DS Forums

 
 

International Cricket 2016


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-08-2016, 19:40
Callum Collum
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,264
West Indies doing well approaching tea. India 130 for 5. Sky Sports 3.
Callum Collum is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 10-08-2016, 15:35
SULLA
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Black Country lad in Yorkshire
Posts: 118,063
Same ream for tomorrow
SULLA is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2016, 15:37
makeba72
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: North London
Posts: 5,117
Same ream for tomorrow
Thanks Joey Essex!
makeba72 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2016, 17:10
davethecue
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The Sunny North
Posts: 8,728
India back in control with an unbroken 6th wicket partnership of 190*

318/5 at lunch


also


The ECB has invited Graeme Swann to work with England's best young spinners.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/england/...y/1044459.html
davethecue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2016, 17:20
seansnotmyname@
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: exeter
Posts: 14,623
India back in control with an unbroken 6th wicket partnership of 190*

318/5 at lunch


also


The ECB has invited Graeme Swann to work with England's best young spinners.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/england/...y/1044459.html
Swann should be a good choice, he wasn't the most talented, was a bit wayward in his yoof, then became a very decent spinner, by just learning flight and control. Sometimes I feel just getting the most talented in who can rip it, like a Warne or Murali, isn't brilliant because there's no way that you can possibly replicate that.
seansnotmyname@ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2016, 19:34
Callum Collum
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,264
India back in control with an unbroken 6th wicket partnership of 190*

318/5 at lunch


also


The ECB has invited Graeme Swann to work with England's best young spinners.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/england/...y/1044459.html
If there was a turning point in this match (so far) it was surely when Ashwin was given out on 35 but it was overturned because of a back-foot no-ball. In the end there was a late collapse by India and they were all out for 353.
Callum Collum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2016, 23:13
SULLA
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Black Country lad in Yorkshire
Posts: 118,063
Thanks Joey Essex!
Noted
SULLA is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2016, 09:55
mb@2day
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 8,711
So the selectors took pity on James Vince ( and his bad hand ) He gets the pick over Adil Rashid for the Oval test. I hope this doesn't tempt fate and Vince drops more chances in the slips and then struggles with his batting.
mb@2day is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2016, 10:38
mimik1uk
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 21,762
thats a very green looking pitch

hope we dont regret that decision to bat first
mimik1uk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2016, 10:41
bradybrady
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: In The Shed
Posts: 1,371
Some terrific clips of Waquar and Wasim in previous Tests at the Oval

Wonder if Tuffers toe is still hurting....
bradybrady is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2016, 11:06
Darren Lethem
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hull - UK City of Culture
Posts: 27,237
So the selectors took pity on James Vince ( and his bad hand ) He gets the pick over Adil Rashid for the Oval test. I hope this doesn't tempt fate and Vince drops more chances in the slips and then struggles with his batting.
Why change a winning team ? Not only would it change the team dynamic it also upsets the team spirit. As Not Sean said earlier, England are playing well as a team at the moment so why change that ?
Darren Lethem is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2016, 11:09
makeba72
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: North London
Posts: 5,117
Why change a winning team ? Not only would it change the team dynamic it also upsets the team spirit. As Not Sean said earlier, England are playing well as a team at the moment so why change that ?
Because they could be playing even better. As they said on TMS this morning, England do have questions about their batting.

I understand the argument (a thread staple!) about not changing a winning team, but I don't personally agree with it.
makeba72 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2016, 11:22
mb@2day
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 8,711
Why change a winning team ? Not only would it change the team dynamic it also upsets the team spirit. As Not Sean said earlier, England are playing well as a team at the moment so why change that ?

Having seen the greener than expected pitch it makes a little more sense. I was anticipating something drier and conducive to spin. Not so this test, Vince and his hand will prop up the batting once more. I wish him well and hope he can escape the frightful forties in this match.

Anyway this means Rashid is free to play against my team in the T20 finals ( curses )
mb@2day is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2016, 11:32
Sam_Clarke1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,685
Doesn't look out but the soft signal was out

Not the correct outcome imo
Sam_Clarke1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2016, 11:33
Lojen
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: London
Posts: 895
That looks a bad decision
Lojen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2016, 11:36
Sam_Clarke1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,685
The close up on Hales facial reaction on playing the shot suggests he saw it hadn't carried
Sam_Clarke1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2016, 11:36
hatpeg
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,986
So the selectors took pity on James Vince ( and his bad hand ) He gets the pick over Adil Rashid for the Oval test. I hope this doesn't tempt fate and Vince drops more chances in the slips and then struggles with his batting.
He is not going to field in the slips due to his injury.
hatpeg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2016, 11:37
makeba72
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: North London
Posts: 5,117
Typical - I had to take a work phone call during that controversy and couldn't hear the commentary. So was the general consensus that Hales was unlucky?
makeba72 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2016, 11:37
Darren Lethem
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hull - UK City of Culture
Posts: 27,237
Because they could be playing even better. As they said on TMS this morning, England do have questions about their batting.

I understand the argument (a thread staple!) about not changing a winning team, but I don't personally agree with it.
And they could equally be playing worse. If TMS are questioning our batting then dropping a batsman for a spinner seems an odd solution.
Darren Lethem is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2016, 11:39
Sam_Clarke1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,685
Typical - I had to take a work phone call during that controversy and couldn't hear the commentary. So was the general consensus that Hales was unlucky?
The issue was that the umpires gave a soft signal of out and there was no clear evidence to overturn it due to their being no clear footage

Without the soft signal it would have been not out
Sam_Clarke1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2016, 11:43
makeba72
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: North London
Posts: 5,117
And they could equally be playing worse. If TMS are questioning our batting then dropping a batsman for a spinner seems an odd solution.
To be fair, I didn't say that. I was speaking generally, as I don't get or agree with the age-old argument about not changing a winning team.

I would have had a look at Borthwick in this match at the expense of Vince or Ballance, but I've said that before.

Being specific, though, this England team is unusual due to it's very long batting line up. IMO Moeen is a proper batsman, so could easily be given more responsibility and bumped up the order to bring in Rashid, who is also better than a tail-ender. In my mind, the phrase 'dropping a batsman to bring in a spinner' doesn't really reflect the wider context.
makeba72 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2016, 11:43
makeba72
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: North London
Posts: 5,117
The issue was that the umpires gave a soft signal of out and there was no clear evidence to overturn it due to their being no clear footage

Without the soft signal it would have been not out
Thanks.
makeba72 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2016, 11:46
Sam_Clarke1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,685
I wonder whether the thinking of not bringing Rashid in has anything to do with Misbah's tactics of attacking the spin bowler and memories of what happened to Simon Kerrigan at the Oval
Sam_Clarke1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2016, 12:08
gomezz
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Buckingham
Posts: 28,549
TMS are saying the Hales dismissal clip is up on the BBC web site but blowed if I can find it?
gomezz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2016, 12:10
sangreal
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 12,161
The issue was that the umpires gave a soft signal of out and there was no clear evidence to overturn it due to their being no clear footage

Without the soft signal it would have been not out

Yes, very strange.

They gave the soft "out" signal because they expect fielders to be honest.
An honest fielder would have given the "not sure" signal.
It looked pretty obvious from the shot we did see that he'd scooped it up off the ground.
I can't believe we've still not seen a blown up version, or that they didn't have any better camera angles.

Oh well, nothing short of 500+ will do now :--)
sangreal is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 16:22.