creeeeeeeekeeeeeet
Moderator: Zulus Thousand of em
- TANGODANCER
- Immortal
- Posts: 43268
- Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2005 9:35 pm
- Location: Between the Regency and the Rubaiyat and forever trying to light penny candles from stars.
Re: creeeeeeeekeeeeeet
Must rate as one of the best run-outs of all time. (A GOAT, if you wish..)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/av/cricket/62273036
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/av/cricket/62273036
Si Deus pro nobis, quis contra nos?
- Bruce Rioja
- Immortal
- Posts: 38742
- Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 9:19 pm
- Location: Drifting into the arena of the unwell.
Re: creeeeeeeekeeeeeet
Wow!TANGODANCER wrote: ↑Sat Jul 23, 2022 11:17 amMust rate as one of the best run-outs of all time. (A GOAT, if you wish..)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/av/cricket/62273036
May the bridges I burn light your way
- TANGODANCER
- Immortal
- Posts: 43268
- Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2005 9:35 pm
- Location: Between the Regency and the Rubaiyat and forever trying to light penny candles from stars.
- Worthy4England
- Immortal
- Posts: 32469
- Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:45 pm
Re: creeeeeeeekeeeeeet
Always difficult to judge on the first couple of hours of 1st innings, but 108-5 has a more familiar ring about it..
Johnny Duck - have we been letting him play T20 again?
Johnny Duck - have we been letting him play T20 again?
- BWFC_Insane
- Immortal
- Posts: 36184
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm
Re: creeeeeeeekeeeeeet
Difficult conditions and SA have bowled outstandingly. Not sure many we are at fault for. Lees I guess.Worthy4England wrote: ↑Wed Aug 17, 2022 1:53 pmAlways difficult to judge on the first couple of hours of 1st innings, but 108-5 has a more familiar ring about it..
Johnny Duck - have we been letting him play T20 again?
But again shows our vulnerabilities against a good attack in testing conditions. 250 sort of pitch yet we will do well to get 150.
- TANGODANCER
- Immortal
- Posts: 43268
- Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2005 9:35 pm
- Location: Between the Regency and the Rubaiyat and forever trying to light penny candles from stars.
Re: creeeeeeeekeeeeeet
116-6, Stokes out last ball before lunch and the rain stops play.
Si Deus pro nobis, quis contra nos?
- Worthy4England
- Immortal
- Posts: 32469
- Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:45 pm
Re: creeeeeeeekeeeeeet
At least we didn't lose any more wickets in the PM.
- TANGODANCER
- Immortal
- Posts: 43268
- Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2005 9:35 pm
- Location: Between the Regency and the Rubaiyat and forever trying to light penny candles from stars.
- TANGODANCER
- Immortal
- Posts: 43268
- Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2005 9:35 pm
- Location: Between the Regency and the Rubaiyat and forever trying to light penny candles from stars.
Re: creeeeeeeekeeeeeet
We're, er, a little bit behind so far,, ahem...
Si Deus pro nobis, quis contra nos?
- Worthy4England
- Immortal
- Posts: 32469
- Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:45 pm
Re: creeeeeeeekeeeeeet
Yeah...looking a bit tougher...
- Worthy4England
- Immortal
- Posts: 32469
- Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:45 pm
Re: creeeeeeeekeeeeeet
Mind the gap! Need to clear out the tail.
50 runs in the last 5 overs....
50 runs in the last 5 overs....
- Worthy4England
- Immortal
- Posts: 32469
- Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:45 pm
- Worthy4England
- Immortal
- Posts: 32469
- Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:45 pm
Re: creeeeeeeekeeeeeet
Oh, oh. Down to earth with a large bump.
-
- Passionate
- Posts: 2381
- Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2018 8:23 pm
Re: creeeeeeeekeeeeeet
I think Bazball might actually just have been EarlyDukesCalamityball.
And what business Zak Crawley has in an England Test squad, I don't know.
And what business Zak Crawley has in an England Test squad, I don't know.
- BWFC_Insane
- Immortal
- Posts: 36184
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm
Re: creeeeeeeekeeeeeet
I’d not be writing anything off based on one test however disastrous it was.
I don’t think the style lost us it. First innings most wickets of the batsmen weren’t through recklessness but good bowling and testing conditions.
Probably notable these balls appeared to retain their hardness more traditionally which meant you didn’t have the ‘5 down but ball is not completely benign for 40 overs’ that definitely brought England back into games against NZ earlier this summer. Bairstow as an example may be far less effective if he’s coming in against a ball still swinging and seaming.
