English cricket thread

Utd heap said:
Gonna give you Englands 'bad luck' (it isn't - it just happens in a 5 test series to both teams):

- Leach out of the series
- Ali comes in, can't bowl in a 4th innings run chase due to injury on a turning deck. Again struggles to bat and bowl in the 5th test with it turning.
- Wood not fit until the 3rd test.
- Robinson injured mid game, missed 90% of first innings and all of the second.
- Pope also gets injured mid game. Misses the remainder of the series.
- Crawley and Duckett having to bat in the dark for a 20 minute spell during a tense run chase. Both get out leaving us 24-2 as the monsoons open. We go on to lose in a tight thriller.
- Stokes on one leg, barely bowls.
- OT losing 5 sessions with England the only possible winner.

I think the ball change in the final test might be my new fave whinge though. Literally happens in every test match and the fecknig screenshot is of the shiny side of the changed ball as opposed to the rough side of the previous :lol:
Click to expand...

Also I thought the Aussies believed in accepting the umpires decision and playing by the rules without whinging
 
If the ball change had happened the other way round we'd be called whingeing sooks for commenting on it

(I think it's a legit grievance, but both teams had their rub of good and bad luck across the series)
 
Utd heap said:
I think the ball change in the final test might be my new fave whinge though. Literally happens in every test match and the fecknig screenshot is of the shiny side of the changed ball as opposed to the rough side of the previous :lol:
Click to expand...

The change of ball was a mistake. The changed ball was no way similar to the one it replaced. The balls that moved straight after the change more than doubled in identical conditions resulting in a couple of vital wickets. A bad error by the umpires. Australia were far from their best with no batsman on top form and they also struggle when Lyon is occasionally missing as they don't have a natural successor. But all this a draw is a win rubbish is a bit delusional.
 
Ayush_reddevil said:
Also I thought the Aussies believed in accepting the umpires decision and playing by the rules without whinging
Click to expand...

Cricketers not moaning? You would check for a pulse. Whingiest sport in the world although England cricket fans seem even worse than Australian ones. The fuss about Bairstow getting out for going walkabout was ludicrous. Australian commentators seem to be the only Aussies complaining about this series TBH. I think Ponting (who does know his stuff) wants the coaches job and old school cricketers will never like having a bowler as captain.

Unless you are talking about me and then I have both passports and care little about cricket except in the sense that I like sport and occasionally even watch tennis ffs.

Watching the 2003 (I think) WC Rugby final (another sport I don't care about) my wife pointed out that I was cheering when both sides attacked :)
 
Last edited:
Wibble said:
The change of ball was a mistake. The changed ball was no way similar to the one it replaced. The balls that moved straight after the change more than doubled in identical conditions resulting in a couple of vital wickets. A bad error by the umpires. Australia were far from their best with no batsman on top form and they also struggle when Lyon is occasionally missing as they don't have a natural successor. But all this a draw is a win rubbish is a bit delusional.
Click to expand...

Hardly any posters have said a draw is a win, they've just praised the turnaround. You might find one or two in the thread who have done it but I wouldn't agree with them and nor do the majority of England fans who have posted in here.

I don't disagree with you on the ball - I would feel aggrieved if we'd been on the receiving end of it (though conditions obviously not identical, it was literally a different day). But I think it's a huge stretch to say that's why Australia lost, and simply not true to claim England had all the luck this series. Lyon was a big loss, but England had injury issues themselves (Pope, Leach, Ali, Wood, Robinson etc.) plus having 5 sessions rained off denying a certain victory at OT was exceptionally bad luck.
 
Wibble said:
Cricketers not moaning? You would check for a pulse. Whingiest sport in the world although England cricket fans seem even worse than Australian ones. The fuss about Bairstow getting out for going walkabout was ludicrous. Australian commentators seem to be the only Aussies complaining about this series TBH. I think Ponting (who does know his stuff) wants the coaches job and old school cricketers will never like having a bowler as captain.

Unless you are talking about me and then I have both passports and care little about cricket except in the sense that I like sport and occasionally even watch tennis ffs.

Watching the 2003 (I think) WC Rugby final (another sport I don't care about) my wife pointed out that I was cheering when both sides attacked :)
Click to expand...

There has been loads of moaning about the ball from all including Khawaja , multiple Aussie ex players and of course the Aussie media. It’s just a bit rich considering they spent the last few weeks talking about the England fans moaning a lot.
 
England clearly had the better of the 'drawn' series. Australia started off well, but they faded badly and realistically they have lost their last three tests.

It's a missed opportunity for England but they will feel the more optimistic moving forward.
 
