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

Register Log in

3rd Investec Test Match - England v West Indies - Lords



Pavilionaire

Pavilionaire

Well-known member
Jul 7, 2003
30,590
If Malan bags a half-century here he's on the plane to Australia.

That said, it's a big 'if'.
 




Beach Hut

Beach Hut

Brighton Bhuna Boy
Jul 5, 2003
71,974
Living In a Box
24/4 Root caught in the slips
 








jakarta

jakarta

Well-known member
May 25, 2007
15,632
Sullington
14 wickets so far today - are there Pitch Inspectors in Test Cricket? ???

EDIT: Off for bad light - probably that is it for the day...
 


Arkwright

Arkwright

Arkwright
Oct 26, 2010
2,792
Caterham, Surrey
The Complete Badger said:
Will England pass 300 in any innings in Australia? I'd like to say yes but I'm not sure I'd bet on it.
Click to expand...

Yes, the wickets are better batting surfaces and we bat a long way down. Stoneman and Westley won't start, Hales will come in with ANother. Root and Bairstow need to bat higher in the order and I would be tempted to play three opening batters.
Our problem will be bowling a side out twice on Australian flat wickets and little swing except for Perth.
 


Beach Hut

Beach Hut

Brighton Bhuna Boy
Jul 5, 2003
71,974
Living In a Box
46/4 close
 




Barry Izbak

Barry Izbak

U.T.A.
Dec 7, 2005
7,326
Lancing By Sea
I've got a ticket for tomorrow

Have you seen the weather forecast

RAIN RAIN RAIN RAIN RAIN RAIN RAIN RAIN RAIN RAIN RAIN RAIN RAIN RAIN RAIN RAIN RAIN RAIN RAIN RAIN RAIN RAIN RAIN RAIN RAIN RAIN RAIN RAIN RAIN RAIN
 


Questions

Questions

Habitual User
Oct 18, 2006
24,896
Worthing
hans kraay fan club said:
Firstly, neither you (nor anyone else) have any idea how fast Larwood bowled (other than 'faster than his peers'). Personally given that modern bowlers are better athletes as a rule, and MUCH taller (Steven Finn is almost a FOOT taller than the 5'8" Larwood), its pretty unlikely that he was genuinely quicker than a host of other England bowlers since.

And yes his bowling on the infamous tour caused an incident, but that was really far more down to Jardine's captaincy and tactics than just Larwood's bowling, surely?
Click to expand...

Through old footage it is easy to work out the pace of the older bowlers. It's been done. They are not as quick as the present quickies but it's not fair to compare because of training, diets and all that etc stuff.
 


M

Mo Gosfield

Well-known member
Aug 11, 2010
6,285
The Complete Badger said:
Will England pass 300 in any innings in Australia? I'd like to say yes but I'm not sure I'd bet on it.
Click to expand...

The lower middle order are going to have to get shed loads of runs, as we are going to be 30-3 pretty regularly and on some of those occasions, there will be no recovery.
 




M

Mo Gosfield

Well-known member
Aug 11, 2010
6,285
Arkwright said:
Yes, the wickets are better batting surfaces and we bat a long way down. Stoneman and Westley won't start, Hales will come in with ANother. Root and Bairstow need to bat higher in the order and I would be tempted to play three opening batters.
Our problem will be bowling a side out twice on Australian flat wickets and little swing except for Perth.
Click to expand...


The problem is that we will be presenting the Aussies with 5 gimme wickets every game. No's 2, 3 , 5, 10, 11. Cook's confidence was shot to pieces last time down under and he may crack again, under constant barrage from the quicks. There is going to be huge pressure on Root, Stokes, Bairstow and Ali and its not fair to expect them to keep rescueing us all the time.
Nobody coming into this England side has the correct technique or the ability to keep leaving the ball. Time and again this summer, we have seen players pushing at the ball with hard hands.
Anderson has never performed well down under and Broad is a busted flush. Too inconsistent with the ball, he has rarely got it right this summer, in conducive conditions. There is not enough quality in the spin department to pose any problems.
Gonna be a long, hard winter and we could fold like a pack of cards again. ( 0 -4, 1-4, 0-5 look reasonable bets again )
 


M

Mo Gosfield

Well-known member
Aug 11, 2010
6,285
Questions said:
Through old footage it is easy to work out the pace of the older bowlers. It's been done. They are not as quick as the present quickies but it's not fair to compare because of training, diets and all that etc stuff.
Click to expand...

All quicks in history have been capable of bowling at high speed i.e close to 90mph.
Larwood was clearly very hostile and one of the few bowlers to ever make the incomparable Bradman uncomfortable. Frank Tyson bowled as fast as anyone in history in the 54-55 series Down Under, blowing the Aussies away on their own wickets. Keith Miller, who saw a fair array of talent in his time, said that he had never seen anything as quick as that. Fred Truman was bowling close to 90mph in his younger days and Wes Hall and Charlie Griffith could be devastatingly fast.
Jeff Thomson was timed at over 90mph and no-one is going to tell me that he and Dennis Lillee weren't as quick as anything around today. Then throw in all the great Windies quicks, ( Patrick Patterson off 16 yards ) Alan Donald and many others and the argument falls down.
The timing is more accurate now and that creates the perception that bowlers are much quicker now. I am not persuaded.
 








Questions

Questions

Habitual User
Oct 18, 2006
24,896
Worthing
Mo Gosfield said:
All quicks in history have been capable of bowling at high speed i.e close to 90mph.
Larwood was clearly very hostile and one of the few bowlers to ever make the incomparable Bradman uncomfortable. Frank Tyson bowled as fast as anyone in history in the 54-55 series Down Under, blowing the Aussies away on their own wickets. Keith Miller, who saw a fair array of talent in his time, said that he had never seen anything as quick as that. Fred Truman was bowling close to 90mph in his younger days and Wes Hall and Charlie Griffith could be devastatingly fast.
Jeff Thomson was timed at over 90mph and no-one is going to tell me that he and Dennis Lillee weren't as quick as anything around today. Then throw in all the great Windies quicks, ( Patrick Patterson off 16 yards ) Alan Donald and many others and the argument falls down.
The timing is more accurate now and that creates the perception that bowlers are much quicker now. I am not persuaded.[/QUOTE

There is no evidence in sport - especially athletics which is timed or measured - that any type of athlete was quicker from 3 or more generations back to subsequently be stronger, faster, or able to throw further than the modern day competitors . Training, coaching and just pure professionalism would ensure that is the case. Btw I don't think being the fastest means you are the best necessarily in cricket. I think that's been born out in the last 15/20 years.
Click to expand...
 


jakarta

jakarta

Well-known member
May 25, 2007
15,632
Sullington
I'll bet Malan is a happy boy, loses his wicket and then 2 minutes later they have to go off.

63-5 at 11.45, bet it will be the same score at Stumps...
 






LlcoolJ

LlcoolJ

Mama said knock you out.
Oct 14, 2009
12,982
Sheffield


jakarta

jakarta

Well-known member
May 25, 2007
15,632
Sullington
LlcoolJ said:
Hameed coming into form at the right time (yes I realise he was out for 88 today but still).

http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/8052/report/1068570/day/2/

He'd be on the plane if it was up to me. The only partner for Cook who has come in and immediately looked like a test batsman.

Hales also has to go.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/sep/01/alex-hales-t20-cricket-pushed-me-to-next-level

Root to 3, Hales at 4. Suddenly the top order looks more solid.
Click to expand...

Yes but Root has never wanted to play at No.3 and he is now the Captain so can't see it happening.
 


You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here