RugbyRebels

Lord Llandaff wrote:

Banquo wrote:Finn rightly spitting feathers; Bairstow can't drop so many simple chances. Move him to 5 and bring Buttler and Stokes back- ironically, then Finn would likely be dropped.

Was thinking exactly the same. Ballance or Vince would then drop out too, Ballance imo.

yep...don't think either are test players. Moeen under pressure imo, as well as Finn.

Banquo wrote:

Lord Llandaff wrote:

Banquo wrote:Finn rightly spitting feathers; Bairstow can't drop so many simple chances. Move him to 5 and bring Buttler and Stokes back- ironically, then Finn would likely be dropped.

Was thinking exactly the same. Ballance or Vince would then drop out too, Ballance imo.

yep...don't think either are test players. Moeen under pressure imo, as well as Finn.

Aye I reckon Stokes will come in for Finn. Question is could they move Moeen up to replace Vince thus freeing up a space for Jimmy? Or will Jimmy simply come in for Ball? Hales needs to do something tomorrow too.

Lord Llandaff wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Lord Llandaff wrote:
Was thinking exactly the same. Ballance or Vince would then drop out too, Ballance imo.

yep...don't think either are test players. Moeen under pressure imo, as well as Finn.

Aye I reckon Stokes will come in for Finn. Question is could they move Moeen up to replace Vince thus freeing up a space for Jimmy? Or will Jimmy simply come in for Ball? Hales needs to do something tomorrow too.

Why? Hales has just come off a pretty devcent series and had 1 failure...

I would like to see England do something about the spin situation though. Perhaps some sort of program where promising spinners are taken away to the subcontinent for 2 years.

The only spinners coming through seem to be batting allrounders. And even those like Rashid are almost allrounders. Why are they allowed to spend so much time batting instead of honing their specialist skill?

So now, when players come through, the best spinners they face are Moeen, Kerrigan, Raynor, Ansari...not good enough

Spinners practice their batting as that's what'll get them selected, same for wicketkeepers. I do really wonder if we'd right now be picking Tuffnell and Russell even if they were actually available and playing well.

Stom wrote:

Lord Llandaff wrote:

Banquo wrote: yep...don't think either are test players. Moeen under pressure imo, as well as Finn.

Aye I reckon Stokes will come in for Finn. Question is could they move Moeen up to replace Vince thus freeing up a space for Jimmy? Or will Jimmy simply come in for Ball? Hales needs to do something tomorrow too.

Why? Hales has just come off a pretty devcent series and had 1 failure...

I would like to see England do something about the spin situation though. Perhaps some sort of program where promising spinners are taken away to the subcontinent for 2 years.

The only spinners coming through seem to be batting allrounders. And even those like Rashid are almost allrounders. Why are they allowed to spend so much time batting instead of honing their specialist skill?

So now, when players come through, the best spinners they face are Moeen, Kerrigan, Raynor, Ansari...not good enough

A decent series against a very mediocre attack. I'm not saying he's on the verge of being dropped, just that he needs to show he has he compsure to bat against proper test strength attacks, as he failed v a weakened SA as well.

As for spin, I agree we need to do something. Part of the issue is the obsession in England teams of batting "properly" right down to at least no. 8 or even 9. It would be ironic if we lose this game to a side with a more traditional tail.

Cook gone. Strange start to quite a big 4th innings chase.

That's rank

Both openers gone, England looking like they're going to lose at 5 an over...

That's rank

England tactic is clearly to ensure they are not spun out by Yasir

Vince and Ballance to save the day...

Cook's wasn't a good wicket to lose and he'd probably think he could do better, but you will always lose wickets to okay balls in an area when the batsmen isn't in with feet moving well. The other wickets lost are just rubbish on our part.

Digby wrote:Cook's wasn't a good wicket to lose and he'd probably think he could do better, but you will always lose wickets to okay balls in an area when the batsmen isn't in with feet moving well. The other wickets lost are just rubbish on our part.

A criticism I'd make of Cook would be over the mindset for the run chase. Best part of 2 days to bat with 283 to get and they looked like they wanted it over in 65 overs. Looks like they might get their wish. I'm watching Sky, but I'd guess Boycott is spitting feathers atm.

Lord Llandaff wrote:

Digby wrote:Cook's wasn't a good wicket to lose and he'd probably think he could do better, but you will always lose wickets to okay balls in an area when the batsmen isn't in with feet moving well. The other wickets lost are just rubbish on our part.

A criticism I'd make of Cook would be over the mindset for the run chase. Best part of 2 days to bat with 283 to get and they looked like they wanted it over in 65 overs. Looks like they might get their wish. I'm watching Sky, but I'd guess Boycott is spitting feathers atm.

Very likely they wanted some runs on the board before the leggie came on to manage the pressure, but Pakistan will give scoring chances and it's a big enough run chase without gifting wickets, and yes perhaps they were getting a bit ahead of themselves as a unit.

Digby wrote:

Lord Llandaff wrote:

Digby wrote:Cook's wasn't a good wicket to lose and he'd probably think he could do better, but you will always lose wickets to okay balls in an area when the batsmen isn't in with feet moving well. The other wickets lost are just rubbish on our part.

A criticism I'd make of Cook would be over the mindset for the run chase. Best part of 2 days to bat with 283 to get and they looked like they wanted it over in 65 overs. Looks like they might get their wish. I'm watching Sky, but I'd guess Boycott is spitting feathers atm.

Very likely they wanted some runs on the board before the leggie came on to manage the pressure, but Pakistan will give scoring chances and it's a big enough run chase without gifting wickets, and yes perhaps they were getting a bit ahead of themselves as a unit.

The abject fear they seem to have for a fairly decent leg spinner on a pitch not offering a huge amount speaks volumes

...and Sky show a clip of Stokes getting out to a young Lancs leggie, lol

Anyway, enough of the negativity, we can still win this!

Lord Llandaff wrote:

Digby wrote:

Lord Llandaff wrote:
A criticism I'd make of Cook would be over the mindset for the run chase. Best part of 2 days to bat with 283 to get and they looked like they wanted it over in 65 overs. Looks like they might get their wish. I'm watching Sky, but I'd guess Boycott is spitting feathers atm.

Very likely they wanted some runs on the board before the leggie came on to manage the pressure, but Pakistan will give scoring chances and it's a big enough run chase without gifting wickets, and yes perhaps they were getting a bit ahead of themselves as a unit.

The abject fear they seem to have for a fairly decent leg spinner on a pitch not offering a huge amount speaks volumes

...and Sky show a clip of Stokes getting out to a young Lancs leggie, lol

It also goes some way to illustrating the recalling of a left handed batsman who wasn't showing much form.

supine chase so far. Three of four getting themselves out.

100 partnership about now would be nice...

Good work here to worsen the footholds bowling to the righthanders. Very rare to see any umpire go from two warnings to your out of the attack of course.

Just when it was looking in the Ballance...

no idea what's going on, if Pakistan we're playing as England there'd be suspicions as to why

I've seen it all now...

Half way there!

batsmen getting themselves in and a lot throwing it away-- and Broad simply can't play fast bowling any more which is unfortunate.

weak chase imo, too many got themselves out.