Notices
Reply to Thread
Page 24 of 37 FirstFirst ... 14222324252634 ... LastLast
Results 691 to 720 of 1108

Thread: The Cricket Thread

  1. #691  
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    26,849
    Quote Originally Posted by TheDarknessIsCalling View Post
    They reckoned England bowled only 24 balls that would have hit the stumps 1st innings, not that I take that as be all and end all as you get quite a few edges just outside off stump and bowling too straight can be easier to hit. It's not like they would result each and every one in an LBW.

    But you might reasonably expect a bit more than that to hit the stumps, and there was a graphic showing the change of accuracy from the opening bowlers (for South Africa I think) and the change bowlers, 1st innings again.

    Good time to have a smirk at Yawn, profit extraordinaire. He's become a hundred times the England captain he was since he retired....

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/40626883
    That's a crazy stat, I can easily forgive Broad and Anderson as they have done so much and carry the weight well, so are bound to have off tests or days, but Wood as hard as he tries just seems to be very inconsistent and rarely finds the mark.

    I noticed he tries to change tack quickly after failing to bowl line and length consistently and then really starts to go for some runs.

    Its been a really poor test match this from England, think they've got most things wrong.

    Still, sharp quick lesson for Root as captain....consider your reviews (they reviewed some woeful LBW's) and get in your bowlers ear far more, especially the ones dishing out 'hit me' balls all day
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  2. #692  
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    20,514
    Quote Originally Posted by welshypool View Post
    Yep, seems a waste having two spinners in English conditions and Alli should be enough to bank on really considering recent form.
    I think England are wrapped up in wanting two spinners, one turning the ball into the (right handed) batsman and one away, but don't want to play only three quicks so see Bairstow, Stokes, Ali and a n other (Dawson) as batting enough that they can play six.

    Bottom line is six bowling options is a waste, great if 1-2 are consistent enough with the bat to practically be batsmen but Stokes and Ali are a smidge short of that, and Stokes really not consistent enough with ball as his talent (like Flintoff) would suggest he should. And if these options are good enough to be bowling then you shouldn't need six, it is wasteful
    People will believe what they want to believe
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  3. #693  
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    20,514
    Will England score more this time around than 1st innings? 93/5 at the moment, 205 'the target'.........
    People will believe what they want to believe
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  4. #694  
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    26,849
    Quote Originally Posted by TheDarknessIsCalling View Post
    I think England are wrapped up in wanting two spinners, one turning the ball into the (right handed) batsman and one away, but don't want to play only three quicks so see Bairstow, Stokes, Ali and a n other (Dawson) as batting enough that they can play six.

    Bottom line is six bowling options is a waste, great if 1-2 are consistent enough with the bat to practically be batsmen but Stokes and Ali are a smidge short of that, and Stokes really not consistent enough with ball as his talent (like Flintoff) would suggest he should. And if these options are good enough to be bowling then you shouldn't need six, it is wasteful
    Yep and I think you have to force that in a sense to avoid picking 6, Stokes and Ali are a little short as you say but you might as well stick with them and keep moulding them into that
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  5. #695  
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    20,514
    Just looking at some England 2nd innings totals during Moeen's career. Obviously England haven't always needed to score 300+ 2nd innings, and it includes times other than batting last, but have scored 300+ just four times during the 39 Tests Moeen has played, one of those times losing.

    And they've not scored 270+ 2nd innings since making 445 against Pakistan August last year.

    ENG 2nd Inns 478 vs New Zealand - won by 124 runs
    ENG 2nd Inns 312 vs Pakistan - lost by 178 runs chasing 491
    ENG 2nd Inns 326 vs South Africa - won by 241 runs
    ENG 2nd Inns 445 vs Pakistan - won by 141 runs



    Moeen's Test record is P39 W16 D6 L17, assuming England do lose this one, not nearly enough draws and considering 9 of those Tests were against Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and West Indies (P9 W4 D2 L3), the record surely should be better than about even.

