Philokles Posted August 17, 2019 Share Posted August 17, 2019 Denly has been a good deal better than some of the batsmen England have tried in recent years. No major technical flaw has been uncovered, he just has a Vincian knack of looking good for 20 odd then finding a way of getting out. With a bit of time he might starting turning his starts into big scores, though there isn’t much point in giving a 33 year old that patience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paxter Posted August 17, 2019 Share Posted August 17, 2019 Personally I rate failed selections like Vince and Malan higher than Denly. Not that either of them were great, but they were either more stylish (Vince) or more mentally suited to test cricket (Malan). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeor Posted August 18, 2019 Author Share Posted August 18, 2019 Australia missed a trick in that last session. The dropped catch off Denly and the non-referral of Burns' LBW hurt. They did get those batsmen out eventually, but had they done it earlier they might have had a chance to take 5 or 6 wickets by the end of the day. As it is, with only 4 wickets down you'd think England have enough to bat out a draw. Every run they score is another run Australia have to chase down so as long as they can last through the first session you think it should be relatively safe. If they can bat through to lunch they should lead by 200+ with two sessions to go and even if they get bowled out then, I don't think Australia can go all-out gung-ho to chase a 200+ target down with Archer bowling so well and Smith's participation uncertain or at least not as assured as we'd expect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Winged Shadow Posted August 18, 2019 Share Posted August 18, 2019 No reason for Australia to push for a win. Langer certainly won't as he seems a bit conservative and happy to think about the larger picture as a draw helps Australia significantly more than it does England. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Winged Shadow Posted August 18, 2019 Share Posted August 18, 2019 13 hours ago, Paxter said: Personally I rate failed selections like Vince and Malan higher than Denly. Not that either of them were great, but they were either more stylish (Vince) or more mentally suited to test cricket (Malan). I worry more about Roy than Denly. Denly has shown enough that I think he is worth holding on to. I feel like it will be easier to fix his weakness (chasing those wide balls, patience) than it is to drop him and go get another average player who will have the same issues and we will be back to this conversation again. I never rated Vince, but thought Malan was worth hanging onto as I agree that his mentality seemed to suit test cricket and would've paid off with a bit of patience. Pretty hard to find those players these days. edit: Also Bairstow needs to bat higher. He is too good to be that low, specially as there aren't anyone better in the batting stock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeor Posted August 18, 2019 Author Share Posted August 18, 2019 16 minutes ago, The Winged Shadow said: edit: Also Bairstow needs to bat higher. He is too good to be that low, specially as there aren't anyone better in the batting stock. Before this innings Bairstow was in a tremendous form slump, averaging in the early 20s with the bat in his last 10 Tests. I think moving him up would be premature unless they were to give Buttler the gloves and tell Bairstow to concentrate on being a proper specialist batsman. I agree Denly actually looks okay, he plays some nice shots but just tends to get out. In the absence of any first-class cricketers with an avalanche of runs they should probably stick with him for at least one more Test. Roy will be desperate for runs in the Third Test. With scores of 10, 28, 0, 2 on the board, you think he might get the axe if he doesn't make some runs in the next match. Denly's returns don't look that much better at 18, 11, 30 and 26 but those last two innings have had more substance to them than any of Roy's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ljkeane Posted August 18, 2019 Share Posted August 18, 2019 Roy has looked worse than Denly, there’s no question about that, but they’re going to give him more time. There’s a lot more potential there and he’s got the credit in the bank of being a top class performer at international level for the one day side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeor Posted August 18, 2019 Author Share Posted August 18, 2019 29 minutes ago, ljkeane said: Roy has looked worse than Denly, there’s no question about that, but they’re going to give him more time. There’s a lot more potential there and he’s got the credit in the bank of being a top class performer at international level for the one day side. I suppose rather than dropping him, they could also move him down the order later in the series. Are there many alternate openers in the mix for the England setup? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philokles Posted August 18, 2019 Share Posted August 18, 2019 1 hour ago, Jeor said: I suppose rather than dropping him, they could also move him down the order later in the series. Are there many alternate openers in the mix for the England setup? Dom Sibley and Zak Crawley. However today is the first day of red ball cricket for a month and they’re both out for a combined 5 runs. Staying within the squad, swapping Roy and Denly would make more sense. As he has little prospects beyond the summer, JD can be the sacrifical opener for the series and Sibley and Crawley can both get a chance in the New Zealand tour which will feature few if any white ball players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Winged Shadow Posted August 18, 2019 Share Posted August 18, 2019 Just stick with the team. Be patient and give them time to absorb their experience and improve. Bit hard ask considering it's the Ashes, but i don't think there are better options that will provide better result. Both Roy and denly will be in a highly motivated state to respond and prove critics wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeor Posted August 18, 2019 Author Share Posted August 18, 2019 The draw is on. Batting conditions don't look too scary with the sun out, and England will get some good time in the middle here - it's just a pity for them it's not the top order. If it does end up being a draw, it's probably a fair result in the end and Australia might even be happy with it after all. If there was time in the match, I don't think they would have fancied chasing anything over 200 in the fourth innings (especially with Smith's participation uncertain) and England look like they would have set a healthy chase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Winged Shadow Posted August 18, 2019 Share Posted August 18, 2019 It's hilarious listening to the commentators trying to sell that all the results are still on . It's a dead on draw. It's been on since yesterday. That's not to say it wasn't an interesting contest yesterday. Probably the best day of cricket so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paxter Posted August 18, 2019 Share Posted August 18, 2019 What do people think of the concussion sub rule? Get Roy down the order where he belongs! Denly has had more chances - he failed against the West Indies too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeor Posted August 18, 2019 Author Share Posted August 18, 2019 I wonder if England is going to declare - it could be a psychological thing to declare before tea, knowing Smith won't be batting, get the pace battery out and start shooting holes in Australia's top order. With the Third Test only a few days away, it might be worth having another chance to take on the shaky top order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeor Posted August 18, 2019 Author Share Posted August 18, 2019 Just now, Paxter said: What do people think of the concussion sub rule? It seems pretty amazing to me...that you can have a full playing sub (able to bat and bowl) come on. I'm guessing it was done more to ensure that the concussed player doesn't try to come back on the field against medical advice feeling guilty that their team is a player down. Hopefully it doesn't ever really get used - because it could really affect the outcome of a match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paxter Posted August 18, 2019 Share Posted August 18, 2019 21 minutes ago, Jeor said: It seems pretty amazing to me...that you can have a full playing sub (able to bat and bowl) come on. I'm guessing it was done more to ensure that the concussed player doesn't try to come back on the field against medical advice feeling guilty that their team is a player down. Hopefully it doesn't ever really get used - because it could really affect the outcome of a match. Yes I agree with the above. I can see the intent of the rule, but I think having different rules for different kinds of injuries can lead to arbitrary results. I guess the other big talking point now is Australia’s batting line up for the third test starting Thursday. Smith is a likely omission...does Marnus come straight into the team? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeor Posted August 18, 2019 Author Share Posted August 18, 2019 1 minute ago, Paxter said: does Marnus come straight into the team? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Winged Shadow Posted August 18, 2019 Share Posted August 18, 2019 It has to be this way. Otherwise no one will go off or will get taken off. You create significant disincentive for the team. I think the rule states it has to be a like for like. I think Aussies have been sneaky in getting Marnus in. Smith is primarily a batter, not allrounder. However, technically Smith has actually bowled this series, so not sure if ICC will allow Marnus to bowl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Winged Shadow Posted August 18, 2019 Share Posted August 18, 2019 3 minutes ago, Paxter said: Yes I agree with the above. I can see the intent of the rule, but I think having different rules for different kinds of injuries can lead to arbitrary results. I guess the other big talking point now is Australia’s batting line up for the third test starting Thursday. Smith is a likely omission...does Marnus come straight into the team? I disagree. Not all injuries are the same so they should not be treated the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paxter Posted August 18, 2019 Share Posted August 18, 2019 15 minutes ago, The Winged Shadow said: I disagree. Not all injuries are the same so they should not be treated the same. What if someone broke a jaw? Or the Simon Jones broken leg type injuries? Extremely serious but no sub. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.