|
Decentric
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 22K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+xWhat type of pitch do the well informed members of the Cricket Forum think the Poms will prepare to give them the bedt chance of a win or draw???... A new face on here. hello. Former England test skippers Nasser Hussain and Michael Vaughan both demand a deck with some grass to provide seam and swing for their bowlers. They reckon the hard flat Edgbaston decked played into the hands of our quicker bowlers. Hello Michael and Nas we have some quality seamers and one or two blokes that can swing the Dukes too.They also said a less benign deck could negate the amazing Steve Smith. They want to spice it up. SA did this to SL and lost, though. I would play on a greenie myself, but the questions England need to find answers to is why are they with 18 counties, futher pro leagues, and a structure that identifies talent from just starting high school, completely and utterly unable to produce more high caliber batsmen. What makes this more obvious, is that Trott and KP were actually groomed and developed in South Africa to U19 levels. I certainly don't blame t20 for this. There is something wrong with the English infrastructure if they have this money, and cannot produce better batsmen than what they are serving up at present. Their test batting is absolutely dire. Simply dire. I said it on a different forum, England has been rolled for under 100, no less than 3 times recently. And its not as though the NZ, WI and Irish attacks are lauded as the best in the world. Not to mention, Jason Holder scored a double century when the WI rolled them. And I am absolutely clueless as to what England can or should do to remedy the situation bar swapping Bairstow with Foakes. I have absolutely no idea who they should try. They've tried so many lately. And given them long runs of opportunities. The batting is woeful. Wow! Without Smith and Warner I think the Aus batting has been pretty bad too.I would have thought Foakes should replace Bairstow as well. The recent English batting performances have been appalling when I read these figures. Yeah - but you have faith in the Australian production system still right? England has only produced one dominant batting team since the 1980's, when Cook, KP and Trott with Prior took them to number 1 with Bell and Strauss giving admirable support. But you take out KP and Trott, and that batting line up looks very very different and far less high calibre. 3 nations have the money to make the best cricketers. Australia, India and England. India is producing not only batsmen, but even fast bowlers now. Fast bowlers! To go with their spinners and fancy and vaunted batsmen. Australia continue to develop fast bowlers, and is in a bit of a pickle right now with batting depth. That said, the system put in place and produced a glut of talent since the 1980s. An absolute glut. So what is England doing so wrong? Why is Australia and India producing batsman after batsman, regularly, and England not able to? England has played some aboslute lemon batsmen since Boycott retired. Regularly. Team after team of them. And most of the best ones were built in SA. See I just don't get it. How can they be failing to produce regular talent, when they have all these resources? No I'm not a massive advocate of the current Aus development system for many of the reasons Baggers has elucidated in aforementioned posts. We have our worst generation of Test batters for some time. Cricket, like many sports, is simply orientated around money at present. 20/20 and BBL reign supreme in Australia. We now have a period in summer from early December until late February when no FC or Shield cricket is played. How can a break in nearly 3 months in the middle of the cricket season be conducive to developing quality red ball cricketers? Moreover, our pitches are very poor in encouraging the development of spin bowlers. The last point is that batters from overseas suggest it is too easy batting on Aussie wickets. I've seen a fair bit of Test cricket on Kiwi pitches. Your test wickets are easy. And right now CA has a batting depth crisis. But since the AIS and Academy in the 1980's - you went through the 90's the naughties, and most of this decade with great batsmen. David Warner (expelled) On top of this, Hayden and Hughes and many more were state made. There is nothing wrong with the Aus production lines for at least batting at home. England don't even have batsmen for home. What has really bothered me is how poor we have been on the Subcontinent. I have read we are the worst performed team in the world in Pakistan, India, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. Despite how good we supposedly are at home, we have been awful away when most Aussie fans don't see us play! I have watched most of those Test matches.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paddles
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xWhat type of pitch do the well informed members of the Cricket Forum think the Poms will prepare to give them the bedt chance of a win or draw???... A new face on here. hello. Former England test skippers Nasser Hussain and Michael Vaughan both demand a deck with some grass to provide seam and swing for their bowlers. They reckon the hard flat Edgbaston decked played into the hands of our quicker bowlers. Hello Michael and Nas we have some quality seamers and one or two blokes that can swing the Dukes too.They also said a less benign deck could negate the amazing Steve Smith. They want to spice it up. SA did this to SL and lost, though. I would play on a greenie myself, but the questions England need to find answers to is why are they with 18 counties, futher pro leagues, and a structure that identifies talent from just starting high school, completely and utterly unable to produce more high caliber batsmen. What makes this more obvious, is that Trott and KP were actually groomed and developed in South Africa to U19 levels. I certainly don't blame t20 for this. There is something wrong with the English infrastructure if they have this money, and cannot produce better batsmen than what they are serving up at present. Their test batting is absolutely dire. Simply dire. I said it on a different forum, England has been rolled for under 100, no less than 3 times recently. And its not as though the NZ, WI and Irish attacks are lauded as the best in the world. Not to mention, Jason Holder scored a double century when the WI rolled them. And I am absolutely clueless as to what England can or should do to remedy the situation bar swapping Bairstow with Foakes. I have absolutely no idea who they should try. They've tried so many lately. And given them long runs of opportunities. The batting is woeful. Wow! Without Smith and Warner I think the Aus batting has been pretty bad too.I would have thought Foakes should replace Bairstow as well. The recent English batting performances have been appalling when I read these figures. Yeah - but you have faith in the Australian production system still right? England has only produced one dominant batting team since the 1980's, when Cook, KP and Trott with Prior took them to number 1 with Bell and Strauss giving admirable support. But you take out KP and Trott, and that batting line up looks very very different and far less high calibre. 3 nations have the money to make the best cricketers. Australia, India and England. India is producing not only batsmen, but even fast bowlers now. Fast bowlers! To go with their spinners and fancy and vaunted batsmen. Australia continue to develop fast bowlers, and is in a bit of a pickle right now with batting depth. That said, the system put in place and produced a glut of talent since the 1980s. An absolute glut. So what is England doing so wrong? Why is Australia and India producing batsman after batsman, regularly, and England not able to? England has played some aboslute lemon batsmen since Boycott retired. Regularly. Team after team of them. And most of the best ones were built in SA. See I just don't get it. How can they be failing to produce regular talent, when they have all these resources? No I'm not a massive advocate of the current Aus development system for many of the reasons Baggers has elucidated in aforementioned posts. We have our worst generation of Test batters for some time. Cricket, like many sports, is simply orientated around money at present. 20/20 and BBL reign supreme in Australia. We now have a period in summer from early December until late February when no FC or Shield cricket is played. How can a break in nearly 3 months in the middle of the cricket season be conducive to developing quality red ball cricketers? Moreover, our pitches are very poor in encouraging the development of spin bowlers. The last point is that batters from overseas suggest it is too easy batting on Aussie wickets. I've seen a fair bit of Test cricket on Kiwi pitches. Your test wickets are easy. And right now CA has a batting depth crisis. But since the AIS and Academy in the 1980's - you went through the 90's the naughties, and most of this decade with great batsmen. David Warner (expelled) On top of this, Hayden and Hughes and many more were state made. There is nothing wrong with the Aus production lines for at least batting at home. England don't even have batsmen for home. What has really bothered me is how poor we have been on the Subcontinent. I have read we are the worst performed team in the world in Pakistan, India, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. Despite how good we supposedly are at home, we have been awful away when most Aussie fans don't see us play! I have watched most of those Test matches. Oh - you've been abysmal away recently. England (until this tour) and SA too. Your last away wins are probably NZ 2016 and WI 2015.