    And if Moeen makes 32 here it will be only the 8th time in his 39 Tests he has made 50+ runs and taken 3+ wickets in a Test. If you make it stricter and say 50+ runs and 4 wickets he's done that 4 times previously, make it 5 wickets and it's 3. That isn't the toughest parameter to set or hard to achieve, it's not even 50 runs in either innings just the match so one is 30 and 35, plus 3/102, another 32 and 39, 1/38 and 2/28 so nothing particularly outstanding.
    People will believe what they want to believe
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  6. #696  
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    20,514
    Quote Originally Posted by welshypool View Post
    Yep and I think you have to force that in a sense to avoid picking 6, Stokes and Ali are a little short as you say but you might as well stick with them and keep moulding them into that
    If we go with that, and stick with Ali and Stokes, do you think playing them as part of a five man attack will make them responsible and expedite their improvement, or do you think the six bowler thing is not only to allow for Stokes' physical frailty (at times) but to try to and ease them in a bit?

    Ali is capable enough of bowling overs even when not taking wickets, so surely that takes fatigue or excess workload out of the equation. England should be aiming to bowl the opposition out inside 100-110 overs most of the time surely, so is say 18-20 overs a day too much for any one bowler? Spells of 4-6 overs, 3-4 in a day, shouldn't be too much. If the pitch isn't doing much for the seamers then Ali can bowl as said, after all in his 39 Tests to date he's bowled 100+ balls 1st innings 19 times and less than 10 overs only six times.
    People will believe what they want to believe
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  7. #697  
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    26,849
    Quote Originally Posted by TheDarknessIsCalling View Post
    If we go with that, and stick with Ali and Stokes, do you think playing them as part of a five man attack will make them responsible and expedite their improvement, or do you think the six bowler thing is not only to allow for Stokes' physical frailty (at times) but to try to and ease them in a bit?

    Ali is capable enough of bowling overs even when not taking wickets, so surely that takes fatigue or excess workload out of the equation. England should be aiming to bowl the opposition out inside 100-110 overs most of the time surely, so is say 18-20 overs a day too much for any one bowler? Spells of 4-6 overs, 3-4 in a day, shouldn't be too much. If the pitch isn't doing much for the seamers then Ali can bowl as said, after all in his 39 Tests to date he's bowled 100+ balls 1st innings 19 times and less than 10 overs only six times.
    I think its something perhaps Root and the selectors have in mind, having two spinners. You could be onto something with protecting Stokes to a degree but then if he's not fit he's not fit and you'd be better off making a call on that for a better long term future for Stokes as opposed to plastering over the problem.

    I agree, I think for a days cricket bowling, 5 really should be enough with Ali and even Root can can bowl a few overs and conserve a bit of collective energy if needs be.

    We seemed to have complicated things with the this selection at present and while it worked for the opening test, it doesn't seem a long term ideal to me
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  8. #698  
    LordJamieOfCarragher is online now LFC Forums Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    88,391
    Pathetic performance
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  9. #699  
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    20,514
    Quote Originally Posted by welshypool View Post
    I think its something perhaps Root and the selectors have in mind, having two spinners. You could be onto something with protecting Stokes to a degree but then if he's not fit he's not fit and you'd be better off making a call on that for a better long term future for Stokes as opposed to plastering over the problem.

    I agree, I think for a days cricket bowling, 5 really should be enough with Ali and even Root can can bowl a few overs and conserve a bit of collective energy if needs be.

    We seemed to have complicated things with the this selection at present and while it worked for the opening test, it doesn't seem a long term ideal to me
    Might look at the stats for another post re six bowlers. I think there is much truth in them wanting to play 2 spinners, leftie/leggie and rightie, and not wanting to sacrifice a seamer, especially with Anderson and Stokes being far from physically reliable.

    Thought Stokes was silly this Test going down and trying to throw down the stumps with little prospect of a run out, more seemed a bit of his own ego.

    T'is all over and 8th time in 33 Tests England have won a Test and lost the next. For sure Wood, Dawson, Ballance and Jennings will be sweating on the team selection next up.
    People will believe what they want to believe
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  10. #700  
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    31,460
    Crazy game, this cricket is.

    Comprehensive thrashing from South Africa after they were put to the sword in the 1st Test.

    Impossible to say what will happen in the 3rd Test though .. I would say that SA are in the ascendency after this Test, but that is what I thought about England after the 1st one - helluva series this is turning out to be.