But it was a bad toss to lose. And we sort of know if it’s a game of batting against good bowling and the moving ball we probably will come out second best.
I don’t think the style lost us it. First innings most wickets of the batsmen weren’t through recklessness but good bowling and testing conditions.
Probably notable these balls appeared to retain their hardness more traditionally which meant you didn’t have the ‘5 down but ball is not completely benign for 40 overs’ that definitely brought England back into games against NZ earlier this summer. Bairstow as an example may be far less effective if he’s coming in against a ball still swinging and seaming.
But it was a bad toss to lose. And we sort of know if it’s a game of batting against good bowling and the moving ball we probably will come out second best.
- Worthy4England
- Immortal
- Posts: 32469
- Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:45 pm
Re: creeeeeeeekeeeeeet
Yeah as a generality - but of course on Crawley, it's not one test, it's probably "another test"...BWFC_Insane wrote: ↑Fri Aug 19, 2022 7:48 pmI’d not be writing anything off based on one test however disastrous it was.
I don’t think the style lost us it. First innings most wickets of the batsmen weren’t through recklessness but good bowling and testing conditions.
Probably notable these balls appeared to retain their hardness more traditionally which meant you didn’t have the ‘5 down but ball is not completely benign for 40 overs’ that definitely brought England back into games against NZ earlier this summer. Bairstow as an example may be far less effective if he’s coming in against a ball still swinging and seaming.
But it was a bad toss to lose. And we sort of know if it’s a game of batting against good bowling and the moving ball we probably will come out second best.
There is a huge discrepancy around what Crawley does, dependent on who won the toss. Could be coincidental...but I don't think it is - alright when everything's going for batting, really dips when it's adversarial to batting.
We win the toss and bat - Ave 40.
Won toss and fielded - Ave 16
Lost toss and sent in - Ave 8
Lost toss and fielded - Ave 20
- TANGODANCER
- Immortal
- Posts: 43268
- Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2005 9:35 pm
- Location: Between the Regency and the Rubaiyat and forever trying to light penny candles from stars.
Re: creeeeeeeekeeeeeet
Guess it's back to the drawing board then?
Si Deus pro nobis, quis contra nos?
- Worthy4England
- Immortal
- Posts: 32469
- Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:45 pm
Re: creeeeeeeekeeeeeet
Probably not. Other than this game, we've had a decent summer so far. We are clearly still struggling on openers, but we've tried a lot of them recently...Crawley, I think they're trying a "long term" strategy on and hoping it pays off at some point in the future...he's not really showing signs to me that it will, in perfect conditions he's great, so I think they see that at his best he's a better bet than many. But, IMO, he's not as good in less than perfect conditions (which are around more often than perfect) than some of our other picks...
- BWFC_Insane
- Immortal
- Posts: 36184
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm
Re: creeeeeeeekeeeeeet
I don’t rate Crawley at all and think personally it’s a mentality thing more than technical and I suspect that makes it very hard to fix.Worthy4England wrote: ↑Fri Aug 19, 2022 10:44 pmYeah as a generality - but of course on Crawley, it's not one test, it's probably "another test"...BWFC_Insane wrote: ↑Fri Aug 19, 2022 7:48 pmI’d not be writing anything off based on one test however disastrous it was.
I don’t think the style lost us it. First innings most wickets of the batsmen weren’t through recklessness but good bowling and testing conditions.
Probably notable these balls appeared to retain their hardness more traditionally which meant you didn’t have the ‘5 down but ball is not completely benign for 40 overs’ that definitely brought England back into games against NZ earlier this summer. Bairstow as an example may be far less effective if he’s coming in against a ball still swinging and seaming.
But it was a bad toss to lose. And we sort of know if it’s a game of batting against good bowling and the moving ball we probably will come out second best.
There is a huge discrepancy around what Crawley does, dependent on who won the toss. Could be coincidental...but I don't think it is - alright when everything's going for batting, really dips when it's adversarial to batting.
We win the toss and bat - Ave 40.
Won toss and fielded - Ave 16
Lost toss and sent in - Ave 8
Lost toss and fielded - Ave 20
I suppose it’s the question as to who else can be picked. But I’d have dropped him a long time ago.
For Bazball to work a simple truth is we need openers able to stick around longer and until we find them the middle order might save you sometimes but often they won’t.
- Worthy4England
- Immortal
- Posts: 32469
- Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:45 pm
Re: creeeeeeeekeeeeeet
Yeah, I think he's getting to the end of "chances"
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests