Cricket .. England in South Africa & Sri Lanka 2019/2020

Wanky review there 
Done out of desperation 

Shouldn't have been allowed to review this anyway as he was walking off then told by the dressing room to review it. Not allowed that communication.

But out anyway. 

What a series haha 

oohaahmortimer said:

3 from 2 sounds easy and I’m sure teams get em more often than not but 
we failed to get them yesterday
we failed in the World Cup Final
NZ also failed to get them in the World Cup Final
pretty sure NZ failed against India last week as well .

3 OFF 2 to win is impossible 
you heard it here first !

Curran has been terrible in these 2 games, surely he has worked out that bowling in the slot is gonna go the distance!? Very lucky in that last over too

Pelling1993 said:

Curran has been terrible in these 2 games, surely he has worked out that bowling in the slot is gonna go the distance!? Very lucky in that last over too

If you look purely at the figures then it seems like that. But there is a reason why all the pundits and commentators are giving him a lot of praise today and he was. He bowled all 4 of his overs at the tough times today in a powerplay (at the start or at the death) Wood by comparison bowled only 1 in a powerplay. 

Wood is the one who should be at risk IMO esp as its archer coming back who is going to come in. Swapping Wood for Archer is pace for pace and keeps the variation in the attack. 

cantersaddick said:

Pelling1993 said:

Curran has been terrible in these 2 games, surely he has worked out that bowling in the slot is gonna go the distance!? Very lucky in that last over too

If you look purely at the figures then it seems like that. But there is a reason why all the pundits and commentators are giving him a lot of praise today and he was. He bowled all 4 of his overs at the tough times today in a powerplay (at the start or at the death) Wood by comparison bowled only 1 in a powerplay. 

Wood is the one who should be at risk IMO esp as its archer coming back who is going to come in. Swapping Wood for Archer is pace for pace and keeps the variation in the attack. 

I rate Curran just think he's been poor in these 2 games, he probably wouldn't get into my full strength T20i side though, completely agree re. Wood don't think he is a T20 bowler, doesn't have enough variation.

I'd go for 2 of Archer, Mills & Brown if fit for the WC in the place of TC & Wood

Addick Addict said:

With all known form to hand I would like to see, at this stage, this as our World Cup starting line up:

Roy
Banton
Malan
Morgan
Stokes
Buttler
Ali
Curran (T)
Rashid
Archer
Wood

Still think that Denly is not an international T20 player (average of 9.6 at a strike rate of 97) and certainly not batting down the order - Roy, Banton, Malan, Hales and Banton are all better at the top.

Buttler needs to come in where he is most effective and we have established openers who do that job equally as well but who aren't finishers. So he needs to be there for the final half a dozen overs or so.

There is possibly an argument for Bairstow instead of Malan but still prefer Malan because he is a cleaner striker of the ball. I suspect that we will end up, depending on the conditions, perming any two from Curran (T), Wood and Jordan. The latter is the established close of innings bowler but I am a bit concerned that in the BBL he wasn't as effective at times. But, as he is in situ, he probably deserves his place. Plus he is one of our best catchers.

So, revised team:

Roy
Banton
Malan/Bairstow
Morgan
Stokes
Buttler
Ali
Jordan
Curran (T)/Wood
Rashid
Archer

killerandflash said:

Denly ill, Malan replaces him

Why did Knight say "Denly is ill, let's put it that way?"

Fantastic entertainment. 
With 20 twenty cricket as exciting as it is why are we bothering with the 100.

AFKABartram said:

Someone explain to me why bowling Yorkers features so little in 20/20. 

Currently watching England getting hoiked over the rope nearly every other ball

A yorker is a really effective delivery, if you can execute it perfectly.  If you're a fraction out in length it's either a half-volley (lots of runs) or a full toss (lots of runs).  It's a bit like taking a free kick from 25 yards away: if you curl it, with pace, into the top corner, you'll probably score - so why don't footballers always do it?  The reason is, it's bloody difficult! 

The other reason that yorkers are used less frequently than a few years ago is that batsmen have worked out ways to play them - either ramping it (everyone plays that now) or playing cross-batted swats to the offside (Buttler is a genius at that). 

So, a yorker is a great delivery, if you can bowl it perfectly and if the batsman isn't expecting it.  Otherwise, it's often smorgasbord. 

AFKABartram said:

Someone explain to me why bowling Yorkers features so little in 20/20. 

Currently watching England getting hoiked over the rope nearly every other ball

The two biggest changes so far as playing yorkers are concerned are that batsman now use the all of the crease so a yorker is no longer one and they can still get underneath it and they have also conditioned themselves to use their wrists in the same way as hockey players do (which is one of the reasons why Buttler is so good at playing them).

So, the ideal yorker is the one a couple of feet outside the off stump but the box in question is tiny and as we are seeing from Wood and Jordan when they get it wrong it invariably becomes a wide or a full toss.