    Well played SA, great bowling performance in both innings.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  11. #701  
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    26,849
    Quote Originally Posted by grenny158 View Post
    Crazy game, this cricket is.

    Comprehensive thrashing from South Africa after they were put to the sword in the 1st Test.

    Impossible to say what will happen in the 3rd Test though .. I would say that SA are in the ascendency after this Test, but that is what I thought about England after the 1st one - helluva series this is turning out to be.

    Well played SA, great bowling performance in both innings.
    Momentum is there for SA now as England will spin themselves into an insecure mess with Root as a new captain

    Thoroughly deserved from SA and they won just about every session and totally dominated this test match

    Third test becomes the test
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  12. #702  
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    20,514
    Six bowler theory

    2017 P2 W1 D0 L1

    1st Test vs SAF - won by 211 runs
    Wood 1 wkt, Stokes 0 wkts, Broad 2 wkts

    2nd Test vs SAF - lost by 340 runs.
    Wood 0 wkts, Dawson 1 wkt & 18 runs


    2016/17 P7 W1 D1 L5

    1st Test vs BAN - won by 22 runs
    Woakes 0 wkts, Broad 2 wkts

    2nd Test vs BAN - lost by 108 runs
    Finn 0 wkts, Ansari 2 wkts & 13 runs

    1st Test vs IND - match drawn
    Stokes 1 wkt, Broad 1 wkt, Woakes 1 wkt & 4 runs

    2nd Test vs IND - lost by 246 runs
    Ansari 0 wkts & 4 runs, Stokes 1 wkt

    3rd Test vs IND - lost by 8 wkts
    Batty 0 wkts, Ali 0 wkts & 21 runs, Anderson 0 wkts, Woakes 1 wkt

    4th Test vs IND - lost by an innings and 36 runs
    Ball 1 wkt, Woakes 1 wkt & 11 runs, Anderson 0 wkts, Stokes 0 wkts

    5th Test vs IND - lost by an innings and 75 runs
    Ball 0 wkts, Ali 1 wkt, Stokes 1 wkt, Rashid 1 wkt


    2016 n/a

    England played only five bowlers in the four Test series vs Pakistan (D2-2)
    England played only five bowlers in the three Test series vs Sri Lanka (W2-0)


    2015/16 P3 W0 D1 L2

    1st Test vs PAK - match drawn
    Broad 1 wkt, Wood 1 wkt

    2nd Test vs PAK - lost by 178 runs
    Broad 1 wkt, Stokes 1 wkts & 17 runs, Rashid 2 wkts

    3rd Test vs PAK - lost by 127 runs
    Stokes 0 wkts & 12 runs*, Rashid 1 wkt

    *Stokes was injured so only bowled 11 overs.

    England played only five bowlers in the four Test series vs South Africa (W2-1)



    I think that's when the nonsense started, in Pakistan, and has continued too much. Record is P12 W2 D2 L8 so lost four times as many as won. And the reason I've included wickets taken where less than you might expect for an "even share" is to show that, where two are named you have to wonder why include six?!?!? And in all TWELVE of those 12 at least two didn't take enough wickets to justify the excess bowling, and bear in mind they have TWO innings to bowl and where they only bowled once I've factored that in and included only those who took one wicket.

    Runs are merely an aside where the player might be expected to contribute with the bat or at least can so if they scored a fairly low number of runs as well I've included the runs to show they didn't contribute much with bat or ball. It's fair to say Stokes and Ali certainly can score runs, but need to score more runs and take more wickets more often.

    As best I'm aware England have yet to win a series playing six bowlers in their attack, they've only just managed to win a couple of Tests, one by 22 runs over one of the weaker Test nations, and the other because Root scored 190 and South Africa collapsed in a heap. I can see why it came about, wanting to play more options in spinner conditions, but it's gone beyond that and beyond a joke.

