England V Windies 4th test
Moderator: Zulus Thousand of em
- Worthy4England
- Immortal
- Posts: 32397
- Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:45 pm
England V Windies 4th test
This one had me confused, was head-scratching to work out where I had "lost" a test. Then realised they'd counted the first Antigua test as an abandoned test and slotted in an extra one.
AJ Strauss (Capt), AN Cook, OA Shah, KP Pietersen, PD Collingwood, RS Bopara, TR Ambrose (Wkt), SCJ Broad, GP Swann, RJ Sidebottom, JM Anderson.
That bowling attack (all capable of taking wickets on "their day") looks very thin to me for a test attack....
AJ Strauss (Capt), AN Cook, OA Shah, KP Pietersen, PD Collingwood, RS Bopara, TR Ambrose (Wkt), SCJ Broad, GP Swann, RJ Sidebottom, JM Anderson.
That bowling attack (all capable of taking wickets on "their day") looks very thin to me for a test attack....
- BWFC_Insane
- Immortal
- Posts: 36098
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm
Re: England V Windies 4th test
That bowling attack is not good enough unless at least 3 of them have 2 really good days.Worthy4England wrote:This one had me confused, was head-scratching to work out where I had "lost" a test. Then realised they'd counted the first Antigua test as an abandoned test and slotted in an extra one.
AJ Strauss (Capt), AN Cook, OA Shah, KP Pietersen, PD Collingwood, RS Bopara, TR Ambrose (Wkt), SCJ Broad, GP Swann, RJ Sidebottom, JM Anderson.
That bowling attack (all capable of taking wickets on "their day") looks very thin to me for a test attack....
- Worthy4England
- Immortal
- Posts: 32397
- Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:45 pm
Re: England V Windies 4th test
TwiceBWFC_Insane wrote:That bowling attack is not good enough unless at least 3 of them have 2 really good days.Worthy4England wrote:This one had me confused, was head-scratching to work out where I had "lost" a test. Then realised they'd counted the first Antigua test as an abandoned test and slotted in an extra one.
AJ Strauss (Capt), AN Cook, OA Shah, KP Pietersen, PD Collingwood, RS Bopara, TR Ambrose (Wkt), SCJ Broad, GP Swann, RJ Sidebottom, JM Anderson.
That bowling attack (all capable of taking wickets on "their day") looks very thin to me for a test attack....
- Worthy4England
- Immortal
- Posts: 32397
- Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:45 pm
- Worthy4England
- Immortal
- Posts: 32397
- Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:45 pm
The problem is which two spinners to go with. Panesar has shown he lacks the variation in flight to succeed on pitches like this, and can easily be milked for 3 an over for a day and Rashid is too unproven to be thrown in on a track like this. KP will have to get through a lot of overs me thinks.dasher wrote:Looks like the bowlers in for some hard labour on this wicket. Might have been an idea to go with two spinners looking at how easy Strauss and Cook have made it look so far. (which no doubt will set off an after lunch collapse)
- Worthy4England
- Immortal
- Posts: 32397
- Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:45 pm
On the plus side, Strauss is hitting a run-rate that suggests he'd like to leave 5 sessions in the 4th innings...jimbo wrote:The problem is which two spinners to go with. Panesar has shown he lacks the variation in flight to succeed on pitches like this, and can easily be milked for 3 an over for a day and Rashid is too unproven to be thrown in on a track like this. KP will have to get through a lot of overs me thinks.dasher wrote:Looks like the bowlers in for some hard labour on this wicket. Might have been an idea to go with two spinners looking at how easy Strauss and Cook have made it look so far. (which no doubt will set off an after lunch collapse)
Or, more likely, he'd like a lead of near 700 before he sticks them in on the 4th evening. They got too close last time!Worthy4England wrote:On the plus side, Strauss is hitting a run-rate that suggests he'd like to leave 5 sessions in the 4th innings...jimbo wrote:The problem is which two spinners to go with. Panesar has shown he lacks the variation in flight to succeed on pitches like this, and can easily be milked for 3 an over for a day and Rashid is too unproven to be thrown in on a track like this. KP will have to get through a lot of overs me thinks.dasher wrote:Looks like the bowlers in for some hard labour on this wicket. Might have been an idea to go with two spinners looking at how easy Strauss and Cook have made it look so far. (which no doubt will set off an after lunch collapse)
jimbo wrote:Beat you to it! Great minds and all.................dasher wrote:Can't say any of our bowlers look in great nick at the minute, fair point re Panesar.
More likely Strauss is thinking of declaring at the same time as last test but hoping to be about 800 in front just in case
LOL cheers for making me look like the Village numpty
- Worthy4England
- Immortal
- Posts: 32397
- Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:45 pm
Any time squire!dasher wrote:jimbo wrote:Beat you to it! Great minds and all.................dasher wrote:Can't say any of our bowlers look in great nick at the minute, fair point re Panesar.
More likely Strauss is thinking of declaring at the same time as last test but hoping to be about 800 in front just in case
LOL cheers for making me look like the Village numpty
- Worthy4England
- Immortal
- Posts: 32397
- Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:45 pm
And Bell! Always seems that players come in on the flattest of tracks and get hundreds. Still need that perfect number 3, maybe even getting Vaughan back in summer would be a decent shout.Worthy4England wrote:600 is a reasonable target to be bowling at. I suspect on reflection, Shah might be a bit disappointed...
- BWFC_Insane
- Immortal
- Posts: 36098
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm
- Dujon
- Passionate
- Posts: 3340
- Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 1:37 am
- Location: Australia, near Sydney, NSW
- Contact:
I haven't seen any images from the test, but 1600+ runs with a session to spare, plus three declarations (@6, @9 & @2), indicate that someone must have substituted the corker with a thick-walled red tennis ball. Blimey!
Of course it could be that neither side has bowlers capable of performing against talented batsmen and/or the fielding capability to complete the intent of the bowlers. Like I said, I haven't seen any of the test so I'm surmising, pondering and a bit confused and not criticising in a manner negative.
Incidentally, after catching up on the result this morning, a question came to mind: When was the last time that a test match ended with the opposing captains agreeing to a declaration and a handshake for the draw? I'm no historian so it has probably happened more often than I think. Any takers?
Anyway, a result in the final test would be good, whichever way it goes - although I'll be hoping for an England win.
Of course it could be that neither side has bowlers capable of performing against talented batsmen and/or the fielding capability to complete the intent of the bowlers. Like I said, I haven't seen any of the test so I'm surmising, pondering and a bit confused and not criticising in a manner negative.
Incidentally, after catching up on the result this morning, a question came to mind: When was the last time that a test match ended with the opposing captains agreeing to a declaration and a handshake for the draw? I'm no historian so it has probably happened more often than I think. Any takers?
Anyway, a result in the final test would be good, whichever way it goes - although I'll be hoping for an England win.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 106 guests