|
|
|
|
|
Decentric
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 22K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xWhat type of pitch do the well informed members of the Cricket Forum think the Poms will prepare to give them the bedt chance of a win or draw???... A new face on here. hello. Former England test skippers Nasser Hussain and Michael Vaughan both demand a deck with some grass to provide seam and swing for their bowlers. They reckon the hard flat Edgbaston decked played into the hands of our quicker bowlers. Hello Michael and Nas we have some quality seamers and one or two blokes that can swing the Dukes too.They also said a less benign deck could negate the amazing Steve Smith. They want to spice it up. SA did this to SL and lost, though. I would play on a greenie myself, but the questions England need to find answers to is why are they with 18 counties, futher pro leagues, and a structure that identifies talent from just starting high school, completely and utterly unable to produce more high caliber batsmen. What makes this more obvious, is that Trott and KP were actually groomed and developed in South Africa to U19 levels. I certainly don't blame t20 for this. There is something wrong with the English infrastructure if they have this money, and cannot produce better batsmen than what they are serving up at present. Their test batting is absolutely dire. Simply dire. I said it on a different forum, England has been rolled for under 100, no less than 3 times recently. And its not as though the NZ, WI and Irish attacks are lauded as the best in the world. Not to mention, Jason Holder scored a double century when the WI rolled them. And I am absolutely clueless as to what England can or should do to remedy the situation bar swapping Bairstow with Foakes. I have absolutely no idea who they should try. They've tried so many lately. And given them long runs of opportunities. The batting is woeful. Wow! Without Smith and Warner I think the Aus batting has been pretty bad too.I would have thought Foakes should replace Bairstow as well. The recent English batting performances have been appalling when I read these figures. Yeah - but you have faith in the Australian production system still right? England has only produced one dominant batting team since the 1980's, when Cook, KP and Trott with Prior took them to number 1 with Bell and Strauss giving admirable support. But you take out KP and Trott, and that batting line up looks very very different and far less high calibre. 3 nations have the money to make the best cricketers. Australia, India and England. India is producing not only batsmen, but even fast bowlers now. Fast bowlers! To go with their spinners and fancy and vaunted batsmen. Australia continue to develop fast bowlers, and is in a bit of a pickle right now with batting depth. That said, the system put in place and produced a glut of talent since the 1980s. An absolute glut. So what is England doing so wrong? Why is Australia and India producing batsman after batsman, regularly, and England not able to? England has played some aboslute lemon batsmen since Boycott retired. Regularly. Team after team of them. And most of the best ones were built in SA. See I just don't get it. How can they be failing to produce regular talent, when they have all these resources? No I'm not a massive advocate of the current Aus development system for many of the reasons Baggers has elucidated in aforementioned posts. We have our worst generation of Test batters for some time. Cricket, like many sports, is simply orientated around money at present. 20/20 and BBL reign supreme in Australia. We now have a period in summer from early December until late February when no FC or Shield cricket is played. How can a break in nearly 3 months in the middle of the cricket season be conducive to developing quality red ball cricketers? Moreover, our pitches are very poor in encouraging the development of spin bowlers. The last point is that batters from overseas suggest it is too easy batting on Aussie wickets. I've seen a fair bit of Test cricket on Kiwi pitches. Your test wickets are easy. And right now CA has a batting depth crisis. But since the AIS and Academy in the 1980's - you went through the 90's the naughties, and most of this decade with great batsmen. David Warner (expelled) On top of this, Hayden and Hughes and many more were state made. There is nothing wrong with the Aus production lines for at least batting at home. England don't even have batsmen for home. What has really bothered me is how poor we have been on the Subcontinent. I have read we are the worst performed team in the world in Pakistan, India, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. Despite how good we supposedly are at home, we have been awful away when most Aussie fans don't see us play! I have watched most of those Test matches. Oh - you've been abysmal away recently. England (until this tour) and SA too. Your last away wins are probably NZ 2016 and WI 2015. I contend we can't play swing, and we struggle to bowl effective spin - and bat effectively against it. Outside Lyon, we have few quality spinners, and those who are reasonable get no encouragement on Aussie wickets. Bellerive is excellent for swing bowling and developing batting skill against it, but according to Tassie's top spinner when I met him, Bellerive is really difficult to bowl spin on. Bowlers like John Holland and O'Keefe aren't bad spinners when one sees them on the Subcontinent, but they receive little encouragement on Aus pitches.
|
|
|
|
|
Paddles
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xWhat type of pitch do the well informed members of the Cricket Forum think the Poms will prepare to give them the bedt chance of a win or draw???... A new face on here. hello. Former England test skippers Nasser Hussain and Michael Vaughan both demand a deck with some grass to provide seam and swing for their bowlers. They reckon the hard flat Edgbaston decked played into the hands of our quicker bowlers. Hello Michael and Nas we have some quality seamers and one or two blokes that can swing the Dukes too.They also said a less benign deck could negate the amazing Steve Smith. They want to spice it up. SA did this to SL and lost, though. I would play on a greenie myself, but the questions England need to find answers to is why are they with 18 counties, futher pro leagues, and a structure that identifies talent from just starting high school, completely and utterly unable to produce more high caliber batsmen. What makes this more obvious, is that Trott and KP were actually groomed and developed in South Africa to U19 levels. I certainly don't blame t20 for this. There is something wrong with the English infrastructure if they have this money, and cannot produce better batsmen than what they are serving up at present. Their test batting is absolutely dire. Simply dire. I said it on a different forum, England has been rolled for under 100, no less than 3 times recently. And its not as though the NZ, WI and Irish attacks are lauded as the best in the world. Not to mention, Jason Holder scored a double century when the WI rolled them. And I am absolutely clueless as to what England can or should do to remedy the situation bar swapping Bairstow with Foakes. I have absolutely no idea who they should try. They've tried so many lately. And given them long runs of opportunities. The batting is woeful. Wow! Without Smith and Warner I think the Aus batting has been pretty bad too.I would have thought Foakes should replace Bairstow as well. The recent English batting performances have been appalling when I read these figures. Yeah - but you have faith in the Australian production system still right? England has only produced one dominant batting team since the 1980's, when Cook, KP and Trott with Prior took them to number 1 with Bell and Strauss giving admirable support. But you take out KP and Trott, and that batting line up looks very very different and far less high calibre. 