• We'd like to take this opportunity to wish you a Happy Holidays and a very Merry Christmas from all at Golf Monthly. Thank you for sharing your 2025 with us!

The Ashes 2017/18

Liverpoolphil said:
Another talented young England cricketer written off by you - suspect he will be another who will prove you to be wrong just like Stokes did

He is 23 for goodness sake and only just starting out his career and has shown promise with both the white ball and red ball.
Click to expand...

You do talk some twaddle.

I have not written him off but I have said that, as yet, his cricket hasn't earned the high regard some, including yourself, seem to have placed upon it. Particularly so in the first class game.
 
MetalMickie said:
You do talk some twaddle.

I have not written him off but I have said that, as yet, his cricket hasn't earned the high regard some, including yourself, seem to have placed upon it. Particularly so in the first class game.
Click to expand...

You called him “another white ball slasher” and questions why he was on a Lions Tour !

He is on the Lions Tour because he has performed very well in CC as well as one Dayers over the last three seasons

In the first class game

2015 - over a thousand runs at an average of over 50 including 4 tons
2016 - 1330 runs at an average of just below 60 - including a 4 scores over 180 with two of them going over 200 - was also named the Young Cricketer of the Year by the writers and PCA and was also the PCA player of the year
2017 - last year he had a few injuries but got just over 800 runs with 4 centuries

In 2016 Lions Tour he scored two big tons 163 and 220

He is another young lad that England more than likely rushed into the team and took a battering away in India after 4 innings and suggesting he is nothing but a white ball slasher is writing the young lad off - but it’s just the same as you did when dismissing the ability of Ben Stokes at test level
 
Liverpoolphil said:
You called him “another white ball slasher” and questions why he was on a Lions Tour !

He is on the Lions Tour because he has performed very well in CC as well as one Dayers over the last three seasons

In the first class game

2015 - over a thousand runs at an average of over 50 including 4 tons
2016 - 1330 runs at an average of just below 60 - including a 4 scores over 180 with two of them going over 200 - was also named the Young Cricketer of the Year by the writers and PCA and was also the PCA player of the year
2017 - last year he had a few injuries but got just over 800 runs with 4 centuries

In 2016 Lions Tour he scored two big tons 163 and 220

He is another young lad that England more than likely rushed into the team and took a battering away in India after 4 innings and suggesting he is nothing but a white ball slasher is writing the young lad off - but it’s just the same as you did when dismissing the ability of Ben Stokes at test level
Click to expand...

Hardly a young lad at 23 and therein may be a the problem.

His attitude and commitment suggest he's struggling to grow up.

As for Stokes my doubts about him at Test level remain.

In my time England have only had one truly great all-rounder in Ian Botham.

Flintoff was a bowler who was a reasonable batsman and Stokes is a batsman who makes a fair job of being a fourth seamers.
 
MetalMickie said:
Hardly a young lad at 23 and therein may be a the problem.

His attitude and commitment suggest he's struggling to grow up.

As for Stokes my doubts about him at Test level remain.

In my time England have only had one truly great all-rounder in Ian Botham.

Flintoff was a bowler who was a reasonable batsman and Stokes is a batsman who makes a fair job of being a fourth seamers.
Click to expand...

This old chestnut is one of English cricket's problems, the constant need to find the next so and so or English cricket's equivalent of so and so. English cricket spent too long looking for an equivalent of Warne and an equivalent of Gilchrist whilst forever anointing the next Ian Botham.
Is stokes worth a place in the team? Yes, his batting over the last year or so is as good as any and he offers a decent option with the ball in both tests and ODI's. Anything after that from a playing point of view is just semantics.
 
Tongo said:
This old chestnut is one of English cricket's problems, the constant need to find the next so and so or English cricket's equivalent of so and so. English cricket spent too long looking for an equivalent of Warne and an equivalent of Gilchrist whilst forever anointing the next Ian Botham.
Is stokes worth a place in the team? Yes, his batting over the last year or so is as good as any and he offers a decent option with the ball in both tests and ODI's. Anything after that from a playing point of view is just semantics.
Click to expand...

I agree with you.

We have picked so called leggies who haven't any control, turn the occasional ball but with not enough zip to trouble Test batsmen and a succession of batsmen who keep wicket but whose glovework has been no better than you might see in top level Club cricket.

My point regarding Stokes is that he would improve our batting and he's a decent enough 4th seamer.

However, unlike some on here and much of the more sensational media I don't believe that he can provide all the answers to England's current woes.
 
MetalMickie said:
I agree with you.

We have picked so called leggies who haven't any control, turn the occasional ball but with not enough zip to trouble Test batsmen and a succession of batsmen who keep wicket but whose glovework has been no better than you might see in top level Club cricket.

My point regarding Stokes is that he would improve our batting and he's a decent enough 4th seamer.

