I wouldn't say they're all riled up, but I don't think saying most are posh boys would be far wide of the mark. They didn't allow women to be members for over 200 years, ffs. Fortunately, having played plenty of club cricket, I know they're not representative of the game as a whole.
Dropping Tongue would be both harsh and a mistake, in my opinion. I never thought I'd be saying this, but I agree that Jimmy probably has to step aside. I'd go with Wood and Foakes in for Jimmy and Pope. However, I expect Ali will get the nod, not least because of the length of our tail, in which case Wood probably misses out.
Wood has to play, he's our only genuine quick bowler ! The only one capable of hitting 90mph. I was amazed he didn't play the last test, unless the ecb are doing a Wycombe and not telling us something. If we are going to go to a lot of short pitch stuff he has to be In there. I do agree, this is looking like the beginning of the end for Jimmy sadly
Also, I'd definitely bring Foakes in for Pope. A proper keeper, who CAN bat as well.
It's been very frustrating series so far as there really isn't that much between the teams, we're 2 down but could very easily, and probably should be 2 up. We've dominated for more days than Australia have, but let them off the hook every time.
With Ali's inclusion, it still annoys and confuses me playing a person who has turned is back on the red ball game to play in the short format. I don't blame him and everyone needs a payday when they can get it but England can't go into another test without a spinner. Lets just hope his finger holds out.
I understand fully your point on Tongue and in all honestly, it was a mistake on my part that I missed him off. However, it would have been a toss up between him and Robinson. I think Robinson would have still been included because he has still has a very good average in the test game. Another (unthinkable) thought would be to drop Broad and go with a younger, quicker but inexperienced bowling team. However, that would put a lot of pressure on Wood and Stokes to manage and take up some of the workload.
This debate has gone from cheating to racism to classism. Its none of those. Bairstow was slack in his attitude, the Aussies want to win. That's it. We don't share the same attitude and boo hoo when others do. Bairstow should not be in the team anyway. All this other stuff is utter bollox.
I agree Bairstow should not be in the team. We overlook Foakes, a high quality wicketkeeper, because of Bairstow's bat. If he is that good with the bat, let him get into the batting lineup on merit!
On a slightly different tack, didn’t there used to be a rule (or guidance) about the number of bouncers that could be bowled in an over?
And similarly, what happened to batsmen playing with runners?
(And as a side thought isn’t there something about a player having to be out in the field for x time if they want to bat? Presumably to avoid a decent batter but lousy fielder being replaced by ‘sub fielder’ all game).
As only a causal watcher of Cricket - the ashes are the only series I’d make an effort to listen to - the thing I am most intrigued by is this baristow wicket seems to have made everyone completely forget the several wickets we threw away in the first innings because baz-ball entertainment reigned over common sense.
You are right that a bowler can bowl only 2 bouncers in an over but thats only if the batsman can't or doesn't play the ball. A bouncer is defined as over shoulder height of the batsman.
As Australia & England have been directing the ball so the batsman has to play the ball, its not considered a bouncer. (Does that make sense?)
However, I hope this series doesn't decend into Bodyline bowling (where the batsmen are targeted, not the stumps)
Its been confirmed that Pope is out for the series. They reckon Lawrence will come in to fill his place but what would that do to the squad?
Options include a like for like and Lawrence plays at 3, moving Root up to 3 and having Lawrence, Brook, Stokes & Bairstow some sort of middle order, have Bairstow at 3, keep the middle order and have Ali in the vacant space?
If they are going to change the bowling line up, questions will be asked of the fitness of those players. Wood & Woakes haven't played much cricket and don't have the recent form to help them, Anderson and Robinson were bowling 75-80 mph towards the end of the game and were easy targets. Can Tongue play back to back test matches? The bowling short tactic does take a lot out of the bowlers, management of them will need to be considered.
I think at Headingly, Wood will be a straight swap for Anderson (Anderson will be back at Old Trafford).
I also think they will bring Moeen in and move Bairstow up to 3. There is a (good) argument for replacing Bairstow with Foakes and moving Root and co up a place but not quite sure we'll risk that.
I also don't think (and sincerely hope) we will see quite the extremes of bowling short we saw at Lords. If the ethos of the England team is to entertain as they keep trying to tell us, that style of bowling falls well short of that.
I would like to see one of our own called up! Tom Alsop of Sussex, born in High Wycombe.
Or perhaps a return to Keaton Jennings, who has gone away and worked on his game much like Ben Duckett. Duckett could drop down to 3. I can see why Lawrence is appealing because he also bowls spin.
If Lawrence and Root then cover the spin bowling, it allows us to pick 4 seamers.
I'm always amazed by cricketers' ability to hit balls coming at them at 90mph+ (Wood is terrifying!). I can't think of another sport that requires such instant reactions other than probably baseball?
England just lack that continuity to keep the pressure on. In the Ashes series, we seem to get Aus in a situation where we look on top but we seem to keep letting them off and not kill off the threat
The lack of intensity is our downfall. Marsh has barely played this year. We should have been all over him and made his life a misery. Instead we quickly allow himself to get in, drop him, allow him to play some shots, give him some bowling from Ali that I would fancy my chances of scoring from and bam we have given a guy a century.