3 nations have the money to make the best cricketers. Australia, India and England. India is producing not only batsmen, but even fast bowlers now. Fast bowlers! To go with their spinners and fancy and vaunted batsmen. Australia continue to develop fast bowlers, and is in a bit of a pickle right now with batting depth. That said, the system put in place and produced a glut of talent since the 1980s. An absolute glut. So what is England doing so wrong? Why is Australia and India producing batsman after batsman, regularly, and England not able to? England has played some aboslute lemon batsmen since Boycott retired. Regularly. Team after team of them. And most of the best ones were built in SA. See I just don't get it. How can they be failing to produce regular talent, when they have all these resources? No I'm not a massive advocate of the current Aus development system for many of the reasons Baggers has elucidated in aforementioned posts. We have our worst generation of Test batters for some time. Cricket, like many sports, is simply orientated around money at present. 20/20 and BBL reign supreme in Australia. We now have a period in summer from early December until late February when no FC or Shield cricket is played. How can a break in nearly 3 months in the middle of the cricket season be conducive to developing quality red ball cricketers? Moreover, our pitches are very poor in encouraging the development of spin bowlers. The last point is that batters from overseas suggest it is too easy batting on Aussie wickets. I've seen a fair bit of Test cricket on Kiwi pitches. Your test wickets are easy. And right now CA has a batting depth crisis. But since the AIS and Academy in the 1980's - you went through the 90's the naughties, and most of this decade with great batsmen. David Warner (expelled) On top of this, Hayden and Hughes and many more were state made. There is nothing wrong with the Aus production lines for at least batting at home. England don't even have batsmen for home. What has really bothered me is how poor we have been on the Subcontinent. I have read we are the worst performed team in the world in Pakistan, India, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. Despite how good we supposedly are at home, we have been awful away when most Aussie fans don't see us play! I have watched most of those Test matches. Oh - you've been abysmal away recently. England (until this tour) and SA too. Your last away wins are probably NZ 2016 and WI 2015. I contend we can't play swing, and we struggle to bowl effective spin - and bat effectively against it. Outside Lyon, we have few quality spinners, and those who are reasonable get no encouragement on Aussie wickets. Bellerive is excellent for swing bowling and developing batting skill against it, but according to Tassie's top spinner when I met him, Bellerive is really difficult to bowl spin on. Bowlers like John Holland and O'Keefe aren't bad spinners when one sees them on the Subcontinent, but they receive little encouragement on Aus pitches. Well it seems you want to build a team that is dominant everywhere. A new superstar team. Good luck with that. I dont see it happening again anytime soon in the world. I think the way teams will go from now on, is more horses for courses. England, Pakistan, NZ, India are very much doing that in selection these days. Aus will start doing this too soon. The entire bowling group gets discarded depending on where they are playing. And slowly, batsmen will start to be chopped out too pending surfaces and opposition. Foakes and Jennings look set to play for England in Asia, but not at home just now. The old players like Waugh and Warne hate horses for courses. And a firm believers of an XI, maybe 12 if SENA playing in Asia, everywhere in the world. I don't agree with that at all. NZ, will I expect - go from no spinners in their last test team - to three vs SL in SL. Which 3 of four, and which 2 of 5 seamers remain, is the tougher question. Ferguson is not even touring SL, he prob wont play against England, but I imagine he surfaces vs Australia in Australia at some point. India do it the most, with openers, #6, and the entire bowling attack up for grabs depending where they are. Jadeja, Ashwin, Kuldeep, Ishant, Bhuvi, Bumrah, Shami, Hardik all take turns. Rohit, Vihari, Rahul, and so on for the batsmen too. Back on point, Paine suggests no changes to the second test team. https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/18659/report/1169533/day/3/worcestershire-vs-australians-tour-match-australia-eng-2019
|
|
|
|
|
BaggyGreens
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+xIs it any wonder that Aussies are lost when it comes to swinging the ball. They dont have the bloody ball or conditions to do so. That is up till three years ago when CA introduced an Aussie version of the English Dukes to be used in the final 5 matches of the Shield. This may pay dividends if we at least are competitive these Ashes. CA may then not feel the need to abandon the idea. If Kooka used to make a swinging ball.. perhaps they shud revisit it otherwise the English Dukes may just take over all red ball international cricket to make it more competitive and save Test cricket from dying. A standardized platform for the ball is being discussed by the iCC right now. What is being tabled, is that SG, Dukes and Kooka still make the balls, but make them all the same. A problem for Kookaburra is they machine make them, SG and Dukes are hand stitched. So interesting times ahead. SA uses a Kookaburra, and that's not a fun tour for many batsmen, so Aus really could just leave more grass on the pitches. That is good news Paddles. So their are basic differences between hand and machine making? Then Kooka have to do likewise and hand stitch theirs or get some other maker to do it. Who uses the SG.. is it Indian? SG is India. Kooka has two fake stitches cos machine made. It is also not crafted by hand. This, and no lacquer, causes it to soften faster. So that is why the the Kooka seam softens quicker than the Dukes. Surely they can apply a lacquer.. they did with the pinkies? Not sure what they can do about the seam. Perhaps continue to machine stitch their white ball but hand stitch the red one. I'd have notioned is is paramount for the evolution of the game that all nations use a universal ball. Kookaburra has money. Far more money than Dukes. They make more gear than just balls, and sell to more countries. NZ uses a Kookaburra cos it paid to do so by Kookaburra. And presumably SA, SL and the likes are also paid. Kookaburra by giving away this dosh, or balls for free, gets endless free advertising. Dukes doesn't have the money to compete with this deal. They only make balls. And because their balls are entirely handmade, they cost a lot more to boot. But makes a better ball for test cricket bowling. So are you saying that SC and Dukes may have to revert to machine making to provide universality because cashed up Kookaburra wont change the way it makes its balls. Yes the balls will be the same but the Dukes will no longer have its main attribute..that of maintaining a hard seam.
