The Cricket Thread. - Page 425

**CalumH** · July 26th, 2016, 03:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scoundrel

But we are a bit lean on players who can sustain 90mph bowling.

Quote:

Originally Posted by countjimmoriarty

As are everybody else. There have never been that many, apart from the great West Indies side of the 70's and 80's.

I think there's a good reason for that: it's not a wicket-taking strategy with good economy.

It scares the hell out of batsmen, sure, but I remember watching the Rawalpindi Express himself, Shoaib Akhtar, at Lords very shortly after he'd broken the 100 mph record, & basically, if it beat the batsman & didn't hit the stumps then it'd beat the keeper too & the next anyone saw of it it was bouncing off the sightsreen, he was actually quite expensive (bloody impressive though!).

**countjimmoriarty** · July 26th, 2016, 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by victor meldrew

I believe we did not force the follow on for two reasons 1) to bat them out of the game & 2) to give the bowlers a rest just in case Pakistan put up a bit of a fight which could possibly meant having to bowl for the best part of two days.

3. And probably most likely. Didn't want to risk even the remotest possibility of having to bat last on a 5th day pitch against Yasir.

**countjimmoriarty** · July 26th, 2016, 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CalumH

I think there's a good reason for that: it's not a wicket-taking strategy with good economy.

It scares the hell out of batsmen, sure, but I remember watching the Rawalpindi Express himself, Shoaib Akhtar, at Lords very shortly after he'd broken the 100 mph record, & basically, if it beat the batsman & didn't hit the stumps then it'd beat the keeper too & the next anyone saw of it it was bouncing off the sightsreen, he was actually quite expensive (bloody impressive though!).

Windies didn't do too bad! Nor a certain D.K. Lillee...

**rupertramjet** · July 26th, 2016, 12:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by countjimmoriarty

Windies didn't do too bad! Nor a certain D.K. Lillee...

W Indies had a certain Jeff Dujon behind the stumps for most of that time, with a mere 267 catches in 81 tests, he even managed five stumpings!!!

Australia has Rod Marsh, during Lilliees career, with 343 in 96 tests and twelve stumpings.

I do not totally agree about quicks not being economical, Malcolm Marshall had a strike rate of 46.22 and a career average of 20.95!

**bp666** · July 26th, 2016, 07:55 PM

The Australians have started the 1st Test against the Sri Lankans very well. SL all out for 117 in 34.2 overs. Wickets well shared between the 4 bowlers used. Nominal 1st change Mitch Marsh didn't even bowl. Hazlewood and Lyon with 3 apiece, Starc and O'Keefe 2 each.

Australia had a poor start with the bat losing both Warner (0) and Burns (3) to be 2-7 after 4 overs. Smith and Khawaja have steadied the ship with an unbeaten stand of 59.

Rain stopped played for the day from tea.

Australia has covered around half SL's 1st innings score for the loss of 2 wickets, though apart from Voges those left in the hutch aren't renowned players of spin. After the double centuries to young guns Root and Kohli in recent days, I wonder if Smith can make a statement? Hope so!

**countjimmoriarty** · July 27th, 2016, 01:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bp666

The Australians have started the 1st Test against the Sri Lankans very well. SL all out for 117 in 34.2 overs. Wickets well shared between the 4 bowlers used. Nominal 1st change Mitch Marsh didn't even bowl. Hazlewood and Lyon with 3 apiece, Starc and O'Keefe 2 each.

Australia had a poor start with the bat losing both Warner (0) and Burns (3) to be 2-7 after 4 overs. Smith and Khawaja have steadied the ship with an unbeaten stand of 59.

Rain stopped played for the day from tea.

Australia has covered around half SL's 1st innings score for the loss of 2 wickets, though apart from Voges those left in the hutch aren't renowned players of spin. After the double centuries to young guns Root and Kohli in recent days, I wonder if Smith can make a statement? Hope so!

Somewhat patronising describing Root and Kohli as 'young guns'. Kohli is the captain of India, Joe Root is the next England captain, and one of the most senior players in the side.

**bp666** · July 27th, 2016, 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by countjimmoriarty

Somewhat patronising describing Root and Kohli as 'young guns'. Kohli is the captain of India, Joe Root is the next England captain, and one of the most senior players in the side.

No malicious intent from me here.

