Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

England Cricket Tours 2018-19 (and everything off the field during that period)

1…4445474950…74

Comments

  • The_President
    The_President Posts: 14,280
    8 wickets for the non-spinning off-spinner.
  • Riviera
    Riviera Posts: 8,167
    Leuth said:

    Here you go. Every major nation represented, which arguably cost Root, Pujara and Ashwin their places, but not Stokes. Who'd he replace? If you say Azam...well, that's who Root would replace.

    Markram
    Karunaratne
    Williamson
    Kohli
    Smith
    Azam
    Bairstow (wk)
    Holder
    Cummins
    Rabada
    Bumrah

    If spin is needed, Lyon Chase comes in for Holder

    There you are, I've fixed that for you...
  • Riviera
    Riviera Posts: 8,167
    I've played with and against many non-turning off spinners but never seen any of them take 8-60!
  • The_President
    The_President Posts: 14,280
    134-1 to 246 all out.
  • Chizz
    Chizz Posts: 28,322
    Chizz said:

    How can that dismissal of Rashid stand? The catcher was standing on the mark where the boundary was. Ridiculous.

    Anyone? With reference to Law 19.3.1
  • The_President
    The_President Posts: 14,280
    Fecking shocking.
  • The_President
    The_President Posts: 14,280
    If it was me, for next Test, Leach would come in, and Ali,Rashid,Jennings would all go.
    And we'd play with nine men !
  • The_President
    The_President Posts: 14,280
    Bring in Woakes and someone else (dont know who we have, is it Denly?)
  • Riviera
    Riviera Posts: 8,167
    Chizz said:

    Chizz said:

    How can that dismissal of Rashid stand? The catcher was standing on the mark where the boundary was. Ridiculous.

    Anyone? With reference to Law 19.3.1
    As reported by the BBC-


    Rashid c Brathwaite b Chase 1 (Eng 234-9)

    Roston Chase has seven wickets. Dearie me.

    Adil Rashid looks to heave the off-spinner into the stands over deep mid-wicket but Kraigg Brathwaite is out on the boundary.

    He takes the catch and is about to step over the rope but throws the ball up in time before stepping back over to complete a superb take.
  • lolwray
    lolwray Posts: 4,894
    In conclusion the best team won ..as usual England were unprepared and also underestimated the Windies...they also selected the wrong team who batted liked novices and bowled poorly...having said all that I am pleased that Windies have found a team some conviction and look like a force in cricket again so fair play to them..a strong Windies side will be good for cricket
  • Sponsored links:



  • McBobbin
    McBobbin Posts: 12,051
    lolwray said:

    In conclusion the best team won ..as usual England were unprepared and also underestimated the Windies...they also selected the wrong team who batted liked novices and bowled poorly...having said all that I am pleased that Windies have found a team some conviction and look like a force in cricket again so fair play to them..a strong Windies side will be good for cricket

    They are decent enough with the white ball, but I've always loved all conquering WI test teams
  • The_President
    The_President Posts: 14,280
    I'm just fed up with the continual lack of fight and guts when the chips are down. The regularity of the collapses and the inability to be able to get wickets when the ball isnt swinging gets on my tits.Plus the lack of backbone by the majority of the players , especially Ali, who is brilliant when England are 350-5, but feckin useless when we are 150-5 just gets it for me.
    All change for me.
  • Chizz
    Chizz Posts: 28,322
    Riviera said:

    Chizz said:

    Chizz said:

    How can that dismissal of Rashid stand? The catcher was standing on the mark where the boundary was. Ridiculous.

    Anyone? With reference to Law 19.3.1
    As reported by the BBC-


    Rashid c Brathwaite b Chase 1 (Eng 234-9)

    Roston Chase has seven wickets. Dearie me.

    Adil Rashid looks to heave the off-spinner into the stands over deep mid-wicket but Kraigg Brathwaite is out on the boundary.

    He takes the catch and is about to step over the rope but throws the ball up in time before stepping back over to complete a superb take.
    Look at Law 19.3.1.

