Author Topic: The cricket... (Read 257120 times)

caerau · « **Reply #1075 on:** 07 August, 2015, 09:57:31 am »

Quote from: Deano on 06 August, 2015, 10:17:48 pm

Quote from: Caerau on 06 August, 2015, 07:11:11 pm
I missed actually watching it but from the press coverage it doesn't sound as cool as Devon Malcolm's demolishment of South Africa back in the 90s where it was ferocious bowling rather than crap batting that was on display. That I did watch and it was awesome.

Shame Malcolm couldn't summon that ire up more often really.

Not that it's any less satisfying overall

That's probably the most exciting sporting performance I've ever seen (on telly). Didn't he tell the Saffers they were history?

Yeah as I recall he got hit on the head by a bouncer from one of the south African bowlers and was very clear about what was going to happen to them.

LEE · « **Reply #1076 on:** 07 August, 2015, 10:28:13 am »

Don't forget we just saw a bowling performance from Broad that will be referenced by commentators for the rest of cricketing history.

Mr Larrington · « **Reply #1077 on:** 07 August, 2015, 10:39:09 am »

Quote from: LEE on 07 August, 2015, 10:28:13 am

Don't forget we just saw a bowling performance from Broad that will be referenced by commentators for the rest of cricketing history.

See also Bob Willis at Headingley in 1981, though somehow Botham always emerges with 99% of the credit for that particular match.

I am thinking of setting up Dial-A-Digger, which will employ Earls Court's population of former bar staff from Captain Cook's Mistake. For a small fee the customer can ring them up and insult them

madcow · « **Reply #1078 on:** 07 August, 2015, 10:56:26 am »

Yep, there's never an Australian around when you need one to laugh at.
The last one we encountered was 3 weeks ago in Edinburgh. Not a bad bloke, he switched the allocation of hotel rooms around so that we could take our bikes into the room.

Mr Larrington · « **Reply #1079 on:** 07 August, 2015, 11:14:12 am »

Perhaps worse is finding an Australian at the appropriate time, only to discover he has no interest in the Game. Ben Goodall, bossman of Aussie recumbent builders Trisled, is one such. As I discovered in the immediate aftermath of the 2005 series chiz.

caerau · « **Reply #1080 on:** 07 August, 2015, 11:15:33 am »

*wonders if he should poke his Aussie family on Facebook with a stick*

Jaded · « **Reply #1081 on:** 07 August, 2015, 12:43:32 pm »

Australia require 132 to avoid the Follow-on.

Oh, hang on...!!!

Wowbagger · « **Reply #1082 on:** 07 August, 2015, 02:38:46 pm »

Alternatively, Aus could knock up 550 by stumps tomorrow and then skittle England...

Wowbagger · « **Reply #1083 on:** 07 August, 2015, 03:45:50 pm »

After 4 wickets have fallen for under 30 runs in about 20 minutes, I think they probably won't.

All over tonight? I don't remember a 2 day test match before.

Edit: apparently there was one in 2000 against the W. Indies. I must have blinked and missed it.

Jaded · « **Reply #1084 on:** 07 August, 2015, 03:54:07 pm »

There have been 19 2 day test matches...

No idea if there were scheduled to be longer, but 4 of them have been this century.

andyoxon · « **Reply #1085 on:** 07 August, 2015, 06:37:04 pm »

Doing well - shame the 2-dayer was missed.

Wowbagger · « **Reply #1086 on:** 07 August, 2015, 07:51:08 pm »

Possibly apocryphal, but I heard on the Toady Prog this am that there was a chap who bought tickets for all 5 days and ended up not going yesterday.

Basil · « **Reply #1087 on:** 07 August, 2015, 09:30:11 pm »

Quote from: Wowbagger on 07 August, 2015, 07:51:08 pm

Possibly apocryphal, but I heard on the Toady Prog this am that there was a chap who bought tickets for all 5 days and ended up not going yesterday.

I heard that too. One of the producers.

andyoxon · « **Reply #1088 on:** 08 August, 2015, 11:40:34 am »

Woohoo...

Jaded · « **Reply #1089 on:** 08 August, 2015, 12:34:32 pm »

Job done!

Michael Clarke was outstanding in his interview after the defeat. It's a great shame for him, but a great result for England.

Deano · « **Reply #1090 on:** 08 August, 2015, 10:45:40 pm »

Broad made an interesting comment in his post-match interview, that he now judges his bowling performance not on wickets, but on how consistently he's bowled.

Seems fair enough - they're not going for the Hollywood balls, just trying to create pressure. This came through on the TMS commentary (less so on the highlights show), as Broad went wicketless early in the series, but was bowling well. It all happened for him on the first morning at Trentbridge.

My only disappointment of the day is that I can't find any video of Mark Wood riding his imaginary horse around the boundary. C5 didn't see fit to include it in the highlights (there was a lot of Mark Nicholas, Michael Slater, Michael Vaughan and Geoffrey Boycott, and I'd struggle to think of four more tedious cricket commentators - Boycs occasionally excepted).

Deano · « **Reply #1091 on:** 08 August, 2015, 10:58:36 pm »

Quote from: Jaded on 08 August, 2015, 12:34:32 pm

Job done!

Michael Clarke was outstanding in his interview after the defeat. It's a great shame for him, but a great result for England.

He was - some of Michael Atherton's questions were a bit crass (the crowd were booing Athers at one point!), but he showed a lot of dignity. Great player on his day, he just seems to be cobbled by injuries.

Wowbagger · « **Reply #1092 on:** 09 August, 2015, 09:42:52 am »

Quote from: Deano on 08 August, 2015, 10:45:40 pm

Broad made an interesting comment in his post-match interview, that he now judges his bowling performance not on wickets, but on how consistently he's bowled.

Seems fair enough - they're not going for the Hollywood balls, just trying to create pressure. This came through on the TMS commentary (less so on the highlights show), as Broad went wicketless early in the series, but was bowling well. It all happened for him on the first morning at Trentbridge.

My only disappointment of the day is that I can't find any video of Mark Wood riding his imaginary horse around the boundary. C5 didn't see fit to include it in the highlights (there was a lot of Mark Nicholas, Michael Slater, Michael Vaughan and Geoffrey Boycott, and I'd struggle to think of four more tedious cricket commentators - Boycs occasionally excepted).

I agree about Broad's comment being interesting. I always thought Mike Hendrick was a much better bowler, for example, than Ian Botham. Always nagging and niggardly, batsmen could never score lots of runs off him and consequently they didn't usually try. Botham often came on as first change for either Willis or Hendrick and his bowling was usually much more wayward, but there was the occasional, or sometimes frequent, good delivery amongst the not-so-good. Towards the end of his career I thought Flintoff was a technically better bowler than Botham, but he didn't get the same wicket haul either.

Peter · « **Reply #1093 on:** 09 August, 2015, 01:27:05 pm »

Has anybody got any ideas about what happened in the second test, where England were slaughtered? It seems almost inexplicable now - though there is one test to go, of course.

A propos of Dean's comments, I agree about the summarisers: most are a waste of space, Boycott is rude but usually correct. I like Swann and think Jim Maxwell is a gentleman. Andrew Samson, the statistitian, is astonishing. Vaughan knows his stuff but keeps on with his silliness about "the cherry" and so on. As for Blofeld and his Hazlecrack for Hazlewood, well, it's just embarrassing.

mcshroom · « **Reply #1094 on:** 09 August, 2015, 01:31:17 pm »

Flat pitch suited the Aussies, and the massive score they made in the 1st innings got to England would be my suggestion.

Wowbagger · « **Reply #1095 on:** 09 August, 2015, 03:57:33 pm »

In the past week I have read an expression that I had never seen before: "flat-pitch bully". I think it's quite a good description of certain types of batsman.

Von Broad · « **Reply #1096 on:** 09 August, 2015, 08:46:01 pm »

Quote from: mcshroom on 09 August, 2015, 01:31:17 pm

Flat pitch suited the Aussie

It was a terrific series, lots of talking points and some magnificent performances and plenty of not so magnificent, but I have one lingering question that's been bugging me all the time I've been listening to TMS. So much has been made of the way that pitches can be prepared - flat/nothing in it for the bowlers or something with a bit more life that might offer something for the bowlers, and we've heard so much about Australia not being able to adapt to the swinging, reverse swinging, seaming ball, and how on a flat pitch [like Lords] they excel because conditions are more comparable to those down under? But, I can never recall this being talked about quite so much in the past as it has been in this series. How many decades have Australia been coming to this country? They know the conditions, a lot of them have played here, there's a whole army of ex-players that can advise about what it's like playing over here, and they've nearly always put up a fighting performance. Look at 2005 - Simon Jones and Flintoff had the ball doing all kinds of stuff, and although Australia lost the series, it was hardly a push over.

So why is it that this team have appeared so ill-equipped to play the Dukes ball that has a tendency to swing and seam? Virtually all of the pitches have been good for batting, certainly not dangerous where the ball could ping up at any old angle, certainly good enough if you're prepared to stay in a bit, and not play stupid shots trying put the bowler away for 6. Athers did ask Michael Clarke this very question, and fair play to MC he just said 'well, we didn't adapt to the conditions and England bowled brilliantly'. How come? These are top quality cricketers. Even Smith, who's rated one of the best in the World, didn't cope well.

Just seems a bit odd to me.

Von Broad · « **Reply #1097 on:** 09 August, 2015, 08:54:13 pm »

Quote from: Wowbagger on 09 August, 2015, 09:42:52 am

I always thought Mike Hendrick was a much better bowler, for example, than Ian Botham. Always nagging and niggardly, batsmen could never score lots of runs off him and consequently they didn't usually try.

One of my favourite ever bowlers. Lovely action.

matthew · « **Reply #1098 on:** 09 August, 2015, 10:56:21 pm »

It's one of the problems of the current cricket calendar, with internationals through most of the years and the IPL overlapping with the early english season, foreign internationals tend not to play in the county championship until they retire from international matches. They are also fast tracked into the international teams before spending a couple of winters playing overseas.

Result English players don't play well on fast, bouncy, Aus/SA pitches by playing forward and in front of the pads to get on top of the bounce. Visitors to E&W don't play late with soft hands to cope with the swinging / seaming ball here. Everyone struggles in the subcontinent when the ball doesn't bounce and turns square.

Peter · « **Reply #1099 on:** 10 August, 2015, 12:47:17 am »

This is all true, but none of it explains the second test adequately. Are we to believe that when the ball doesn't do anything and is therefore easier to predict then England can't bat in those conditions? There was also absolutely no clue in that match that England's bowlers would be made to look so devastating in the next two games. I think it's great that all England's bowlers have done well at some stage in this series. Have a nagging feeling that South Africa will find them out, though. But then, I thought the Aussies would thrash us (and so did they). A game of many halves, cricket!