5th Ashes Test England v Australia July 27-31 1930hrs @ The Oval

[theiaofseed]

Oh ffs.

Where does it say that?

Is it THAT unreasonable to conclude that a team who got destroyed by Australia can draw a series with them next time around, plus drawn test that they dominated, and form the belief that ‘hey, this worked even against the number 1 team in the world’?

Righto precious, pent out enough of the sooking energy yet?

 

[PhatBoy]

Being able to play a swinging spinning or seaming ball. The fact they made roads to suit suggests that McCullum is well aware of this.

So the pitches over the last 12 months where they’ve made runs when the ball was seaming and swinging, they just what, don’t count? Those runs get taken off their record?

 

[PhatBoy]

Righto precious, pent out enough of the sooking energy yet?

You just posted a quote from a sportsman saying he was satisfied that their gameplan worked, and bemoaned that he said it. How is my response ‘sooking’ and your post isn’t?

Seems an odd analysis to use.

 

[ChristianBoy]

So the pitches over the last 12 months where they’ve made runs when the ball was seaming and swinging, they just what, don’t count? Those runs get taken off their record?

Please. Englands coach wanted flat decks I will take that as enough evidence

 

[DaRick]

Tell me what makes a bad test technique. You haven’t given me an answer.

All you’ve provided me is the names of 3 guys who’ve averaged 50+ for the last 12 months and another guy who was the leading scorer for his team in the ashes.

What is a poor test technique

This sounds glib, but a poor Test technique is one which does not stand up to examination at the highest level because there are too many technical flaws for bowlers to exploit.

Rory Burns is a prime example. In 2021-22, he was constantly on the move when the ball was being bowled, he didn't play with a straight bat, he didn't get forward enough, he didn't use his feet particularly well against spin, and he kept misjudging where his off stump was. About the only thing he didn't do was leave a big gap between bat and pad - which Bairstow does, FWIW.

All four of the listed batsmen have some technical issues, though not to Burns' extent - Crawley isn't great outside off because he doesn't always get to the pitch of the ball, Brook sometimes prods outside off and he can be indecisive against the short ball, Duckett's not particularly confident on the back foot and his tendency to constantly play at the ball makes him a candidate for an early dismissal when the ball moves, and Bairstow I've already covered.

I can see Crawley and Duckett averaging mid 30's over the long term, and Brook should average 40-45, roughly on par with Ian Bell. Ian Bell has a better technique, but Brook is more destructive.

 

[PhatBoy]

Please. Englands coach wanted flat decks I will take that as enough evidence

Right, so words from a captain - it was actually Stokes that the request was attributed to - are more valuable in assessing a batsman’s technique than their output.

This makes sense.

 

[PhatBoy]

This sounds glib, but a poor Test technique is one which does not stand up to examination at the highest level because there are too many technical flaws for bowlers to exploit.

Rory Burns is a prime example. In 2021-22, he was constantly on the move when the ball was being bowled, he didn't play with a straight bat, he didn't get forward enough, he didn't use his feet particularly well against spin, and he kept misjudging where his off stump was. About the only thing he didn't do was leave a big gap between bat and pad - which Bairstow does, FWIW.

All four of the listed batsmen have some technical issues, though not to Burns' extent - Crawley isn't great outside off because he doesn't always get to the pitch of the ball, Brook sometimes prods outside off and he can be indecisive against the short ball, Duckett's not particularly confident on the back foot and his tendency to constantly play at the ball makes him a candidate for an early dismissal when the ball moves, and Bairstow I've already covered.

I can see Crawley and Duckett averaging mid 30's over the long term, and Brook should average 40-45, roughly on par with Ian Bell. Ian Bell has a better technique, but Brook is more destructive.

I don’t disagree with the principles you’re addressing but until they get found out - Crawley has at times hence his record is sub-par though it’s improving - then they will always be judged on output over appearance

 

[DaRick]

I don’t disagree with the principles you’re addressing but until they get found out - Crawley has at times hence his record is sub-par though it’s improving - then they will always be judged on output over appearance

Oh absolutely. Technique isn't everything.

Looking great and then throwing your wicket away (James Vince) does little for your side.

 

[PhatBoy]

Oh absolutely. Technique isn't everything.

Looking great and then throwing your wicket away (James Vince) does little for your side.

I knew there was someone I was forgetting.

See I totally agree with your analysis of Burns. The problem more than anything that he had thought IMO was that there was no counterpoint to that stuff - no weapons to offset his weaknesses. He was a sitting duck

 

[DaRick]

I knew there was someone I was forgetting.

See I totally agree with your analysis of Burns. The problem more than anything that he had thought IMO was that there was no counterpoint to that stuff - no weapons to offset his weaknesses. He was a sitting duck

He had a great temperament - he really tried to make you work for his wicket, but his technical issues obviated his good intentions.

 

[Partridge]

It’s not just the media, the players are high on their own supply. They are not ‘saving’ cricket at all, they are making it a little more popular in their little island, ignoring the fact it was their own hubris after 2005 that cruelled interest. They are not playing all the cricket, they are not winning when they lost, they are not upholding the spirit of cricket, they are one of the more boorish teams going around.

