Jump to content

Cricket 36: Ashes to Ashes, Warner to Dust...


Jeor

Recommended Posts

Woakes looking solid with the bat again - he's really becoming a genuine all-rounder, a bit like an inverse Ben Stokes. Not quite as accomplished as Stokes with the bat, but definitely a better bowler than him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jeor said:

Woakes looking solid with the bat again - he's really becoming a genuine all-rounder, a bit like an inverse Ben Stokes. Not quite as accomplished as Stokes with the bat, but definitely a better bowler than him.

He's definitely a capable batsman. I think what stands out about him compared to most of the rest of the England team at the moment is that he comes out looking composed and like he knows what he wants to do. It might not come off but at least he doesn't pile pressure on himself by looking frantic and mentally scrambled.

Speaking of knowing what they want to do; he hasn't looked perfect by any means but it's good to see Bairstow looking like he's got a clear plan on how to play Lyon at least. It's not rocket science but recognising the sweep is a fairly low risk shot on effectively a day one pitch while Lyon's bowling over the wicket is a nice sign there's at least some clarity of thought out there.  

ETA: Having just praised his composure Woakes really didn't look comfortable with the sustained short pitch bowling Cummins just directed his way and it's no surprise to see him gloving one through to the keeper. I suspect he's going to see a lot more of that now until he shows he can handle it better.

That's probably the end of England's chances of a decent total.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ljkeane said:

I think this England batting lineup is probably the strongest I can remember in terms of raw talent; Root, Bairstow, Buttler and Stokes are extravagantly gifted batsmen.

I'm not so sure about that, at least where test cricket is concerned. In recent history, players like Pietersen, Bell, Strauss and Prior had a tremendous amount of pure talent and played together in the same team. And, unlike the four you mentioned above, they all averaged over 40. 

On current form, I wouldn't be surprised if Root ends his career with an inferior record to KP. 

I kind of agree and disagree with TWS' posts above. The problem isn't so much that they are dropping players, it's that they are selecting them in those positions in the first place. Ollie Pope should never have been picked to bat at 4 last summer - it was an utter joke and a confidence blow to a promising batsman. The same with Vince at 3 for the last Ashes tour. And the same with Denly in the West Indies and right now.

ETA: Poor Leach coming in at number 11 after opening in his last Lord's innings and making a fine 92!

And just (for a change) to say something positive about England: Rory Burns has been a bit of a revelation in this series so far. I know he's been quite fortunate at times, but I don't think anyone foresaw him scoring 200 runs in his first few innings. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Paxter said:

I'm not so sure about that, at least where test cricket is concerned. In recent history, players like Pietersen, Bell, Strauss and Prior had a tremendous amount of pure talent and played together in the same team. And, unlike the four you mentioned above, they all averaged over 40.

I think that's probably the only recent England lineup which you could make an argument for. Pietersen and Bell were certainly right up there in terms of talent but, honestly, I think Bairstow and Buttler have more natural ability than Strauss and Prior. That there's so much less actual production from them really is discouraging.

Anyway, I think Leach has got it wrong there. He really needed to farm the strike and protect his lower order batsman. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Warner gone again early. The thread title is working it's magic!

This is an important innings for Bancroft. He's averaging under 30 after ten tests - that needs to rise at some stage or he is going to find himself replaced by Harris or Burns. 

ETA: Pretty good day for Australia after making the call to bowl first. If they are good enough, they can bat England out of the match tomorrow. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Paxter said:

Warner gone again early. The thread title is working it's magic!

Muahahahahah.....ehhhhxcellent. *steeples fingers*

7 hours ago, Paxter said:

ETA: Pretty good day for Australia after making the call to bowl first. If they are good enough, they can bat England out of the match tomorrow. 

Yes, the route to victory is to try and only bat once (or as close to it as possible), e.g. score 400 and bowl England out cheaply again. I don't think it's going to be easy to make a big score, though - Archer seems to have been bowling pretty quick, Broad picked up a wicket, and Woakes has an excellent record at Lords.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aaand once again Australia’s top order falls in a heap and it’s all down to Smith. You can’t say England aren’t getting chances in this series!

Another poor decision from Dar, fortunately England had the review...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And another poor decision with Wade successfully challenging. I was watching the first session with a mate and as soon as the appeal went up both of us instantly said "Pitched outside leg".

Great bowling from England. Conditions helped them too with it being cloudy and drizzly, but they definitely got the ball moving and could have had even more wickets than the 3 they got with all the plays and misses. Australia's tail is also a bit weaker too (Hazlewood is a genuine No. 11 whereas Pattinson who he replaced could handle a bat pretty well) - there's a chance they could get rolled pretty quickly.

Smith and Wade are in now, but they've only got Paine to come (and he's not quite as accomplished as a specialist batsman). Cummins can bat a bit, so can Siddle, but I don't think you want to keep counting on lower-order fightbacks. 258 looks like it could have been a decent first innings score after all.

EDIT: Mark Taylor talking up Usman Khawaja and I think he's right. Khawaja has made some starts and then got out, but each time he has played he has scored reasonably quickly and has looked in as good form as anybody in the Australian team (minus Smith). I think Khawaja has a century or two in him this series.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be honest, England have bowled very well throughout the series so far, with only Smith and Wade really firing for Australia. Again this morning they looked penetrating and bowled with even more control than at Edgbaston. We'll never know how the Edgbaston test might have played out differently if England had a complete pace quartet. 

It's the batting that is the focal point for England and their real Achilles Heel. Last season, Sam Curran or Woakes consistently bailed them out with the bat. It's much harder to see that happening in an Ashes series with Curran not selected. I really don't know what they can do about it. They look terrible even with Burns doing his best to replicate Cook. 

