groovyalbert
it's a mute point
Love watching it. You can't beat test cricket.
It's still the best format by a country mile. Always will be.
Love watching it. You can't beat test cricket.
It's still the best format by a country mile. Always will be.
However effective, Smith and Labuschagne are the most annoying batsman in world cricket to watch, yelling and screaming 'no run', constantly ordering people in the stands to move. They wear the bowlers down before Head comes in and takes advantage of the bowling attack's tiredness. At least it's enjoyable watching Head.
Could be one very long summer for England if there's no clear plan on how to remove those two.
I've said it before and I'll say it again "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder." Test cricket is all about attrition, frustration, mental toughness. That's why it's five days. If I want to see batsmen smacking it all over the place, I'll watch T20. Test cricket is a test of mind, heart, body and soul and nobody does it better than Steven Smith.However effective, Smith and Labuschagne are the most annoying batsman in world cricket to watch. They wear the bowlers down before Head comes in and takes advantage of the bowling attack's tiredness. At least it's enjoyable watching Head.
Could be one very long summer for England if there's no clear plan on how to remove them.
Management thought to strengthen the bench as well.Damn! That ball from Jadeja turned. Where is Ashwin when you need him?
Exactly my thoughts. Imagine Jadeja and Ashwin would have run riot here, not to mention a much better contribution from Ashwin with the bat than Yadav as well.Damn! That ball from Jadeja turned. Where is Ashwin when you need him?
It was a great grab but that umpire seemed awfully confident from an image quality that’s usually seen in images of big foot.Cracking catch.
It was a great grab but that umpire seemed awfully confident from an image quality that’s usually seen in images of big foot.
I wouldn’t have given it out.
It would be not out. The umpire didn’t seem bothered by this at all strangely. cnutWhen is a catch considered to be completed?
If he dived, caught the ball, fell and hit his and on the ground and the ball popped out/rolled away, would that be given out?
If that's out because the catch is ruled to be completed before the hand hits the ground, then this is out too..
If not, then this shouldve been not out.
When is a catch considered to be completed?
If he dived, caught the ball, fell and hit his and on the ground and the ball popped out/rolled away, would that be given out?
If that's out because the catch is ruled to be completed before the hand hits the ground, then this is out too..
If not, then this shouldve been not out.
What is the point of even having him.Pujara
Pujara
He played very well. It was an unusual shot choice that let him down, and on another day the shot might’ve worked.I actually thought given his county stint, he would have played better than what he has.
India still clinging on but could’ve been so much better, the Gill one was 50/50 and the Sharma and Pujara dismissals were unforgivable. Needs a massive partnership from Kohli/Rahane and them some from the rest. Expect Australia to chip away to a win due to sheer amount of runs.
Adding to that, a maximum of 90 overs per side in a test match with an introduction of 3rd innings of 40 overs each on the final day. In case of a draw, the higher run rate wins the match for the team.Cricket is a ridiculously slow sport, they must change the game. An over should have 12-20 balls bowled by 2 bowlers at either end to two batsmen.
Also, running should not be a thing, single or double should be added based on the placement of the shot in the field.
Trophy is shared.Just a question. If the test final ends in a draw - is it a draw, or does one of the teams (aka Australia) then win the trophy on run rate or something?
I know it's unlikely given the six day format and where we're at, I'm just curious if a joint award is possible.
Cricket is a ridiculously slow sport, they must change the game. An over should have 12-20 balls bowled by 2 bowlers at either end to two batsmen.
Also, running should not be a thing, single or double should be added based on the placement of the shot in the field.
Great idea, I was thinking two bowlers either side of the wicket against one batsman with a slightly larger bat having to take a choice of what ball to hit and protect his stumps at the same time maybe get a 12 if he can connect.yep, always thought it was a waste of time having two batsmen but only one on strike at any time. balls should be bowled simultaneously from both ends, you’d get the match finished in half the time.
Thanks. All a bit academic but I was curious about it...Trophy is shared.
What do you mean no excuses? We are on the way down. Kohli and Rohit are past their prime and the next gen hasn't stepped up yet.India's ICC event record the past decade is shocking with the talent they've had. No excuses for them in the home World Cup later this year.
Bowling in the first innings was completely bereft of strategy. Should have also played Ashwin and batted first after winning the toss.We lost the game in the first innings. Gavaskar on TV blaming the batting, and I got into a discussion with a friend who thinks the batting was at fault
When you concede 469 in the first innings, it changes the complexion of every innings to come.
We have a decent, but not great batting lineup and they played poor shots this match but I statsguru'ed it and 20% of matches in test history had >450 in innings 1, and only 3% were lost by the time batting first.
https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...=450;runsval1=runs;template=results;type=team
Do the Indian selectors have something against Ashwin? He often seems to get left out of the team when on the surface you would think he would be an almost automatic choice. Yadav is a bang average bowler, yet he was picked ahead of him. I've also seen it happen numerous times before. Nathan Lyon is one of the first names on the team sheet for Australia but IMLTHO Ashwin is a better bowler and a significantly better batsman yet he struggles to get in the team. The guy has 450+ test wickets. Talk about getting no respect.Bowling in the first innings was completely bereft of strategy. Should have also played Ashwin and batted first after winning the toss.
I think we shouldn't absolve the batting though, considering it needed (yet another) rearguard action to get to a fairly decent first innings score, after (yet another) top order failure.
Australia won this without even having to fight too hard
We lost the game in the first innings. Gavaskar on TV blaming the batting, and I got into a discussion with a friend who thinks the batting was at fault
When you concede 469 in the first innings, it changes the complexion of every innings to come.
We have a decent, but not great batting lineup and they played poor shots this match but I statsguru'ed it and 20% of matches in test history had >450 in innings 1, and only 3% were lost by the time batting first.
https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...=450;runsval1=runs;template=results;type=team