However, unlike some on here and much of the more sensational media I don't believe that he can provide all the answers to England's current woes.
Click to expand...

I think Stokes has the potential. Whether he already delivered in test and ODI cricket is a different thread. As for Duckett he is very much an untried package at the top level and against the best sides. At 23 he isn't an absolute youngster but has time. I wonder whether his temperament will be his undoing and sides will work on that
 
MetalMickie said:
Flintoff was a bowler who was a reasonable batsman and Stokes is a batsman who makes a fair job of being a fourth seamers.
Click to expand...

Flintoff was much more than just a bowler in his prime. Towards the end of his career he was definitely in the side as a bowler that could contribute a few quick runs but from 2003 to the end of the 2005 Summer he averaged almost 44 with the bat with 4 hundreds and 15 50's, he was a serious threat with the bat - especially at home where he averaged over 50 in that period. His purple patch didn't last as long as Beefy's but when he was on he was a superb all-rounder.
 
Some poor shots this morning - Root and Cook

Stoneman battled well and faced some very hostile bowling then got out to a snorter but review was shocking and very had to see how there was conclusive evidence to overturn the Not out

Vince again got in then got a cracker

Need a big score from Malan and Bairstow now
 
Can I finally stop hiding from behind my cushion and start following the scores on the BBC website again? Really pleased for Malan. Let's hope we can get to 450 tomorrow.
 
Malan and Bairstow were superb - played some superb crisp shots and also defended well - they were peppered with short balls all day long and attacked them - sometimes it was the wrong choice but they got away with some loose shots.

The dismissal of Stoneman was poor though - nothing on hotspot , snicko has a slight noise , the replays the umpire saw show no conclusive evidence that it was the top hand glove that it touched yet he gave it out - nothing but a guess from him . The host broadcaster found other replays that suggest it might have touched the top glove but that it also might have flicked the grill - Root says it was the grill . It was a very poor advert for telly reviews
 
Liverpoolphil said:
Malan and Bairstow were superb - played some superb crisp shots and also defended well - they were peppered with short balls all day long and attacked them - sometimes it was the wrong choice but they got away with some loose shots.

The dismissal of Stoneman was poor though - nothing on hotspot , snicko has a slight noise , the replays the umpire saw show no conclusive evidence that it was the top hand glove that it touched yet he gave it out - nothing but a guess from him . The host broadcaster found other replays that suggest it might have touched the top glove but that it also might have flicked the grill - Root says it was the grill . It was a very poor advert for telly reviews
Click to expand...

It also raises questions when there are stories in the press around corruption of the Test match, it was a very poor decision, and I don't know how Dar made the decision he did.

Great batting from Malan and Bairstow, looked comfortable, and generally left the ball really well - let's hope they can re-start tomorrow, bat most of the day, and then stick the Aussies in towards the end.
 
Wilson said:
It also raises questions when there are stories in the press around corruption of the Test match, it was a very poor decision, and I don't know how Dar made the decision he did.

.
Click to expand...

The guys on TMS said they'd seen a camera angle which suggested the ball hit his glove (hand holding the bat) so the decision was correct, however this view wasn't available until 4 minutes after Dar had made the decision, up until then it was impossible to know for sure so essentially Dar made a wild guess and got lucky.
 
Well i wasnt expecting that when i heard on the radio into work that England were 4 down. Fair play to Malan and Bairstow. Still need to get beyond 450 though. If they do it'll be interesting to see how the Aussies' fragile batting fares under some scoreboard pressure.
 
After Malan & Bairstow's heroics the subsequent collapse was disappointing. Can't see us getting much joy out of this one looking at the way the Aussies are motoring on.
 
Blue in Munich said:
After Malan & Bairstow's heroics the subsequent collapse was disappointing. Can't see us getting much joy out of this one looking at the way the Aussies are motoring on.
Click to expand...

One partnership has helped England avoid another skittling. However, the bowling has been poor. England's bowlers cant seem to stick the ball in the right spot for 6 deliveries. At their pace that is a cardinal sin. And Moeen looks cannon fodder, as he so often does away from England.
 
Lord Tyrion said:
Back to hiding behind the cushion 😟. The tail that is usually so good is letting us down now.
Click to expand...

I don't think the tail is the problem, the job No's 1-4 in the batting order are getting paid for is to score big runs and set the innings up.

Too many batsmen are getting a start and then getting out which is not good enough at that level.

Cook appears shot, Stoneman is working hard for runs and could have a future, Vince is way too loose outside off stump especially if he has been tied down and Root keeps finding new ways to give it away.

Smith is a great example, keeps churning out big runs despite looking awful, he just finds a way.

Frustrating since this isn't a great Aussie team. If we were able to keep them in the field longer at least one of their quicks would have broken down by now and most of their reserves are crocked.

I fear a decent Aussie lead and England 2nd innings collapse as per usual.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top