RugbyRebels

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:Roland-Jones will also be feeling somewhat hard done by.

Good. At least he can talk to Anderson who at times felt hard done by with a seam attack of Harmison, Hoggard, Flintoff and Jones being picked ahead of him.

I suppose we could simply pick another bowler, it's not like 3 of the batsman are worth 3 slots in the team, question then is would the bowlers want to lose out on possible overs in a day, 5 seamers and a spinner (sort of) doesn't leave a lot of overs each

not a great analogy, but hey-ho.

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:Roland-Jones will also be feeling somewhat hard done by.

Good. At least he can talk to Anderson who at times felt hard done by with a seam attack of Harmison, Hoggard, Flintoff and Jones being picked ahead of him.

I suppose we could simply pick another bowler, it's not like 3 of the batsman are worth 3 slots in the team, question then is would the bowlers want to lose out on possible overs in a day, 5 seamers and a spinner (sort of) doesn't leave a lot of overs each

not a great analogy, but hey-ho.

You say he looks hard done by, but I still think away from English conditions he'll look as dangerous as a one-legged man in a kickboxing bout

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:
Good. At least he can talk to Anderson who at times felt hard done by with a seam attack of Harmison, Hoggard, Flintoff and Jones being picked ahead of him.

I suppose we could simply pick another bowler, it's not like 3 of the batsman are worth 3 slots in the team, question then is would the bowlers want to lose out on possible overs in a day, 5 seamers and a spinner (sort of) doesn't leave a lot of overs each

not a great analogy, but hey-ho.

You say he looks hard done by, but I still think away from English conditions he'll look as dangerous as a one-legged man in a kickboxing bout

No, I said he'll feel hard done by, what with Woakes being somewhat sub par with the ball, in contrast to Roland-Jones who (and we are after all currently playing in england, unless I'm mistaken) was very effective. Woakes was undercooked tbh, thus a game early imo, thus logical to keep Roland Jones in the team when in good bowling form on a wicket that would suit him. I agree TRJ isn't a long term fixture in the side esp abroad, but for this specific match....(still a poor analogy.)

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote: not a great analogy, but hey-ho.

You say he looks hard done by, but I still think away from English conditions he'll look as dangerous as a one-legged man in a kickboxing bout

No, I said he'll feel hard done by, what with Woakes being somewhat sub par with the ball, in contrast to Roland-Jones who (and we are after all currently playing in england, unless I'm mistaken) was very effective. Woakes was undercooked tbh, thus a game early imo, thus logical to keep Roland Jones in the team when in good bowling form on a wicket that would suit him. I agree TRJ isn't a long term fixture in the side esp abroad, but for this specific match....(still a poor analogy.)

The 1st or 2nd?

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:
You say he looks hard done by, but I still think away from English conditions he'll look as dangerous as a one-legged man in a kickboxing bout

No, I said he'll feel hard done by, what with Woakes being somewhat sub par with the ball, in contrast to Roland-Jones who (and we are after all currently playing in england, unless I'm mistaken) was very effective. Woakes was undercooked tbh, thus a game early imo, thus logical to keep Roland Jones in the team when in good bowling form on a wicket that would suit him. I agree TRJ isn't a long term fixture in the side esp abroad, but for this specific match....(still a poor analogy.)

The 1st or 2nd?

ha ha. Both.

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote: No, I said he'll feel hard done by, what with Woakes being somewhat sub par with the ball, in contrast to Roland-Jones who (and we are after all currently playing in england, unless I'm mistaken) was very effective. Woakes was undercooked tbh, thus a game early imo, thus logical to keep Roland Jones in the team when in good bowling form on a wicket that would suit him. I agree TRJ isn't a long term fixture in the side esp abroad, but for this specific match....(still a poor analogy.)

The 1st or 2nd?

ha ha. Both.

It might indeed have been a test too early for Woakes, but it's not exactly where our issues in this game are coming from. Tim Bresnan was another who had very good results whilst in an England side and was just passed over, so there's another TRJ can have a natter with. I don't think TRJ was keeping Woakes out of the side for long, so I'm not too fussed about that call. Bringing in Buttler and playing Bairstow simply as a batter isn't without merit, that's a decent shout

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:
The 1st or 2nd?

ha ha. Both.

It might indeed have been a test too early for Woakes, but it's not exactly where our issues in this game are coming from. Tim Bresnan was another who had very good results whilst in an England side and was just passed over, so there's another TRJ can have a natter with. I don't think TRJ was keeping Woakes out of the side for long, so I'm not too fussed about that call. Bringing in Buttler and playing Bairstow simply as a batter isn't without merit, that's a decent shout

I agree on the last point as I said above, but I do think we have had an issue with our bowling in this match too, though Broad has been the worst culprit.

