[Cricket] Third test: England v India at Southampton, Jul 27-31

[keaton]

With no frontline spinner and Woakes and Jordan hardly firing I don't think any captain would enforce the follow on when Anderson's bowled 26 overs and Broad 25.

 

[Pavilionaire]

I've got to say I think enforcing the follow-on was the way to go. The England bowlers had just an hour in the field on Monday, then a night's rest, a full day yesterday and another night's rest. They've just bounced out India's captain, so his plans for India batting until they avoided the follow-on total are in tatters.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Textbook stuff from England this morning.

Now let's build a slow innings, 204-1 at the close of play, making sure we can't lose, that's what matters.

Need to build slowly to start with to be fair, nothing wrong with just nudging that lead on, but once it reaches 300, we should really start belting out the park after lunch so that we can get them in, maybe a tricky 20mins before tea, then the whole of the evening session at them.

BUT, the way Cook captains this side, your hypothesis maybe spot on.

 

[Mackenzie]

Safe captaincy. Anderson looked superb this morning, I'd have stuck them back in unless the bowlers felt that they were too fatigued.

 

[Braggfan]

I think it's a decent decision to bat again. The feeling is the pitch is only going to get worse, so we definitely don't want to put ourselves in a position we could lose by letting them get ahead and then having to bat on bad track. If we treat it like a 50 over game, go out and get 170 to 200 quickly (unless they tear into us, and then we change it slightly), we could have 4 sessions at them on deterioating pitch.

 

[Bold Seagull]

With no frontline spinner and Woakes and Jordan hardly firing I don't think any captain would enforce the follow on when Anderson's bowled 26 overs and Broad 25.

I think this is probably it. We're trying to find our best back up fast bowlers right now and putting them under even more pressure with a follow on probably isn't the way to go. With so much reliance on Jimmy and Broad, I guess this decision makes sense.

 

[Pavilionaire]

With no frontline spinner and Woakes and Jordan hardly firing I don't think any captain would enforce the follow on when Anderson's bowled 26 overs and Broad 25.

This is tantamount to saying England only have two bowlers and will structure their gameplan around that. But I think you have to expose Jordan and Woakes to the workload and pressure - you can't hide 3 of your 5 bowlers; it might work in the short-term but in the longer-term it puts too much of a drain on Broad and Anderson and it skews the team ethic.

Jordan and Woakes should relish the chance of getting out there to bowl England to victory. There's also a lot less pressure on them bowling on the morning of Day 4 than expecting them to take wickets on the afternoon of Day 5 with a dead wicket, an old ball and the press sharpening their pencils.

 

[Titanic]

If we can't set them a decent total in the next 50 overs and then bowl them out in 130 on a 5th day wicket, then whatever we had done, we wouldn't have won.

Good decision... now get on with scoring 200+ in 50 overs and putting them out of the game altogether.

 

[Triggaaar]

England chose not to enforce the follow-on. Is that the right decision?

I think so. I assume it'll be hot out there. We've got a great lead - smash some runs in the mid-day sun, then declare. That way the bowlers continue to rest, get a session tonight, another rest over night, and hard at them tomorrow on a 5th day wicket.

 

[Titanic]

I think so. I assume it'll be hot out there. We've got a great lead - smash some runs in the mid-day sun, then declare. That way the bowlers continue to rest, get a session tonight, another rest over night, and hard at them tomorrow of a 5th day wicket.

and a new ball tomorrow afternoon, if we need it.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Realistically, making them follow on would have been the only way to have given India a chance of winning the game.

Had they batted well, got a total of 400+, then England would have been batting for 2 sessions chasing a tricky total on a wearing pitch - we know what can happen there.

Even if they get us out cheaply for say 150 in this innings, England will still be very much in the driving seat.

 

[Simster]

My opinion is broadly similar to [MENTION=16159]Bold Seagull[/MENTION]'s. Perfectly acceptable decision, this, but does mean we need to kick on after lunch. I'd expect to see Ballance and Buttler come in fairly quickly after lunch.

 

[Braggfan]

Realistically, making them follow on would have been the only way to have given India a chance of winning the game.

Had they batted well, got a total of 400+, then England would have been batting for 2 sessions chasing a tricky total on a wearing pitch - we know what can happen there.

Even if they get us out cheaply for say 150 in this innings, England will still be very much in the driving seat.

There are times to enforce the follow on, but this isn't one of them. Exactly like you say, batting again is essentially taking the possibility of losing out of the equation. And like Titanic put it, if we can't set a score and bowl them out on 5th day wicket then we were never going to win it. This has definitely put us in the driving seat.

 

[Titanic]

Robson 'fails' again... outside off.

22-1 (261 lead)

 

[Bold Seagull]

Quality bowling from Kumar.

I think we need to stick by Robson. Opening is an a real mental test, and we are ejecting far too many potential openers without giving them a real chance. I've seen enough from him to think he can get through this stuttering start - although 1, 19, 127, 24, 59, 17, 7, 13 isn't altogether particularly bad.

 

[Titanic]

Quality bowling from Kumar.

I think we need to stick by Robson. Opening is an a real mental test, and we are ejecting far too many potential openers without giving them a real chance. I've seen enough from him to think he can get through this struggling start.

Indeed... definitely to the end of this series, and hopefully beyond. Cook getting some runs will help too.

 

[Titanic]

My opinion is broadly similar to @Bold Seagull's. Perfectly acceptable decision, this, but does mean we need to kick on after lunch. I'd expect to see Ballance and Buttler come in fairly quickly after lunch.

or a bit sooner!

 

[Uncle Buck]

Quality bowling from Kumar.

I think we need to stick by Robson. Opening is an a real mental test, and we are ejecting far too many potential openers without giving them a real chance. I've seen enough from him to think he can get through this stuttering start - although 1, 19, 127, 24, 59, 17, 7, 13 isn't altogether particularly bad.

He has a very crabby style, which should not be a huge issue, but the movement across the crease increases the LBW issue.

I do think he is a tad limited shot wise, but again that is not a problem if he is mentally strong.

However there is some logic in Hales playing as he is more attacking, which compliments the more cautious style of Cook and at times Ballance (who should be at 4, might happen if Trott comes back).

 

[Titanic]

Ballance getting after Kumar... two, four (midwicket), four(straight)

England 44-1 (lead 283)

Cook 18, Ballance 13

 

[Simster]

20 off the last two overs then. Lovely stuff.