England Cricket 2021

[kabbes]

I don't understand why so many batsmen now seem to think that they should start swinging the bat, sweeping the ball and even reverse-sweep within the first ten balls they are facing. Whatever happened to getting your eye in, getting the feel of the pitch and getting set?

 

[kabbes]

Pope going there seems like a case in point. He's been slogging away at stuff -- one six and a load of total misses and then one gets through and he's out. I would have hoped that players would only take on a high risk/reward approach when they were set well enough that the proportion they miss is small. That totally wasn't the case and personally, I was just counting the balls until Pope got himself out.

 

[rubbershoes]

Shit on a stick

Again

 

[planetgeli]

Look at Pope's last eight innings.

34, 28, 22, 12, 1, 12, 29, 15.

Mark Ramprakash I tell thee.

 

[Idaho]

Lawrence is at least a good find. Although all he's doing here is proving that the rest are playing shit.

 

[planetgeli]

Yep, I'm pleased for Lawrence. He looked good in SL. Dunno what was wrong with him earlier against India because he looked all at sea. Definite touch of the KPs. Looks classy again.

 

[two sheds]

Picking seven specialist batsmen is just telling them you expect most of them to fail. Not that I'd call some of these 'specialist batsmen' at this point.
all day long.

you've only said that because I included it on the annoying phrases people say thread

 

[two sheds]

I think I misremembered why I stopped watching cricket all those years ago. I'd thought it was because they took it off terrestrial tv but it was more likely the perennial disappointment when they just do enough to make you think at one point in the game that they're going to make a good fist of it and then they don't

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Lawrence is at least a good find. Although all he's doing here is proving that the rest are playing shit.

Twice now I've woken up to watch Lawrence batting and looking really good. Doesn't reflect well on the rest. This is a playable pitch still. Frustrating performance this match.

 

[Idaho]

As long as I've been watching England (since the warne ball of the century match), it's always been our shit batting. We had a brief phase with Cook, Strauss, trott, Petersen and prior where we regularly got big scores, but before and since we've always been fragile.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Schooled in the conditions mostly. England have done that at home often enough.

It was a compliment to England that India changed their pitch tactics after the first test. Sadly at that point it was the difference in quality between the two spin attacks that was the biggest difference. I still think if you gave England Ashwin and forced India to pick Bess there wouldn't be too much in it.

 

[Lord Camomile]

The other week I gave my friend an impromptu explanation of the very basics of cricket. In the time since I have received numerous "it looks like England are doing badly, is that right?" messages

 

[littlebabyjesus]

'Yes the game is supposed to last five days'

 

[Spymaster]

Pant may well be destined to become one of the great wicket-keeper batsmen. I didn't realise he's only 23. His keeping has improved massively in this series alone.

He’s going to be a legend.

Axar Patel must be thinking the game’s a piece of piss too. Four fifers and a tenfer in six innings. It’ll be fascinating to see what India do when Jadeja is fit again.

 

[Lord Camomile]

Schooled in the conditions mostly. England have done that at home often enough.

It was a compliment to England that India changed their pitch tactics after the first test. Sadly at that point it was the difference in quality between the two spin attacks that was the biggest difference. I still think if you gave England Ashwin and forced India to pick Bess there wouldn't be too much in it.

This is something I've never quite understood about cricket, in terms of how engrained a nation's style is in their play.

As an 'only watch the Ashes' novice, it does seem like, possibly more than a lot of sports, cricket players will grow up playing and learning the national style, which is often influenced by that country's climate and conditions? And that makes home advantage even more of a thing in cricket, and perhaps team styles don't always travel too well?

So, for example, England tend to be about pace bowlers, while in hotter countries it's more about spin?

Or is it just England are sort of shit at travelling?

 

[Lord Camomile]

'Yes the game is supposed to last five days'

That is literally the summary of a conversation we had during the last test

 

[Lord Camomile]

 

[Monkeygrinder's Organ]

This is something I've never quite understood about cricket, in terms of how engrained a nation's style is in their play.

As an 'only watch the Ashes' novice, it does seem like, possibly more than a lot of sports, cricket players will grow up playing and learning the national style, which is often influenced by that country's climate and conditions? And that makes home advantage even more of a thing in cricket, and perhaps team styles don't always travel too well?

So, for example, England tend to be about pace bowlers, while in hotter countries it's more about spin?

Or is it just England are sort of shit at travelling?

Yes, you could complicate it of course but that's basically right. Winning away in test cricket is very difficult and particularly where the conditions are so different to what you're used to. Despite the thumping here England will still be favourites next time these teams play in England.

 

[Idaho]

I still think if you gave England Ashwin and forced India to pick Bess there wouldn't be too much in it.

We effectively lost 3 matches, each by an innings. I think the gap is more than Bess/Ashwin.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

This is something I've never quite understood about cricket, in terms of how engrained a nation's style is in their play.

As an 'only watch the Ashes' novice, it does seem like, possibly more than a lot of sports, cricket players will grow up playing and learning the national style, which is often influenced by that country's climate and conditions? And that makes home advantage even more of a thing in cricket, and perhaps team styles don't always travel too well?

So, for example, England tend to be about pace bowlers, while in hotter countries it's more about spin?

Or is it just England are sort of shit at travelling?

Pitches and conditions can determine technique when batting. Most Australians are used to pitches with pace and bounce. Indians grow up playing on turning pitches. In England, depending often on the weather, there is seam and swing.

The very best batsmen work it all out everywhere.

England are actually the last away team to win a test series in India so it's not just England who struggle away from home.

But England won the first test here. Gave India a fright. Won in Sri Lanka and in South Africa last year. It's not all gloom on their travels.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

We effectively lost 3 matches, each by an innings. I think the gap is more than Bess/Ashwin.

And won the other match convincingly. India top order was fragile throughout. I don't think the difference is much more than that.

 

[kabbes]

It’s not the losing that makes me gloomy, it’s the complete lack of a batting plan B. There is one style of play and if that doesn’t work, we’re out for 100 to 200.

 

[Lord Camomile]

Most Australians are used to pitches with pace and bounce... In England, depending often on the weather, there is seam and swing.

Those are different things..?

My impression was that swing was part of pace? Possibly influenced by how much people talk about Anderson's ability to 'get it to swing'. Are other bowlers more just about 'wang it as fast as you can'?

 

[planetgeli]

We are desperately short of a number 3 batsman. Hopefully that's the last of Bairstow. Don't put Lawrence there, let him play at 5 for a while, with Stokes at 6 where he should be. Pope needs to go back to county cricket and stop being fussed over because he's a Surrey boy.

The bowling, at home at least, is ok. Archer just needs to get fit/keep fit. Stone coming through.

The batting is the problem. We are a number 3 short. Well, Crawley should be there. So we're an opener short. And there's no-one.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Those are different things..?

My impression was that swing was part of pace? Possibly influenced by how much people talk about Anderson's ability to 'get it to swing'. Are other bowlers more just about 'wang it as fast as you can'?

Swing is movement in the air; 'seam' is movement off the pitch. Both fast bowler phenomena. Although Warne always said 'if it seams it will spin'.

The fact the ball has a seam is the key to both swing and seam movement. Then there's reverse swing, when the ball is roughed up on one side.

Eta: sorry you were probably asking about Aus pace and bounce. In Aus bowlers also swing it though not as much and get a bit of seam movement but again not as much. It's mostly a bit easier to bat in Aus, basically, if you can deal with the bounce, plus they use a really shit ball that goes soft after 10 overs. (Soft ball generally doesn't swing or seam)

 

[Lord Camomile]

Swing is movement in the air; 'seam' is movement off the pitch. Both fast bowler phenomena. Although Warne always said 'if it seams it will spin'.

The fact the ball has a seam is the key to both swing and seam movement. Then there's reverse swing, when the ball is roughed up on one side.

Ok, but pace, seam and swing are all part of the same style?

Ah, wait, I think I misread your original post, thinking 'pace and bounce' was a different style to 'seam and swing', but if I've got it right this time they're more about how fast bowling acts on different pitches?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Ok, but pace, swing and style are all part of the same style?

Ah, wait, I think I misread your original post, thinking 'pace and bounce' was a different style to 'seam and swing', but if I've got it right this time they're more about how fast bowling acts on different pitches?

I think we both misread each other's post.

 

[redsquirrel]

Or is it just England are sort of shit at travelling?

England are not alone in struggling when travelling. England's away form is mediocre but this loss comes on the back to two away series wins (SA and SL).

Two things that come to my mind, for all the silliness of the WTC the standings are not too bad an picture of the relative quality of the teams - India, NZ, Aus and Eng ahead of the rest (England in the back of the top four), then Pak, Windies and SA, then SL and Bang bringing up the rear.

Vaughn posted a tweet about all the great players that have played for England in the last decade and there are/have been some great players but there is no way you can point to England and say they are a great team, or even a very good one, so surely that much tell you something about the team.

 

[planetgeli]

Ok, but pace, seam and swing are all part of the same style?

Ah, wait, I think I misread your original post, thinking 'pace and bounce' was a different style to 'seam and swing', but if I've got it right this time they're more about how fast bowling acts on different pitches?

Fast bowlers generally don't swing the ball. Though they may move it off the seam. Medium-fast or medium paced bowlers do swing it (and if they don't, they are generally lacking in Test quality).

Swing is in the air, seam is movement off the pitch.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Fast bowlers generally don't swing the ball. Though they move it off the seam. Medium-fast or medium paced bowlers do (and if they don't, they are generally lacking in Test quality).

Why steyn was so good. Pace and swing.