The issue on TRJ is different to both those you've highlighted though, though agree it probably a quibble over timing. Both Bresnan and Anderson were kept out of sides by demonstrably better bowlers (at the time, admittedly Anderson has developed brilliantly).....jury out on Woakes still imo.

I don't think Woakes is wonderful, but he's better than TRJ for me.

At least Ali has caught one, still if he has to drop a sitter then just for poops and giggles happy go lucky Broad is the one to do it to.

Digby wrote:I don't think Woakes is wonderful, but he's better than TRJ for me.

At least Ali has caught one, still if he has to drop a sitter then just for poops and giggles happy go lucky Broad is the one to do it to.

Yep as a wind up, that's a pearler.

I think Woakes is likely a better player, just an average pick this time round, as his output showed.

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:I don't think Woakes is wonderful, but he's better than TRJ for me.

At least Ali has caught one, still if he has to drop a sitter then just for poops and giggles happy go lucky Broad is the one to do it to.

Yep as a wind up, that's a pearler.

I think Woakes is likely a better player, just an average pick this time round, as his output showed.

I tend to think if you want to pick someone over a player who's done well that player needs to deliver, and Woakes hasn't. Seeing as I was critical of such as dropping Burns back in NZ then being consistent so far Woakes over TRJ isn't a good call.

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:I don't think Woakes is wonderful, but he's better than TRJ for me.

At least Ali has caught one, still if he has to drop a sitter then just for poops and giggles happy go lucky Broad is the one to do it to.

Yep as a wind up, that's a pearler.

I think Woakes is likely a better player, just an average pick this time round, as his output showed.

I tend to think if you want to pick someone over a player who's done well that player needs to deliver, and Woakes hasn't. Seeing as I was critical of such as dropping Burns back in NZ then being consistent so far Woakes over TRJ isn't a good call.

that's pretty much the point I started out with....

Playing England is certainly a help when your team is described as inept .

West Indies look out for the count at the moment, all those dropped catches catching up with them.

I'd want England to have had 10 overs at them tonight, and I certainly don't understand Woakes and Broad batting time , when Moeen was there the score was moving so that was okay but now it's just drifted a little. Still, England are in control and should have enough

Digby wrote:West Indies look out for the count at the moment, all those dropped catches catching up with them.

I'd want England to have had 10 overs at them tonight, and I certainly don't understand Woakes and Broad batting time , when Moeen was there the score was moving so that was okay but now it's just drifted a little. Still, England are in control and should have enough

woakes has played very well, important innings, fair play.

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:West Indies look out for the count at the moment, all those dropped catches catching up with them.

I'd want England to have had 10 overs at them tonight, and I certainly don't understand Woakes and Broad batting time , when Moeen was there the score was moving so that was okay but now it's just drifted a little. Still, England are in control and should have enough

woakes has played very well, important innings, fair play.

Yes he did, and I don't think it'll make much difference but England did seem to take a few overs out of the game for reasons passing understanding. Broad hit a boundary early doors, but then until the final over when they'd had the nod they were coming in for a bowl it was a little bit of dead time, and I'd rather they'd hit out or simply declared. Given the overs Moeen is likely to bowl on a spinning wicket I can't see how the bowlers would've ended up too tired even had they bowled 110 overs.

First drop of the day, Cook putting down a solid chance off Broad

I can't say it was even close to the Moeen levels on ineptness as regards shelling a chance from Broad's bowling, but Cook would expect to take that. Maybe he just didn't pick it up, I can't think he's already lost concentration with the two main bowlers looking for an early breakthrough

I quite like England have no mid-off, though I'd prefer we had a straighter mid-off and left space at cover. Leaving space down the ground might encourage the drive, but also to play that much straighter

Broad bowling more threatening balls so far than Jimmy

Almost a catch back to Broad, but the ball bounces off Broad and runs out the non striker who was backing up.

50 odd for 2 now

Almost nothing happening, Bairstow seems quiet, and more worrying the captain too. Still, Root is very new, but he's channeling Gooch rather than Vaughan, it's all a bit staid

Woakes has been below speed again. And we've seen not a lot of Anderson chasing his 500. Moeen having an issue as he's not really giving it a rip, and when it is spinning it's reasonably slow

Stokes on now to see if he can do something

Stokes too straight by around 8-10 inches.

turns out Root's declaration was far from conservative, given how ineffectual to poor the bowling has been so far. Calypso callapso is the only thing tween Windies and a stunning win.

Moeen strikes

I don't think there's a problem with the declaration. We've just not bowled well, an with the ball not doing much they haven't been able to bowl in pairs to dry up runs and apply pressure