Cricket Discussion - Part 1

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.

Log in to remove this ad.

How good is that?

I cannot believe that the Pommy media are claiming that this pitch was 'bad for Test cricket'. Ricky Ponting must be getting cash for comments as he is agreeing with them.

A guy called George Dobell is actually arguing that England may have requested a low flat pitch to curb Mitchell Johnson and it cost them the game. If that is the case Georgie both sides had to bat on it and Australia made 820 for the loss of 10 wickets ! England made 403 and lost 20 wickets in a game that didn't even get to the last day and on a pitch that held few terrors. Sure the pitch was slow but the Poms could not handle it and that isn't the groundsman's fault.

It seems that if England win the pitches are OK, if not they are 'bad for Test Cricket'.
 
Last edited:
I'd suggest being a significantly inferior cricket side who got lucky in the first test had a fair bit more to do with the result than the pitch
 
raptalia said:
How good is that?

I cannot believe that the Pommy media are claiming that this pitch was 'bad for Test cricket'. Ricky Ponting must be getting cash for comments as he is agreeing with them.

A guy called George Dobell is actually arguing that England may have requested a low flat pitch to curb Mitchell Johnson and it cost them the game. If that is the case Georgie both sides had to bat on it and Australia made 820 for the loss of 10 wickets ! England made 403 and lost 20 wickets in a game that didn't even get to the last day and on a pitch that held few terrors. Sure the pitch was slow but the Poms could not handle it and that isn't the groundsman's fault.

It seems that if England win the pitches are OK, if not they are 'bad for Test Cricket'.
Click to expand...
What's the old saying: something about winners are grinners? This Test was no different to any other Test in England - it simply emphasised the importance of winning the toss over there, because the team that does normally bosses the game. If England wins the toss and bats at Edgbaston next week, I'm sure there won't be any complaints about the pitch.
 
Last edited:
That will have wiped the smiles off the red top rag editors and sporting journos. Now they can get back to their favourite past time of bashing their own cricket team.

Funny how the deck didn't look too flat when Australia bowled on it. Maybe Anderson and Broad should get gophers.
 
I also think the whinging is an insult to the extraordinary feats of Smith and Rogers in this Test. Blaming the pitch is also letting England's butter fingered slips fielders off the hook - if Bell had held that first innings catch when Smith was 52, it could have been a completely different outcome.
 
philreich said:
I also think the whinging is an insult to the extraordinary feats of Smith and Rogers in this Test. Blaming the pitch is also letting England's butter fingered slips fielders off the hook - if Bell had held that first innings catch when Smith was 52, it could have been a completely different outcome.
Click to expand...
As the first test may have been had Haddin not dropped Root. The Poms largely won by a margin that reflected that. This was against an Australian side that bowled pretty poorly and threw their wickets away once they made 30 in Cardiff.

Anyway, at the moment Jimmy Anderson looks a long way off his best. Without some moisture in the pitch he's straight up and down. But with moisture in the pitch our attack would be pretty difficult to combat too.

Here's to hoping we ruthlessly grind their noses in it in the remaining 3 tests.
 
Just looked an interview with former England player Mark Butcher. He is also on the 'blame the type of pitch ordered' bandwagon as well. He is almost saying that the England team management 'ordered' the type of pitch that was prepared. If that is the case the ICC should be investigating the connection between the Lord's ground staff and the English cricket authorities.

Unbelievable attitude and almost as bad as the drivel that comes from the sub continent when they lose, both sides had to play on this pitch one did the job, other didn't. How do you get bowled out for 103 on a low flat pitch that offered little sideways movement? The answer is simple and it has nothing to do with the groundsman or the standard of the wicket.

The other issue that is suddenly surfacing in England is the 'win the toss win the match' argument. It is true, but no one in the English media offered this theory at the end of the last series in England. If the Pommy Media do a little research they will find that in the three Tests won by England in 2013 series England won the toss and batted first. Australia was in a winning position in the other two Tests but for the weather after winning the toss and batting first.
So what is new? Oh, England lost a Test.

Sour grapes for sure.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

philreich said:
Please say it isn't so - Lehmann hopes Haddin will be able to replace Nevill at Edgbaston!!!
Click to expand...

It hasn't taken Boof long to become one of the old school. Objectivity has never been a strength of Australian cricket and those in power tend not to embrace change easily. Just before the second test Matthew Hayden was telling the world that his good mate Shane Watson should not be dropped. The difference between Lehmann and Hayden is that Lehmann has the power to influence selection while Hayden does not.

Haddin's keeping ability is still there but you have to wonder for how long. It has been twelve Tests since the almost 38 year old Haddin made a century and he has passed 50 only once in his last seventeen completed innings. I guess mateship counts for more than batting figures.

In fairness to Boof he did add that he was pleased with the performances of Peter Nevill and Mitchell Marsh and he noted that they did their jobs well and added enthusiasm to the team. If available Haddin will play in the match against Derbyshire this week then Rod Marsh and Lehmann will make a decision on who plays in the Third Test. It sounds like the old boys want to give a mate every chance to justify their decision.
 
Ballance dropped for England... Jonny Bairstow returns and will bat at #5, Bell up to #3 and Root down to #4.

2 spinners may be played in 3rd test according to coach, Bayliss.
 
Last edited:
philreich said:
Bit surprised Lyth survived the cut - he's looked out of his depth so far. Anyway: that's their problem - hopefully Bell comes to the crease at 1 for 3 next week.
Click to expand...
Lyth looks like he would be more suited to riding at Newmarket than playing cricket
 
Garibaldi Red said:
Lyth looks like he would be more suited to riding at Newmarket than playing cricket
Click to expand...
By the end of this series, I daresay Mitchell Johnson will make him wish he WAS riding at Newmarket :)
 
One to watch - at stumps on day 2 of the First Test against South Africa, Bangladesh is giving a really good account of itself. Having dismissed the Proteas yesterday for just 248 (after they were 1 for 136), the Bangers are now 4 for 179. It's impossible to think that they could pull off what would surely be Test cricket's upset of the millenium, but it's good to see them doing well.
 
Last edited:
The inside word is that, if Rogers is declared unfit to play at Edgbaston, Shane Watson will be his replacement - ahead of Shaun Marsh, and Warner and Watson will open the innings. Gee it's hard to type when one's head is shaking uncontrollably!!!!!!!!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

K
Opinion Jeremy Finlayson verdict broader discussion
2 3
Replies
71
Views
1K
Duckimus Prime
Duckimus Prime
Festerz
Corona virus and other pestilences. Poxes ‘n stuff. Part 6.
71 72 73 74 75
Replies
2K
Views
69K
OneGreatClub
OneGreatClub

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top