View Full Version : England v. Sri Lanka:Part 3
Booze Hound
13 Jun 2002, 22:50
England 105-1 at lunch.
Hussain won the toss for the 2nd time in a row, as a pig flew over the ground, and elected to bat.
Vaughan and Trescothick set off at a good lick, just under 5 an over including 11 from the chuckers first 6 balls.
With the score on 66 after 14 overs Vaughan drives at a slower one from Fernando and is caught at mid-off. Tresco and Butcher score 39 in the ten overs before they strap on the nosebag.
The pitch doesn't look that quick. but that may be down to the Sri Lankan 'pace' attack. It has taken a fair bit of rain over the last week and may well quicken up through the match.
Brett Li
14 Jun 2002, 00:04
right
Hope England send Stewart off in style, he has been a good servant of English cricket. Pitty though they ruined a great batsman by making him the wicket keeper.
Average before he became test keeper - 53
Current average - 39.51
Brett Li
14 Jun 2002, 01:47
name me a better keeper than Stewart in the last 5 years
NYPomme
14 Jun 2002, 05:14
Originally posted by Brett Li
name me a better keeper than Stewart in the last 5 years
Mark Bosnich? Now hang on......that's not true!:D
SeinDude
14 Jun 2002, 11:40
Originally posted by Brett Li
name me a better keeper than Stewart in the last 5 years
Warren Hegg!! LOL!! :D:D:D:D
Seriously, what has young Jamie Foster done wrong to be left out?? I thought he showed some good signs on the tour to India, and in my opinion it was a strange decision by England to "revert" back to Stewart for this series. :confused::confused:
Cheers!! :cool:
SeinDude
Briedis
14 Jun 2002, 12:12
Originally posted by SeinDude
Warren Hegg!! LOL!! :D:D:D:D
Seriously, what has young Jamie Foster done wrong to be left out?? I thought he showed some good signs on the tour to India, and in my opinion it was a strange decision by England to "revert" back to Stewart for this series. :confused::confused:
Cheers!! :cool:
SeinDude
Foster is injured.
Youngster
14 Jun 2002, 23:05
Originally posted by Brett Li
name me a better keeper than Stewart in the last 5 years
That's not hard - A better keeper than Alec Stewart....old irongloves? Greg Dyer for one!!
:)
Seriously, Alec Stewart in my opinion is the most over-rated cricketer in the history of the game. Why they ditched Jack Russell in favour of him for the gloves still remains a mystery to me, and no doubt most cricket fans.
Sure, Jack was a bit eccentric, but his glovework was sensational -I've never forgotten his stumping of Dean Jones down the leg side off Gladstone Small - yes, that's right - in the 90-91 series - it's even made Deano's video. And he was a fighter with the bat - how many times did old Alec do the hard work only to get out to an incredibly soft dismissal?
Granted I'm rating him on his performances against Australia, against whom he was very very very ordinary.
I've no doubt stirred a hornets nest here...
Brett Li
15 Jun 2002, 00:43
....in the last 5 years in test cricket, a better keeper, anaswer the question. Jack Russell played ages ago. Nice of you to judge a guy's test career on performances against one test nation.
Richie Benaud
15 Jun 2002, 01:52
Mark Butcher is out LBW to Chaminda Vass for a marvellous innings of 123. England are still in a very good position at 354 for 5 with Alec Stewart and Andrew Flintoff at the crease.
Youngster
16 Jun 2002, 10:25
Hi Brett Li
Better keepers in the last 5 years....I think the names "Healy" and "Gilchrist" come to mind. Or are you just talking about England and their half baked hacks?
But seriously, Jack Russell was still available for England for most of the time Stewart has had the gloves, and was still running around playing county cricket last year. The only reason Stewart got the gloves was so they could pick an extra batter...whatever happened to picking your best keeper? Jack was that far in front of Alec Stewart as a KEEPER it is not funny.
And lets face it, whether you like it or not, Australia is the benchmark of cricket today, and has been since 95. Perform against the Aussies consistently (ie Lara and Tendulkar) and you'll get respect...
Cheers
Youngster
I don't think being wicky ruined Stewart as much as batting at 6-he's a great player of quick bowling but crap against spin-he hasn't got a clue against Warnie especially the flipper!I read in today's paper Hussain saying how in the West Inides in 94/95 he chatted with Ambrose,Bishop & Walsh & they each gave their world II of the time & all 3 of them put Stewart in as opener-If anyone should be able to rate opners it's that lot.
As for his keeping it's good enough you rarely see him dropping anything he may not be quite as good standing up but then we don't bowl much spin anyway so it's not a problem.In fact I reckon he makes less mistakes than Russell.Healey was a true champion & the reason why one of the most amazing players you'll ever see in Gilchrist didn't make his debut till he was 27-what a waste!