Just using the media's favourite term for the quartet of Kohli, Smith, Williamson and Smith. Each have played between 40-50 tests, and are aged from 25-27. So they are not "old" and all are "gun" batsmen in their own right.

Three are captain of their respective country's national teams, and all signs point to Root becoming England's captain as well.

No disrespect to them intended, and I hope we get to see all 4 plying their trade at the top level for the next 10-15 years.

Interesting that England's coach was quoted in a July story on cricinfo as saying "And thankfully for England's sake, he's pretty much at the start of his career." in relation to Root.

If these guys can manage to emulate Tendulkar (200 Test matches), they are between 1/4 to 1/5 of the way through their Test careers.

Root and Williamson have already played more Test innings than Bradman. Smith and Kohli are less than 10 innings behind him.

**DB83** · July 27th, 2016, 10:54 PM

I'm getting lazy in my old age and have not looked this up but the impression I get is that if Jo Root gets runs then England do well and, more than often, win the game. Whereas if he has a bad day at the office the team loses.

Of course, in the last test, Capt. Cook also got runs. Same theory ?

Maybe someone can point out a game when one, or even both, got a good score and England still lost.

As for the debate about the follow-on Cook is far too cautious. Pakistan were mentally shot and could easily have folded that same evening had they followed on - the bowlers were hardly stretched in the first innings and the rain breaks, not forgetting the overcast conditions, would have assisted the bowlers as well. Manchester weather, even in high summer, is un-predictable. If had had rained on the fourth morning there could well have been some squeaky trousers around.

**CalumH** · July 28th, 2016, 05:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by countjimmoriarty

Windies didn't do too bad! Nor a certain D.K. Lillee...

Granted, & yes I know the arguments, but I'm just saying the subtleties are, really, what makes the game great. ... & believe me, I felt truly honoured to have a few moments watching Akhtar, it was truly amazing, but... once the ball passed the batsman it was (usually) one bounce, boundary, four on the board... I've never seen a keeper work so hard, for so little, poor sod!

**countjimmoriarty** · July 28th, 2016, 11:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CalumH

Granted, & yes I know the arguments, but I'm just saying the subtleties are, really, what makes the game great. ... & believe me, I felt truly honoured to have a few moments watching Akhtar, it was truly amazing, but... once the ball passed the batsman it was (usually) one bounce, boundary, four on the board... I've never seen a keeper work so hard, for so little, poor sod!

Shoaib was just a one dimensional bully though. The others all have brilliant skills to go with the raw speed. Dennis Lillee and Malcolm Marshall, for example, were just as effective when they cut their speed.

July 26th, 2016, 07:55 PM	#4245
bp666 Vintage Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 1,073 Thanks: 77,546 Thanked 14,184 Times in 1,074 Posts	The Australians have started the 1st Test against the Sri Lankans very well. SL all out for 117 in 34.2 overs. Wickets well shared between the 4 bowlers used. Nominal 1st change Mitch Marsh didn't even bowl. Hazlewood and Lyon with 3 apiece, Starc and O'Keefe 2 each. Australia had a poor start with the bat losing both Warner (0) and Burns (3) to be 2-7 after 4 overs. Smith and Khawaja have steadied the ship with an unbeaten stand of 59. Rain stopped played for the day from tea. Australia has covered around half SL's 1st innings score for the loss of 2 wickets, though apart from Voges those left in the hutch aren't renowned players of spin. After the double centuries to young guns Root and Kohli in recent days, I wonder if Smith can make a statement? Hope so!

July 27th, 2016, 10:54 PM	#4248
DB83 Vintage Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 1,472 Thanks: 1,948 Thanked 12,018 Times in 1,458 Posts	I'm getting lazy in my old age and have not looked this up but the impression I get is that if Jo Root gets runs then England do well and, more than often, win the game. Whereas if he has a bad day at the office the team loses. Of course, in the last test, Capt. Cook also got runs. Same theory ? Maybe someone can point out a game when one, or even both, got a good score and England still lost. As for the debate about the follow-on Cook is far too cautious. Pakistan were mentally shot and could easily have folded that same evening had they followed on - the bowlers were hardly stretched in the first innings and the rain breaks, not forgetting the overcast conditions, would have assisted the bowlers as well. Manchester weather, even in high summer, is un-predictable. If had had rained on the fourth morning there could well have been some squeaky trousers around.