    The boundary had been disturbed and was, at the time of that delivery, further back than it had been earlier. The fielder caught the ball, with both feet on the ground, one within the boundary, one beyond the original position of the boundary, but inside the disturbed boundary marker. He then threw the ball up, stepped back over the marker, stepped back and caught it again.

    Before he threw the ball up, he was standing beyond the boundary (although the "right" side of the boundary marker). It's crystal clear on the images that it should be not out, six runs.
  • The_President
    The_President Posts: 14,280
    Chizz said:

    Riviera said:

    Chizz said:

    Chizz said:

    How can that dismissal of Rashid stand? The catcher was standing on the mark where the boundary was. Ridiculous.

    Anyone? With reference to Law 19.3.1
    As reported by the BBC-


    Rashid c Brathwaite b Chase 1 (Eng 234-9)

    Roston Chase has seven wickets. Dearie me.

    Adil Rashid looks to heave the off-spinner into the stands over deep mid-wicket but Kraigg Brathwaite is out on the boundary.

    He takes the catch and is about to step over the rope but throws the ball up in time before stepping back over to complete a superb take.
    Look at Law 19.3.1.

    The boundary had been disturbed and was, at the time of that delivery, further back than it had been earlier. The fielder caught the ball, with both feet on the ground, one within the boundary, one beyond the original position of the boundary, but inside the disturbed boundary marker. He then threw the ball up, stepped back over the marker, stepped back and caught it again.

    Before he threw the ball up, he was standing beyond the boundary (although the "right" side of the boundary marker). It's crystal clear on the images that it should be not out, six runs.
    I agree, it would have made all the difference - we would have won - we only had another 350+ to get.
  • Riviera
    Riviera Posts: 8,167
    Chizz said:

    Riviera said:

    Chizz said:

    Chizz said:

    How can that dismissal of Rashid stand? The catcher was standing on the mark where the boundary was. Ridiculous.

    Anyone? With reference to Law 19.3.1
    As reported by the BBC-


    Rashid c Brathwaite b Chase 1 (Eng 234-9)

    Roston Chase has seven wickets. Dearie me.

    Adil Rashid looks to heave the off-spinner into the stands over deep mid-wicket but Kraigg Brathwaite is out on the boundary.

    He takes the catch and is about to step over the rope but throws the ball up in time before stepping back over to complete a superb take.
    Look at Law 19.3.1.

    The boundary had been disturbed and was, at the time of that delivery, further back than it had been earlier. The fielder caught the ball, with both feet on the ground, one within the boundary, one beyond the original position of the boundary, but inside the disturbed boundary marker. He then threw the ball up, stepped back over the marker, stepped back and caught it again.

    Before he threw the ball up, he was standing beyond the boundary (although the "right" side of the boundary marker). It's crystal clear on the images that it should be not out, six runs.
    I'm not arguing with you and I really couldn't give a hoot, I'm just showing you how the experts saw it. Agnew said "Great work there..."
  • Chizz
    Chizz Posts: 28,322
    The_President said:

    Chizz said:

    Riviera said:

    Chizz said:

    Chizz said:

    How can that dismissal of Rashid stand? The catcher was standing on the mark where the boundary was. Ridiculous.

    Anyone? With reference to Law 19.3.1
    As reported by the BBC-


    Rashid c Brathwaite b Chase 1 (Eng 234-9)

    Roston Chase has seven wickets. Dearie me.

    Adil Rashid looks to heave the off-spinner into the stands over deep mid-wicket but Kraigg Brathwaite is out on the boundary.

    He takes the catch and is about to step over the rope but throws the ball up in time before stepping back over to complete a superb take.
    Look at Law 19.3.1.

    The boundary had been disturbed and was, at the time of that delivery, further back than it had been earlier. The fielder caught the ball, with both feet on the ground, one within the boundary, one beyond the original position of the boundary, but inside the disturbed boundary marker. He then threw the ball up, stepped back over the marker, stepped back and caught it again.