|
|
|
|
|
BaggyGreens
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+xWhat type of pitch do the well informed members of the Cricket Forum think the Poms will prepare to give them the bedt chance of a win or draw???... A new face on here. hello. Former England test skippers Nasser Hussain and Michael Vaughan both demand a deck with some grass to provide seam and swing for their bowlers. They reckon the hard flat Edgbaston decked played into the hands of our quicker bowlers. Hello Michael and Nas we have some quality seamers and one or two blokes that can swing the Dukes too.They also said a less benign deck could negate the amazing Steve Smith. They want to spice it up. SA did this to SL and lost, though. I would play on a greenie myself, but the questions England need to find answers to is why are they with 18 counties, futher pro leagues, and a structure that identifies talent from just starting high school, completely and utterly unable to produce more high caliber batsmen. What makes this more obvious, is that Trott and KP were actually groomed and developed in South Africa to U19 levels. I certainly don't blame t20 for this. There is something wrong with the English infrastructure if they have this money, and cannot produce better batsmen than what they are serving up at present. Their test batting is absolutely dire. Simply dire. I said it on a different forum, England has been rolled for under 100, no less than 3 times recently. And its not as though the NZ, WI and Irish attacks are lauded as the best in the world. Not to mention, Jason Holder scored a double century when the WI rolled them. And I am absolutely clueless as to what England can or should do to remedy the situation bar swapping Bairstow with Foakes. I have absolutely no idea who they should try. They've tried so many lately. And given them long runs of opportunities. The batting is woeful. Wow! Without Smith and Warner I think the Aus batting has been pretty bad too.I would have thought Foakes should replace Bairstow as well. The recent English batting performances have been appalling when I read these figures. Yeah - but you have faith in the Australian production system still right? England has only produced one dominant batting team since the 1980's, when Cook, KP and Trott with Prior took them to number 1 with Bell and Strauss giving admirable support. But you take out KP and Trott, and that batting line up looks very very different and far less high calibre. 3 nations have the money to make the best cricketers. Australia, India and England. India is producing not only batsmen, but even fast bowlers now. Fast bowlers! To go with their spinners and fancy and vaunted batsmen. Australia continue to develop fast bowlers, and is in a bit of a pickle right now with batting depth. That said, the system put in place and produced a glut of talent since the 1980s. An absolute glut. So what is England doing so wrong? Why is Australia and India producing batsman after batsman, regularly, and England not able to? England has played some aboslute lemon batsmen since Boycott retired. Regularly. Team after team of them. And most of the best ones were built in SA. See I just don't get it. How can they be failing to produce regular talent, when they have all these resources? No I'm not a massive advocate of the current Aus development system for many of the reasons Baggers has elucidated in aforementioned posts. We have our worst generation of Test batters for some time. Cricket, like many sports, is simply orientated around money at present. 20/20 and BBL reign supreme in Australia. We now have a period in summer from early December until late February when no FC or Shield cricket is played. How can a break in nearly 3 months in the middle of the cricket season be conducive to developing quality red ball cricketers? Moreover, our pitches are very poor in encouraging the development of spin bowlers. The last point is that batters from overseas suggest it is too easy batting on Aussie wickets. I've seen a fair bit of Test cricket on Kiwi pitches. Your test wickets are easy. And right now CA has a batting depth crisis. But since the AIS and Academy in the 1980's - you went through the 90's the naughties, and most of this decade with great batsmen. David Warner (expelled) On top of this, Lejmann, Hayden and Hughes and many more were state made. There is nothing wrong with the Aus production lines for at least batting at home. England don't even have batsmen for home.\ Now in the same time frame, England has developed Cook and Root. Trott and KP were imports. Buttler and Prior is being generous to include them. But lets say we do. It doesn't compare. There is nothing wrong with your spin bowlers. The Academy expelled Warne and graduated MacGill. But you lost years worth of options when you sought a new leg spinner where the was none. It took you years to play Lyon. And even then NSW overlooked Sommerville at a state level who can demolish Pakistan in UAE at test level. England has one spinner in Leach who is quality. Ali is made spinner. Who has been useful at times. But he was made at intl level. Not even domestic. After Swann they had noone, before Swann, it was what? Panesar? Tuffnell? Embury? I think what DC is saying is that our spin bowlers dont get the chance to develop their skills because there are not sufficient spinning pitches available at state level. A good example is Ashton Agar. He is a fine bowler imo but where does he play most of his state cricket.. the WACA.. without doubt Australia's most spin unfriendly deck. While our other two international class tweakers Jon Holland and SOK have the MCG and SCG respectively.. both of which provide turn late in the match. I recall a match at the SCG few years back.. it turned from day one and by the last two days was an absolute dust bowl. SOK and Agar both took multiple wickets. From memory the West Aussie pipped SOK in the wicket tally.. and that is his home ground.
|
|
|
|
|
RedKat
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4K,
Visits: 1
|
England set for 2 changes- Ali and Anderson out, Leach and Arhcer in
|
|
|
|
|
BaggyGreens
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.1K,
Visits: 0
|
Who listened to the tour match on BBC radio? Both days the broadcast ceased after lunch.. Not a word to us viewers why. Rain obviously. Anyone know the criteria for points in the World Test Championship? The ladder shows Australia took all 24 points from their win at Edgbaston. That is great as it gives us a terrific start to the tournament. But I do question why England took no points from the first two days when they were on top.
|
|
|
|
|
Decentric
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 22K,
Visits: 0
|
+xWho listened to the tour match on BBC radio? Both days the broadcast ceased after lunch.. Not a word to us viewers why. Rain obviously. Anyone know the criteria for points in the World Test Championship? The ladder shows Australia took all 24 points from their win at Edgbaston. That is great as it gives us a terrific start to the tournament. But I do question why England took no points from the first two days when they were on top. I thought England were on top for the first three days. England should have had nearly as many points as Australia from Edgbaston, as they were probably on top for more of the game than us.
|
|
|
|
|
MikeR
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 478,
Visits: 0
|
+xWho listened to the tour match on BBC radio? Both days the broadcast ceased after lunch.. Not a word to us viewers why. Rain obviously. Anyone know the criteria for points in the World Test Championship? The ladder shows Australia took all 24 points from their win at Edgbaston. That is great as it gives us a terrific start to the tournament. But I do question why England took no points from the first two days when they were on top. In a 5 test series win a test 24 pts tie the test 12 points draw the test 8 points lose the test 0 points The points are varied depending on the number of tests in a series eg in a 2 test series Win a test 60 pts, tie 30 pts, draw 20 pts lose 0 pts in a 3 test series Win a test 40 pts, tie 20, draw 13 pts lose a test 0 points in a 4 test series Win a test 30 pts tie 15, draw 10 lose 0 pts It is the way ICC value all the series regardless of how many tests, and that allows teams like Sri Lanka, Bangladesh etc that generally play 2-3 test series to be on an even ground as England, Australia that do play more tests as their series which are longer, 4-5 tests. No points for having a good day, but who really makes the call that one team is on top. After Day 2 in the first test It "appeared" that England may have been on top but when Smith and the tail put on nearly 200 runs in the 1st innings it did show that the pitch was flattening out and England utilised the flat pitch on Day 2. We now know at the end of the test that the great bowling from our attack on Day 2 really had Australia on top at the end of Day 2 they just had to bat on Day 3 to prove they were on top. That's the problem with qualitative analysis, it is solely an an opinion of an individual and are not necessarily true, they are bias. Quantitative analysis especially over a period of time give a true indication how someone is truly going with regards to other members of the team and against other teams, they take away the bias, that is why all sports use statistical analysis, it is the only true reflection of an individual's performance, with regards to others, especially over a period of time, can't use them for 1 or 2 games but after 20 or so you get an accurate reflection, especially in a sport like cricket and baseball where runs scored and wickets taken are the object of the game. They have a numerical value which is measurable with no bias, a number is a number, no arguments. We don't count play and misses for an example as did the batsmen actually miss deliberately by pulling out of the shot or was the bowler responsible. To make that call is qualitative based on an individual's opinion, means nothing.
