 13436
- Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:17 am
Re: Cricket fred
This about as close to watching test match cricket as I can recall in a while. There have been a few SA sides willing to grind things out, but there are two teams here willing to work their way into a match
- Galfon
- Posts: 4299
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 8:07 pm
Re: Cricket fred
Will be disappointed not to get the follow on option.
Good to see the pair properly in tandem sgain .
Good to see the pair properly in tandem sgain .
-
- Posts: 19371
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: Cricket fred
They only need c30 now though, so unlikely I'd think; both these two are decent bats.Galfon wrote:Will be disappointed not to get the follow on option.
Good to see the pair properly in tandem sgain .
- Stom
- Posts: 5847
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 10:57 am
Re: Cricket fred
I’d think around 230 is where they’ll get to.Banquo wrote:They only need c30 now though, so unlikely I'd think; both these two are decent bats.Galfon wrote:Will be disappointed not to get the follow on option.
Good to see the pair properly in tandem sgain .
Btw, what was the name of that other obese wi spinner?
-
- Posts: 19371
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: Cricket fred
Jofra not having a great time. Not sure why he and woakes opened this am- though in fairness jofra had an over to finish
-
- Posts: 5608
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:49 pm
Re: Cricket fred
Broad has 4No. 3 wicket spells this year. Pretty good going.
- Stom
- Posts: 5847
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 10:57 am
Re: Cricket fred
He wasn't WI, that's why I was confused. Bermudan: Dwayne LeverockStom wrote:I’d think around 230 is where they’ll get to.Banquo wrote:They only need c30 now though, so unlikely I'd think; both these two are decent bats.Galfon wrote:Will be disappointed not to get the follow on option.
Good to see the pair properly in tandem sgain .
Btw, what was the name of that other obese wi spinner?
- Puja
- Posts: 17854
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:16 pm
Re: Cricket fred
Feels like a poor decision not to promote Stokes and Buttler to 3 and 4. It was right to open with Sibley and Burns as we weren't far enough ahead that we could gamble, but they've done a fine job, got the lead over 270, taken the shine off the ball, wearied the bowlers, and now we need to take a chance to accelerate and try and beat the weather to get a result. It's overcautious captaincy from Root - looking to erase any possibility of defeat rather than looking at ways to win.
Puja
Puja
Backist Monk