    Before he threw the ball up, he was standing beyond the boundary (although the "right" side of the boundary marker). It's crystal clear on the images that it should be not out, six runs.
    I agree, it would have made all the difference - we would have won - we only had another 350+ to get.
    I don't think anyone is suggesting "it would have made all the difference". But when the team for the next Test is being selected, it would have given a better opportunity to Adil Rashid had he been fifty not out. Especially when England fans are "fed up with the continual lack of fight and guts when the chips are down".
  • Leuth
    Leuth Posts: 23,308
    Chizz said:

    The_President said:

    Chizz said:

    Riviera said:

    Chizz said:

    Chizz said:

    How can that dismissal of Rashid stand? The catcher was standing on the mark where the boundary was. Ridiculous.

    Anyone? With reference to Law 19.3.1
    As reported by the BBC-


    Rashid c Brathwaite b Chase 1 (Eng 234-9)

    Roston Chase has seven wickets. Dearie me.

    Adil Rashid looks to heave the off-spinner into the stands over deep mid-wicket but Kraigg Brathwaite is out on the boundary.

    He takes the catch and is about to step over the rope but throws the ball up in time before stepping back over to complete a superb take.
    Look at Law 19.3.1.

    The boundary had been disturbed and was, at the time of that delivery, further back than it had been earlier. The fielder caught the ball, with both feet on the ground, one within the boundary, one beyond the original position of the boundary, but inside the disturbed boundary marker. He then threw the ball up, stepped back over the marker, stepped back and caught it again.

    Before he threw the ball up, he was standing beyond the boundary (although the "right" side of the boundary marker). It's crystal clear on the images that it should be not out, six runs.
    I agree, it would have made all the difference - we would have won - we only had another 350+ to get.
    I don't think anyone is suggesting "it would have made all the difference". But when the team for the next Test is being selected, it would have given a better opportunity to Adil Rashid had he been fifty not out. Especially when England fans are "fed up with the continual lack of fight and guts when the chips are down".
    It was an absolutely terrible shot by Rashid and rightly punished
  • The_President
    The_President Posts: 14,280
    Chizz said:

    The_President said:

    Chizz said:

    Riviera said:

    Chizz said:

    Chizz said:

    How can that dismissal of Rashid stand? The catcher was standing on the mark where the boundary was. Ridiculous.

    Anyone? With reference to Law 19.3.1
    As reported by the BBC-


    Rashid c Brathwaite b Chase 1 (Eng 234-9)

    Roston Chase has seven wickets. Dearie me.

    Adil Rashid looks to heave the off-spinner into the stands over deep mid-wicket but Kraigg Brathwaite is out on the boundary.

    He takes the catch and is about to step over the rope but throws the ball up in time before stepping back over to complete a superb take.
    Look at Law 19.3.1.

    The boundary had been disturbed and was, at the time of that delivery, further back than it had been earlier. The fielder caught the ball, with both feet on the ground, one within the boundary, one beyond the original position of the boundary, but inside the disturbed boundary marker. He then threw the ball up, stepped back over the marker, stepped back and caught it again.

    Before he threw the ball up, he was standing beyond the boundary (although the "right" side of the boundary marker). It's crystal clear on the images that it should be not out, six runs.
    I agree, it would have made all the difference - we would have won - we only had another 350+ to get.
    I don't think anyone is suggesting "it would have made all the difference". But when the team for the next Test is being selected, it would have given a better opportunity to Adil Rashid had he been fifty not out. Especially when England fans are "fed up with the continual lack of fight and guts when the chips are down".
    You think Rashid would have got 50 ?
  • Chizz
    Chizz Posts: 28,322
    The_President said:

    Chizz said:

    The_President said:

    Chizz said:

    Riviera said:

    Chizz said:

    Chizz said:

    How can that dismissal of Rashid stand? The catcher was standing on the mark where the boundary was. Ridiculous.

    Anyone? With reference to Law 19.3.1
    As reported by the BBC-


    Rashid c Brathwaite b Chase 1 (Eng 234-9)

    Roston Chase has seven wickets. Dearie me.

    Adil Rashid looks to heave the off-spinner into the stands over deep mid-wicket but Kraigg Brathwaite is out on the boundary.

