Cricket fred

Post Reply
Banquo
Posts: 18888
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Banquo »

Digby wrote:I wonder if Bairstow had in mind at this point of an innings (a in wickets down) we'd normally be somewhat closer to 80 overs and getting the reviews back. It was a very quick decision to review based on not a lot, he might even have just panicked
he's not big on logic behind the stumps either. Its good to have drive and be voluble as a keeper, but prone to the Amygdala hijack or summat
Banquo
Posts: 18888
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Banquo »

a lead of more than 20 looks dubious now. Shouldn't really criticise Stokes. But..
Banquo
Posts: 18888
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Banquo »

Banquo wrote:a lead of more than 20 looks dubious now. Shouldn't really criticise Stokes. But..
gawd....be a nice time for Broad to rediscover an appetite for batting. Moeen can be a tad frustrating, but consistent in the way he plays I spose.
Banquo
Posts: 18888
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Banquo »

at least Broad has finally contributed...good lad. 50 plus lead is good from where we are an hour ago
Banquo
Posts: 18888
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Banquo »

Broad will be mightily hacked off.....7th dropped chance this series. Stokes surprisingly.
Banquo
Posts: 18888
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Banquo »

Broad so unlucky
Banquo
Posts: 18888
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Banquo »

blimey a worse review than YJB can normally manage
Banquo
Posts: 18888
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Banquo »

good heart from windies, poor reviews and loss of temper from an excited Jimmy
Digby
Posts: 13436
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:17 am

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Digby »

Banquo wrote:good heart from windies, poor reviews and loss of temper from an excited Jimmy
Was that the panto you're running on the wicket Jimmy, oh no I'm not, oh yes you were...

(if anyone hasn't seen it he was clearly running onto the wicket where they're not allowed so the umpire was quite right)
Banquo
Posts: 18888
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Banquo »

Digby wrote:
Banquo wrote:good heart from windies, poor reviews and loss of temper from an excited Jimmy
Was that the panto you're running on the wicket Jimmy, oh no I'm not, oh yes you were...

(if anyone hasn't seen it he was clearly running onto the wicket where they're not allowed so the umpire was quite right)
yep, and he was still 'dissenting' at the end.

Weather looks good for today, so England need to take wickets early on to avoid a run chase of 200++
Digby
Posts: 13436
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:17 am

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Digby »

Jimmy was clearly in the wrong and could easily lose some of his match fee at the very least. Maybe the umpires will let him off knowing sometimes players lose their rag a little. Given he's in the news for 500 test wickets, and what an achievement that is, I don't know cricket will want to change that story but if he repeats that behaviour today I don't see they'd have a choice
WaspInWales
Posts: 3623
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 10:46 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by WaspInWales »

107 to win.

Amazingly, the match could still go either way.
Banquo
Posts: 18888
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Banquo »

Rashid has become a seriously good one day bowler.
User avatar
Mellsblue
Posts: 14541
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 7:58 am

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Mellsblue »

Banquo wrote:Rashid has become a seriously good one day bowler.
He has. Hard work will always improve a player. He's Adil-igent trainer.
Banquo
Posts: 18888
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Banquo »

Mellsblue wrote:
Banquo wrote:Rashid has become a seriously good one day bowler.
He has. Hard work will always improve a player. He's Adil-igent trainer.
Mikey Brown will be in a spin over that, and kick you in the googlies
Digby
Posts: 13436
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:17 am

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Digby »

Well that's not very clever Mr Stokes.
Banquo
Posts: 18888
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Banquo »

Digby wrote:Well that's not very clever Mr Stokes.
....though released without charge.....but agreed, Looks like Mr Hales is in more bother
Banquo
Posts: 18888
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Banquo »

dodgy looking ashes squad I have to say; Stoneman, Ballance, Vince, Malan all look at best average, and Ballances selection borders on nuts.

Not sure why you wouldn't take Buttler, and push Bairstow up to bolster the middle order, and don't get why Rashid isn't there tbh.

Oz aren't very strong either, but this squad won't worry them much.
User avatar
Stom
Posts: 5828
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 10:57 am

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Stom »

Banquo wrote:dodgy looking ashes squad I have to say; Stoneman, Ballance, Vince, Malan all look at best average, and Ballances selection borders on nuts.

Not sure why you wouldn't take Buttler, and push Bairstow up to bolster the middle order, and don't get why Rashid isn't there tbh.

Oz aren't very strong either, but this squad won't worry them much.
I think Ballance COULD be a good no5. But he's no no3, that's for sure. I would still rather see everyone move up one, though, and for us to bring in another spinner at 8/9/10.

Our 11 is not a bad 11 at all, it just has the predictable 3 weaknesses.

Vince I don't get.
Banquo
Posts: 18888
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Banquo »

Stom wrote:
Banquo wrote:dodgy looking ashes squad I have to say; Stoneman, Ballance, Vince, Malan all look at best average, and Ballances selection borders on nuts.