Ayush_reddevil said:
There has been loads of moaning about the ball from all including Khawaja , multiple Aussie ex players and of course the Aussie media. It’s just a bit rich considering they spent the last few weeks talking about the England fans moaning a lot.
Click to expand...

Back home it has been very low key. Mostly making fun of the ludicrous reaction to Bairstow going walkabout.
 
Ponting as coach would be an interesting option as he plainly knows his shit better than almost everyone.

Cummings might make a better vice-captain to allow him to concentrate on his bowling although he has done very well overall since taking over. Particularly in changing the old school culture. Like England the changing of the guard with bowlers is going to be interesting but perhaps there is greater strength in depth in Australia except in terms of spin where both countries don't have spectacular options as far as I know. Smith should probably be made captain again although not sure he is fully rehabilitated yet and he is getting a bit long in the tooth.
 
As for England Bazball would be far better if used more intelligently, not just universally no matter what. Play like this in India and they will get murdered. How England replace their aging/retired fast bowlers will be a huge challenge.
 
Wibble said:
As for England Bazball would be far better if used more intelligently, not just universally no matter what. Play like this in India and they will get murdered. How England replace their aging/retired fast bowlers will be a huge challenge.
Click to expand...
I dunno, I thought the same at first but applying it universally seems to mean better performances than England "playing it by ear" like they used to. A lot of the batters don't have the ability to bat time.

I think we were saying the same before this series. No chance it works against the Aussie attack. And it did for the most part, some poor tactical decisions and catching etc aside. Obviously we had home advantage which helps.

I think if we do anything different in India we'll still get out cheaply, just for not many runs. I can't see the likes of Crawley, Duckett, Brook doing well pushing and prodding at spinners on turning pitches no matter what the game situation. So I think they'll play the exact same style. Truth is we will struggle no matter what with a lack of spinners, India away is tough.
 
Abraxas said:
I dunno, I thought the same at first but applying it universally seems to mean better performances than England "playing it by ear" like they used to. A lot of the batters don't have the ability to bat time.
Click to expand...

Against a better Australian team (or at least in better form and with Lyon) it would look far far worse than it did. India in India will murder them if they use that approach.

It is like the Japanese national waterpolo team. "They play exciting attacking exciting waterpolo that upsets the big boys" and then they still lose by 5+ goals, and can't even beat a very ordinary Australian side at the Worlds.

I think we were saying the same before this series. No chance it works against the Aussie attack. And it did for the most part, some poor tactical decisions and catching etc aside. Obviously we had home advantage which helps.

I think if we do anything different in India we'll still get out cheaply, just for not many runs. I can't see the likes of Crawley, Duckett, Brook doing well pushing and prodding at spinners on turning pitches no matter what the game situation. So I think they'll play the exact same style. Truth is we will struggle no matter what with a lack of spinners, India away is tough.
Click to expand...

Given how the pitches are manufactured to suit spin so much it is hardly surprising that everyone loses in India. Waste of a trip most of the time for England/Australia. And always boring as batshit.
 
Last edited:
Wibble said:
Given how the pitches are manufactured to suit spin so much it is hardly surprising that everyone loses in India. Waste of a trip most of the time for England/Australia. And always boring as batshit.
Click to expand...


I actually think Bazball might work in India. When the ball is new, if the batters can get off to a reasonably good score at a fast pace, then they can put pressure on Indian spinners.

Current Indian batters aren’t as good players of spin as the previous gen, so Bazball might pay off.
 
Utd heap said:
Gonna give you Englands 'bad luck' (it isn't - it just happens in a 5 test series to both teams):

- Leach out of the series
- Ali comes in, can't bowl in a 4th innings run chase due to injury on a turning deck. Again struggles to bat and bowl in the 5th test with it turning.
- Wood not fit until the 3rd test.
- Robinson injured mid game, missed 90% of first innings and all of the second.
- Pope also gets injured mid game. Misses the remainder of the series.
- Crawley and Duckett having to bat in the dark for a 20 minute spell during a tense run chase. Both get out leaving us 24-2 as the monsoons open. We go on to lose in a tight thriller.
- Stokes on one leg, barely bowls.
- OT losing 5 sessions with England the only possible winner.

I think the ball change in the final test might be my new fave whinge though. Literally happens in every test match and the fecknig screenshot is of the shiny side of the changed ball as opposed to the rough side of the previous :lol:
Click to expand...
Whinging pom.
 
We need to get more Australians on here so that we can have a proper fallout.