    Sure England would have probably lost in India anyway, but I doubt they would have so easily in Bangladesh and it's almost giving away home advantage to be playing six bowlers and only four out and out batsmen of whom two are struggling.
    People will believe what they want to believe
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  13. #703  
    TheRiedle is online now First team regular
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    36,262
    Complacency leads to a embarrassing defeat. Ballance and Jennings need to be dropped esp Ballance.
    ?
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  14. #704  
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    31,460
    Quote Originally Posted by welshypool View Post
    Momentum is there for SA now as England will spin themselves into an insecure mess with Root as a new captain

    Thoroughly deserved from SA and they won just about every session and totally dominated this test match

    Third test becomes the test
    Haha, welshy, I think you inadvertently hit on one key for the 3rd Test when you said "England will spin themselves into an insecure mess" - thing is that, on a green track, SA hold the advantage but, on a slower, turning wicket, England are favourites imo. The Oval should be prepared as a spinners heaven to give England the advantage - will that happen?
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  15. #705  
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    20,514
    Have England batted well as a team this series? Root made 190 in their only sizeable total so far, support from Ali and others but pretty much the size of that total was down to Root's efforts - the margin of victory (211) about the same as his contribution overall (195)

    On a cricket forum I go on an India fan pointed out only three of the England team average 40+ (Cook, not in great form, Root and Bairstow) I don't believe England have the batting to play six bowlers, with a more solid top 4-5 they might but only when they've had runs on the board have the bowlers looked up to it.

    Seems rentagob is on his one man mission again, this time stating Ballance and Jennings have a future

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/40636933

    Maybe if he looked at the stats he'd see Ballance has done buggery lower than #3, maybe the problem is he's had a golden start but been worked out now. You don't get a quality batsman average near 60 then struggle because the team do him the "disservice" of batting him at #3. Did he not notice Ballance batting lower in the order and doing diddly?!?!?

    He should do a bit more groundwork before some of his claims. Think the evidence is overwhelming that Ali is best at '#7, any lower would be a waste of someone who is a bit of a batsman and bowler, but capable of big innings - something which would be endangered further by running out of partners if batted lower. He's indulged quite a bit in the shuffle game, fantasy cricket.

    Do like some of the comments on that page

    Quote Originally Posted by richardtee
    I can't believe what I've just read. Another Vaughan trash comment which highlights he still hasn't made the transition from competent cricketer to responsible competent journalist.
    Whilst Hameed may not be in county form, county form is fairly meaningless. Ballance is a fine example, and his batting position shouldn't make a massive difference especially when he has got to 20 and 30, and some barely play any. He may be one of those that transcends county form, applies himself. Besides, we gave players chance after chance when they're failing on the off chance they'll come good eg Roy, why shouldn't we give a chance to someone who's done well for England before and isn't in a rut for his country..............?!?
    People will believe what they want to believe
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  16. #706  
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    9,725
    Great result for the ladies!

    Made a meal of it but won with 1 ball to spare with 8 wickets down
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  17. #707  
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    20,514
    Zimmers missed a good chance to beat Sri Lanka in their only Test, the lankans beat them by a few wickets in the end.

    I gather Ballance will be out of the next Test, might have been anyway, but saves the selectors the decision and may even be a chance to not select him again for a bit.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/40650867

    Would have been nice to give players a whole series, but can you afford to when :


    Jennings 44 runs @ 11.00
    Ballance 85 runs @ 21.25
    Stokes 75 runs @ 18.75
    Dawson 18 runs @ 6.00

    Ironically for all the talk of Ballance he is FIFTH top runscorer so far for England, albeit the side has (in theory) four batsmen, about the same number of all-rounders, Broad, Wood and Anderson.

    And from he bowling side :

    Wood 1 wkt @ 197.00
    Stokes 4 wkts @ 41.00
    Broad 5 wkts @ 38.20

    Dawson isn't in just for his batting, he is supposed to be offering balance between bat and ball and his bowling average is just off the end of the last list (5 wkts @ 33.80) Broad is borderline, averaging nearly 40 with ball isn't great and his 2nd innings performances (0/5 and 0/60) are not as good as his 1st innings (2/62 and 3/64)

    Is Stokes doing enough? 2/77 and 2/34 is ok, apart from his 56 he's fired relative blanks with the bat. As little as some might like it, and as I recall plenty got carried away with his 258 against the saffers, but since that 258 he has scored 721 runs @ 31.35 so not kicked on as some believed he would. He is very Flintoff in my book, although I think had Flintoff pitched it up a lot more his bowling figures would have been far more impressive than they ended. Just over 30 with bat and ball is not bad for an all-rounder, but really ought to be doing better with at least one of the two skills.
    People will believe what they want to believe
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  18. #708  
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    17,227
    Stokes isn't getting left out anytime soon.