    He takes the catch and is about to step over the rope but throws the ball up in time before stepping back over to complete a superb take.
    Look at Law 19.3.1.

    The boundary had been disturbed and was, at the time of that delivery, further back than it had been earlier. The fielder caught the ball, with both feet on the ground, one within the boundary, one beyond the original position of the boundary, but inside the disturbed boundary marker. He then threw the ball up, stepped back over the marker, stepped back and caught it again.

    Before he threw the ball up, he was standing beyond the boundary (although the "right" side of the boundary marker). It's crystal clear on the images that it should be not out, six runs.
    I agree, it would have made all the difference - we would have won - we only had another 350+ to get.
    I don't think anyone is suggesting "it would have made all the difference". But when the team for the next Test is being selected, it would have given a better opportunity to Adil Rashid had he been fifty not out. Especially when England fans are "fed up with the continual lack of fight and guts when the chips are down".
    You think Rashid would have got 50 ?
    We'll never know.
  • Chizz
    Chizz Posts: 28,322
    Leuth said:

    Chizz said:

    The_President said:

    Chizz said:

    Riviera said:

    Chizz said:

    Chizz said:

    How can that dismissal of Rashid stand? The catcher was standing on the mark where the boundary was. Ridiculous.

    Anyone? With reference to Law 19.3.1
    As reported by the BBC-


    Rashid c Brathwaite b Chase 1 (Eng 234-9)

    Roston Chase has seven wickets. Dearie me.

    Adil Rashid looks to heave the off-spinner into the stands over deep mid-wicket but Kraigg Brathwaite is out on the boundary.

    He takes the catch and is about to step over the rope but throws the ball up in time before stepping back over to complete a superb take.
    Look at Law 19.3.1.

    The boundary had been disturbed and was, at the time of that delivery, further back than it had been earlier. The fielder caught the ball, with both feet on the ground, one within the boundary, one beyond the original position of the boundary, but inside the disturbed boundary marker. He then threw the ball up, stepped back over the marker, stepped back and caught it again.

    Before he threw the ball up, he was standing beyond the boundary (although the "right" side of the boundary marker). It's crystal clear on the images that it should be not out, six runs.
    I agree, it would have made all the difference - we would have won - we only had another 350+ to get.
    I don't think anyone is suggesting "it would have made all the difference". But when the team for the next Test is being selected, it would have given a better opportunity to Adil Rashid had he been fifty not out. Especially when England fans are "fed up with the continual lack of fight and guts when the chips are down".
    It was an absolutely terrible shot by Rashid and rightly punished
    Hitting the ball for six is rightly punished by being given out, incorrectly. That makes even less sense than your world XI selection.
  • Sponsored links:



  • The_President
    The_President Posts: 14,280
    Chizz said:

    The_President said:

    Chizz said:

    The_President said:

    Chizz said:

    Riviera said:

    Chizz said:

    Chizz said:

    How can that dismissal of Rashid stand? The catcher was standing on the mark where the boundary was. Ridiculous.

    Anyone? With reference to Law 19.3.1
    As reported by the BBC-


    Rashid c Brathwaite b Chase 1 (Eng 234-9)

    Roston Chase has seven wickets. Dearie me.

    Adil Rashid looks to heave the off-spinner into the stands over deep mid-wicket but Kraigg Brathwaite is out on the boundary.

    He takes the catch and is about to step over the rope but throws the ball up in time before stepping back over to complete a superb take.
    Look at Law 19.3.1.

    The boundary had been disturbed and was, at the time of that delivery, further back than it had been earlier. The fielder caught the ball, with both feet on the ground, one within the boundary, one beyond the original position of the boundary, but inside the disturbed boundary marker. He then threw the ball up, stepped back over the marker, stepped back and caught it again.

