• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • Entertainment
  • Sport
International Cricket 2016
<<
<
186 of 284
>>
>
swingaleg
05-08-2016
Originally Posted by davethecue:
“From Hills :

Match Betting Live

2/1 England
9/4 Draw
5/4 Pakistan”

Pakistan 6/4 now a Stan James.......I've a nibble on the basis that england will probably lose 3 or 4 wickets before drawing level......then Pakistan would be odds on.....then you can hedge on England !
mimik1uk
05-08-2016
Originally Posted by makeba72:
“But it's your first quote above that I still don't understand, as a general point. I don't understand why anyone would worry about having only 4 specialist batsmen if the all-rounders were good batsmen themselves. I don't see having extra bowling options as spoiling the balance - I see it as a bonus. I don't think anyone complained about balance when Kallis was batting higher up in the order for SA, and so on.

(Just to be 100% clear, I'm not comparing Moeen to Kallis, but making a general point, just as you appear to be doing in that quote.)”

i did specifically say if someone was good enough, as per kallis as you mention, to get into the side on their batting alone and can contribute with the ball as more than just a part-timer i have no problem with that

my position here is that if we were to decide that vince needed to be replaced i do not agree with the principle of picking someone who wouldn't get into the team on their batting alone but try to justify it on the basis of "at least they give us another bowling option" when we really should not need that extra bowling , and that i would prefer to pick someone purely on their batting ability
davethecue
05-08-2016
Originally Posted by swingaleg:
“Pakistan 6/4 now a Stan James.......I've a nibble on the basis that england will probably lose 3 or 4 wickets before drawing level......then Pakistan would be odds on.....then you can hedge on England !”

Dont forget the rain ....a draw could still happen
swingaleg
05-08-2016
Originally Posted by davethecue:
“Dont forget the rain ....a draw could still happen”

oh well.......I've had a winner on the horses today so just playing with winnings !

Darren Lethem
05-08-2016
Originally Posted by mb@2day:
“Umpires are getting jittery as the pakis lead was suddenly under threat. Easy answer take Anderson out for overstepping by one inch !

If that sounds like biased bilious argument then it is.”

Is it 1972 ?
makeba72
05-08-2016
Originally Posted by mimik1uk:
“my position here is that if we were to decide that vince needed to be replaced i do not agree with the principle of picking someone who wouldn't get into the team on their batting alone but try to justify it on the basis of "at least they give us another bowling option" when we really should not need that extra bowling , and that i would prefer to pick someone purely on their batting ability”

I absolutely agree with that and don't think I have said anything to the contrary.

Speaking specifically now, though - Moeen in your opinion isn't good enough as a batsmen, whilst I think that's open to debate. But as I have said already, given the current choices available, I would have no problem whatsoever replacing Vince or Ballance with Moeen and then getting in a front-line spinner. The extra bowling would be a bonus.
mimik1uk
05-08-2016
Originally Posted by makeba72:
“I absolutely agree with that and don't think I have said anything to the contrary.

Speaking specifically now, though - Moeen in your opinion isn't good enough as a batsmen, whilst I think that's open to debate. But as I have said already, given the current choices available, I would have no problem whatsoever replacing Vince or Ballance with Moeen and then getting in a front-line spinner. The extra bowling would be a bonus.”

the reason i am against that is i dont think that solves the problem we have

you are not improving the batting side of the team by replacing a batsman with a bowler, what we would be doing is weakening the batting and adding an extra bowler that we shouldn't actually need

what i am saying is if we decide that vince needs to be replaced we should look to improve the team not weaken it, bringing in a borthwick or a hildreth might not work but at least its being done for the right reason imo
bradybrady
05-08-2016
The stats do seem to go against what would seem likely

Opening partnership of 35 off 10 overs with Cook 29 off 24 balls and Hales 5 off 37 balls !!
mimik1uk
05-08-2016
Originally Posted by bradybrady:
“The stats do seem to go against what would seem likely

Opening partnership of 35 off 10 overs with Cook 29 off 24 balls and Hales 5 off 37 balls !!”

me and bhav mentioned this during the first test i think, cook quite often scores his first 20 or so runs quickly and then settles down

dont know if its just nerves and he plays at deliveries early that he leaves later or not
makeba72
05-08-2016
Originally Posted by mimik1uk:
“the reason i am against that is i dont think that solves the problem we have

you are not improving the batting side of the team by replacing a batsman with a bowler, what we would be doing is weakening the batting and adding an extra bowler that we shouldn't actually need

what i am saying is if we decide that vince needs to be replaced we should look to improve the team not weaken it, bringing in a borthwick or a hildreth might not work but at least its being done for the right reason imo”

Overall, I do agree with you, but at this moment in time, I wouldn't mind bumping up Moeen in order to bring in Rashid, who is better than a tail-ender with the bat.

I think your analysis depends on believing that Borthwick (et al) is a solid better bat than Moeen, but Moeen was a top-order batsmen until England bumped him down the order and gave him an 'all-rounder slot'. I don't see this as cut and dried as I think your posts are saying.
makeba72
05-08-2016
In the meantime, who's this plodder that England have opening with Cook?
Darren Lethem
05-08-2016
This just shows our lack of trust in spinners. Pakistan bring on Yasir after 14 overs, we brought on Ali after 50 odd
makeba72
05-08-2016
Originally Posted by Darren Lethem:
“This just shows our lack of trust in spinners. Pakistan bring on Yasir after 14 overs, we brought on Ali after 50 odd”

In spinners, or in Moeen specifically?
SULLA
05-08-2016
Originally Posted by mb@2day:
“I wish they had Sulla. In my old club cricket days on artificial pitches you needed chalk to mark the batsmans guard out. Something similar could help the bowler get it right.”

