Playing for the draw here.
Playing for the draw here.
Trott is quite something, just plays his way, no matter what.
What is the benefit of this innings?
Knocking it around when you need 12 an over.
If you'd said that when Trott was on 50 off 55, I'd have agreed. But soon after, all the recognized batsmen were out and the onus fell on Trott to be the backbone of the chase. He's been knocking it around since then. Surely he recognizes there's no need for an anchor once all the other recognized batsmen are gone?
What's he anchoring for? Jimmy Anderson or Steven Finn to get a quickfire 80?
If you'd said that when Trott was on 50 off 55, I'd have agreed. But soon after, all the recognized batsmen were out and the onus fell on Trott to be the backbone of the chase. He's been knocking it around since then. Surely he recognizes there's no need for an anchor once all the other recognized batsmen are gone?
What's he anchoring for? Jimmy Anderson or Steven Finn to get a quickfire 80?
So what's he supposed to do? Start slogging get himself out for 60 and England get bowled out in 30 overs?
England lost today because they bowled shit (again) and no one batted with Trott.
Blaming a guy who scored a run a ball century is bizarre.
Try to score faster and go for the win?
What's the point of throwing in the towel and knocking it around to get a century?
So what's he supposed to do? Start slogging get himself out for 60 and England get bowled out in 30 overs?
England lost today because they bowled shit (again) and no one batted with Trott.
Blaming a guy who scored a run a ball century is bizarre.
No it's clearly not when the other team has scored more than 350.
Obviously other batsmen are to be blamed, but this is hardly the first time that Trott has been accused of scoring runs slowly.
As Zing says, he didn't took the initiative when England were in their lower half of batting.