RE: Usman, yeah, I dunno. He has a poor record in England with just the one fifty from nine innings. I thought he had made a significant breakthrough last year with that incredible hundred against Pakistan. But then he was ordinary in the Australian summer (averaged 28) and hasn't set this Ashes on fire. He did score a hundred against Sri Lanka in Canberra (lol). I just don't think he has looked the same player since everything went down with his brother last year. 

An intriguing test is unfolding in Galle. NZ have had a few chances to really nail Sri Lanka, but each time the hosts come back. There is a bit more riding on these test matches now with victories in two-test series having an inordinately high weighting for the Test Championship. 

ETA: I've said it before and I'll say it again: BJ Watling is the most underrated test cricketer of the modern era.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Paxter said:

RE: Usman, yeah, I dunno. He has a poor record in England with just the one fifty from nine innings. I thought he had made a significant breakthrough last year with that incredible hundred against Pakistan. But then he was ordinary in the Australian summer (averaged 28) and hasn't set this Ashes on fire. He did score a hundred against Sri Lanka in Canberra (lol). I just don't think he has looked the same player since everything went down with his brother last year.

His last couple of innings he has looked good and just happened to get out, and his last two innings he has scored at a pretty fast clip for Test cricket (40 off 48, then 36 off 56). In England with the conditions and the skill of England's bowling attack, there might be a ball coming down with your name on it but I think he's got as good a chance as anyone not named Smith to score a century.

5 minutes ago, Paxter said:

It's the batting that is the focal point for England and their real Achilles Heel.

Yes, I still can't get over how badly England are batting here. I mean, you look at the lineup and the initial reaction is that you think there's quite a bit of potential there, but the career Test averages and the performances are just poor. Australia's bowling is good, but I think England are giving them quite a bit of help too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Jeor said:

His last couple of innings he has looked good and just happened to get out, and his last two innings he has scored at a pretty fast clip for Test cricket (40 off 48, then 36 off 56). In England with the conditions and the skill of England's bowling attack, there might be a ball coming down with your name on it but I think he's got as good a chance as anyone not named Smith to score a century.

I think Head and Wade are the men in form and will be the mainstay apart from Smith. The top three are in a tricky position having to deal with the new rock; plus Warner and Bancroft are making their comebacks.

I must say I raised an eyebrow when Warner got bowled in this innings - it's not often he gets beaten in that fashion. And his form is even more surprising after all those World Cup runs. The flat-track bully label continues to hold true. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Paxter said:

I must say I raised an eyebrow when Warner got bowled in this innings - it's not often he gets beaten in that fashion. And his form is even more surprising after all those World Cup runs. The flat-track bully label continues to hold true. 

Given Roy and Warner's ODI success but recent Test failings, I was trying to think what the difference is between ODI and Test openers. Obviously in both formats you still have to deal with the new ball and well-rested opening bowlers, so that can't be the cause. And in both formats at least early on the fields are reasonably attacking - you might have a few more slips in Test cricket but there will only be a couple of people on the boundary rope at the start of the innings, whether it's ODIs or Tests.

I'm not quite sure if I'm on the right track, but I think some of it may have to do with the quality of the pitches (although we didn't see it so much in this World Cup, ODI pitches are generally deliberately made to be as batting friendly roads as possible, whereas Test pitches have a bit more variety and certainly deteriorate in quality as the second innings comes into play).

I think it also has to do with the "strike zone" of the batsman. In ODIs, bowlers generally have to bowl a tight line to you (not too wide outside off, definitely not down the legside, and only one bouncer). Because it's an ODI, you want to feel bat on ball and hit a few in the middle, and the ball has to travel down a pretty thin channel to get to you. Whereas in Tests, the bowlers have a bigger target of what's acceptable, and batsmen don't have to try and score off every ball. We've seen how effective Smith is at leaving the ball, and ODI batsmen just don't have good "leaves" in their armoury. I know Warner got bowled, but Roy has been caught behind the wicket playing at balls he didn't really need to, and has generally looked too anxious to put bat on ball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wade's played pretty well for his 6 there. It's a little bit harsh that it's not going to look great on the scorecard.

The problem for England is still that Smith looks largely untroubled. Forget about getting him out, they don't even seem to have a plan for making him uncomfortable for a sustained period.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m loving the way Australia are digging in. Not making many runs, but trying to withstand the pressure and get as close to England as possible. It’s very Langer-esque!

ETA: A good session for the visitors. England bowled well but the pitch is looking flat now and they will be counting down the overs to the new ball. Smith his usual, unflappable self.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Annoys me endless when they use mph on the speedo. Have to constantly convert it to kph using google....:angry:

Good stuff from Archer. Really good pace for how much overs he already bowled. Plus he has been a bit unluckly with some of those boundaries he has conceded. Will be interesting to see if Smith goes off at Tea. He is definitely struggle street at the moment lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Smith looks in a bit of trouble here. That was a very solid blow to the head. They should probably just take him off to be safe.

ETA: Credit to Australia’s medical team there. Smith doesn’t look happy but they’ve done the right thing to take him to do some proper checks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For all the buildup it does look like Archer made Smith look uncomfortable. A hit on the arm is one thing, but to then hit him in the neck shows it wasn't a fluke. Strangely enough neither of those balls was really a venomous bouncer - the second one Smith virtually ducked into. England may be onto something, although they still haven't really got Smith out before he scores a century.

Agreed, good job by the medical team to take him out against his wishes. He would have loved to stay out there and show Archer he isn't intimidated, but clearly his decision making isn't in the most rational state.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it's necessarily Archer as much as two paced pitch. They are misjudging the bounce quite a bit. Ducking on length, but some are powering through while others aren't going up. Although his pace is definitely the dangerous factor, in that there is really not much you can do at that pace if its not bouncing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...