Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

England Cricket 2022

Weather looks good late afternoon. Set up nicely for another crash bang wallop session.
 
50 partnership in 39 balls. Remember when a 296 run chase culminating in the afternoon of day 5 was considered a challenge of slow, careful accumulation that prioritised avoiding the loss?
 
50 partnership in 39 balls. Remember when a 296 run chase culminating in the afternoon of day 5 was considered a challenge of slow, careful accumulation that prioritised avoiding the loss?

As a lifelong cricket fan, I've always wondered why test run rates are so slow. Why not just play your natural game... if that's all it took, for McCullum to say 'just hit it' to the batters and 'just pitch it up' to the bowlers, 'i wont hold it against you if you get out or get smashed for a few boundaries', then why did this brainwave take so long to materialise?
 
Well that was all rather... easy.

Bairstow must be itching to play his next game, he must feel so good about his game atm.

And Root's got his average back over 50 again for about the fifth time this year.
 
India are basically only playing this game to avoid having to pay the ECB millions in compensation. But they've brought a full team and they'll be up for it, so it's all good from my pov. Sharma has covid, which is a fucker. Hope no more go down.
 
As a lifelong cricket fan, I've always wondered why test run rates are so slow. Why not just play your natural game... if that's all it took, for McCullum to say 'just hit it' to the batters and 'just pitch it up' to the bowlers, 'i wont hold it against you if you get out or get smashed for a few boundaries', then why did this brainwave take so long to materialise?

You sell your wicket dearly at Test cricket because you've got 5 days, and if you're out slashing for 7 you look pretty stupid when an opposition scores 400+ over a day and a half.

And this will happen. Don't get me wrong, it's been great to watch but England have got away with it. The series turned when Stokes took on Patel and hit him for 22 in 2 overs. But Stokes had an almighty slash at Patel's 5th ball and it missed off stump by an inch. If it had hit, things would probably have turned out completely differently. As it was Williamson got scared and dropped Patel forever from the series.

It won't always miss. Bairstow won't always get dropped early on. This approach will get found out. But here's too some exciting viewing until it does.
 
You sell your wicket dearly at Test cricket because you've got 5 days, and if you're out slashing for 7 you look pretty stupid when an opposition scores 400+ over a day and a half.

And this will happen. Don't get me wrong, it's been great to watch but England have got away with it. The series turned when Stokes took on Patel and hit him for 22 in 2 overs. But Stokes had an almighty slash at Patel's 5th ball and it missed off stump by an inch. If it had hit, things would probably have turned out completely differently. As it was Williamson got scared and dropped Patel forever from the series.

It won't always miss. Bairstow won't always get dropped early on. This approach will get found out. But here's too some exciting viewing until it does.

Yeah definitely. I think to be fair England have accepted that - they probably didn't expect it to go as well as it has but if they'd have managed a 2-1 series win or even a fighting 2-1 defeat it would have looked like an improvement on where they were. I think the question is how far it can go isn't it. The first time they lose badly as a result they'll shrug their shoulders and go 'that's the risk you take' and it will look fine compared to a team that had won one in seventeen. If you have genuine aspirations to be the top team though? I don't think you'd have heard Clive Lloyd or Steve Waugh saying that.
 
I didn't see the post match interviews but apparently McCullum said something along the lines of he didn't want any player to fear for their place because of failure. It's not rocket science to know he might have been talking about so let's see if this strategy works on the hapless one at the top of the order.
 
It's been an absolutely astonishing turnaround though, I was one of the doubters of the Key/McCullum appointments but happy to be proven wrong. Should remember this is actually a very good kiwi side, reigning world champs. And they've been whitewashed with gusto.
 
Just watching the highlights from day 4 and Leach’s progress is impressive. Even if you take out the spin friendly wicket, the drift and dip is not something I’ve seen him produce. He won’t get such rich rewards at Edgbaston as I guess they’ll request a green top but bring on the Ashes.
 
Note how he’s tried to rebrand as “Vaughany” which feels forced and cringey.

His new podcast is embarrassing and possibly the shittest cricket podcast I’ve heard. He’s used children rabbiting nonsense, no doubt as part of his rebrand, chummy “Vaughany” the family man. Even his statement mentions he’s stepping back for his family. “Look I’m a family man, how could I possibly be a fascist cunt?!”

The fascist cunt.
 
I agree with this. Foakes is a good keeper yes, although maybe not as good as thinks he is if he keeps leaping in front of his slips. But he's a passenger with the bat. Get Buttler in to open. Free up Foakes spot.

Stokes the secret pragmatist

After seven years, the Morgan method is now being applied in Tests. Ben Stokes is, if anything, even more inclined to have a bash. And Brendon “Baz” McCullum, a big influence in the background on his good friend Morgan, is now in the Test dressing room. At Headingley, when England had just treated a target of 296 like a trip to the funfair, Nasser Hussain asked McCullum if he and Stokes were cut from the same cloth. “I’m aggressive,” he replied, “but I reckon he might have me covered!”