PS I don't think Stewart averaged 53 before becoming wicket keeper-I don't have the figures but I would guess it was low 40s at best.He averaged about 27 after he's palyed his first 20 Tests or so & there was always a debate about dropping him till he made the breakthrough.
NYPomme
17 Jun 2002, 10:35
Originally posted by Youngster
Hi Brett Li
Better keepers in the last 5 years....I think the names "Healy" and "Gilchrist" come to mind. Or are you just talking about England and their half baked hacks?
And lets face it, whether you like it or not, Australia is the benchmark of cricket today, and has been since 95. Perform against the Aussies consistently (ie Lara and Tendulkar) and you'll get respect...
Cheers
Youngster
Advance Austrayia...yawn, yawn...tugg, tugg,............zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz..................... ..
Amazing England beat Sri Lanka home and away - and they STILL get stick!
Briedis
17 Jun 2002, 11:11
Originally posted by NYPomme
Advance Austrayia...yawn, yawn...tugg, tugg,............zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz..................... ..
Amazing England beat Sri Lanka home and away - and they STILL get stick!
I agree mate! I'm an Aussie, and I am sick of Aussie cricket posturing. But, be patient as I reckon the next Aussie cricket slump is about 5 years away, there does not seem to be a next generation coming through....
Back to the actual topic....
Very impressed with Alex Tudor and Matty Hoggards performances last night to bowl out the Sri Lankans without the leadership of Andy Caddick.
And the captaincy of Nassar Hussain. That trick to get de Silva (I think) where they placed a man in short at leg gully was brilliant. With Steve Waugh gone, Nassar has to be the best captain going around in intrnational cricket at the moment, hopefully he will rethink his retirement. Really looking forward to the ashes series out here this year, I reckon the Poms are a chance against a Waugh-less Aussie team....
Booze Hound
17 Jun 2002, 18:11
Interesting comment on the Stewart/Russell debate by Mike Atherton on Saturday:
"Everyone talks about how good Russell was but I always felt Alec was better."
And hes hould know.
I'd agree. Russell was a sloppy worker. Personally I'd say Stewart was/is at least as good a keeper as Healy.
But there is no one around today anywhere near as good as Bob Taylor or Alan Knott.
Should be a good last day of the Test if the weather holds. England bowled very well yesteday with Caddick out of the attack.
Brett Li
17 Jun 2002, 21:42
"And lets face it, whether you like it or not, Australia is the benchmark of cricket today, and has been since 95. Perform against the Aussies consistently (ie Lara and Tendulkar) and you'll get respect... "
Let's face it, you're not at all predictable are you?....England and their players suck, now that's a new one......:rolleyes:
Youngster
18 Jun 2002, 00:23
Originally posted by Booze Hound
Personally I'd say Stewart was/is at least as good a keeper as Healy.
[/B]
Ooooh, big call, doubt that you will find many that agree with you ...what do you base that one on??
Mat Ct St
AJ Stewart 117 225 12
IA Healy 119 366 29
Healy, 2 more matches, 168 more dismissals.....
Thanks to the Stats Guru on baggygreen.com.au...
The stats don't lie this time. Even if Heals did lose 2 tests with missed chances at the death...1994 v Pakistan, 1999 v West Indies.
Youngster
18 Jun 2002, 00:34
Originally posted by Brett Li
"And lets face it, whether you like it or not, Australia is the benchmark of cricket today, and has been since 95. Perform against the Aussies consistently (ie Lara and Tendulkar) and you'll get respect... "
Let's face it, you're not at all predictable are you?....England and their players suck, now that's a new one......:rolleyes:
Whoa, who's defensive now???
I never said that England and their players suck, probably think it though...;) We'll see how the Ashes series goes in a few months!
Having said that we still haven't beaten India or Sri Lanka away from home in a series recently, there is still a lot to achieve. Lets see how the youth policy goes...:rolleyes:
Cheers
Youngster
Brett Li
18 Jun 2002, 01:36
Originally posted by Youngster
Ooooh, big call, doubt that you will find many that agree with you ...what do you base that one on??
Mat Ct St
AJ Stewart 117 225 12
IA Healy 119 366 29
Healy, 2 more matches, 168 more dismissals.....
Thanks to the Stats Guru on baggygreen.com.au...
The stats don't lie this time. Even if Heals did lose 2 tests with missed chances at the death...1994 v Pakistan, 1999 v West Indies.
I'm assuming all of Stewarts matches are as a keeper, right? :rolleyes:
Originally posted by Youngster
AJ Stewart 117 225 12
IA Healy 119 366 29
Healy, 2 more matches, 168 more dismissals.....
