Michael Vaughan Vs South Africa

Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊



















Gritt23

New member
Jul 7, 2003
14,902
Meopham, Kent.
Beeneys gloves said:
And now he's gone too, this is f***ing embarassing :angry:

Please don't go all "tabloid" on us, jumping on the bandwagon, and slagging the side off at the first sign of trouble. Judging by the weather round here (London Bridge) I'd guess it's swinging all over the place. Don't crucify us until we know more about the conditions and see how we bowl on it. They won the toss and put us in, so they obviously expected there to be something to bowl on in the first session.

Look at the last test. Their score looked massive. Yes we bowled poorly but it was a very flat track as we showed until the ball started to not bounce (poor Flintoff!).

Please reserve judgement for a little later than before the end of the first session.
 


Beeneys gloves

New member
Jul 7, 2003
1,467
I'm not going 'all tabloid' Gritt23, Im stating the facts

Yes we got put into bat, but there seems to be a mindset of quick runs in the side rather than batting time at the crease.

Vaughan hooked down fine legs throat, Tresco was trying to push rather than block, Butcher, decent ball but was excited after hitting 4 4s, mcgrath terrible shot and hussain shouldnt have attempted such a big drive.

It's not swinging around that much but just a lack of application on the batsmans part

Im one of the last people to jump on the bandwagon and am still holding onto belief Freddie and Stewie with get tons, unfortunately i think if we get 200 it will be a good effort from the lower order, 2 of whom aren't renknowned for their batting prowess
 






Gritt23 said:
Please don't go all "tabloid" on us, jumping on the bandwagon, and slagging the side off at the first sign of trouble. Judging by the weather round here (London Bridge) I'd guess it's swinging all over the place. Don't crucify us until we know more about the conditions and see how we bowl on it. They won the toss and put us in, so they obviously expected there to be something to bowl on in the first session.

Look at the last test. Their score looked massive. Yes we bowled poorly but it was a very flat track as we showed until the ball started to not bounce (poor Flintoff!).

Please reserve judgement for a little later than before the end of the first session.

Fair enough, except for one point.

Top-class batsmen come into their own when the conditions favour the bowlers. The ability to hold on, defend the wicket and score runs is what we should expect at least from numbers 3-5 in any batting order, if not the openers as well.
 






Gritt23

New member
Jul 7, 2003
14,902
Meopham, Kent.
All I'm saying is that test cricket is a 5 day game (well sometimes) so lets not write us off after one session.

There can and probably will be many twists to the story yet. I bloody hope so anyway.
 










Reading Posh

Sophisticated rhetorician
Jul 8, 2003
1,305
Off M4 J11
So, if I'm reading the England scorecard correctly, the biggest partnership of 55 runs was for the last wicket with numbers 9 and 11 at the crease.

WTF! :censored:
 












Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top