    England defo need to have a very long think about the make up of their test side though, top order outside of Cook is embarrassing and the bowling can be very average.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  19. #709  
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    20,514
    Quote Originally Posted by Eddes View Post
    Stokes isn't getting left out anytime soon.
    Wasn't suggesting for a minute he would be, England don't work like that, but his output could definitely be better

    Quote Originally Posted by Eddes View Post
    England defo need to have a very long think about the make up of their test side though, top order outside of Cook is embarrassing and the bowling can be very average.
    Was thinking about it after reading your post earlier this morning, problem is :

    Batting:

    - four batsmen, two of whom are fumbling around to find form so might be considers 0.5s or maybe a 1.0 combined.
    - one wicket-keeper batsman who is a capable batsman but can get himself out too easily and his keeping is oft criticised, but gone quite on that front.
    - three 'all-rounders' of whom two can make runs, but only average low to mid 30s and are vulnerable so perhaps count 1.5 towards the batting and another in Dawson who counts maybe 0.5 on the batting front.
    - three lower order batsmen in Broad, Wood and Anderson, all can be nuisance value and Broad occasionally score a nice 30,40 or even 50+ but form again a concern. Not that the lower order should be compensating failings higher up the order.


    So despite in theory batting down to eight there are three who might barely count as 0.5s, another couple who are hit and miss, and only really Cook, Root and Bairstow as the backbone of the batting. When Root is out you aren't sure what to expect, if you're four down and Cook, Root and Bairstow are three of them then optimism rests shakily on Stokes.

    Bowling:

    - in theory six, in reality Broad and Anderson plus maybe something from Stokes, Ali, Wood and Dawson who probably count as a couple of 0.75s and a couple of 0.5s (in order) Add that up as 1.0+1.0+0.75+0.75+0.5+0.5 and you actually have 4.5 bowlers in terms of quality/output at present.

    Is that harsh on Stokes and Ali? Might appear so to Ali who has taken 10 in a match this summer, but he doesn't average just under 40 because he's doing that lots. I was never that impressed with Wood, or Ball for that matter, and he's struggling at the moment. Dawson has done ok, but not much more than that, and whilst Stokes looked a bit better last Test he is frail and not been consistent with ball or bat.



    Flintoff took 3 5wis and scored 5 hundreds in his 79 Tests. Stokes is only on 34 Tests and just 1 hundred behind Flintoff, and has 3 5wis as well so certainly set fair to best Flintoff on those landmarks, but 2.44 wickets per Test and 34.78 average for Stokes is less wickets per Test than Flintoff (2.86) and a worse average than Flintoff's 32.79 suggesting/showing Stokes is more likely to make an impact in any given Test but unable to sustain it any better than Flintoff.

    Amazingly their respective best match figures are Flintoff 8/156 vs Stokes 8/161 so five runs innit.
    People will believe what they want to believe
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  20. #710  
    LordJamieOfCarragher is online now LFC Forums Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    88,391
    Tom Westley replaces Gary Ballance in the England team for the 3rd Test.

    Dawid Malan also called up to the squad.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  21. #711  
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    26,849
    Quote Originally Posted by LordJamieOfCarragher View Post
    Tom Westley replaces Gary Ballance in the England team for the 3rd Test.

    Dawid Malan also called up to the squad.
    Don't know enough of either, what's the low down on these?
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  22. #712  
    LordJamieOfCarragher is online now LFC Forums Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    88,391
    Quote Originally Posted by welshypool View Post
    Don't know enough of either, what's the low down on these?
    Same really, don't know much about either.

    Westley doing well with Essex this season, hopefully can click with Cook once Jennings is out for 0.