Bazball is as much PR as it is tactics.

To be fair, that's most international cricketers in the world for a long, long time now.

 

[theiaofseed]

You just posted a quote from a sportsman saying he was satisfied that their gameplan worked, and bemoaned that he said it. How is my response ‘sooking’ and your post isn’t?

Seems an odd analysis to use.

Pointed out the absurdity doesn't equal sooking, No he quoted a 3-0 series win followed by saying "they said we couldn't" at no point did anyone question if they could score at a high run rate, they question if it was effective. They didn't win the series the same result as 2019, a series they dominated outside of Smith, so no Bazball didn't work.

No no moral victories claims changes that fact,

 

[PhatBoy]

Pointed out the absurdity doesn't equal sooking, No he quoted a 3-0 series win followed by saying "they said we couldn't" at no point did anyone question if they could score at a high run rate, they question if it was effective. They didn't win the series the same result as 2019, a series they dominated outside of Smith, so no Bazball didn't work.

No no moral victories claims changes that fact,

Yes, it did work.

Did they improve? Yes
Did they get closer to winning than they would have under previous game plans? Yes
Did a team that was garbage a year ago fight the number one team to a standstill? Yes.

There are a billion sporting analogies you could use.
Joe Frazier lost the thrilla in Manila. Didn’t even draw it.
But he was given little if any chance of pushing Ali.

Even Ali himself acknowledged that what Frazier threw at him that night ‘worked.’ Because it pushed him within an inch of losing the fight and probably even his life.

 

[MinerBoy]

Oh ffs.

Where does it say that?

Is it THAT unreasonable to conclude that a team who got destroyed by Australia can draw a series with them next time around, plus drawn test that they dominated, and form the belief that ‘hey, this worked even against the number 1 team in the world’?

Honestly they didn’t win a series on home soil against a team that hasn’t won there in 20+ years. They 100% should have been planning on winning and should consider it a failure not to. It certainly isn’t an example of a great result.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[anchor man]

Please. Englands coach wanted flat decks I will take that as enough evidence

Stokes asked for them as well .Fact.

 

[Ohitsthatguy]

So the English have all come out and said they were handed the game

Wilson and Dharmasena should be sighted

Wilson has cost us two Ashes wins

 

[Foxx]

I read somewhere the emergency umpire who brought the balls out to the middle is an Englishman.

 

[HalloweenJack]

Stokes' carry-on about the "spirit of cricket" was a smokescreen to stop the media going for the jugular.

If he cared so much about this esoteric ideal he wouldn't have reviewed the Smith non-catch and he certainly would have requested the umpires to change the ball when it was obvious to all and sundry that the changed ball was in much better condition.

Stokes is full of it just like his coach.

 

[4Seasons]

I mean if there's any merit to declaring 8 down on day 1 on the first test of a 5 test series then sure, debate it. But there isnt

Then they moaned about spirit of the game, moral victories, nonsense. Poor team selection on top. Such thought provoking s**t

Their genius tactics are being slightly more attacking with the bat. Hardly world breaking is it. I do agree though, the media s**t me on this more than the poms did.

BAZBALL

The idea of declaring might have been to dismiss Warner, put the pressure on him, and then eliminate him from the series.
It might not have been the correct decision, but there are scenarios as to why they did it.

 

[Nicho50]

Investigation into the ball swap is happening. Claims the ball that was chosen was actually 5 years old so it was the style of duke that swings a lot as the newer ones don’t swing as much.

There is no way you can change a ball like that and say it’s like for like. The umpire that carried the case out was English wasn’t he? Same old England always cheating

 

[hoopla]

Investigation into the ball swap is happening. Claims the ball that was chosen was actually 5 years old so it was the style of duke that swings a lot as the newer ones don’t swing as much.

There is no way you can change a ball like that and say it’s like for like. The umpire that carried the case out was English wasn’t he? Same old England always cheating

I suspected this at the time. Here’s the article.

No Cookies | CODE Sports

No Cookies | CODE Sports

www.codesports.com.au

 

[The hands of stone]

Tell me what makes a bad test technique. You haven’t given me an answer.

All you’ve provided me is the names of 3 guys who’ve averaged 50+ for the last 12 months and another guy who was the leading scorer for his team in the ashes.

What is a poor test technique

Lets see how they do out here .

Would be very suprised if any of them can average 35plus .

 

[Nicho50]

Even with an investigation there can't be any meaningful outcome can there? Apparently its up to the stadium/ team hosting the match to provide the balls so if anything Surrey might cop a fine and perhaps the umpires get some kind of sanction?

If it was found to be a ball from the previous years batches then surely they have no alternative but to declare the match as void as it really does change the match completely?

 

[PhatBoy]

Lets see how they do out here .

Would be very suprised if any of them can average 35plus .

Fantastic, don’t see what it has to do with anything happening two years away

 

[Santana]

Are you running this account eddiesmith?

Imagine looking at each team's recent away records and having the gall to post something like that, while at the same time just failing to win back the Ashes at home. I guess when you've got nothing but your own hype to hold onto you have to grasp at anything