Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Cricket .. England in South Africa & Sri Lanka 2019/2020
Comments
-
Our bowling has been horrendous today0
-
Umpire error: Jordan's no-ball in the 17th over that was called as a no-ball and then changed to a wide, should have been a no-ball.0
-
Not only have we been muddled in our plans but our line and length has been awful. We have bowled 9 individual wides and the extra balls in those overs went for 17 so we have given them 26 runs unnecessarily.Addick Addict said:Our bowling has been horrendous today
It's the difference between having next to little or no chance of chasing 223 and a chance of reaching 1972 -
Can you tell us why it should be a no ball. Sky commentators were saying that a wide was the right decision.Chizz said:Umpire error: Jordan's no-ball in the 17th over that was called as a no-ball and then changed to a wide, should have been a no-ball.0 -
Bad day today. SA have come at us hard from the start and put us under pressure.
Tom Curran our best bowler (though his last over wasnt brilliant) to go at 8s when the team has gone at 11s and when hes bowled all the tough overs is impressive.
I think we missed a trick not going back to Moeen in the middle overs as that's where he is at his best and the quicks were taking some tap. Would have meant we wouldn't have had to bowl wood at the death either.
Game is by no means done yet. The altitude makes the ball fly a lot further a matter of a few metres further and we have plenty of power in the side but we have to put the pressure on them from the get go.0 -
Can see Steyn taking some tap in this innings. He doesnt have the back of the hand slower ball (like Stokes and Curran do) which was the only effective ball when we bowled.
They do have the advantage of having seen us bowl and learning what works and more importantly what didnt0 -
Yeah. It was wide. Very, very wide. But not "a" wide.cantersaddick said:
Can you tell us why it should be a no ball. Sky commentators were saying that a wide was the right decision.Chizz said:Umpire error: Jordan's no-ball in the 17th over that was called as a no-ball and then changed to a wide, should have been a no-ball.
Since the October 2017 Law change, a ball that lands off the pitch is (now) a no ball, instead of a wide. Law 21.7. The only difference in real terms is that it should have been followed by a free hit, instead of just an extra ball.0 -
Agree with your updated side.Addick Addict said:
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.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
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
I flip flop on the Buttler issue. I can see both sides but I think I'm now leaning towards him as the finisher due to the lack of other options in that role.
I do think england should be flexible with the batting order. Moeen is our best player of spin in this format so we should send him in in the middle overs when the spinners are on. We dont want Buttler coming in with no time to influence the game so should move him up the order if we get a good start. Have him coming in around the 10th over.
Morgan can adapt to whatever role and I actually think this is stokes weakest format with the bat (backed up by the stats) so would probably have him at 7.
On the subject of finishers. It wont happen and I wouldn't for the T20 world cup. But longer term we should groom Pope for this role. He is a specialist there in county cricket and has all the shots. Goes at a decent rate too.
Archer and Jordan are the certs with 1 quick bowling slot up for grabs for me. TC is in the driving seat for me at the moment.
Left arm option would be nice but it's a shame both of ours (Willey and Sam Curran) are both bowlers who rely quite heavily on swing. And these white balls just dont swing.1 -
Fair enough. Didnt know that. And neither did the sky commentators it seems.Chizz said:
Yeah. It was wide. Very, very wide. But not "a" wide.cantersaddick said:
Can you tell us why it should be a no ball. Sky commentators were saying that a wide was the right decision.Chizz said:Umpire error: Jordan's no-ball in the 17th over that was called as a no-ball and then changed to a wide, should have been a no-ball.
Since the October 2017 Law change, a ball that lands off the pitch is (now) a no ball, instead of a wide. Law 21.7. The only difference in real terms is that it should have been followed by a free hit, instead of just an extra ball.
Did seem like england managed to bully or rather pressure these inexperienced "local" umpires into changing their decision.
0 -
I didn't know about it until recently stumbling over it when I was looking up something about the ball bouncing more than once before reaching the batsman. It's not surprising the commentators don't know about it, because it's so rare. But for both umpires to consult and agree on the wrong decision was really poor.cantersaddick said:
Fair enough. Didnt know that. And neither did the sky commentators it seems.Chizz said:
Yeah. It was wide. Very, very wide. But not "a" wide.cantersaddick said:
Can you tell us why it should be a no ball. Sky commentators were saying that a wide was the right decision.Chizz said:Umpire error: Jordan's no-ball in the 17th over that was called as a no-ball and then changed to a wide, should have been a no-ball.
Since the October 2017 Law change, a ball that lands off the pitch is (now) a no ball, instead of a wide. Law 21.7. The only difference in real terms is that it should have been followed by a free hit, instead of just an extra ball.
Did seem like england managed to bully or rather pressure these inexperienced "local" umpires into changing their decision.1 - Sponsored links:
-
Looking like an absolute batters paradise. This is going to be some game if we can keep plenty in the hutch.2
-
Might have to review my views on Malan. His feet did not move once for those 4 Shamsi balls and clearly prefers pace on.1
-
Wheels have come off just as I started watching! Two wickets, no boundaries...0
-
Which is why of you play him he probably needs to open. At worst bat 3.Addick Addict said:Might have to review my views on Malan. His feet did not move once for those 4 Shamsi balls and clearly prefers pace on.1 -
Exciting end to this series. I think it’s going to be a single figures defeat1
-
Morgan had his Weetabix this morning2
-
Wow. 20 off the 17th over from Ngidi. This going to be tight.0
-
Shamsi to finish I reckon0
-
This is gonna be tight0
-
Morgan has it sorted.1
- Sponsored links:
-
Never in doubt1
-
As I said:Addick Addict said:
Not only have we been muddled in our plans but our line and length has been awful. We have bowled 9 individual wides and the extra balls in those overs went for 17 so we have given them 26 runs unnecessarily.Addick Addict said:Our bowling has been horrendous today
It's the difference between having next to little or no a very good chance of chasing 223 and a chance as opposed to a certainty of reaching 197
2 -
Magnificent2
-
Maybe notcantersaddick said:This is gonna be tight0 -
Chasing that down with 5 balls left is obscene.1
-
Called itcantersaddick said:Bad day today. SA have come at us hard from the start and put us under pressure.
Tom Curran our best bowler (though his last over wasnt brilliant) to go at 8s when the team has gone at 11s and when hes bowled all the tough overs is impressive.
I think we missed a trick not going back to Moeen in the middle overs as that's where he is at his best and the quicks were taking some tap. Would have meant we wouldn't have had to bowl wood at the death either.
Game is by no means done yet. The altitude makes the ball fly a lot further a matter of a few metres further and we have plenty of power in the side but we have to put the pressure on them from the get go.3 -
Loved that Morgan/Stokes partnership.1
-
Fantastic! Just saw the Lions score as well. Few good performances in there, most notably Lawrence who scored 1903
-
Yes saw the lions. What is the standard of the CA XI though? No names I recognise.McBobbin said:Fantastic! Just saw the Lions score as well. Few good performances in there, most notably Lawrence who scored 1900 -
"Bowlers must do better" is an easy thing to say after a high scoring series but I think it's at least in part to the nature of T20 and the modern game. It favours the batsmen and it makes bowling much harder.
Winning the game with 5 balls to spare perhaps suggests we didnt bowl as badly as it first seemed.0