Taking the last six Aussie wickets for 23 runs in 8 overs sounds a useful counterbalance to any earlier lack of intensity. Without the runs from Marsh (118), Head (39) and 23 Extras, Australia would have been all out for 83.
We may need one of our batsmen to match Marsh if we are to gain that all-important first innings lead. Be a bit much to expect Stokes to be that man again but, weatherwise, tomorrow looks like being a much better day for batting than Saturday and Bairstow in particular should be well up for the challenge!
Just to put a bit of science behind this thought. It’s talking about baseball, but it can equally apply to cricket:
“Information about the pitch — its speed, trajectory and location — takes about 100 milliseconds, or a tenth of a second, to go from eye to brain. It takes another 150 milliseconds for the batter to start a swing and get the bat over the plate.
This leaves 150 to 250 milliseconds — a quarter of a second at most — for the hitter to decide whether to complete the swing and, if he opts to do so, where to place the bat.”
it also blows my mind that we can drive cars, let alone hit moving balls, when there is a genuine delay in the time between our eyes seeing something and when it reaches the brain and is translated into something we are consciously aware of
I am not sure of how many are aware of Shohei Ohtani, but he is a Japanese baseball player who is an all-star hitter AND an all-star pitcher. This has basically not been done since Babe Ruth, and even then not to the same degree (and in a segregated league).
If baseball was not waning in popularity, Ohtani would be widely regarded as vying to be the greatest athlete on the planet, as he is one of the best at two completely different disciplines, which - especially in today's specialist athlete world - should be almost impossible. The closest thing, taking it back to the posts above, might be an all-rounder in cricket like Ben Stokes - but all-rounders tend to be very good at both without being among the best. Ohtani is closer to Joe Root with the bat and Mark Wood with the ball.
I’ve not watched the Test today but has Bairstow not improved massively since his faltering performance behind the stumps in the first Test? I’d be happy if he settles into the crease and scores a hundred tomorrow.
Comments
I wouldn't say they're all riled up, but I don't think saying most are posh boys would be far wide of the mark. They didn't allow women to be members for over 200 years, ffs. Fortunately, having played plenty of club cricket, I know they're not representative of the game as a whole.
Dropping Tongue would be both harsh and a mistake, in my opinion. I never thought I'd be saying this, but I agree that Jimmy probably has to step aside. I'd go with Wood and Foakes in for Jimmy and Pope. However, I expect Ali will get the nod, not least because of the length of our tail, in which case Wood probably misses out.
Wood has to play, he's our only genuine quick bowler ! The only one capable of hitting 90mph. I was amazed he didn't play the last test, unless the ecb are doing a Wycombe and not telling us something. If we are going to go to a lot of short pitch stuff he has to be In there. I do agree, this is looking like the beginning of the end for Jimmy sadly
Also, I'd definitely bring Foakes in for Pope. A proper keeper, who CAN bat as well.
It's been very frustrating series so far as there really isn't that much between the teams, we're 2 down but could very easily, and probably should be 2 up. We've dominated for more days than Australia have, but let them off the hook every time.
With Ali's inclusion, it still annoys and confuses me playing a person who has turned is back on the red ball game to play in the short format. I don't blame him and everyone needs a payday when they can get it but England can't go into another test without a spinner. Lets just hope his finger holds out.
I understand fully your point on Tongue and in all honestly, it was a mistake on my part that I missed him off. However, it would have been a toss up between him and Robinson. I think Robinson would have still been included because he has still has a very good average in the test game. Another (unthinkable) thought would be to drop Broad and go with a younger, quicker but inexperienced bowling team. However, that would put a lot of pressure on Wood and Stokes to manage and take up some of the workload.
This debate has gone from cheating to racism to classism. Its none of those. Bairstow was slack in his attitude, the Aussies want to win. That's it. We don't share the same attitude and boo hoo when others do. Bairstow should not be in the team anyway. All this other stuff is utter bollox.
I agree Bairstow should not be in the team. We overlook Foakes, a high quality wicketkeeper, because of Bairstow's bat. If he is that good with the bat, let him get into the batting lineup on merit!
On a slightly different tack, didn’t there used to be a rule (or guidance) about the number of bouncers that could be bowled in an over?
And similarly, what happened to batsmen playing with runners?
(And as a side thought isn’t there something about a player having to be out in the field for x time if they want to bat? Presumably to avoid a decent batter but lousy fielder being replaced by ‘sub fielder’ all game).
As only a causal watcher of Cricket - the ashes are the only series I’d make an effort to listen to - the thing I am most intrigued by is this baristow wicket seems to have made everyone completely forget the several wickets we threw away in the first innings because baz-ball entertainment reigned over common sense.
are we not entertained?
You are right that a bowler can bowl only 2 bouncers in an over but thats only if the batsman can't or doesn't play the ball. A bouncer is defined as over shoulder height of the batsman.
As Australia & England have been directing the ball so the batsman has to play the ball, its not considered a bouncer. (Does that make sense?)