As a neutral in this series, my appetite for being a WUM and argumentative is not very high. @The Corinthian is making a good fist of it though

@Wibble is here but he's talking about fecking water polo
 
England fans still moaning? Surely not... :wenger:

Not sure why anyone can't just appreciate how good of a series it was without having to nitpick and moan.

Also, England don't have to worry about replacing their aging bowlers, there's plenty of talent floating around to plug the gaps.
 
zing said:
We need to get more Australians on here so that we can have a proper fallout.

As a neutral in this series, my appetite for being a WUM and argumentative is not very high. @The Corinthian is making a good fist of it though

@Wibble is here but he's talking about fecking water polo
Click to expand...
Saving it all for January?
 
Wibble said:
True, but wearing my joint nationality hat, Australians accusing others of whinging is a bit like a blue whale accusing a basking shark of filter feeding.
Click to expand...
I just find it funny how the Australian media kept going on about it after the Bairstow incident, then can’t see the irony in moaning about a ball change (despite Australia asking for constant ball changes too).

I’m sure the limited Australian media I saw from over here was probably the Australian equivalent of Piers Morgan or the Sun, so I guess it’s no different.
 
Exactly. It’s double standards and nothing else. Fans of both sides will always complain when something goes against their team and that’s just human nature.

It’s also odd to say things like “Bazball wouldn’t have worked if…” or “Australia would have won if…” [they hadn’t been below par/Lyon was fit/the ball hadn’t been changed/they’d won the toss more] and we’d be rightly laughed at if we came out with the equivalent claims. You can’t separate the Australian performances from the England approach, the two are related, and the whole point of a 5 test series is you test that over a period of time to try and average out the unusual factors.

It was basically a very good, evenly matched series where England started sloppily and were punished for it by a more clinical Australia, but eventually honed their approach and Australia struggled after that point. I don’t know why others, including all these alleged neutrals, are so unwilling to acknowledge that and instead coming up with all these excuses and complaints.
 
Wibble said:
As for England Bazball would be far better if used more intelligently, not just universally no matter what. Play like this in India and they will get murdered. How England replace their aging/retired fast bowlers will be a huge challenge.
Click to expand...

Don't agree at all. India's selectors are rubbish, they probably won't even play Ashwin and the England batters will be looking to get on top of the Indian attack wherever possible and score quickly whenever the going is good.

In terms of spin options I'm looking forward to seeing Rehan Ahmed hopefully for England and I would be very happy to have Jacks and Root rounding out the attack. It won't happen, Leach will get the nod and get his customary 3 wickets and 8 runs, but I would be delighted if we just went for the jugular and picked the spinners based on all round ability and potential rather than just bowling pedigree. Jacks and Root did better than Leach with the ball last time they were out there anyway I think in terms of wickets.
 
Agent Red said:
It’s also odd to say things like “Bazball wouldn’t have worked if…” or “Australia would have won if…” [they hadn’t been below par/Lyon was fit/the ball hadn’t been changed/they’d won the toss more] and we’d be rightly laughed at if we came out with the equivalent claims. You can’t separate the Australian performances from the England approach, the two are related, and the whole point of a 5 test series is you test that over a period of time to try and average out the unusual factors.
Click to expand...

Yeah I think its a bizarre argument, a major part of the reason why the Aussie players were off form particularly the bowlers was due to England's aggressive approach. They ended up going super defensive as England consistently battered the Aussie 3rd and 4th bowlers.

One of the reasons why Australia won in Edgbaston was because Cummins knew he couldn't rely on either Boland or Hazlewood so he had to bowl a mammoth stretch and their over-rates were incredibly slow even by the series' standards.
 
FlawlessThaw said:
Yeah I think its a bizarre argument, a major part of the reason why the Aussie players were off form particularly the bowlers was due to England's aggressive approach. They ended up going super defensive as England consistently battered the Aussie 3rd and 4th bowlers.

One of the reasons why Australia won in Edgbaston was because Cummins knew he couldn't rely on either Boland or Hazlewood so he had to bowl a mammoth stretch and their over-rates were incredibly slow even by the series' standards.
Click to expand...

Yep. And the bowlers did very well to stop any of the batters having a blow away series as well. All of them apart from Anderson ended up having a pretty good summer.
 
I see Ricky Ponting is whinging about the ball being changed at The Oval. He doesn't mention the ball change that benefiteed the Aussies at Headingley and we are supposed to be the whinging poms. Poor losers and sportsmen. I wouldn't be surprised if Ponting is still moaning abour being run out by a substitute fielder or even how England changed the weather to favour the bowlers or other such crap.
 
Ayush_reddevil said:


This is a bit ridiculous tbh. England have basically no chance of making WTC final
Click to expand...


