[Cricket] 3rd Investec Test: England v Pakistan at Edgbaston, Aug 3-7, 2016

[Triggaaar]

We probably could have both had more runs & given ourselves more time if we'd been in 20/20 mode for the last half hour of the 4th day. Pakistan were out on their feet and Bairstow/ Ali were totally in.

Yeah I agree entirely. Should have started smashing it earlier, to give us plenty of runs and a bit more time.

 

[Pavilionaire]

The stats also say you've only got a 3% chance of winning after conceding a 100 run lead in the first innings.

Try this stat on for size: We batted on and got a lead of 342, and we won with time to spare.

I think Cook got the timing of this declaration spot on, and he was right to send out the batsmen all guns blazing at 11.00 am yesterday.

That said, Pakistan's middle order collapsed and they lost 4 wickets in the space of a couple of overs. Do you honestly think that is going to happen most times? If the middle order had held it together for just 10 or 12 overs (rather than the 2 or 3 they managed) then the batsmen could have wasted enough time to see them home.

I think saying we won "with time to spare" is a little generous - winning at 17.30pm on Day 5 with less than 15 overs to go is beginning to cut it fine.

 

[Triggaaar]

That said, Pakistan's middle order collapsed and they lost 4 wickets in the space of a couple of overs. Do you honestly think that is going to happen most times?

No. It was a flat wicket and I think Pakistan should have been able to bat it out. If we had declared a bit earlier, I still think they should have been able to bat it out (or won).

I think saying we won "with time to spare" is a little generous - winning at 17.30pm on Day 5 with less than 15 overs to go is beginning to cut it fine.

Obviously we need to take the context into account. It was a flat wicket where taking 20 wickets is difficult, and England only had the option of bowling them out on the last day. Cook chose to give them 84 (ish) overs, and we bowled them out with 13 overs left, so 13 out of 84 is a pretty reasonable chunk.

I think Cook got the timing of this declaration spot on, and he was right to send out the batsmen all guns blazing at 11.00 am yesterday.

So what exactly are we debating? Willis and Holding thought Cook should have declared earlier, you and I think he got it right.

 

[Pavilionaire]

No. It was a flat wicket and I think Pakistan should have been able to bat it out. If we had declared a bit earlier, I still think they should have been able to bat it out (or won).

Obviously we need to take the context into account. It was a flat wicket where taking 20 wickets is difficult, and England only had the option of bowling them out on the last day. Cook chose to give them 84 (ish) overs, and we bowled them out with 13 overs left, so 13 out of 84 is a pretty reasonable chunk.

So what exactly are we debating? Willis and Holding thought Cook should have declared earlier, you and I think he got it right.

The point is that historically Cook and Strauss before him would almost certainly have batted on longer and, had Cook stayed true to form, that could have cost us the win.

In the wider context we're talking about an improvement in Cook's captaincy. For every one of the 5 bowlers to contribute 2 wickets in that 4th innings suggests that Cook is doing something right. His field placing were generally very good, even bring the slips up in anticipation that the ball wouldn't carry paid dividends with catches being taken at grass level.

It wasn't always so - Cook's captaincy used to be formulaic and conservative.

 

[Triggaaar]

The point is that historically Cook and Strauss before him would almost certainly have batted on longer and, had Cook stayed true to form, that could have cost us the win.

I never disagreed. I said that Willis and Holding thought Cook got it wrong this time, and I disagree with them. You seem to agree with me, yet you were disagreeing too.

 

[Brovion]

As an accountant I'm guided by the stats, so if they say no team has successfully chased over 300 in the 4th innings to win a test at Edgbaston then the probability is once you've got a 300 lead you've probably done enough.

....

Whilst that's true if you look at those figures you'll see that they're all for only about 3 or 4 wickets, so the batting side had a lot of unused capacity. Plus in the modern (20/20) era scoring 300+ in a day isn't an impossible dream. The bare fact of saying "no one has chased over 300 in the 4th innings at Edgbaston" doesn't tell the whole story IMO and Cook was wise to use his judgment rather than relying on ancient stats.

 

[chucky1973]

Maybe he'll make it anyway, but chucky was suggesting we put them in once he has it, which is not the point.

I understand what you are saying but at the time I made it there was 20 mins play left and they were saying about an hour in the morning. I was saying get his 100 and then throw them in as I thought they had enough as it was. But you are right. Personnal milestones shouldn't come into it

 

[Pavilionaire]

Whilst that's true if you look at those figures you'll see that they're all for only about 3 or 4 wickets, so the batting side had a lot of unused capacity. Plus in the modern (20/20) era scoring 300+ in a day isn't an impossible dream. The bare fact of saying "no one has chased over 300 in the 4th innings at Edgbaston" doesn't tell the whole story IMO and Cook was wise to use his judgment rather than relying on ancient stats.

The 20/20 thing is getting overblown. There's a reason not many teams can chase down much over 240 in the 4th innings anywhere and that's because of a Day 5 pitch.

There's a perception that test teams who are chasing in the 4th innings are capable of blazing 300+ in a couple of sessions but it simply isn't happening.

 

[Brovion]

The 20/20 thing is getting overblown. There's a reason not many teams can chase down much over 240 in the 4th innings anywhere and that's because of a Day 5 pitch.

There's a perception that test teams who are chasing in the 4th innings are capable of blazing 300+ in a couple of sessions but it simply isn't happening.

By common consent though that pitch was ok (and the last wicket stand proved it). I take your point inasmuch as it doesn't automatically follow that just because modern batsman have learnt a few new shots that it means that scoring 300 on Day 5 isn't the challenge it once was, but it IS a different era and basing decisions on stats that go back to the 19th century is foolish. One of the things that always annoyed me about Peter Moores was he that would try and explain away below-par England One-Day performances by saying "Well the stats show that 240 was a par score on such-and-such a ground", which didn't acknowledge the fact that the game had moved on.

 

[Triggaaar]

The 20/20 thing is getting overblown. There's a reason not many teams can chase down much over 240 in the 4th innings anywhere and that's because of a Day 5 pitch.

Yes, but this pitch did not deteriorate much, which is why England were able to get much more in their second innings than in their first.

 

[Redundant Gigolo]

The 20/20 thing is getting overblown. There's a reason not many teams can chase down much over 240 in the 4th innings anywhere and that's because of a Day 5 pitch.

There's a perception that test teams who are chasing in the 4th innings are capable of blazing 300+ in a couple of sessions but it simply isn't happening.

This is spot on. I think some people don't realise the challenge of chasing a total down on a worn pitch. Even a flat deck has some issues against an attsck that has pace, reverse swing and spin in its artillery.

Have a look as to how many of the best sides in the game today at test level have consistently (or occasionally for that matter) chased down totals of 280 and above.

Not many

 

[Triggaaar]

I think some people don't realise the challenge of chasing a total down on a worn pitch. Even a flat deck has some issues against an attsck that has pace, reverse swing and spin in its artillery.

Have a look as to how many of the best sides in the game today at test level have consistently (or occasionally for that matter) chased down totals of 280 and above.

Not many

It's not easy to look up how many have chased something around 280 on a flat pitch.

Pakistan chased 377 last year and won.