|
||||||||
International Cricket 2016 |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1451 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hull - UK City of Culture
Posts: 27,237
|
Quote:
how much money would you have put on us winning that between innings ?
![]() |
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#1452 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 21,762
|
thats a good point du plessis just made
they gave up 26 extras and as bad as our bowling was we gave up 4 |
|
|
|
|
|
#1453 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 9,907
|
Quote:
thats a good point du plessis just made
they gave up 26 extras and as bad as our bowling was we gave up 4 |
|
|
|
|
|
#1454 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hull - UK City of Culture
Posts: 27,237
|
Changes for next game ?
I'd bring Plunkett and Dawson in for Topley and Rashid |
|
|
|
|
#1455 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 7,776
|
Quote:
Changes for next game ?
I'd bring Plunkett and Dawson in for Topley and Rashid |
|
|
|
|
#1456 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Gtr Manchester UK
Posts: 7,934
|
I was screaming for them to get it finished in the 18th for net-run-rate calculations!! Great stuff; should never have got into the situation where they were chasing 200+ BUT there's an argument that with 20 overs, it's better to chase a large target than a medium one as your mind-set is to take off from the start, as our openers did. Great to see us for once using the power-play to the full, and it gave us the space to push the spinners around and still keep up with the rate.
Q is Root currently the best batsman in the world, in any form of the game? Now, odds on losing to Afghanistan? |
|
|
|
|
|
#1457 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hull - UK City of Culture
Posts: 27,237
|
Quote:
Rashid was one of england best bowlers today.
|
|
|
|
|
#1458 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Gtr Manchester UK
Posts: 7,934
|
Quote:
Doesn't mean a great deal. Jordan was England's best bowler against West Indies yet today he was poor. Nobody has coveted themselves in glory with the ball and it's against Afghanistan so worth trying.
![]() ![]() NB Ali 2 for 34 off 4 is respectable amongst the carnage. Don't think he bowled a wide either (??), it's a pity that the figures for the bowlers don't include wides which should really be tagged on to their numbers? |
|
|
|
|
|
#1459 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 7,776
|
Leg byes should be included as well in the bowler figures.
|
|
|
|
|
#1460 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Gtr Manchester UK
Posts: 7,934
|
Quote:
Leg byes should be included as well in the bowler figures.
But deffo wides and noballs should be added to the bowler's figures. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1461 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 12,022
|
This is just completely mental Cricket. Iv seen a fair number of 60 over games with finishing totals less than both sides managed in just 20 today. The scoring rate simply staggers me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1462 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 7,776
|
Quote:
Not sure. You can genuinely beat the bat, the ball hit the pads or thighpads and run off for byes (although you could argue that the ball, therefore, wasn't hitting the stumps!!) and I reckon that's unfair....as is adding overthrows - I think if a batsman scores 1 and the fielder misses the keeper/stumps by miles and it goes for 4, those runs are added on to the bowler's record?).
But deffo wides and noballs should be added to the bowler's figures. In T20 it looks like the bowler economical even though he could have conceded runs from leg byes. |
|
|
|
|
#1463 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Gtr Manchester UK
Posts: 7,934
|
Quote:
This is just completely mental Cricket. Iv seen a fair number of 60 over games with finishing totals less than both sides managed in just 20 today. The scoring rate simply staggers me.
It's all well and good seeing the ball fly over the car park, but as some of the pundits alluded to, where are the good bowlers gonna come from in future, if everyone wants to become a batsman? It's strange that in this competition alone, a target of 230 is achieved, but some under 150 haven't though. Generally I'd like to see a bit more balance between bat and ball - maybe ditch the "powerplays" and allow each bowler a maximum of 5, so if one or two are getting a bit of control they can stay on that extra over. On saying that; both today's games have been thoroughly entertaining - the AUZ/NZ relatively low scoring but great bowling by NZ and tonight's run-fest. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1464 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 21,762
|
Quote:
Yes, in the Gillette Cup (60 overs) setting anything above 230 was considered a stiff target! (Certainly for Lancashire....)
It's all well and good seeing the ball fly over the car park, but as some of the pundits alluded to, where are the good bowlers gonna come from in future, if everyone wants to become a batsman? It's strange that in this competition alone, a target of 230 is achieved, but some under 150 haven't though. Generally I'd like to see a bit more balance between bat and ball - maybe ditch the "powerplays" and allow each bowler a maximum of 5, so if one or two are getting a bit of control they can stay on that extra over. On saying that; both today's games have been thoroughly entertaining - the AUZ/NZ relatively low scoring but great bowling by NZ and tonight's run-fest. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1465 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: In The Shed
Posts: 1,371
|
How about you should have 5 bowlers bowling a minimum of 3 and the remaining 5 overs split how you want ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1466 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 21,762
|
Quote:
How about you should have 5 bowlers bowling a minimum of 3 and the remaining 5 overs split how you want ?
i still think a far simpler solution would be to do something about bat sizes making bats bigger and increasing the size of sweetspots because of the peripheral weighting means too many poorly timed shots still end up going for boundaries and imo rewards brute force rather than skill |
|
|
|
|
|
#1467 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hull - UK City of Culture
Posts: 27,237
|
Quote:
something like that could work
i still think a far simpler solution would be to do something about bat sizes making bats bigger and increasing the size of sweetspots because of the peripheral weighting means too many poorly timed shots still end up going for boundaries and imo rewards brute force rather than skill |
|
|
|
|
#1468 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Gtr Manchester UK
Posts: 7,934
|
Quote:
But isn't that what the T20 brigade want to see ? They would sooner see a smash go for 4 than a beautifully timed cover drive. I am a bit of a snob when it comes to T20, it is without doubt my 3rd favourite format of the game.
Suggestions about the size of bats being reduced for 20/20 (weight and depth) get my approval, and as for having 4 bowlers (5 overs) and teams over-loading with batsmen, how's about when you are 7 down you are "all-out" (therefore No's 9, 10, and 11 can't bat - so they might as well be specialist bowlers?) |
|
|
|
|
|
#1469 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: colchester
Posts: 15,352
|
Quote:
Suggestions about the size of bats being reduced for 20/20 (weight and depth) get my approval, and as for having 4 bowlers (5 overs) and teams over-loading with batsmen, how's about when you are 7 down you are "all-out" (therefore No's 9, 10, and 11 can't bat - so they might as well be specialist bowlers?)
Not sure that would be a crowd pleaser to be deprived of that ending. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1470 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Gtr Manchester UK
Posts: 7,934
|
Quote:
So England would have lost?
Not sure that would be a crowd pleaser to be deprived of that ending. and, yes, 7 wickets they would have lost*, same for all teams!! *Of course, SA might not have gone hell-for-leather if they knew losing 2 - 3 early wickets would put them in trouble. In return you would have thrilling endings where a team needs 6 - 10 to win off the last over with 5 or 6 wickets down, whereas right now it's usually a stroll, it would bring another dimension to the 20/20 game and make it a touch more like the first-class game, and encourage specialist bowlers. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1471 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: exeter
Posts: 14,623
|
Wouldn't mind if we played all three spinners next match, SLA, Leg-break and off-spin, all different, and let's face it all the seamers (including Stokes) have been horrible.
We'd still have 3 pace bowlers. Other teams have no problem with this bowling balance. Should be said in this match, the 4 bowlers that had the best ER were spinners. One of them was Duminy and he's appalling. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1472 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hull - UK City of Culture
Posts: 27,237
|
Quote:
Both teams would have maximum sized bats....
and, yes, 7 wickets they would have lost*, same for all teams!! *Of course, SA might not have gone hell-for-leather if they knew losing 2 - 3 early wickets would put them in trouble. In return you would have thrilling endings where a team needs 6 - 10 to win off the last over with 5 or 6 wickets down, whereas right now it's usually a stroll, it would bring another dimension to the 20/20 game and make it a touch more like the first-class game, and encourage specialist bowlers. |
|
|
|
|
#1473 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: colchester
Posts: 15,352
|
Quote:
Both teams would have maximum sized bats....
and, yes, 7 wickets they would have lost*, same for all teams!! *Of course, SA might not have gone hell-for-leather if they knew losing 2 - 3 early wickets would put them in trouble. In return you would have thrilling endings where a team needs 6 - 10 to win off the last over with 5 or 6 wickets down, whereas right now it's usually a stroll, it would bring another dimension to the 20/20 game and make it a touch more like the first-class game, and encourage specialist bowlers. I'm not sure why you think a priori if you make these changes it will result in thriling endings significantly different to what happens currently. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1474 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Black Country lad in Yorkshire
Posts: 118,058
|
Quote:
can we just concede now ?
Quote:
England seem to have a very good batting line up but a god awful bowling one
Quote:
Where's Parry who bowled Lancs to the 20/20 title last year? He bowls bullets to the base of leg stump, they very rarely end up clearing the car-park?
Quote:
Changes for next game ?
I'd bring Plunkett and Dawson in for Topley and Rashid Quote:
Rashid was one of england best bowlers today.
Quote:
Leg byes should be included as well in the bowler figures.
Anyway great game. Well done Root. A man for all series. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1475 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 2,854
|
Quote:
But deffo wides and noballs should be added to the bowler's figures.
As in the summary of bowling figures should show an extra 2 columns (which it did occasionally in the past)? Because all wides and no-balls in all forms of cricket are included in the runs conceded column of bowling figures and have been for as long as ive ever watched cricket
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 15:49.








and, yes, 7 wickets they would have lost*, same for all teams!!