Comfortable win on Thursday, thanks mainly of course to Root and Morgan, but plenty of concerns also,
Whilest the batting looks good enough to win it the bowling looks far from it, Wood bowled well and Plunkett finished up with some good figures, but there wasn't to much else to get excited about was there ?
Big blow to lose Woakes and possibly for the entire tournament, and Ball was awful God knows what Australia and New Zealand would do to him,
So with Jason Roy likely to have played his last game for a while , I think it leaves 3 places up for grabs for the next game with Roy, Ball and the unfortunate Woakes out who comes in ? I think 2 of the places are fairly obvious with Bairstow and Rashid coming in but who would you have to replace Woakes as I believe a player can be brought in from outside of the squad ?
Big decision to be made on that third player I hope they get it right.
Cricket is watched by one man and his dog, yet receives disproportionate media coverage based upon it's lionization. One would equate cricket's relevence to that of women's soccer/boxing, crown green bowls and morris dancing.
Quote from: Nick Bateman on June 02, 2017, 01:45:30 AM
Cricket is watched by one man and his dog, yet receives disproportionate media coverage based upon it's lionization. One would equate cricket's relevence to that of women's soccer/boxing, crown green bowls and morris dancing.
Here in the states I know for a fact that cricket are watched by more then one man and his dog. While I am not a cricket man I have several friends who are apart of a local club of British and Indian exiles who teach and run a youth club for cricket. I have gone to a few of their matches and they seem to really being enjoying themselves and having a good time. They even get together and watch international matches.
So, ignoring the side static ...
are we talking test cricket? or limited over?
Bairstow should definately come in for Roy.
I think taking the pace of the ball may help - so play rashid as an extra spinner- he can bat too.
David Willey is the only other bowler in the squad I believe so he comes in if woakes is unfit
Quote from: Nick Bateman on June 02, 2017, 01:45:30 AM
Cricket is watched by one man and his dog, yet receives disproportionate media coverage based upon it's lionization. One would equate cricket's relevence to that of women's soccer/boxing, crown green bowls and morris dancing.
Utter rubbish - it's actually quite a popular game.
Yep, Bairstow, Rashid and Willey for me.
Riversider, although you say there wasn't much to get excited about, I think chasing down 305 is some going and I was excited enough.
Also, I think Alex Hales should get a mention, as after Roy didn't turn up again, I think Hales steadied the ship.
I think Roy will keep his place, bairstoebhas never opened in a one day game for England and that worries me, it's ok against county trundlers and smashing 170 odd, but it's a different kettle of fish against starc et al. In some ways the extra pace that Australia and New Zealand will have may well suit Roy more
See rashid coming back in forneither woakes or ball, ball was terrible yesterday. If for ball then Willey for woakes only issue there is that if it doesn't swing Willey goes for plenty
Woakes is out for tournament - side strain
I think it's important to drop Roy for a while, because when confidence is low it only puts unbearable pressure on him to avoid humiliation with another failure. You could see the desperation to score runs surfacing with that unorthodox shot which got him out so early in the innings.
Quote from: Nick Bateman on June 02, 2017, 01:45:30 AM
Cricket is watched by one man and his dog, yet receives disproportionate media coverage based upon it's lionization. One would equate cricket's relevence to that of women's soccer/boxing, crown green bowls and morris dancing.
Tell that to the full house at the Oval yesterday!! :dft011:
Quote from: Nick Bateman on June 02, 2017, 01:45:30 AM
Cricket is watched by one man and his dog, yet receives disproportionate media coverage based upon it's lionization. One would equate cricket's relevence to that of women's soccer/boxing, crown green bowls and morris dancing.
Tell that to the 1.3billion people in India.
As I said in my original post, it's my understanding that you can bring in players from outside of the squad (could be wrong) so it may not necessarily be David Willey replacing Woakes.
How things have changed in the limited overs game!
Bangladesh's score of 305 was considered to be at least 20 under par, and so it proved.
Back in 1979 the Lords final between England and West Indies was a 60 over a side match.
West Indies' score of 289, which included a brilliant Viv Richards contribution, was considered to be quite sprightly (England had won their semi with a score of 221) but would seem pathetic today.
England sent in Brearley (a brilliant captain, but a very ordinary batsman) and Boycott (a great batsman, but entirely defensive and self-obsessed). They put on 129 for the first wicket - but took 38 overs to do it! Geoff made 57 off 105 balls and took 17 overs to reach double figures.
Quote from: cmg on June 02, 2017, 01:20:03 PM
How things have changed in the limited overs game!
Bangladesh's score of 305 was considered to be at least 20 under par, and so it proved.
Back in 1979 the Lords final between England and West Indies was a 60 over a side match.
West Indies' score of 289, which included a brilliant Viv Richards contribution, was considered to be quite sprightly (England had won their semi with a score of 221) but would seem pathetic today.
England sent in Brearley (a brilliant captain, but a very ordinary batsman) and Boycott (a great batsman, but entirely defensive and self-obsessed). They put on 129 for the first wicket - but took 38 overs to do it! Geoff made 57 off 105 balls and took 17 overs to reach double figures.
Slow going indeed by Geoffrey, but blimey he was facing one of the best pace attacks that the world has ever seen,
Would have loved to have seen the likes of Richards and Botham playing at their peak today in the modern game.
Quote from: Slaphead in Qatar on June 02, 2017, 07:24:50 AM
Quote from: Nick Bateman on June 02, 2017, 01:45:30 AM
Cricket is watched by one man and his dog, yet receives disproportionate media coverage based upon it's lionization. One would equate cricket's relevence to that of women's soccer/boxing, crown green bowls and morris dancing.
Utter rubbish - it's actually quite a popular game.
Not just utter rubbish but illiterate rubbish; and even crown green bowls may have its relevance.
Quote from: Riversider on June 02, 2017, 01:58:13 PM
Quote from: cmg on June 02, 2017, 01:20:03 PM
How things have changed in the limited overs game!....
Slow going indeed by Geoffrey, but blimey he was facing one of the best pace attacks that the world has ever seen,
Would have loved to have seen the likes of Richards and Botham playing at their peak today in the modern game.
Yes. Roberts, Holding, Croft, Garner in that game.
Although it seems crazy now, at the time some people thought that the England approach was quite reasonable. When they tried to accelerate Garner and Croft ran through them.
I think that Richards and Botham would both thrive in today's game. Not quite sure how they might handle the 'substance' testing.
The sight of Viv Richards, cap askew, leaning casually on his bat, faint smile on his face as England prepared to bowl the last ball of the innings to him, will remain one of my enduring sporting memories. By the time Brearley and Hendricks had made half-a-dozen adjustments and the plan had been dissected in detail, I think everyone in the ground knew what was going to happen whatever ball Hendricks bowled. Sure enough - step away, swivel, smack, six into the Mound stand.
Quote from: Nick Bateman on June 02, 2017, 01:45:30 AM
Cricket is watched by one man and his dog, yet receives disproportionate media coverage based upon it's lionization. One would equate cricket's relevence to that of women's soccer/boxing, crown green bowls and morris dancing.
What a load of c0ck
Quote from: cmg on June 02, 2017, 02:21:42 PM
Quote from: Riversider on June 02, 2017, 01:58:13 PM
Quote from: cmg on June 02, 2017, 01:20:03 PM
How things have changed in the limited overs game!....
Slow going indeed by Geoffrey, but blimey he was facing one of the best pace attacks that the world has ever seen,
Would have loved to have seen the likes of Richards and Botham playing at their peak today in the modern game.
Yes. Roberts, Holding, Croft, Garner in that game.
Although it seems crazy now, at the time some people thought that the England approach was quite reasonable. When they tried to accelerate Garner and Croft ran through them.
I think that Richards and Botham would both thrive in today's game. Not quite sure how they might handle the 'substance' testing.
The sight of Viv Richards, cap askew, leaning casually on his bat, faint smile on his face as England prepared to bowl the last ball of the innings to him, will remain one of my enduring sporting memories. By the time Brearley and Hendricks had made half-a-dozen adjustments and the plan had been dissected in detail, I think everyone in the ground knew what was going to happen whatever ball Hendricks bowled. Sure enough - step away, swivel, smack, six into the Mound stand.
In 1981 I had the honour of being at Lords for the Benson and Hedges Cup Final between Surrey and Somerset, Somerset that day had Botham, Garner and Richards in their side and unsurprisingly thrashed Surrey with about 10 overs to spare,
When Richards came out to bat he literally sauntered out with a swagger , a man of supreme confidence, he went on to make 132 !
Surrey batted first and Big Bird Joel Garner had figures of 11 overs 5 wickets for 14 runs ! Stunning figures,
I love my cricket of today but boy do I miss those glorious cricketing days of the 1980's when the West Indies dominated the game, and pitch invasions were an accepted part of the day.
Quote from: Riversider on June 02, 2017, 03:55:26 PM
In 1981 I had the honour of being at Lords for the Benson and Hedges Cup Final between Surrey and Somerset, Somerset that day had Botham, Garner and Richards in their side and unsurprisingly thrashed Surrey with about 10 overs to spare,
When Richards came out to bat he literally sauntered out with a swagger , a man of supreme confidence, he went on to make 132 !
Surrey batted first and Big Bird Joel Garner had figures of 11 overs 5 wickets for 14 runs ! Stunning figures,
I love my cricket of today but boy do I miss those glorious cricketing days of the 1980's when the West Indies dominated the game, and pitch invasions were an accepted part of the day.
A pleasure and a privilege to have witnessed these great players in their prime.
In the match you mention, Surrey had a bowler who, on his day, was quicker than anyone I ever saw. Sylvester Clarke, cited by so many of his contemporaries as the most dangerous man they ever faced, didn't get so many calls by the West Indies not only because of the depth of competition but because of a lack of discipline both in his bowling and in his personal life. Botham knew how to deal with him. Clarke was a great fan of hard liquor and Both made sure he was lavishly entertained the night before any match in which he had to face him. Sadly alcohol was probably a contributory factor in his early death.
Quote from: cmg on June 02, 2017, 04:21:39 PM
Quote from: Riversider on June 02, 2017, 03:55:26 PM
In 1981 I had the honour of being at Lords for the Benson and Hedges Cup Final between Surrey and Somerset, Somerset that day had Botham, Garner and Richards in their side and unsurprisingly thrashed Surrey with about 10 overs to spare,
When Richards came out to bat he literally sauntered out with a swagger , a man of supreme confidence, he went on to make 132 !
Surrey batted first and Big Bird Joel Garner had figures of 11 overs 5 wickets for 14 runs ! Stunning figures,
I love my cricket of today but boy do I miss those glorious cricketing days of the 1980's when the West Indies dominated the game, and pitch invasions were an accepted part of the day.
A pleasure and a privilege to have witnessed these great players in their prime.
In the match you mention, Surrey had a bowler who, on his day, was quicker than anyone I ever saw. Sylvester Clarke, cited by so many of his contemporaries as the most dangerous man they ever faced, didn't get so many calls by the West Indies not only because of the depth of competition but because of a lack of discipline both in his bowling and in his personal life. Botham knew how to deal with him. Clarke was a great fan of hard liquor and Both made sure he was lavishly entertained the night before any match in which he had to face him. Sadly alcohol was probably a contributory factor in his early death.
I think sylvester also joined the rebel South Africa tours - that's why his appearances for windies were restricted.