These people have bowling coaches. They should be making sure that the bowlers are well clear of the protected area

Originally Posted by makeba72:
“I absolutely agree with that and don't think I have said anything to the contrary.

Speaking specifically now, though - Moeen in your opinion isn't good enough as a batsmen, whilst I think that's open to debate. But as I have said already, given the current choices available, I would have no problem whatsoever replacing Vince or Ballance with Moeen and then getting in a front-line spinner. The extra bowling would be a bonus.”

Mooen has now had 46 test innings. Thanks to his 63 in the first innings, his average is now 30. This does not make him a test batter
makeba72
05-08-2016
Originally Posted by SULLA:
“Mooen has now had 46 test innings. Thanks to his 63 in the first innings, his average is now 30. This does not make him a test batter”

Understood, but I think he's been mucked about a lot in the order, which won't have helped him.
mimik1uk
05-08-2016
Originally Posted by makeba72:
“Overall, I do agree with you, but at this moment in time, I wouldn't mind bumping up Moeen in order to bring in Rashid, who is better than a tail-ender with the bat.

I think your analysis depends on believing that Borthwick (et al) is a solid better bat than Moeen, but Moeen was a top-order batsmen until England bumped him down the order and gave him an 'all-rounder slot'. I don't see this as cut and dried as I think your posts are saying.”

i think thats where we are disagreeing

its about whether borthwick is a better batsman than rashid or whether rashid is a better bowler than moeen

i repeat what i said earlier, the problem i believe we are trying to solve is how to improve our batting and we dont do that by dropping a batsman and replacing him with a bowler

by dropping vince and just moving everyone up a spot and dropping in another bowler at #9 we weaken the batting, or at best dont improve it, and what we gain is another bowler that we shouldn't need. overall we aren't really doing anything to make the TEAM better

if we are going to make changes at least try to do something that might make us better not just say "well it cant be any worse"
SULLA
05-08-2016
Originally Posted by makeba72:
“Understood, but I think he's been mucked about a lot in the order, which won't have helped him.”

But the lower he gets in the order the more not outs he could get
alanwarwic
05-08-2016
At 32 behind it is major advantage England now.
Darren Lethem
05-08-2016
Originally Posted by mimik1uk:
“i think thats where we are disagreeing

its about whether borthwick is a better batsman than rashid or whether rashid is a better bowler than moeen

i repeat what i said earlier, the problem i believe we are trying to solve is how to improve our batting and we dont do that by dropping a batsman and replacing him with a bowler

by dropping vince and just moving everyone up a spot and dropping in another bowler at #9 we weaken the batting, or at best dont improve it, and what we gain is another bowler that we shouldn't need. overall we aren't really doing anything to make the TEAM better

if we are going to make changes at least try to do something that might make us better not just say "well it cant be any worse"”

If Rashid is brought in for Vince and Mo bats at 3 and isn't our front line spinner we don't have that issue because Ali is playing as a batsman
bradybrady
05-08-2016
Originally Posted by mimik1uk:
“me and bhav mentioned this during the first test i think, cook quite often scores his first 20 or so runs quickly and then settles down

dont know if its just nerves and he plays at deliveries early that he leaves later or not”

I see what you mean

Hales has nearly caught Cook now

(albeit off a lot more deliveries)
SULLA
05-08-2016
Originally Posted by Darren Lethem:
“If Rashid is brought in for Vince and Mo bats at 3 and isn't our front line spinner we don't have that issue because Ali is playing as a batsman”

Ali at 3. You cannot be serious
mimik1uk
05-08-2016
Originally Posted by Darren Lethem:
“If Rashid is brought in for Vince and Mo bats at 3 and isn't our front line spinner we don't have that issue because Ali is playing as a batsman”

yes we do, as ali is already in the team and already bats, the personnel change we would be making is dropping a batsman for a bowler to try and improve the batting

he wouldn't bat at #3 anyway as we wouldn't move root back down

put it this way a 5/6/7 of bairstow/moeen/woakes does not inspire me with any confidence whatsoever
Darren Lethem
05-08-2016
Originally Posted by mimik1uk:
“yes we do, as ali is already in the team and already bats, the personnel change we would be making is dropping a batsman for a bowler to try and improve the batting

he wouldn't bat at #3 anyway as we wouldn't move root back down

put it this way a 5/6/7 of bairstow/moeen/woakes does not inspire me with any confidence whatsoever”

After reading you for all these years let's be honest a 5/6/7 of Stewart/Gooch/Botham wouldn't either
mimik1uk
05-08-2016
Originally Posted by Darren Lethem:
“After reading you for all these years let's be honest a 5/6/7 of Stewart/Gooch/Botham wouldn't either ”

if thats how you feel then there is no point discussing anything with you, welcome to my ignore list
SULLA
05-08-2016
Originally Posted by mimik1uk:
“if thats how you feel then there is no point discussing anything with you, welcome to my ignore list”

I am on his ignore list and it leaves me free to quote him when I feel it is appropriate. However, unlike him, I do avoid making it personal
<<
<
186 of 284
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map