|
|
|
|
|
Paddles
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xWhat type of pitch do the well informed members of the Cricket Forum think the Poms will prepare to give them the bedt chance of a win or draw???... A new face on here. hello. Former England test skippers Nasser Hussain and Michael Vaughan both demand a deck with some grass to provide seam and swing for their bowlers. They reckon the hard flat Edgbaston decked played into the hands of our quicker bowlers. Hello Michael and Nas we have some quality seamers and one or two blokes that can swing the Dukes too.They also said a less benign deck could negate the amazing Steve Smith. They want to spice it up. SA did this to SL and lost, though. I would play on a greenie myself, but the questions England need to find answers to is why are they with 18 counties, futher pro leagues, and a structure that identifies talent from just starting high school, completely and utterly unable to produce more high caliber batsmen. What makes this more obvious, is that Trott and KP were actually groomed and developed in South Africa to U19 levels. I certainly don't blame t20 for this. There is something wrong with the English infrastructure if they have this money, and cannot produce better batsmen than what they are serving up at present. Their test batting is absolutely dire. Simply dire. I said it on a different forum, England has been rolled for under 100, no less than 3 times recently. And its not as though the NZ, WI and Irish attacks are lauded as the best in the world. Not to mention, Jason Holder scored a double century when the WI rolled them. And I am absolutely clueless as to what England can or should do to remedy the situation bar swapping Bairstow with Foakes. I have absolutely no idea who they should try. They've tried so many lately. And given them long runs of opportunities. The batting is woeful. Wow! Without Smith and Warner I think the Aus batting has been pretty bad too.I would have thought Foakes should replace Bairstow as well. The recent English batting performances have been appalling when I read these figures. Yeah - but you have faith in the Australian production system still right? England has only produced one dominant batting team since the 1980's, when Cook, KP and Trott with Prior took them to number 1 with Bell and Strauss giving admirable support. But you take out KP and Trott, and that batting line up looks very very different and far less high calibre. 3 nations have the money to make the best cricketers. Australia, India and England. India is producing not only batsmen, but even fast bowlers now. Fast bowlers! To go with their spinners and fancy and vaunted batsmen. Australia continue to develop fast bowlers, and is in a bit of a pickle right now with batting depth. That said, the system put in place and produced a glut of talent since the 1980s. An absolute glut. So what is England doing so wrong? Why is Australia and India producing batsman after batsman, regularly, and England not able to? England has played some aboslute lemon batsmen since Boycott retired. Regularly. Team after team of them. And most of the best ones were built in SA. See I just don't get it. How can they be failing to produce regular talent, when they have all these resources? No I'm not a massive advocate of the current Aus development system for many of the reasons Baggers has elucidated in aforementioned posts. We have our worst generation of Test batters for some time. Cricket, like many sports, is simply orientated around money at present. 20/20 and BBL reign supreme in Australia. We now have a period in summer from early December until late February when no FC or Shield cricket is played. How can a break in nearly 3 months in the middle of the cricket season be conducive to developing quality red ball cricketers? Moreover, our pitches are very poor in encouraging the development of spin bowlers. The last point is that batters from overseas suggest it is too easy batting on Aussie wickets. I've seen a fair bit of Test cricket on Kiwi pitches. Your test wickets are easy. And right now CA has a batting depth crisis. But since the AIS and Academy in the 1980's - you went through the 90's the naughties, and most of this decade with great batsmen. David Warner (expelled) On top of this, Lejmann, Hayden and Hughes and many more were state made. There is nothing wrong with the Aus production lines for at least batting at home. England don't even have batsmen for home.\ Now in the same time frame, England has developed Cook and Root. Trott and KP were imports. Buttler and Prior is being generous to include them. But lets say we do. It doesn't compare. There is nothing wrong with your spin bowlers. The Academy expelled Warne and graduated MacGill. But you lost years worth of options when you sought a new leg spinner where the was none. It took you years to play Lyon. And even then NSW overlooked Sommerville at a state level who can demolish Pakistan in UAE at test level. England has one spinner in Leach who is quality. Ali is made spinner. Who has been useful at times. But he was made at intl level. Not even domestic. After Swann they had noone, before Swann, it was what? Panesar? Tuffnell? Embury? I think what DC is saying is that our spin bowlers dont get the chance to develop their skills because there are not sufficient spinning pitches available at state level. A good example is Ashton Agar. He is a fine bowler imo but where does he play most of his state cricket.. the WACA.. without doubt Australia's most spin unfriendly deck. While our other two international class tweakers Jon Holland and SOK have the MCG and SCG respectively.. both of which provide turn late in the match. I recall a match at the SCG few years back.. it turned from day one and by the last two days was an absolute dust bowl. SOK and Agar both took multiple wickets. From memory the West Aussie pipped SOK in the wicket tally.. and that is his home ground. I don't see the problem here. You're not going to serve up Eng, NZ, let alone Ind, SL, Ban (should you ever host them) or Pak spinning decks in a test. But like you say, there is some turn on offer in Vic and NSW, Adelaide too can turn up a bit late. And Queensland could always cut more grass off. Now if Australia wants to make some more and better spinners, find some young grade cricketers, send them to the Academy that Warne and McGill went too, and make some spinners. You have a spin centre in Queensland. You have the resources. Just use them more wisely. But given Agar wants to a pyjama player more than a test player, I don't really foresee him becomming a better red ball spinner any time soon. Zampa is from NSW and is still a joke among intl spinners. Quality batsmen never seemed troubled by him, while he does fare well against the weaker batsmen.
|
|
|
|
|
Paddles
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.5K,
Visits: 0
|
|
|
|
|
|
RedKat
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4K,
Visits: 1
|
Guys this has gone way off topic. Lets keep this type of talk on the general cricket thread and keep this for matters relating to the second test.
|
|
|
|
|
Decentric
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 22K,
Visits: 0
|
+xGuys this has gone way off topic. Lets keep this type of talk on the general cricket thread and keep this for matters relating to the second test. It has, and probably should be confined to the general cricket thread. The good thing is that civil cricket discussion is occurring. On Whirlpool so much is restricted.
|
|
|
|
|
Decentric
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 22K,
Visits: 0
|
For the Second Test scenarios, the best site I've accessed has been Cricinifo.
The English Guardian has some decent articles too.
One good article on Crincifo was how Justin Langer suggested that Siddle was close to the best bowler in the game , yet he took no wickets. I love reading these articles from a coach's perspective - with far greater insights than anyone else.
|
|
|
|
|
BaggyGreens
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+xFor the Second test scenarios, the best site I've accessed has been Cricinifo. The English Guardian has some decent articles too. One good article on Crincifo was how Justin Langer suggested that Siddle was close to the best bowler in the game , yet he took no wickets. I love reading these articles from a coach's perspective - with far greater insights than anyone else. So do I DC. Getting it from the horses mouth so to speak. I have posted something that may interest all purists like us on the General Thread.
|
|
|
|
|
BaggyGreens
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xWhat type of pitch do the well informed members of the Cricket Forum think the Poms will prepare to give them the bedt chance of a win or draw???... A new face on here. hello. Former England test skippers Nasser Hussain and Michael Vaughan both demand a deck with some grass to provide seam and swing for their bowlers. They reckon the hard flat Edgbaston decked played into the hands of our quicker bowlers. Hello Michael and Nas we have some quality seamers and one or two blokes that can swing the Dukes too.They also said a less benign deck could negate the amazing Steve Smith. They want to spice it up. SA did this to SL and lost, though. I would play on a greenie myself, but the questions England need to find answers to is why are they with 18 counties, futher pro leagues, and a structure that identifies talent from just starting high school, completely and utterly unable to produce more high caliber batsmen. What makes this more obvious, is that Trott and KP were actually groomed and developed in South Africa to U19 levels. I certainly don't blame t20 for this. There is something wrong with the English infrastructure if they have this money, and cannot produce better batsmen than what they are serving up at present. Their test batting is absolutely dire. Simply dire. I said it on a different forum, England has been rolled for under 100, no less than 3 times recently. And its not as though the NZ, WI and Irish attacks are lauded as the best in the world. Not to mention, Jason Holder scored a double century when the WI rolled them. And I am absolutely clueless as to what England can or should do to remedy the situation bar swapping Bairstow with Foakes. I have absolutely no idea who they should try. They've tried so many lately. And given them long runs of opportunities. The batting is woeful. Wow! Without Smith and Warner I think the Aus batting has been pretty bad too.I would have thought Foakes should replace Bairstow as well. The recent English batting performances have been appalling when I read these figures. Yeah - but you have faith in the Australian production system still right? England has only produced one dominant batting team since the 1980's, when Cook, KP and Trott with Prior took them to number 1 with Bell and Strauss giving admirable support. But you take out KP and Trott, and that batting line up looks very very different and far less high calibre. 3 nations have the money to make the best cricketers. Australia, India and England. India is producing not only batsmen, but even fast bowlers now. Fast bowlers! To go with their spinners and fancy and vaunted batsmen. Australia continue to develop fast bowlers, and is in a bit of a pickle right now with batting depth. That said, the system put in place and produced a glut of talent since the 1980s. An absolute glut. So what is England doing so wrong? Why is Australia and India producing batsman after batsman, regularly, and England not able to? England has played some aboslute lemon batsmen since Boycott retired. Regularly. Team after team of them. And most of the best ones were built in SA. See I just don't get it. How can they be failing to produce regular talent, when they have all these resources? No I'm not a massive advocate of the current Aus development system for many of the reasons Baggers has elucidated in aforementioned posts. We have our worst generation of Test batters for some time. Cricket, like many sports, is simply orientated around money at present. 20/20 and BBL reign supreme in Australia. We now have a period in summer from early December until late February when no FC or Shield cricket is played. How can a break in nearly 3 months in the middle of the cricket season be conducive to developing quality red ball cricketers? Moreover, our pitches are very poor in encouraging the development of spin bowlers. The last point is that batters from overseas suggest it is too easy batting on Aussie wickets. I've seen a fair bit of Test cricket on Kiwi pitches. Your test wickets are easy. And right now CA has a batting depth crisis. But since the AIS and Academy in the 1980's - you went through the 90's the naughties, and most of this decade with great batsmen. David Warner (expelled) On top of this, Hayden and Hughes and many more were state made. There is nothing wrong with the Aus production lines for at least batting at home. England don't even have batsmen for home. What has really bothered me is how poor we have been on the Subcontinent. I have read we are the worst performed team in the world in Pakistan, India, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. Despite how good we supposedly are at home, we have been awful away when most Aussie fans don't see us play! I have watched most of those Test matches. This is not news mate. Australia has been poor in the sub cont for at least the past two decades. Steve Waugh called winning in India "the last frontier". Back home there is probably one state deck.. the SCG.. that you could term spin friendly. What has CA done to address the massive problem? Very little until about the last 3/5 years. These days our best 16 year olds are sent to sub cont and embedded in local sides to learn to play in their conditions. Good move. CA also built and installed Indian style (soil) wickets at the NCC. Good move but has not entirely done the trick. Many past players advocate the pitches should be in a game situation as opposed for mere practice. CA has said it does intend making more of these spinning decks using Aussie soil at grass roots level thruout the country.
|
|
|
|
|
RedKat
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4K,
Visits: 1
|
To get back things onto second test discussion. Still very cryptic from selectors if Starc or Hazlewood sneak in. Im thinking they go unchanged. For england, as mentioned previously Archer and Leach will play for Anderson and Ali
|
|
|
|
|
Paddles
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xWhat type of pitch do the well informed members of the Cricket Forum think the Poms will prepare to give them the bedt chance of a win or draw???... A new face on here. hello. Former England test skippers Nasser Hussain and Michael Vaughan both demand a deck with some grass to provide seam and swing for their bowlers. They reckon the hard flat Edgbaston decked played into the hands of our quicker bowlers. Hello Michael and Nas we have some quality seamers and one or two blokes that can swing the Dukes too.They also said a less benign deck could negate the amazing Steve Smith. They want to spice it up. SA did this to SL and lost, though. I would play on a greenie myself, but the questions England need to find answers to is why are they with 18 counties, futher pro leagues, and a structure that identifies talent from just starting high school, completely and utterly unable to produce more high caliber batsmen. What makes this more obvious, is that Trott and KP were actually groomed and developed in South Africa to U19 levels. I certainly don't blame t20 for this. There is something wrong with the English infrastructure if they have this money, and cannot produce better batsmen than what they are serving up at present. Their test batting is absolutely dire. Simply dire. I said it on a different forum, England has been rolled for under 100, no less than 3 times recently. And its not as though the NZ, WI and Irish attacks are lauded as the best in the world. Not to mention, Jason Holder scored a double century when the WI rolled them. And I am absolutely clueless as to what England can or should do to remedy the situation bar swapping Bairstow with Foakes. I have absolutely no idea who they should try. They've tried so many lately. And given them long runs of opportunities. The batting is woeful. Wow! Without Smith and Warner I think the Aus batting has been pretty bad too.I would have thought Foakes should replace Bairstow as well. The recent English batting performances have been appalling when I read these figures. Yeah - but you have faith in the Australian production system still right? England has only produced one dominant batting team since the 1980's, when Cook, KP and Trott with Prior took them to number 1 with Bell and Strauss giving admirable support. But you take out KP and Trott, and that batting line up looks very very different and far less high calibre. 3 nations have the money to make the best cricketers. Australia, India and England. India is producing not only batsmen, but even fast bowlers now. Fast bowlers! To go with their spinners and fancy and vaunted batsmen. Australia continue to develop fast bowlers, and is in a bit of a pickle right now with batting depth. That said, the system put in place and produced a glut of talent since the 1980s. An absolute glut. So what is England doing so wrong? Why is Australia and India producing batsman after batsman, regularly, and England not able to? England has played some aboslute lemon batsmen since Boycott retired. Regularly. Team after team of them. And most of the best ones were built in SA. See I just don't get it. How can they be failing to produce regular talent, when they have all these resources? No I'm not a massive advocate of the current Aus development system for many of the reasons Baggers has elucidated in aforementioned posts. We have our worst generation of Test batters for some time. Cricket, like many sports, is simply orientated around money at present. 20/20 and BBL reign supreme in Australia. We now have a period in summer from early December until late February when no FC or Shield cricket is played. How can a break in nearly 3 months in the middle of the cricket season be conducive to developing quality red ball cricketers? Moreover, our pitches are very poor in encouraging the development of spin bowlers. The last point is that batters from overseas suggest it is too easy batting on Aussie wickets. I've seen a fair bit of Test cricket on Kiwi pitches. Your test wickets are easy. And right now CA has a batting depth crisis. But since the AIS and Academy in the 1980's - you went through the 90's the naughties, and most of this decade with great batsmen. David Warner (expelled) On top of this, Hayden and Hughes and many more were state made. There is nothing wrong with the Aus production lines for at least batting at home. England don't even have batsmen for home. What has really bothered me is how poor we have been on the Subcontinent. I have read we are the worst performed team in the world in Pakistan, India, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. Despite how good we supposedly are at home, we have been awful away when most Aussie fans don't see us play! I have watched most of those Test matches. This is not news mate. Australia has been poor in the sub cont for at least the past two decades. Steve Waugh called winning in India "the last frontier". Back home there is probably one state deck.. the SCG.. that you could term spin friendly. What has CA done to address the massive problem? Very little until about the last 3/5 years. These days our best 16 year olds are sent to sub cont and embedded in local sides to learn to play in their conditions. Good move. CA also built and installed Indian style (soil) wickets at the NCC. Good move but has not entirely done the trick. Many past players advocate the pitches should be in a game situation as opposed for mere practice. CA has said it does intend making more of these spinning decks using Aussie soil at grass roots level thruout the country. It wasn't 'last frontier' - that's Alaska, or the 'final frontier' is space and from Star Trek, Steve Waugh used "holy grail" instead, lol. While an acceptable cliche, the Crusades and the execution of Jesus can often stir up emotions, but be very thankful he didn't use "Jewell in the Crown" which your Rugby League players and personalities so often use to describe next to everything. I don't think Rugby Leage personalities are aware that the systematic exploitation of the British Raj (now India and Pakistan) was the "Jewell in the Crown" of the British Empire. The English have still not been forgiven for this by many Indians. First and foremost, to keep the sport healthy, a team has to win or compete well at home. The away tours compete with football, and are behind a pay tv wall, and do not get the some publicity as home summers. They are less important, except for the players and the deep fans. Fans like you and I.