    Malan had that great debut in the T20i v SA
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  23. #713  
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    17,227
    Quote Originally Posted by welshypool View Post
    Don't know enough of either, what's the low down on these?
    Don't know much about Westley if I'm honest but Malan is a surprise to me, he's not far off 30 and has never been anything special. I've always thought of him as more of a one day player really.
    Left handed (another one) opener/number 3 with South African heritage (another one !!!) although I think he was born in England ( think I remember that being said when he was in the T20 squad )
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  24. #714  
    LordJamieOfCarragher is online now LFC Forums Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    88,391
    Quote Originally Posted by Eddes View Post
    Don't know much about Westley if I'm honest but Malan is a surprise to me, he's not far off 30 and has never been anything special. I've always thought of him as more of a one day player really.
    Left handed (another one) opener/number 3 with South African heritage (another one !!!) although I think he was born in England ( think I remember that being said when he was in the T20 squad )
    Malan is a very strange inclusion.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  25. #715  
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    26,849
    Quote Originally Posted by LordJamieOfCarragher View Post
    Same really, don't know much about either.

    Westley doing well with Essex this season, hopefully can click with Cook once Jennings is out for 0.

    Malan had that great debut in the T20i v SA
    To be fair to Jennings I think he gets another shot based on the first test.


    Quote Originally Posted by Eddes View Post
    Don't know much about Westley if I'm honest but Malan is a surprise to me, he's not far off 30 and has never been anything special. I've always thought of him as more of a one day player really.
    Left handed (another one) opener/number 3 with South African heritage (another one !!!) although I think he was born in England ( think I remember that being said when he was in the T20 squad )
    Hmm, does seem to be a bit out of left field then that one.

    I am glad Ballance has been dropped, he didn't seem to change his batting one jot in those two tests. I'm sure he's good at county level and obviously gets runs but test level he looks way off to me

    Also concerned about Mark Wood, I really don't rate him so far from what I've seen
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  26. #716  
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    20,514
    Quote Originally Posted by welshypool View Post
    To be fair to Jennings I think he gets another shot based on the first test.
    99 runs in last 7 innings isn't clever, think he will open though because there is no likely alternative (Ali?)

    Quote Originally Posted by welshypool View Post
    Also concerned about Mark Wood, I really don't rate him so far from what I've seen
    I have been unconvinced by him, and 13 wickets in his last 13 bowls at high 40s average is not at all what I'd expect to be retaining a place either. England don't need six bowlers, but here's how the line up could be:

    Cook
    Jennings
    Westley
    Root
    Bairstow/Malan
    Stokes (Bairstow if Malan plays)
    Ali (Stokes if Malan plays)
    Dawson (Ali if Malan plays)
    Roland-Jones/Wood
    Broad
    Anderson

    Most of the uncertainty is surely in the middle order. I'd like to see Dawson, Wood and ideally Jennings out of the side but if I had to dump two out of three then (dead)Wood and Dawson, the latter not so much as he is unimpressive with the bat as not offering anything in particular that the side doesn't already have (aside from the theory of variety of SLA)
    People will believe what they want to believe
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  27. #717  
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    31,460
    England selectors seem crazy as bat**** to me .. one could be forgiven for thinking they try to select as many players with Saffer connections for their team as possible. David Malan is as pure a boer name as you are ever likely to see.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  28. #718  
    LordJamieOfCarragher is online now LFC Forums Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    88,391
    Quote Originally Posted by grenny158 View Post
    England selectors seem crazy as bat**** to me .. one could be forgiven for thinking they try to select as many players with Saffer connections for their team as possible. David Malan is as pure a boer name as you are ever likely to see.
    *Dawid

    Middle name Johannes

    His brother is Charl Christiaan Malan by the way
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  29. #719  
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    31,460
    Quote Originally Posted by LordJamieOfCarragher View Post
    *Dawid

    Middle name Johannes

    His brother is Charl Christiaan Malan by the way
    Hahaha, I actually did type DaWid (David is as UNLIKELY a Boer name as you are likely to get) but autocorrect clearly did it's thing (had to correct David to Dawid in this post, so there is the confirmation).
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  30. #720  
    LordJamieOfCarragher is online now LFC Forums Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    88,391
    Good luck to England in the final of the Women's Cricket World Cup v India today.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   



Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •