Cricket 43: So long, and thanks for all the Finch

[Xray the Enforcer]

6 hours ago, TheLastWolf said:

SL over Pak and who there? 

 

Seattle over Atlanta. 

Edited to say that I'm glad I have the cricket to watch this morning. Otherwise I'd be stuck with the Bundesliga and nobody deserves that.

[Xray the Enforcer]

1 hour ago, ljkeane said:

Looks like South Africa are too broken up by the Queen’s death to be playing cricket today.

Guessing that spending two days on the lash have done nothing for their match fitness.

[Maltaran]

It doesn’t look like shortening this to a three day match is going to affect the result 

[williamjm]

7 hours ago, Maltaran said:

It doesn’t look like shortening this to a three day match is going to affect the result 

It did seem to be played in fast forward. Some good bowling but other than Pope not a day any of the batsmen will look back on fondly.

[Paxter]

Turned into an unexpectedly great home test summer for England. Bowling first has helped a lot but they still deserve credit for these performances. Nice to see Robinson back in the side and doing well.

Sri Lanka just keep surprising us despite all of their on- and off-field challenges. The Asian Cup win goes nicely with a very respectable third spot in the WTC table and the ODI series win against Aus. 

[williamjm]

2 hours ago, Paxter said:

Turned into an unexpectedly great home test summer for England. Bowling first has helped a lot but they still deserve credit for these performances. Nice to see Robinson back in the side and doing well.

I guess we'll see whether they can have similar success on tour, or whether it's a return to being strong at home and weak abroad.

The South African batting line-up does seem incredibly weak at the moment, it didn't help that Elgar didn't review his incorrect lbw decision after he'd managed to make a decent start.

Broad has now passed Glenn McGrath to have the second-most Test wickets of any seamer, although I am sure he would explain at length that he deserved twice the number.

[Paxter]

1 hour ago, williamjm said:

The South African batting line-up does seem incredibly weak at the moment, it didn't help that Elgar didn't review his incorrect lbw decision after he'd managed to make a decent start.

Agreed on SA's batting. They are one of several nations (together with England, Australia, West Indies, Pakistan and Sri Lanka) who used to have several batters in the side averaging over 40 and even a few over 50. Not so long ago, it would have been unthinkable for Australia to have a batter in its top 6 averaging less than 35. Now they have Marcus Harris holding down the coveted opening slot with an average of 25. 

Some of this is due to an incredible stock of fast and swing bowlers across the cricketing world. Perhaps it was inevitable that bowlers would make a comeback after batters dominated on lifeless pitches in the 2000s. And some is probably due to slipping test batting standards on the back of fewer first-class matches and batting techniques/temperaments.

Either way, it does make for shorter and more entertaining test matches, if not always the most skillful batting displays. 

[ljkeane]

Yeah, unexpectedly good summer for England. Their new batting aggression was important against New Zealand and India but this series against the Proteas felt like more of the usual 'England have really good seam bowlers for English conditions' fare.

Looking at the side in general Pope does look to be quietly growing into the number three role, which is useful, good finish to the summer for Crawley but the opening partnership still looks like a problem. On the bowling front they've done really well but they could probably do with one of the quicker bowlers getting themselves fit in time for Pakistan. I'd still like them to find an actual number 8 too.

[Paxter]

I think England got themselves into trouble with the overall leadership of the test set-up in the COVID era and that contributed to a potentially avoidable poor run (especially that Windies defeat). Having dumped Ed Smith (for no particular reason), they then ended up with Silverwood and the somewhat exhausted/depleted Root as supremos. There is nothing really wrong with those two guys per se, but they lack the flair and positivity of the Stokes/Baz combo, which really came to the fore this summer. 

Funnily enough, this rise in England's test prospects seems to be inversely related to their limited overs form. I wouldn't really give England a great chance in the upcoming T20 WC, whereas last time around they were firm favourites. 

[williamjm]

16 hours ago, Paxter said:

Some of this is due to an incredible stock of fast and swing bowlers across the cricketing world. Perhaps it was inevitable that bowlers would make a comeback after batters dominated on lifeless pitches in the 2000s. And some is probably due to slipping test batting standards on the back of fewer first-class matches and batting techniques/temperaments.

I think even during the late 80s and 90s when there were also a lot of great seam bowlers around the batting averages were still noticeably higher even if not as high as in the 2000s so I don't think it's just due to the quality of the bowling.

8 hours ago, ljkeane said:

On the bowling front they've done really well but they could probably do with one of the quicker bowlers getting themselves fit in time for Pakistan. I'd still like them to find an actual number 8 too.

I think Moeen is likely to be back for the Pakistan tests so that could solve the number 8 position, at least temporarily.

[ljkeane]

Controversial finish to the England India womens series. India win the last match with a mankading for the final dismissal. It looks a proper premeditated one from the bowler as well. The English batter isn't particularly taking the piss with her backing up, she's in her ground as the bowler's going into her delivery stride. There's going to be some bad blood between these sides the next time they play.

[Maltaran]

I don’t have any problems with Mankading in general, but I do think that one should have been disallowed, because the bowler had clearly started her delivery stride before turning around to take the bails off

[Raja]

1 hour ago, Maltaran said:

I don’t have any problems with Mankading in general, but I do think that one should have been disallowed, because the bowler had clearly started her delivery stride before turning around to take the bails off

Don't you *have* to be in your delivery stride for it to count? 

[Maltaran]

Seems they changed the laws so while I used to be right, currently it can be done at any time “before he would normally have been expected to release the ball”

[Raja]

I think it's certainly an anti-climactic & a shame to finish the game & a series in that way, especially when you're 2-0 up and don't have a chance to lose the series if you lose the game.

However, I don't really see it as something against the 'spirit of the game', given that it's explictly in the rules.

[ljkeane]

1 minute ago, Raja said:

However, I don't really see it as something against the 'spirit of the game', given that it's explictly in the rules.

It’s just a bit shit though really. It’s not that difficult for bowlers to do if they really want to use it as a wicket taking tactic but it’s not good cricket or adding anything positive to the game for the spectators. It’s the first time it’s been done in the history of women’s international cricket so there’s clearly some aversion to it amongst the players.

I understand why it’s allowed in the rules because fielding teams should have some recourse to prevent the non striker from overdoing it with backing up but they should probably codify the ‘give a warning first’ convention into the rules I’d say. 

Pakistan have gotten themselves into a bit of a hole in the T20 against England. I think they were a bit too concerned with losing wickets after the last game so they’re going to have to bowl well now.

[Raja]

I think it's a shit way to end a match & a series, and as a spectator I'm disappointed but I wouldn't blame the players one bit for doing it. In addition, I think 'aversion amongst the players' is a bit of a stretch just because we haven't seen it before.

The MCC did put out a statement regarding  as well as it when it occured in the IPL, specifically regarding warnings

Quote

To clarify, it has never been in the Laws that a warning should be given to the non-striker and nor is it against the Spirit of Cricket to run out a non-striker who is seeking to gain an advantage by leaving his/her ground early.

Imo, a warning is an incorrect way to go about it. I'm totally for figuring out a way to avoid dismissals like this though.

[ljkeane]

1 minute ago, Raja said:

I think 'aversion amongst the players' is a bit of a stretch just because we haven't seen it before.

I mean everyone’s aware you can do it if you want and the vast majority of the time players are declining to take wickets that way. Dean apparently could have done it herself today if she wanted to. I’m not sure what else you’d call it.

4 minutes ago, Raja said:

The MCC did put out a statement regarding  as well as it when it occured in the IPL, specifically regarding warnings

Imo, a warning is an incorrect way to go about it. I'm totally for figuring out a way to avoid dismissals like this though.

Well, yeah, it’s not in the rules but that’s generally what the convention is. I’m not particularly committed to that as a solution but that’s what players do at the moment.

England seem to be digging themselves a hole by adopting a more aggressive style so who knows how this match’ll go.

[ljkeane]

Absolute chaos in Karachi. Pakistan just can't help themselves from getting involved in dramatic finishes.

[Paxter]

Classic Pakistan.

On running out non-strikers: I don’t really get all the fuss. This issue has been dealt with by the ICC. Should just be a normal part of the game like pick off plays in baseball. It’s not particularly compelling viewing (just like pick offs) but there does need to be some risk-reward in backing up.