Bit harsh given we had the oldest average age of bowlers. You can’t expect them to run in as fast as younger bowlers. If Jimmy’s playing next summer we might need one of those flat airport escalators to get him back to his mark in time.
 
Ayush_reddevil said:
Click to expand...

The rules have changed since the last cycle. You now lose a point for every over short unless you bowl out a side in less than 80 overs, so Australia were saved from losing a few more points because of England's shorter innings.

I think they should also take into account that spinners bowl less in some countries, especially with the overhead conditions in this series. It's easier to get through 90 overs bowling mainly spin on a dustbowl in India. Too much time is wasted though so a harsher punishment is fair, this is a better way than fining players their entire match fee.
 
Offsideagain said:
I see Ricky Ponting is whinging about the ball being changed at The Oval. He doesn't mention the ball change that benefiteed the Aussies at Headingley and we are supposed to be the whinging poms. Poor losers and sportsmen. I wouldn't be surprised if Ponting is still moaning abour being run out by a substitute fielder or even how England changed the weather to favour the bowlers or other such crap.
Click to expand...

It was a really poor ball change by any standard though.

And accusing an Aussie commentator of being a poor loser after the reactions by English cricketers and Lords members to Bairstow going walkabout is a bit rich.
 
The rule that Australia only lost points at Manchester because England don’t bat 80 overs is such a hilarious rule. Makes absolutely zero sense.
 
As for the replacement ball that proved a lucky charm for England - swings and roundabouts.

In the second test the Aussies had the ball changed at a similar stage and it was immediately swinging around corners. Crawley got out shortly afterwards. The general rule is that when a ball is changed you will either get a duff ball or a 'good' one. England and Australia both got a lucky pick in the series, so it evened out.

There's a lot of sour grapes in this thread - mostly, it seems, from the 'neutrals' - who were backing Australia to beat England comfortably and are now throwing their toys out of the pram.

You just need to face up to the fact that you called it wrong and that over the five tests England got the better of Australia, while playing entertaining cricket.

Why you even care so much is beyond me.
 
IRN-BRUno said:
The rules have changed since the last cycle. You now lose a point for every over short unless you bowl out a side in less than 80 overs, so Australia were saved from losing a few more points because of England's shorter innings.

I think they should also take into account that spinners bowl less in some countries, especially with the overhead conditions in this series. It's easier to get through 90 overs bowling mainly spin on a dustbowl in India. Too much time is wasted though so a harsher punishment is fair, this is a better way than fining players their entire match fee.
Click to expand...

I don’t see how harsher punishments like this help either. You can’t have punishments that are this over the top where a team is basically losing 66% of the points that they won over a series. It makes a mockery of the actual cricket played in the series. England in any case won’t make the WTC final so they can just chill through the cycle now and not give a shit about overrates
 
mYXigPC.png


England behind Windies who only have points for avoiding a whitewash because of rain :lol:
 
LDUred said:
You just need to face up to the fact that you called it wrong and that over the five tests England got the better of Australia, while playing entertaining cricket.
Click to expand...

It ended 2-2
 
Ayush_reddevil said:
I don’t see how harsher punishments like this help either. You can’t have punishments that are this over the top where a team is basically losing 66% of the points that they won over a series. It makes a mockery of the actual cricket played in the series. England in any case won’t make the WTC final so they can just chill through the cycle now and not give a shit about overrates
Click to expand...
If you don't want to lose points then get through your overs quicker, it's as simple as that.

I doubt England are bothered anyway, nobody seems to have any interest in the WTC. It's not a good system when you don't face all sides and have different lengths of series.
 
Ayush_reddevil said:
I don’t see how harsher punishments like this help either. You can’t have punishments that are this over the top where a team is basically losing 66% of the points that they won over a series. It makes a mockery of the actual cricket played in the series. England in any case won’t make the WTC final so they can just chill through the cycle now and not give a shit about overrates
Click to expand...

The rule is stupid and I've never liked it. The points table should be exclusively a meritocracy on performance. Slow over rates shouldn't influence how many points you get -- there should be independent fines for that. Ultimately we're watching cricket to find the best team - the wins, losses, draws are the measure of that. Especially if the slower over rates had no influence on the outcome of the match, why is any punishment required at all? To the viewer, it does not matter if the result came in 410 overs if the 410 overs were bowled slower than otherwise.

This is similar to the T20 rule where in the last over you have to have a fielder less outside the circle if you're behind the over rate. That dramatically influences the game. It's a game of bat vs ball.

This is purely motivated by TV schedules
 
You must log in or register to reply here.