Jump to content
IGNORED

International Cricket


Monkeh

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, Lew-T said:

Ollie Pope shocker there. Need these two to dig in for another 50 runs if possible…

Hoping for something around 350 lead.

Apparently Brook called and changed his mind but I’m not watching. I’m all for bazball but with so much time left in the game parts of this innings have simply been crazy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Globe Trotter said:

Brook is some talent 

 

4 minutes ago, Sheltons Army said:

Seems to have the whole package doesn’t he

Technique , temperament 

Probably the best looking prospect bat wise since Root

 

4 minutes ago, Lew-T said:

Taken test cricket like a duck to water.

I know we have a tendency to big up our batsmen only for them to fail miserably over time but he does look the real deal.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, And Its Smith said:

Apparently Brook called and changed his mind but I’m not watching. I’m all for bazball but with so much time left in the game parts of this innings have simply been crazy. 

It was Pope’s call as he was at the strikers end and had the full view. To be fair the pitch is dying a bit, Duckett’s wicket rolled along the floor pretty much!

I like this approach, if we sit in we’ll be bowled out with very little to play with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Open End Numb Legs said:

Brook looks like a walking text book, he has it all and can adapt to T20 as well.

Balance, still head, reads the bowling, great hands, good shot choice, relaxed at the crease. Arguably looks the best English batsman to me. 

He is class isn’t he. I wonder if he could / should open the batting in Tests? When Bairstow is back that’s gotta be a consideration

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a left arm spinner myself back in the day (long ago) I want to like Jack's bowling but it does leave me a bit cold.

I don't worry too much about runs conceded but he does fire the ball in too flat for my liking. Ok if you have bat/pad catchers and a spitting wicket to bowl on but when the fielders are back in the ring late in the day on a flat track you have to get some loop and drift on the ball and tempt the batters to hit out a bit more. I don't want to see the batters tucking the ball off the back foot for 1s and 2s with zero risk.

I know he got a late wicket but he has all the attributes to be even better, just needs to add some variation and guile.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Certainly a controversial, questionable decision.

Did I not read recently that the umpires’ ‘soft signal’ is no longer relevant for certain decisions?

Ah, I have just seen the BBC site, which appears to confirm that the umpires’ ‘soft signal’ is only relevant when ‘technology fails’.

I see that Arbrar has been promoted from 11, the position in which he batted in the first innings.

He has started extremely well and, if Pakistan are going to win, what a dream debut that would turn out to be should he score the winning run.

Oh Ahmed, I am so sorry.

Edited by PHILINFRANCE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Robbored said:

‘Just’ one wicket to go……….Pakistan need 35 to win. This is what test cricket should be about.

On day 4 thanks to speed that England score their runs. Fantastic effort by both sides, I am usually cautious in predicting cricket results, but I am going rule out the draw. ;)

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brilliant to have a winning habit, credit to the fast bowlers for the effort. It seems rather than drift out of the game on a benign pitch as in previous years the quicks are kept interested by England looking after the ball and getting reverse swing.

Meanwhile the spinners like the newer ball to get a bit of extra bounce. It seems a bit upside down to other eras but then that is no surprise I suppose with Stokes/McCullum in charge.

I was a bit sceptical at first but you can't buy a happy team, especially on tour. Congrats to them all on great leadership.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Port Said Red said:

On day 4 thanks to speed that England score their runs. Fantastic effort by both sides, I am usually cautious in predicting cricket results, but I am going rule out the draw. ;)

Four day finishes in Test cricket are usually due to one team getting a high first innings score and the other team collapsing in both of their innings, generally resulting in a quite boring, going through the motions, end.

This Test, however, just like the previous one, was a cracker, tense until the final wicket.

Just how Test cricket should be.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just seen the controversial wicket, have to say I don't think that was out, the catch wasn't completed when it looked as though the ball touched the ground.

The umpire at the bowlers end had his doubts and referred it.

Strange how TV replay decisions in football, rugby and cricket don't go the way you expect them to despite it all happening in ultra slow motion and close up.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There’s one DRS that I find ridiculous is when a LBW review is deemed ‘umpires call’ when the ball would have hit the edge of the stumps or bails but the soft signal is not out.

Point is the ball would have hit the stumps regardless of where it would have hit.

I just don’t get it. 

Surely the ball must be missing completely to be not out?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Robbored said:

There’s one DRS that I find ridiculous is when a LBW review is deemed ‘umpires call’ when the ball would have hit the edge of the stumps or bails but the soft signal is not out.

Point is the ball would have hit the stumps regardless of where it would have hit.

I just don’t get it. 

Surely the ball must be missing completely to be not out?

It’s done for the following reasons:

1.  It cannot be true that DRS is 100% correct. 
2. It gives gravitas to the umpires decision i.e if the umpire hasn’t made a clear and obvious error then the decision shouldn’t be overturned 

3. it was always the case, pre DRS, that if the umpire thought the ball was clipping the stumps he would give it as Not Out as benefit of the doubt would (and should) go to the batter.  I would say that generally, the batter still gets that benefit of the doubt but more decisions as Out now than they used to be.  The ball used to have to be hitting middle and leg to get an LBW and not just leg stump

For me DRS, with ‘umpires call’ works perfectly 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, And Its Smith said:

It’s done for the following reasons:

1.  It cannot be true that DRS is 100% correct. 
2. It gives gravitas to the umpires decision i.e if the umpire hasn’t made a clear and obvious error then the decision shouldn’t be overturned 

3. it was always the case, pre DRS, that if the umpire thought the ball was clipping the stumps he would give it as Not Out as benefit of the doubt would (and should) go to the batter.  I would say that generally, the batter still gets that benefit of the doubt but more decisions as Out now than they used to be.  The ball used to have to be hitting middle and leg to get an LBW and not just leg stump

For me DRS, with ‘umpires call’ works perfectly 

I completely get what you’re saying but would argue that with the benefit of DRS if the ball is hitting the bails or stumps anywhere then it should given out even if the soft signal is not out.

If a batsman revues a LBW,  I get that a fine edge is virtually impossible to see from the umpires end and the batsman will know that - no issue there.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...