Thanks to the Stats Guru on baggygreen.com.au...
The stats don't lie this time. Even if Heals did lose 2 tests with missed chances at the death...1994 v Pakistan, 1999 v West Indies.
The stats actually do lie in this case you idiot. You have completely forgotten that Alex Stewart has not spent his whole test career behind the stumps.
Alex Stewart became the England wicketkeeper when England were on tour. Jack Russell who was the keeper at the time back his hand and a replacement had to be found. Stewart who had kept in lower levels, occaisionally with Surrey in County cricket was made stand in keeper, he never returned to the field.
In doing this the world did not get to fully see one of potentially the best batsmen of our time. Stewart at the time was an opening batsmen with a batting average of over 50!
Healy was a better gloveman than Stewart, but Stewart is a far better bat.
NYPomme
18 Jun 2002, 04:55
Anway - all this predictable Pommie Bashing is getting away from the thread = Third Test. England win by 10 wickets.
So - Sri Lanka were, by all accounts, a good team going into this Test series - does England beating make England at least a decent team - or does Sri Lanka losing make a promising side a couple of months ago - a weak one all of a sudden?
ps. I find it amazing that the only point some people can make on the England-dominated Sri Lanka series - is how England have turned Stewart into a moderate test batsmen - incredible.
Briedis
18 Jun 2002, 11:50
I think England have definately turned a corner. Their bowling and batting have improved out of sight and have some good up-and-coming propects (which I cannot see here in Australia, for all you Aussies who want to Pom bash!)
Sri Lanka have a very handy batting lineup and had a great record before this series albeit against lower sides and mainly at home - but you can only do your best and they pasted a lot of teams. Their weakness has been bowling, they rely on one man too much and he has been fighting injury.
Attapatu batted very bravely last night and technically I reckon he has the one of the soundest defensive games going around. I was very dissapointed with deSilva. For a former captain to come out and play a one day innings and get out hooking, when his side needed him to dig in and stay with Arnold was a disgrace. It might be time for a change there for Sri Lanka.
I thought Hussains captaincy was again very impressive last night. Bowling changes at the right time and always made sure that his chargers hung in there.
I don't think that the Poms will beat us out here, but they will put up a good fight and may well win the next series over in ole Blighty....
Brett Li
18 Jun 2002, 17:37
Originally posted by Briedis
I think England have definately turned a corner. Their bowling and batting have improved out of sight and have some good up-and-coming propects (which I cannot see here in Australia, for all you Aussies who want to Pom bash!)
Sri Lanka have a very handy batting lineup and had a great record before this series albeit against lower sides and mainly at home - but you can only do your best and they pasted a lot of teams. Their weakness has been bowling, they rely on one man too much and he has been fighting injury.
Attapatu batted very bravely last night and technically I reckon he has the one of the soundest defensive games going around. I was very dissapointed with deSilva. For a former captain to come out and play a one day innings and get out hooking, when his side needed him to dig in and stay with Arnold was a disgrace. It might be time for a change there for Sri Lanka.
I thought Hussains captaincy was again very impressive last night. Bowling changes at the right time and always made sure that his chargers hung in there.
I don't think that the Poms will beat us out here, but they will put up a good fight and may well win the next series over in ole Blighty....
Thanks Briedis, I'm framing that one:D
Booze Hound
18 Jun 2002, 18:24
An amazing win at the end of a day of really hard fought Test cricket. The pitch remained very good throughout and the England bowlers really had to work hard. I thought the seamers all bowled outstandingly well, although Flintoff's figures don't give him what he deserves) and Giles, despite a bad back, came out strong at the end.
The run chase was fun to watch although I felt the Sri Lankans got their thinking wrong. They should have had a couple of fielders on the one. As it was the England openers always had at least a single when they wanted it which helped the momentum.
Mark Nicholas got a little excited on TV.
Back to the keeping debate:
Slax: Stewart first played for England as a keeper in the final Test of the England v West Indies series at the Oval in 1991 (when Tufnell ran throgh there first innings on the Saturday morning:)). He was picked in that role and batted 6. He actually joined the Surrey staff as a keeper/batsman but suffered a back injury and didn't keep at all for about four years. He has played a number of Tests as a pure batsman since though, and he's way better than 'poor' at Test level.
Youngster: I base my judgement of keepers on a number of factors. The total dismissals doesn't give a fair reflection of the total picture as you don't know the standard of bowlers, opponents, pitches etc. I base mine, for the keepers of my era, on personal observation. I look at how safe their catching and general glovework is, their footwork, their agility, handspeed and how well they maintain their standards during a hard day.
I would back Stewart against Healey on most of these, and put him ahead on agility.
