Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
England Cricket 2023
Comments
-
Saw the stat yesterday that since he came back from the sandpaper ban, he's averaged a century every 2.7 innings, crazy.Addick Addict said:Smith is the one we need to get. That stat of him averaging 87.57 in the first innings of a match in Test cricket is absolutely staggering - 4,641 runs in 61 innings of which he was not 8 times
1 -
Awful by Bairstow0
-
As we talk Bairstow drops another0
-
Or even Stone, Mahmood, Overton fit for the first 2 matches. Would have made a difference.kentaddick said:Now imagine if we had archer fully fit...0 -
Disaster from Bairstow.0
-
Woakes has been bowling quicker than I realised he was capable of. Regularly in the mid 80s. Quicker than Broad Anderson and Robinson have bowled for most of the series. I know its a quick pitch but it's good to see.1
-
.Addick Addict said:
And there is an example of lack of movement of the feet. Bairstow dives far more from that standing position and in fact I would argue that Foakes will take some of those without the need to diveI can't say whether Foakes would have caught that one or not but I do know that, generally speaking, Foakes' movement of the feet is much the better of the two and that does mean that he isn't quite so flat footed when he does have to dive2 -
I'm going to crawl back into my hole now
That's shocking from Jonny 0 -
Bairstow over Foakes is proving to be the mistake most people thought it was.6
-
Yes!! Think even I might have caught that one!0
- Sponsored links:
-
Broad you fucking beauty!!!2
-
That has to be an inside edge doesn't it?1
-
Quick climb back out, he's just caught onePelling1993 said:I'm going to crawl back into my hole now That's shocking from Jonny3 -
WTF was that Smith???? Thanks anyway!!!Addick Addict said:That has to be an inside edge doesn't it?1 -
absolutely quality morning from england.3
-
Nice wasted review too!4
-
Smith is such a wanker. Pretending like he didn't know he hit it3
-
Foakes would have done keepy-uppies with that and then volleyed it into the stumps9
-
That is one aspect that suits the Aussies about this wicket. They can do what they do at home and that is to leave on length in the knowledge that the ball is going over the stumps.0
-
I don’t entirely blame Bairstow but he is costing us. I'm not putting Foakes on a false pedestal I just think he would have caught everything Bairstow hasn't
Great bowling this morning5 - Sponsored links:
-
Mark Wood that's the best 1 for i've ever seen 2
-
Try driving that Mitch!!!!1
-
Fantastic morning session that.2
-
big W in the session column for england.1
-
I was dubious abut putting the Aussies in .. but I'm not now lol
0 -
Good start 4 out brilliant0
-
In this case I don't think the averages tell the full story. I don't think, since the introduction of central contracts, a player has been messed about as much as Bairstow. Foakes hasn't been moved up and down the order, gloves on, gloves off.Addick Addict said:
Not when taking the gloves he isn't.Pelling1993 said:
And Bairstow is the far superior batsman.blackpool72 said:
All keeper's drop catches no ones perfect.Pelling1993 said:Whilst there's no doubting that Foakes is the best keeper, he's dropped plenty in an England shirt too.
But there's no denying Foakes is a far superior keeper than Bairstow.
Edit - that isn't actually true because from what I can see Bairstow averages 37.08 when keeper and 36.62 when keeper. Foakes averages 32.20 so the differential is 4.88 runs per innings. It's a question then of quantifying how many runs and games Foakes' mistakes have cost us compared to Bairstow
Bairstow should bat at 6 without the gloves, the problem with that is either the all rounder or the keeper has to bat in the top 5. If Stokes can't bowl it's another riddle that needs solving.0 -
Wood now has 4 of the 6 fastest spells in England. The other two? Not quick Brett Lee
2 -
The answer to the riddle was obvious though - Brook took Bairstow's place, did well, Bairstow had to wait for a chance in the top order (which may have been this match following injury to Pope, but possibly not given Stokes can't bowl this Test).Cafc43v3r said:
In this case I don't think the averages tell the full story. I don't think, since the introduction of central contracts, a player has been messed about as much as Bairstow. Foakes hasn't been moved up and down the order, gloves on, gloves off.Addick Addict said:
Not when taking the gloves he isn't.Pelling1993 said:
And Bairstow is the far superior batsman.blackpool72 said:
All keeper's drop catches no ones perfect.Pelling1993 said:Whilst there's no doubting that Foakes is the best keeper, he's dropped plenty in an England shirt too.
But there's no denying Foakes is a far superior keeper than Bairstow.
Edit - that isn't actually true because from what I can see Bairstow averages 37.08 when keeper and 36.62 when keeper. Foakes averages 32.20 so the differential is 4.88 runs per innings. It's a question then of quantifying how many runs and games Foakes' mistakes have cost us compared to Bairstow
Bairstow should bat at 6 without the gloves, the problem with that is either the all rounder or the keeper has to bat in the top 5. If Stokes can't bowl it's another riddle that needs solving.
Unlucky for Bairstow but it happens, you get injured and some bloke does well in your place.
Foakes didn't deserve to be dropped.
We all know Bairstow was preferred largely because he's mates with Stokes, Root etc.0