    Before he threw the ball up, he was standing beyond the boundary (although the "right" side of the boundary marker). It's crystal clear on the images that it should be not out, six runs.
    I agree, it would have made all the difference - we would have won - we only had another 350+ to get.
    I don't think anyone is suggesting "it would have made all the difference". But when the team for the next Test is being selected, it would have given a better opportunity to Adil Rashid had he been fifty not out. Especially when England fans are "fed up with the continual lack of fight and guts when the chips are down".
    You think Rashid would have got 50 ?
    We'll never know.
    Maybe he might have got 350 ??
  • The_President
    The_President Posts: 14,280
    tbh, the fewer runs Rashid gets is better for England then the sooner they can drop him - which is more than likely the next test !
  • Addickted2TheReds
    Addickted2TheReds Posts: 7,734
    Would be interested to know the 11 people would pick for the 2nd test...
  • LenGlover
    LenGlover Posts: 31,651
    lolwray said:

    My team for next test

    Burns
    Denly
    Bairstow
    Root
    Buttler
    Stokes
    Foakes
    Curran
    Broad
    Leach
    Anderson

    In that order..

    In answer to @Addickted2TheReds I'm with @lolwray .

    I don't see that side being any worse than this time.
  • The_President
    The_President Posts: 14,280
    lolwray said:

    My team for next test

    Burns
    Denly
    Bairstow
    Root
    Buttler
    Stokes
    Foakes
    Curran
    Broad
    Leach
    Anderson

    In that order..

    I like that. Bit concerned about Denly, but he cant do any worse than Jennings , and its a left-right combo.
  • LenGlover
    LenGlover Posts: 31,651
    The_President said:

    lolwray said:

    My team for next test

    Burns
    Denly
    Bairstow
    Root
    Buttler
    Stokes
    Foakes
    Curran
    Broad
    Leach
    Anderson

    In that order..

    I like that. Bit concerned about Denly, but he cant do any worse than Jennings , and its a left-right combo.
    He offers a leg spin option too.
  • Gravesend_Addick
    Gravesend_Addick Posts: 7,298
    Shambolic!
  • The_President
    The_President Posts: 14,280
    Gravesend_Addick said:

    Shambolic!

    You talking about Grants penalty ??!!
  • Chizz
    Chizz Posts: 28,322
    The_President said:

    Chizz said:

    The_President said:

    Chizz said:

    The_President said:

    Chizz said:

    Riviera said:

    Chizz said:

    Chizz said:

    How can that dismissal of Rashid stand? The catcher was standing on the mark where the boundary was. Ridiculous.

    Anyone? With reference to Law 19.3.1
    As reported by the BBC-


    Rashid c Brathwaite b Chase 1 (Eng 234-9)

    Roston Chase has seven wickets. Dearie me.

    Adil Rashid looks to heave the off-spinner into the stands over deep mid-wicket but Kraigg Brathwaite is out on the boundary.

    He takes the catch and is about to step over the rope but throws the ball up in time before stepping back over to complete a superb take.
    Look at Law 19.3.1.

    The boundary had been disturbed and was, at the time of that delivery, further back than it had been earlier. The fielder caught the ball, with both feet on the ground, one within the boundary, one beyond the original position of the boundary, but inside the disturbed boundary marker. He then threw the ball up, stepped back over the marker, stepped back and caught it again.

    Before he threw the ball up, he was standing beyond the boundary (although the "right" side of the boundary marker). It's crystal clear on the images that it should be not out, six runs.
    I agree, it would have made all the difference - we would have won - we only had another 350+ to get.
    I don't think anyone is suggesting "it would have made all the difference". But when the team for the next Test is being selected, it would have given a better opportunity to Adil Rashid had he been fifty not out. Especially when England fans are "fed up with the continual lack of fight and guts when the chips are down".
    You think Rashid would have got 50 ?
    We'll never know.
    Maybe he might have got 350 ??
    I don't share your optimism
  • Callumcafc
    Callumcafc Posts: 63,734
    Burns
    Denly
    Bairstow
    Root
    Buttler
    Stokes
    Foakes
    Woakes
    Broad
    Leach
    Anderson

    Denly, Woakes, Leach, Broad in.

    Jennings, Ali, Rashid, Curran out.

Categories

“Marketplace”