The big question now is, can this brave new England keep it up? They are clearly going to try: Stokes has been cheerfully stoking the fire, saying “we’ll go even harder”. But in the field, much like Morgan, Stokes is a secret pragmatist. Matt Potts, his main discovery, is a classic English seamer – right-arm, northern, parsimonious, targeting the top of off-stump. Jack Leach, the hothouse flower benefiting most from the new head gardener, is not naturally attacking: he keeps asking for mid-off to go back. Stokes smiles and says no, possibly because he himself is apt to get caught there – but he prefers the dogged Leach to the more erratic Matt Parkinson. After getting out of a jail called 55-6, England may feel they can do anything with the bat, but they are still fairly sober with the ball.

Giving Ben Foakes the wicketkeeping gloves is another vote for discretion over valour. The logic of Bazball leads to the solution suggested by Kumar Sangakkara, an expert keeper-batter: picking Buttler as an opener, with permission to pummel the ball. The gloves would go to either Buttler or Bairstow, and it wouldn’t matter if Stokes was unfit to bowl, as an all-rounder could replace Foakes at No.7. The choice may well be a defining one.
 
Didn't they try this with Jason Roy. And it didn't go well. Not sure a change of captain, manager would make a difference. Going hard on a green top or dust bowl doesn't always work, no matter who the batter is.
 
Well the change of management has done wonders so far. I think if they told Buttler don't worry about pretending to be Dom Sibley and just play your game as they have with the others it could work.

The same might have with Roy.
 
Foakes isn't faultless as a keeper, but he is better than Buttler or Bairstow, particularly standing up. And he's far from a passenger with the bat. First test, he stayed with Root to see England home from a position that was still pretty dodgy - 120 to win, not much batting to come. Then he shared another century stand with Root to get England up to NZ's first innings total in the second test. Short memories!
 
Foakes isn't faultless as a keeper, but he is better than Buttler or Bairstow, particularly standing up. And he's far from a passenger with the bat. First test, he stayed with Root to see England home from a position that was still pretty dodgy - 120 to win, not much batting to come. Then he shared another century stand with Root to get England up to NZ's first innings total in the second test. Short memories!

He also has a test century. Average of just under 30 as against just under 32 for Buttler, who has had a lot of chances by now.

If they are going to commit to the super aggressive approach though I think it's inevitable that they'll find a way to squeeze Buttler in somehow in the not too distant future. It might or might not work but it will obviously be in their thinking.
 
Who is lobbying for him at the bbc that got him his job back initially - Agnew?

Not sure. Agnew is certainly dodgy, just listen to him grilling Michael Holding over his support of Black Lives Matter. He retired from commentary shortly afterwards and I don’t blame him.
 
Not sure. Agnew is certainly dodgy, just listen to him grilling Michael Holding over his support of Black Lives Matter. He retired from commentary shortly afterwards and I don’t blame him.
Agnew got that interview badly wrong, but imo it's evidence of cluelessness more than dodginess. There is a story about him speaking up against racist comments to another player back when he was still a teenager.

This is the story. He gets a tick for that.

“Agnew jumped up and said: ‘You shouldn’t be doing this, it’s not on.’ He was playing for Surrey twos, down on trial. Titmus was carrying on in front of everybody and Agnew said: ‘No, no, this is not acceptable.’ He was the only one who stood up.”

Lonsdale Skinner: 'Most of the racism came from the committee room'
 
His politics are right wing, just look at his spat with Gary Lineker. He maybe clueless but in the Venn diagram of racism there’s a big old overlap with dodginess.
 
The BCCI have asked the ECB if they can fuck England in the arse and the ECB have said yes please. The move to start the test half an hour early is a show of dominance by the Indians and the ECB have showed their belly. I sincerely hope England can devastate them in Birmingham…and I hope they’re bad losers.
 
…and back to Agnew, let’s not forget the pearl clutching when Jofra Archer was about to begin his England career…

Often, the message is subtler, wrapped and swaddled in layers of well-meaning code. “A huge call,” warned Jonathan Agnew. “Morale and camaraderie is a big part in team performance.” Which feels instinctively unarguable - who doesn’t love morale and camaraderie, after all? - until you begin to ask why Archer is deemed such a grave threat to it. And why no other player, foreign-born or not, is ever subjected to the same standard. (“Deserves his call, clearly a good player,” was Agnew’s snap verdict on Ballance’s Ashes call-up in 2013, in case you’re wondering.)

…and that article highlights Vaughan’s fears of the damage Archer would do to England’s “culture”.

Equally, it’s worth asking why Michael Vaughan - broadly supportive of Archer - nevertheless feels “there are questions about whether he fits into the team culture”, when Archer has displayed no indication of being anything other than a sound, inspirational team-mate.

Fuck the pair of them
 
Back
Top Bottom