|
|
|
|
|
Decentric
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 22K,
Visits: 0
|
+xTo get back things onto second test discussion. Still very cryptic from selectors if Starc or Hazlewood sneak in. Im thinking they go unchanged. For england, as mentioned previously Archer and Leach will play for Anderson and Ali The English press are talking up Archer, using his WC success as a criterion to indicate he will be successful. Look at Starc though. Archer has only bowled 31 overs in county second eleven in the last 11 months. Also, the white ball is different from the red ball. Leach is considered to be hardworking and clever, but with only a modicum of talent. I’ve seen a recent article somewhere, with a quote by either Langer or Paine, or both, where the bowling plan was to restrict England scoring square of the wicket boundaries. They planned for a tight line, more defensive bowling, hence Siddle has been integral to team game plans, whilst Starc is considered too loose.
|
|
|
|
|
Paddles
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xTo get back things onto second test discussion. Still very cryptic from selectors if Starc or Hazlewood sneak in. Im thinking they go unchanged. For england, as mentioned previously Archer and Leach will play for Anderson and Ali The English press are talking up Archer, using his WC success as a criterion to indicate he will be successful. Look at Starc though. Archer has only bowled 31 overs in county second eleven in the last 11 months. Also, the white ball is different from the red ball. Why would anyone compare Starc to Archer? Archer is a proper channel wicket to wicket bowler (at pace). Perfect for test cricket. Starc is a pyjama yorker slinger who sprays around long hops and wide balls in between his yorkers. :P Starc's basically a better and faster version of Malinga. That's it. Leach is talented and easily Englands best spinner. He wrecked SL in SL - but those were dustbowls. But he can bowl well enough. But Archer, save for injury, will be a superstar of the 2020's. Bumrah, Rabada, Archer, they're set for superstardom globally.
|
|
|
|
|
Decentric
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 22K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xTo get back things onto second test discussion. Still very cryptic from selectors if Starc or Hazlewood sneak in. Im thinking they go unchanged. For england, as mentioned previously Archer and Leach will play for Anderson and Ali The English press are talking up Archer, using his WC success as a criterion to indicate he will be successful. Look at Starc though. Archer has only bowled 31 overs in county second eleven in the last 11 months. Also, the white ball is different from the red ball. Why would anyone compare Starc to Archer? Archer is a proper channel wicket to wicket bowler (at pace). Perfect for test cricket. Starc is a pyjama yorker slinger who sprays around long hops and wide balls in between his yorkers. :P Starc's basically a better and faster version of Malinga. That's it. But Archer, save for injury, will be a superstar of the 2020's. Bumrah, Rabada, Archer, they're set for superstardom globally. I am comparing them because they are currently the quickest bowlers of the two teams playing. As we know sheer pace alone alone does not equate to success. ATM though, both Starc and Archer rely on sheer speed to take wickets, in addition to the other tools they have in their toolbox that you elucidate, Paddles.
|
|
|
|
|
Decentric
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 22K,
Visits: 0
|
I should also add that Australia can afford to leave Starc out, whilst England view Archer as a saviour.
Sheer pace is less significant in England than in Aus.
|
|
|
|
|
BaggyGreens
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+xI should also add that Australia can afford to leave Starc out, whilst England view Archer as a saviour. Sheer pace is less significant in England than in Aus. Agree to an extent. Cummins proved on the last day at Edgbaston that pace also wins games here. I think at Lords tho accuracy is the way to go. Reason I am recalling Hazlewood to partner Siddle and have both toiling away up and down the slope. With their accuracy and the predictable Dukes we should be able to make early inroads into their raw batting lineup. Would be interested to know which of the Pommie lineup have Lords as their home ground?
|
|
|
|
|
BaggyGreens
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.1K,
Visits: 0
|
Why would anyone compare Starc to Archer? Archer is a proper channel wicket to wicket bowler (at pace). Perfect for test cricket. Starc is a pyjama yorker slinger who sprays around long hops and wide balls in between his yorkers.  Starc's basically a better and faster version of Malinga. That's it.
Will have to take your word on Archer. I have never seen him bowl with a red ball against world class opposition.. have you? He is untested at this level.
|
|
|
|
|
Paddles
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+xWhy would anyone compare Starc to Archer? Archer is a proper channel wicket to wicket bowler (at pace). Perfect for test cricket. Starc is a pyjama yorker slinger who sprays around long hops and wide balls in between his yorkers. Starc's basically a better and faster version of Malinga. That's it.