But of course he's English so won't get nearly as much appreciation.
Youngster
18 Jun 2002, 20:50
Granted, I'll take that one on the chin, I did forget that Stewart did not play his whole career as a keeper.
But I guess we'll agree to disagree on that Stewart is in Healy's class - Heals was an absolute champion with the gloves. No disputing Stewart was a better bat than Healy, but as a keeper, I truly believe it was Healy, daylight (and lots of), Stewart which is what this original discussion was about? Nothing to do with the fact he's English...although I do enjoy some Pom baiting now and again...and the white pointers on this forum seem to have taken the bait...
:)
We'll see how the England team goes for the rest of their summer, Hopefully winning time after time with India now the opposition - if so there will be huge build up for the Ashes Series!
Cheers!
Youngster
Briedis
18 Jun 2002, 22:47
Originally posted by Brett Li
Thanks Briedis, I'm framing that one:D
Why?
I just want us to beat a quality side for a change! :D
Nah, seriously it would be great to see some great competitive cricket for a change. It's been a while for us Aussie spectators....
Great the way we finished the Sri Lankans off.I still rememebr a run chase against Pakistan at Egbaston in 87 when we got it all wrong sending in Botham too early & actually risking defeat so the way they went after those runs was perfect.I was screaming for Stewart to open with Tresco but how wrong was I?those too were as cool as cucumbers.
One last point on the Stewart debate I agree with Youngster that Healey is a better keeper than Stewart-standing back to the pace men there's probably not a lot in it & in fact Stewart is one of the most athletic keepers I've seen he can make a lot of ground both sides & upwards as well but I defy any one to say that Stewart comes anywhere near to being as good a gloveman as Healey to the spinners.I mean Healey has kept to the most mesmerising spinner the world has seen a guy that turns it both ways as well as putting on load of top & back spin & he did it beautifully.Stweart always looked a little bit unsure to me keeping to spinners & these were guys who didn't even turn the ball & they didn't turn it in only one direction as well:D
Ps Boozie I've gotta agree re Mark Nicholas the guy's a plank.I reckon he thinks he's TVs answer to John Arlott but he's an idiot with all his 'Jeewhizzes' & 'Jeeperscreepers' &'rollocking good shot'-C4 coverage would benefit greatly from giving him the bnullet(preferably betwen the eyes).I'm all for a bit more of Richie who seems to get less & less air time with all the charismaticless robots they have on their now.
NYPomme
19 Jun 2002, 22:08
Originally posted by DIPPER
Ps Boozie I've gotta agree re Mark Nicholas the guy's a plank.I reckon he thinks he's TVs answer to John Arlott but he's an idiot with all his 'Jeewhizzes' & 'Jeeperscreepers' &'rollocking good shot'-C4 coverage would benefit greatly from giving him the bnullet(preferably betwen the eyes).I'm all for a bit more of Richie who seems to get less & less air time with all the charismaticless robots they have on their now.
LOL.......got to agree with your there on Nicholas. Second-rate cricketer.......third-rate bloke! Why have they got him on? He looks like a Young-Tory who has not quite got out of the 80's ...
and you just KNOW he really fancies himself...what a chopper!!!
Granted I've not had the pleasure of C4 coverage for over a year now....but I thought they had done a good job of replacing the BBC's tired coverage (on TV that is...) ie. Tony Lewis, Ray Illingworth (for a while), etc..
I particularly liked the 'rolling' analysis given by Simon Hughes from the trailer (not sure if they still do that)... who else have they got on as anchormen ..apart from Mr. Jazz-hat himself?
Yeah they've definitely spiced it up-they've got Derrmot 'you fat hasbeen'Reeve, Mike Atherton (who commentates like he bats),Michael 'I'll never wear the baggy green again Slater, Richie & Simon Hughes in the trailer.
I don't know if you've seen hawkeye that laser guided tracking system that shows where the ball would have hit or missed the stumps on LBW shouts-its pretty good if it is indeed as accurate as they keep telling us.The interesting thing with it is how many balls would go over the stumps-last season they showed the graphis of a spell from McGrath & about 3 deliveries from 10 overs would have hit the stumps the rest were going over or outside off stump.They've got that red zone as well that goes between the stumps & shows how many people are given LB to balls pitching outside leg
London Dave
19 Jun 2002, 23:12
Channel 4 coverage is pretty good I reckon, apart from Nicholas, who is a bit too 'pratty' for my tastes...had to laugh at Ranatunga though, after Attapattu was LBW in the 2nd dig (playing back, as plumb as you can get), our friend Arjuna was still insisiting the ball was missing off stump, despite umpteen replays and hawkeye! Wonder why everyone hates his guts?