The Cricket Thread

[Billysboots]

You'd be missing the ball for one thing . Bad light is annoying for spectators but batsmen need to be able to see the ball clearly. At all paces but in particular against the quicks.

Slap and dash is fine under lights, test cricket is harder.

The irony is listening to Michael Vaughan saying how ridiculous they didn’t carry on. I don’t recall him refusing the light whenever it was offered. Can’t abide the man, and comments like that don’t help given he is an ex-player and England captain. I thought he was there to comment from the players’ perspective.

I just think that, in this day and age, we should not be losing the number of overs we do in red ball cricket to bad light. Especially not when you consider how expensive it is to go to a Test these days.

 

[Neilds]

The irony is listening to Michael Vaughan saying how ridiculous they didn’t carry on. I don’t recall him refusing the light whenever it was offered. Can’t abide the man, and comments like that don’t help given he is an ex-player and England captain. I thought he was there to comment from the players’ perspective.

I just think that, in this day and age, we should not be losing the number of overs we do in red ball cricket to bad light. Especially not when you consider how expensive it is to go to a Test these days.

They should also do something about the over rates as well. And be able to make up for lost overs more easily if conditions allow. The amount of times they go off at 6:30 sharp when they could easily play for another hour or so to make up for lost time.

 

[RichA]

The irony is listening to Michael Vaughan saying how ridiculous they didn’t carry on. I don’t recall him refusing the light whenever it was offered. Can’t abide the man, and comments like that don’t help given he is an ex-player and England captain. I thought he was there to comment from the players’ perspective.

I just think that, in this day and age, we should not be losing the number of overs we do in red ball cricket to bad light. Especially not when you consider how expensive it is to go to a Test these days.

Agree with what you said earlier. Might as well just use a pink ball in England in September.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

@Billysboots I never played against a pink ball or under floodlights so I can't comment on it from a batsmans perspective. Fielders also have to be able to see the ball, people often underestimate the issues there.

Vaughan is awful, one of the worst pundits I've ever heard in cricket. No idea why he still gets a gig. I hope no one ever listens to his suggestions, they really shouldn't

 

[Grizzly]

Only ever netted under floodlights, it was bloody hard, at least until the floodlights were the only light there was. The pink ball....divides opinions. We used them for midweek league games for three years, some people found them really easy to see, others couldn't pick them up at all in the field. I was in the former group, but not above claiming to be the latter as a convenient excuse!

 

[HomerJSimpson]

Vaughan is poor as a commentator and pundit. A good point about the light above from a fielders perspective. No fun standing at slip with it whizzing at you at head height and not seeing it. Has to be a level plating field for both

 

[IanM]

Where's the "Pope's crap and only in the side cos he plays for Surrey" post gone?

 

[Billysboots]

Where's the "Pope's crap and only in the side cos he plays for Surrey" post gone?

It aged as well as my “Ten Hag is the future at United” post(s).

 

[Arthur Wedge]

Where's the "Pope's crap and only in the side cos he plays for Surrey" post gone?

Not sure seen that been mentioned

Pope been worth his spot on his performances

 

[IanM]

It was, although I couldn't be bothered to go and get the post number. Feel free to look.

 

[Grizzly]

Pope been worth his spot on his performances

That's a difficult one. He got a hundred today on a day when most people would have expected the batting side to struggle. But it came in a dead rubber after he made basically nothing in the meaningful matches, and he may have faced the worst bowling performance (especially if you just look at the balls he faced) in Test history to get it.

I spent twenty years telling people "you've still got to get them", so that has to apply here.

I think the issue with Pope is, if he played for, lets say, Somerset, he'd have been cast aside two years ago. His Test average is worse than, say, Jonny Bairstow's, but without the constant messing around and moving up and down the order, keeping wicket (apart from a couple of games) or not etc. It seems at times his face fits even if nothing else does. But then again, if you got through the list of "next cabs", they are all players best suited to batting five or thereabouts (indeed, when they needed an opener they selected a number six) so perhaps you have to give him a break.

Longer term, they need to get the gloves off Jamie Smith and on to Ollie Robinson or James Rew. Smith has the ideal technique to bat three long term.

 

[Bunkermagnet]

Oh dear Vaughan, on TMS.."He's a good tosser"......

 

[venger]

Oh dear Vaughan, on TMS.."He's a good tosser"......

Is Vaughan talking about himself again?

 

[Bunkermagnet]

Is Vaughan talking about himself again?

No, the Sri Lankan Capting, talking about him winning the toss so many times

 

[HomerJSimpson]

Bad day yesterday. Going to need a big morning with the ball but think they have let this slip too far but remain to be proven wrong

 

[Neilds]

Bad day yesterday. Going to need a big morning with the ball but think they have let this slip too far but remain to be proven wrong

I think it will be all over by early afternoon - if not by lunch. And not in England's favour. The bowling attack is far too weak, Atkinson is injured and struggling for pace, Hull is nowhere near ready for Test cricket and his experience will really suffer when we play a stronger side.

With regard to all the injuries that our faster bowlers suffer, I was thinking about how unready their bodies must be for Test cricket. They may be gym/nets fit but obviously they are not fit enough to bowl repeated spells with time between running in the field and getting a bit stiff. Maybe they should be playing more cricket rather than less to get their bodies a bit more conditioned to long periods of play?

 

[Fade and Die]

Watched the cricket yesterday and must say England’s approach was at times utter .
I really have enjoyed the recent approach, and a 125 ao is always on the cards in a series playing with that attitude,but I’d expect that to happen when the opposition bowl really well maybe on a helpful deck.
A few today imo however were super cocky and disrespectful of their opponents.
Brooks in particular I think needs to get a better grip , he’s hugely talented and may end up wasting it if he doesn’t give the game more respect.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

I think it will be all over by early afternoon - if not by lunch. And not in England's favour. The bowling attack is far too weak, Atkinson is injured and struggling for pace, Hull is nowhere near ready for Test cricket and his experience will really suffer when we play a stronger side.

With regard to all the injuries that our faster bowlers suffer, I was thinking about how unready their bodies must be for Test cricket. They may be gym/nets fit but obviously they are not fit enough to bowl repeated spells with time between running in the field and getting a bit stiff. Maybe they should be playing more cricket rather than less to get their bodies a bit more conditioned to long periods of play?

Totally agree. They need several full seasons on a county side to get use to bowling prolonged periods. Not the same as one day spells and far more strain in the longer format as there is also prolonged periods in the field as well

 

[Neilds]

Leics v Yorkshire could be over in a day - hosts all out for 98 (after being 15-7!!!) and Yorkshire are already 2 down for 21 in response.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

Yorkies now 30-3