Will have to take your word on Archer. I have never seen him bowl with a red ball against world class opposition.. have you? He is untested at this level. Heh, that's what people said to me before he played ODI's. I'll use the same reply I used then, 'I'll back Archer to be a superstar any day of the week'. And he was a World Cup star, surprise - surprise. I have seen him bowl many white balls to many world class opposition. If he can get a white ball to do anything on a road in an odi, he will love a red dukes with some grass on the pitch. He is a channel - stump to stump bowler. He gets away with it in ODI/T20i whereas Abbas or Philander would struggle, cos of his pace and ability to get bounce. Unlike them, he has all the death options at his disposal too, just like Bumrah. 3 years ago, Archer played his first ever first class game, against the touring Pakistan side. He caused Misbah, Younis Khan, Hafeez, and them all more than a few problems, but Ali tonned up. Sussex rested most their team as is the norm over there. Archer gave the Pakistan test players a shake up. https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/8499/scorecard/913637/sussex-vs-pakistanis-tour-match-pak-tour-of-eng-2016His very first first class game. Archer could flop this test, or this entire series, especially if his side strain flares up, but he will still be a test superstar imo if he remains fit. He has everything a fast bowler needs. Seam position, release, pace, accuracy, control, and more than a few variations of accurate bouncers, yorkers, even slower balls (more relevant to pyjama cricket). Archer is a compete package. He has everything. He is going to be a superstar. He is so much a better bowler already than Stuard Broad, its not funny. This is why every global cricket fan has been following Archer's progress and career since the u19 tournament where he played for WI. From 2016, he has been on global countdown. Most global cricket fans have wanted to see him in internationals. The kid is a star. The next decade seems set for us to be spoiled with bowling superstars, Bumrah, Rabada, Archer - but also Ngidi, Cummins, Abbas, H Ali, Ferg, Holder is improving rapidly, (Gabriel is already oldish) it could be as interesting as the 1980 - 1995 era of seam bowling.
|
|
|
|
|
BaggyGreens
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xWhy would anyone compare Starc to Archer? Archer is a proper channel wicket to wicket bowler (at pace). Perfect for test cricket. Starc is a pyjama yorker slinger who sprays around long hops and wide balls in between his yorkers. Starc's basically a better and faster version of Malinga. That's it.
Will have to take your word on Archer. I have never seen him bowl with a red ball against world class opposition.. have you? He is untested at this level. Heh, that's what people said to me before he played ODI's. I'll use the same reply I used then, 'I'll back Archer to be a superstar any day of the week'. And he was a World Cup star, surprise - surprise. I have seen him bowl many white balls to many world class opposition. If he can get a white ball to do anything on a road in an odi, he will love a red dukes with some grass on the pitch. He is a channel - stump to stump bowler. He gets away with it in ODI/T20i whereas Abbas or Philander would struggle, cos of his pace and ability to get bounce. Unlike them, he has all the death options at his disposal too, just like Bumrah. 3 years ago, Archer played his first ever first class game, against the touring Pakistan side. He caused Misbah, Younis Khan, Hafeez, and them all more than a few problems, but Ali tonned up. Sussex rested most their team as is the norm over there. Archer gave the Pakistan test players a shake up. https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/8499/scorecard/913637/sussex-vs-pakistanis-tour-match-pak-tour-of-eng-2016His very first first class game. Archer could flop this test, or this entire series, especially if his side strain flares up, but he will still be a test superstar imo if he remains fit. He has everything a fast bowler needs. Seam position, release, pace, accuracy, control, and more than a few variations of accurate bouncers, yorkers, even slower balls (more relevant to pyjama cricket). Archer is a compete package. He has everything. He is going to be a superstar. He is so much a better bowler already than Stuard Broad, its not funny. This is why every global cricket fan has been following Archer's progress and career since the u19 tournament where he played for WI. From 2016, he has been on global countdown. Most global cricket fans have wanted to see him in internationals. The kid is a star. The next decade seems set for us to be spoiled with bowling superstars, Bumrah, Rabada, Archer - but also Ngidi, Cummins, Abbas, H Ali, Ferg, Holder is improving rapidly, (Gabriel is already oldish) it could be as interesting as the 1980 - 1995 era of seam bowling. What is his story. He played for Windies at underage level. Did Windies let him go.. or was he poached? I suspect the latter as surely if he was such a prospect then they needed him. Since the 80s great quicks have not exactly fallen from the trees over in the Caribbean.
|
|
|
|
|
RedKat
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4K,
Visits: 1
|
English father, English passport etc. People do have multiple nationalities but ECB did decrease their minimum residency period of eligibility for him pre the world cup
|
|
|
|
|
BaggyGreens
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+xEnglish father, English passport etc. People do have multiple nationalities but ECB did decrease their minimum residency period of eligibility for him pre the world cup What is the current eligibility rules for non passport holders?
|
|
|
|
|
Paddles
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xWhy would anyone compare Starc to Archer? Archer is a proper channel wicket to wicket bowler (at pace). Perfect for test cricket. Starc is a pyjama yorker slinger who sprays around long hops and wide balls in between his yorkers. Starc's basically a better and faster version of Malinga. That's it.
Will have to take your word on Archer. I have never seen him bowl with a red ball against world class opposition.. have you? He is untested at this level. Heh, that's what people said to me before he played ODI's. I'll use the same reply I used then, 'I'll back Archer to be a superstar any day of the week'. And he was a World Cup star, surprise - surprise. I have seen him bowl many white balls to many world class opposition. If he can get a white ball to do anything on a road in an odi, he will love a red dukes with some grass on the pitch. He is a channel - stump to stump bowler. He gets away with it in ODI/T20i whereas Abbas or Philander would struggle, cos of his pace and ability to get bounce. Unlike them, he has all the death options at his disposal too, just like Bumrah. 3 years ago, Archer played his first ever first class game, against the touring Pakistan side. He caused Misbah, Younis Khan, Hafeez, and them all more than a few problems, but Ali tonned up. Sussex rested most their team as is the norm over there. Archer gave the Pakistan test players a shake up. https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/8499/scorecard/913637/sussex-vs-pakistanis-tour-match-pak-tour-of-eng-2016His very first first class game. Archer could flop this test, or this entire series, especially if his side strain flares up, but he will still be a test superstar imo if he remains fit. He has everything a fast bowler needs. Seam position, release, pace, accuracy, control, and more than a few variations of accurate bouncers, yorkers, even slower balls (more relevant to pyjama cricket). Archer is a compete package. He has everything. He is going to be a superstar. He is so much a better bowler already than Stuard Broad, its not funny. This is why every global cricket fan has been following Archer's progress and career since the u19 tournament where he played for WI. From 2016, he has been on global countdown. Most global cricket fans have wanted to see him in internationals. The kid is a star. The next decade seems set for us to be spoiled with bowling superstars, Bumrah, Rabada, Archer - but also Ngidi, Cummins, Abbas, H Ali, Ferg, Holder is improving rapidly, (Gabriel is already oldish) it could be as interesting as the 1980 - 1995 era of seam bowling. What is his story. He played for Windies at underage level. Did Windies let him go.. or was he poached? I suspect the latter as surely if he was such a prospect then they needed him. Since the 80s great quicks have not exactly fallen from the trees over in the Caribbean. He wasn't poached. Just like all the Indian, Pakistani and South African born talent coming through in Australia, he simply migrated for a better life. The closest it got to poaching was Chris Jordan saying to him after Archer was dropped of WI U-19, while facing him in the nets, come trial for my county, you're going to be a star. So he did. Sussex signed him up, and Archer said he would play for England not WI. If he had moved to England before 18, there would have been no stand down period at all.
|
|
|
|