Not sure why you wouldn't take Buttler, and push Bairstow up to bolster the middle order, and don't get why Rashid isn't there tbh.

Oz aren't very strong either, but this squad won't worry them much.
I think Ballance COULD be a good no5. But he's no no3, that's for sure. I would still rather see everyone move up one, though, and for us to bring in another spinner at 8/9/10.

Our 11 is not a bad 11 at all, it just has the predictable 3 weaknesses.

Vince I don't get.
If you have 3 weaknesses, that's pretty significant, as they are all in the top 5! 60% of the top 5, great than 25% of the team. That takes a lot of masking!

I'd also argue Broad needs a very quick return to form, and Anderson needs to bowl better than ever before In Oz.

3,5 all they have to do is bowl fast yorkers at Ballance, and he's gone.

The upside is that Cook has done well in Oz (tour before last), Root is world class, as is an on form and not in prison Stokes; YJB needs to bat for longer. If Moeen can try and eliminate the brainfarts whilst still being an attacking cricketer, that would help. All our class players need to over-achieve imo, to compensate for a top order and third seamer that will be attacked remorselessly......and Root will be targeted, suspect with a lot of chin music.

Mind, as before, Oz aren't that much to be scared of, they have similar issues, truth be known- if they can get and keep their best bowlers fit, it'll be uphill for us.
Discreet Hooker
Posts: 379
Joined: Mon May 16, 2016 7:55 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Discreet Hooker »

I see Michael Vaughan has been suggesting Stokes needs to change his life style . He's had warnings already as we know and if his character is as aggressive off the field as on , then late night drinking and bumping into drunks ain't doing him any favours .
fivepointer
Posts: 5834
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 3:42 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by fivepointer »

The video of the Stokes incident isn't great viewing. Whatever the Police decide to do - and there does look to be strong grounds for a charge - the ECB will have to take some disciplinary action.
Big D
Posts: 5579
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:49 pm

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Big D »

Discreet Hooker wrote:I see Michael Vaughan has been suggesting Stokes needs to change his life style . He's had warnings already as we know and if his character is as aggressive off the field as on , then late night drinking and bumping into drunks ain't doing him any favours .
He could do with having a word with the PCA president. He knows a thing or two about over coming issues with the booze. I think Flintoff is now practically tea total actually.
fivepointer wrote:The video of the Stokes incident isn't great viewing. Whatever the Police decide to do - and there does look to be strong grounds for a charge - the ECB will have to take some disciplinary action.
I think he'd have gotten away with it (and a slap on the wrist/fined by the ECB) if he had stopped before the last few punches but I guess when you are as an aggressive personality as him when the red mist descends all bets are off for him trying to retain any composure. Which begs the question why get into that position in the 1st place.
User avatar
Stom
Posts: 5828
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 10:57 am

Re: Cicket fred

Post by Stom »

Big D wrote:
Discreet Hooker wrote:I see Michael Vaughan has been suggesting Stokes needs to change his life style . He's had warnings already as we know and if his character is as aggressive off the field as on , then late night drinking and bumping into drunks ain't doing him any favours .
He could do with having a word with the PCA president. He knows a thing or two about over coming issues with the booze. I think Flintoff is now practically tea total actually.
fivepointer wrote:The video of the Stokes incident isn't great viewing. Whatever the Police decide to do - and there does look to be strong grounds for a charge - the ECB will have to take some disciplinary action.
I think he'd have gotten away with it (and a slap on the wrist/fined by the ECB) if he had stopped before the last few punches but I guess when you are as an aggressive personality as him when the red mist descends all bets are off for him trying to retain any composure. Which begs the question why get into that position in the 1st place.
And why didn't Alex Hales step in more forcibly...
Big D
Posts: 5579
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:49 pm

Re: RE: Re: Cicket fred

Post by Big D »

Stom wrote:
Big D wrote:
Discreet Hooker wrote:I see Michael Vaughan has been suggesting Stokes needs to change his life style . He's had warnings already as we know and if his character is as aggressive off the field as on , then late night drinking and bumping into drunks ain't doing him any favours .
He could do with having a word with the PCA president. He knows a thing or two about over coming issues with the booze. I think Flintoff is now practically tea total actually.
fivepointer wrote:The video of the Stokes incident isn't great viewing. Whatever the Police decide to do - and there does look to be strong grounds for a charge - the ECB will have to take some disciplinary action.
I think he'd have gotten away with it (and a slap on the wrist/fined by the ECB) if he had stopped before the last few punches but I guess when you are as an aggressive personality as him when the red mist descends all bets are off for him trying to retain any composure. Which begs the question why get into that position in the 1st place.
And why didn't Alex Hales step in more forcibly...
Not sure you cam punish Hales for not forcibly splitting it up to be honest.
Post Reply