• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

Cricket Thread

I watched all 5 days, and in my view, the declaration came to early. 4 overs to bowl at the new batting team ? That's not enough. England should've gotten 450 minimum.

Also,
This overly aggressive style should not be tried against the new Test World Champions. It is both too ambitious and too reckless.

McCullum and Stokes need to reign it in a bit, if they want to win the series.
 
I didn't like the declaration or Root's premeditated scoop but actually on day 1 England played some sensible but aggressive cricket. I can't remember the exact stat but it was something like England ran the most singles in a session of test cricket.

To me that's aggressive cricket, keeping the scoreboard ticking over and the opposition on their toes while being comparatively low risk.

Crawley's 61 had a strike rate of 83 but only 28 in boundaries.

52 of Root's 118 were boundaries at a strike rate of 77.

48 of Bairstow's 78 were from boundaries at a strike rate of 100.

Good strike rates, but for Crawley and Bairstow in particular I think you'd usually see a much higher % in boundaries.
 
I didn't like the declaration or Root's premeditated scoop but actually on day 1 England played some sensible but aggressive cricket. I can't remember the exact stat but it was something like England ran the most singles in a session of test cricket.

To me that's aggressive cricket, keeping the scoreboard ticking over and the opposition on their toes while being comparatively low risk.

Crawley's 61 had a strike rate of 83 but only 28 in boundaries.

52 of Root's 118 were boundaries at a strike rate of 77.

48 of Bairstow's 78 were from boundaries at a strike rate of 100.

Good strike rates, but for Crawley and Bairstow in particular I think you'd usually see a much higher % in boundaries.
People misinterpret BazBall as mindless slogging. Its really not (unless someone goes off on one).

Kumar Sangakkara once described his methodology for diffrent forms of Cricket. In tests he'd look to defend, score then slog. In ODI score, defend, slog and in T20s slog, score, defend. Trying to play each ball on merit of those opportunities. With in that mindset England are playing with an ODI mindset. If the ball is there to be scored with they will rather than defend it to retain their wicket which in a normal mindset has more value. This has lead to much higher scoring rates even if players are facing less balls before being out putting more time into the game to get wickets yourself as your batting less time but on the face of it England haven't scored more runs than a normal team (despite some monster chases).

Australia fell into that trap rather than 4s along the ground England are happy to sit back and run 1s and 2s with the field pushed back. As they are looking to score rather than hit it out the ground with 6s.

Like I say it's about what the philosophy actually is rather than what it's billed to be. If you've watched the last year the amount of reckless shots is actually limited except at certain periods of play. England tried slogging a few years back with Jason Roy it didn't work.
 
Read a bit about all this. It's terrible.
Yep, racism is a societal problem. It'll always be there on some kind of level whether it be in Cricket, football or any other sport. How we go about reducing it. - that is the main question.
 
Yep, racism is a societal problem. It'll always be there on some kind of level whether it be in Cricket, football or any other sport. How we go about reducing it. - that is the main question.
Start by acknowledging that a large part of the root of it is that many British people and in particular white British people still think they are superior to other ethnicities and nationalities. It's coupled with a sense of entitlement in which they should have things how they want and everyone else should either support that or leave.
 
Its not really a surprise the translation of people from South Asian decent from grassroots to professional is a long standing known problem. The reliance on "posh boys schools" also has its inherent issues.

The real question is will they put real initiatives in place that can have an impact?
 
England are playing such strange cricket. 91 run lead for Australia.
Brendon McCullem's tactics are perfect for ODI's and T20's. I think he's overzealous with Test cricket. He is not respecting Australia.
 
Whatever your definition of Bazball, several wickets needlessly thrown away. Australia now firm favourites to win this and go 2-0 with a big helping hand from us in both games.

Unless the weather intervenes it's a high probability that the series / Ashes are gone after 8 of potentially 25 days cricket. We've handed the Aussies the momentum and all they'd need is a draw from the 3 remaining games.
 
Issue for me is that England are still posting good/respectable scores. First test declaring just short of 400, second test first innings score over 300 and should have been higher. I feel the problem is that England can't take 10 wickets easily and that nullifys Bazball. England are capable of scoring well and quickly, but Australia can just bat patiently and match them. It then exposes the vulnerability of Bazball where England can get out playing rash shorts. You really need an attack that can restrict Australia to below 300 and I don't see that.
 
Why were the Aussies having a go at Duckett for their inability to complete a catch legitimately?
 
If we lose this match its because we couldn't but a wicket in day 1. Hate to say it but Anderson feels like he's past it this series. Tongue and Broad the only ones so far who have done much.

Both sides missing a front line spinner and it shows.
 

Latest posts

Top