LukeParkerno1
Post-Human
agreed. they're struggling to pitch it up enough to give the ball a chance...
They bowled what I call “pretty”. It’s economical but unthreatening.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
agreed. they're struggling to pitch it up enough to give the ball a chance...
Pretty easy to do that when you bowl 65 overs of spin.and again the girls bowl 100 overs in the time the guys usually take to bowl about 80-85 overs.
Pretty easy to do that when you bowl 65 overs of spin.
If you think that's the reason they got through the overs quicker you were watching a different match to me.Yes but it shows some hustle between overs and not taking 5 minutes between each ball
Need not look beyond the current squad to find someone who's had a cushier ride.As for us, laughable Nicole Bolton was selected yet again. Score under 10 again. She’s got to be the luckiest cricketer around, especially when Mooney and Haynes can open.
Have to say there's a fair bit of Graeme Swann toolishness about Sophie Ecclestone. Tried to intimidate Jonassen in Game 2, failed and backfired.is it possible for the pommy women to get through an over without going ooh to every ball. even those that hit the centre of the bat?
I think so too. Its not like the men get through 100 overs in a day on rank turners in India with 60 overs of spin. (Although the overs bowled by the pacemen are off a longer run than those bowled by the pacewomen.)and of course all of their pace bowlers run off a shorter run-up... I'm sure both of those factors play a part... but even when all of that is taken into account, I think the girls still bowl at an over-rate considerably more quickly than the guys.
From the replay I saw it looked like it hit the glove first.Haynes out for 87 off 246... plumb LBW