Jump to content
IGNORED

Cricket Thread


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, MikeO said:

West Indies in the seventies?

Bowlers regarded as legends, never a suggestion of ill intent.

Yes, I remember the Fab Four bowlers, and also Dennis Lillee and Jeff Thomson, and they used occasional short balls, but on the whole they relied on speed and power. I don't recall any test match in the past with anywhere near as many short balls as this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Cornish Steve said:

Sadly, we see less and less sportsmanship these days. Robinson has been a disgrace the whole series, and I can't condone unsportsmanlike behavior in any team. Throughout, though, everyone's been shouting "but that's the rule", so that's what teams do to win. I hate to see all these short balls; it's ruining the game. Nonetheless, teams realized in this test match that short balls cause problems and win games. I'd really like to see a return of sportsmanship - individuals being sportsmanlike even if it costs them a game - but can you imagine how the crowds and commentators would respond? We're now firmly in a world where winning is everything, and that is sad.

The short ball should be limited to 2 balls an over whether or not the umpire considers it as genuine wicket attempt and not a threat to the batsman. England did adopt the short ball for one innings where as the Aussies adopted it for both innings, if England had started in the vain we may have seen completely different outcome in the first innings, but it’s all immaterial now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Palfy said:

The short ball should be limited to 2 balls an over whether or not the umpire considers it as genuine wicket attempt and not a threat to the batsman. England did adopt the short ball for one innings where as the Aussies adopted it for both innings, if England had started in the vain we may have seen completely different outcome in the first innings, but it’s all immaterial now. 

I agree with limiting the number of short balls per over. It’s a good idea. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, MikeO said:

Then let's limit the number of aces allowed in a tennis game as well.

Nonsense.

Not really Mike it’s taking away from the spectacle of the game, and in that test game using 3 bowling innings we had a record amount of players being hit dangerously with the ball in any test game before. For me it’s like the tackle from behind or the 2 footed jump in batsman are being used as a target which is pretty dangerous. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Palfy said:

Not really Mike it’s taking away from the spectacle of the game, and in that test game using 3 bowling innings we had a record amount of players being hit dangerously with the ball in any test game before. For me it’s like the tackle from behind or the 2 footed jump in batsman are being used as a target which is pretty dangerous. 

Difference being it's within the laws of the game, and with all the body armour players have today not at all unsafe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, MikeO said:

Difference being it's within the laws of the game, and with all the body armour players have today not at all unsafe.

You’re absolutely right it is within the laws of the game as was Bairstow’s stumping, but still not nice to see. I personally think they should look to limit the number of short balls an over. But can’t argue with your point it’s in the rules because it is. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Australian commentators are claiming that Bairstow tried the very same run-out attempt earlier in the game but happened to miss the stumps. It would be interesting to see whether there's a video clip of that. Here's the quote:

"There is a certain element of irony in all of this, considering two days earlier Bairstow tried to execute the exact same style of dismissal against Marnus Labuschagne – but failed. Australia were 1-79 when Bairstow threw the ball at the stumps and missed. In that instance, Labuschagne was aware of the fact and kept his ground. It's even more ironic that McCullum has a grievance considering he has pulled off the same or similar stunts."


https://wwos.nine.com.au/cricket/the-ashes-news-2023-australia-vs-england-brendon-mccullum-on-jonny-bairstow-stumping-run-out-controvery/9ed61eea-9d56-47ed-a491-5b748b1cf094?ocid=Social-WWOS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Romey 1878 said:

I think we need to drop Anderson and get some pace into the bowling attack.

He's not done anything so far and our bowlers are all too samey. The Australian's have got a big advantage over us due to the express pace bowlers they have.

We miss Archer and Wood badly - and a spinner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought the Aussie tactics in the game were spot on as well. In the first innings we were rattling away with the bat and they went short. In the second innings Stokes was smashing them all over the park and they put every one back, bowled a bit wider and took the momentum away from him and made him force the shots which led to his wicket. 

It was another fantastic game of cricket and one hell of an innings from Stokes but the Aussies have been that little bit better than us in both games. It has been such a fine margin. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also agree with @Romey 1878 that Anderson probably needs to come out of the attack. Im not sure where the next game is or what the conditions will be so unless he is going to be able to swing the ball, some genuine pace is needed. 

Its a shame Stokes is struggling because we could really do with him being able to bowl a bit more too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Bailey said:

I also agree with @Romey 1878 that Anderson probably needs to come out of the attack. Im not sure where the next game is or what the conditions will be so unless he is going to be able to swing the ball, some genuine pace is needed. 

Its a shame Stokes is struggling because we could really do with him being able to bowl a bit more too. 

The next match is at Headingley.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Bailey said:

I thought the Aussie tactics in the game were spot on as well. In the first innings we were rattling away with the bat and they went short. In the second innings Stokes was smashing them all over the park and they put every one back, bowled a bit wider and took the momentum away from him and made him force the shots which led to his wicket. 

It was another fantastic game of cricket and one hell of an innings from Stokes but the Aussies have been that little bit better than us in both games. It has been such a fine margin. 

It's been very fine margins. The teams are well-matched, which means it all comes down to strategy and tactics. Flexibility and willingness to adapt, in my opinion, are the key.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 04/07/2023 at 19:14, Cornish Steve said:

According to the BBC, even a narrow loss would put them through.

 

On 04/07/2023 at 19:24, MikeO said:

True enough but I dodn't know the numbers.

Scotland scored 277-9, Netherlands are 72-2 off 14.5.

"If Netherlands clear Scotland's 277 by one run, they need to win in 44 overs. If they clear it by six runs, they need to win in 45 overs."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...