However, I hope this series doesn't decend into Bodyline bowling (where the batsmen are targeted, not the stumps)
Thanks @Otter87 . Greatly appreciate the clarity of your reply
No problem @bookertease
Its been confirmed that Pope is out for the series. They reckon Lawrence will come in to fill his place but what would that do to the squad?
Options include a like for like and Lawrence plays at 3, moving Root up to 3 and having Lawrence, Brook, Stokes & Bairstow some sort of middle order, have Bairstow at 3, keep the middle order and have Ali in the vacant space?
If they are going to change the bowling line up, questions will be asked of the fitness of those players. Wood & Woakes haven't played much cricket and don't have the recent form to help them, Anderson and Robinson were bowling 75-80 mph towards the end of the game and were easy targets. Can Tongue play back to back test matches? The bowling short tactic does take a lot out of the bowlers, management of them will need to be considered.
I think at Headingly, Wood will be a straight swap for Anderson (Anderson will be back at Old Trafford).
I also think they will bring Moeen in and move Bairstow up to 3. There is a (good) argument for replacing Bairstow with Foakes and moving Root and co up a place but not quite sure we'll risk that.
I also don't think (and sincerely hope) we will see quite the extremes of bowling short we saw at Lords. If the ethos of the England team is to entertain as they keep trying to tell us, that style of bowling falls well short of that.
I would like to see one of our own called up! Tom Alsop of Sussex, born in High Wycombe.
Or perhaps a return to Keaton Jennings, who has gone away and worked on his game much like Ben Duckett. Duckett could drop down to 3. I can see why Lawrence is appealing because he also bowls spin.
If Lawrence and Root then cover the spin bowling, it allows us to pick 4 seamers.
Bowling wise, Robinson & Broad have to play.
I'd then pick Wood & Woakes.
I'm always amazed by cricketers' ability to hit balls coming at them at 90mph+ (Wood is terrifying!). I can't think of another sport that requires such instant reactions other than probably baseball?
Tennis I guess?
Fair shout
The noise of the stumps going flying from a batsman being clean bowled has got to be one of the most satisfying sounds in all of sport
Some serious pace from Wood this morning ! I'd have been tempted to keep him on for one more against Smith
Paintball?
Can't argue with that 😂
England just lack that continuity to keep the pressure on. In the Ashes series, we seem to get Aus in a situation where we look on top but we seem to keep letting them off and not kill off the threat
The lack of intensity is our downfall. Marsh has barely played this year. We should have been all over him and made his life a misery. Instead we quickly allow himself to get in, drop him, allow him to play some shots, give him some bowling from Ali that I would fancy my chances of scoring from and bam we have given a guy a century.
What a seriously good day of test cricket today was.
Brilliant fast bowling from Wood.
Good job we can’t catch as we’d have this game in the bag by now and who really wants a nice comfortable win when we’ve still got fingernails to chew?
(Me Me Me Me Me Me Me…..)
Taking the last six Aussie wickets for 23 runs in 8 overs sounds a useful counterbalance to any earlier lack of intensity. Without the runs from Marsh (118), Head (39) and 23 Extras, Australia would have been all out for 83.
We may need one of our batsmen to match Marsh if we are to gain that all-important first innings lead. Be a bit much to expect Stokes to be that man again but, weatherwise, tomorrow looks like being a much better day for batting than Saturday and Bairstow in particular should be well up for the challenge!
Hope springs eternal.
Bairstow better hit about 723 not out to justify his selection, as he has done nothing to warrant it to date, in any of the tests.
I can proudly reveal that I have obtained top secret images of England's preparations for the second day of the test.
Just to put a bit of science behind this thought. It’s talking about baseball, but it can equally apply to cricket:
“Information about the pitch — its speed, trajectory and location — takes about 100 milliseconds, or a tenth of a second, to go from eye to brain. It takes another 150 milliseconds for the batter to start a swing and get the bat over the plate.
This leaves 150 to 250 milliseconds — a quarter of a second at most — for the hitter to decide whether to complete the swing and, if he opts to do so, where to place the bat.”
it also blows my mind that we can drive cars, let alone hit moving balls, when there is a genuine delay in the time between our eyes seeing something and when it reaches the brain and is translated into something we are consciously aware of
I am not sure of how many are aware of Shohei Ohtani, but he is a Japanese baseball player who is an all-star hitter AND an all-star pitcher. This has basically not been done since Babe Ruth, and even then not to the same degree (and in a segregated league).
If baseball was not waning in popularity, Ohtani would be widely regarded as vying to be the greatest athlete on the planet, as he is one of the best at two completely different disciplines, which - especially in today's specialist athlete world - should be almost impossible. The closest thing, taking it back to the posts above, might be an all-rounder in cricket like Ben Stokes - but all-rounders tend to be very good at both without being among the best. Ohtani is closer to Joe Root with the bat and Mark Wood with the ball.
I’ve not watched the Test today but has Bairstow not improved massively since his faltering performance behind the stumps in the first Test? I’d be happy if he settles into the crease and scores a hundred tomorrow.