Any cricket lovers on here?
Comments
-
Yeah; although apparently he prefers bowling from the other end!Pross said:It's odd having an end / stand named after someone who is still playing (and it was named over 5 years ago now!).
0 -
Re Bairstow, we actually got better with the extras in that last innings.
26, 18, 38, 36, 23 and 7 in order. Although the innings were obviously shorter at Headingly (116.1, 92.3, 100.4, 101.5 vs. 60.4 and 67.1), so 3rd test 1st innings was the worst per over (0.22, 0.20, 0.38, 0.36, 0.38 and 0.1).
And it's not like Australia haven't given away extras - 20 in that run chase alone. But they have given away 99 extras in the series vs our 148, which is a big difference.0 -
More concerned with the missed chances than the extras TBH. Not saying they're not important but too often no keeper on earth would stop some of the byes.bobmcstuff said:Re Bairstow, we actually got better with the extras in that last innings.
26, 18, 38, 36, 23 and 7 in order. Although the innings were obviously shorter at Headingly (116.1, 92.3, 100.4, 101.5 vs. 60.4 and 67.1), so 3rd test 1st innings was the worst per over (0.22, 0.20, 0.38, 0.36, 0.38 and 0.1).
And it's not like Australia haven't given away extras - 20 in that run chase alone. But they have given away 99 extras in the series vs our 148, which is a big difference.0 -
0 -
The non-debate about Bairstow vs Foakes is bizarre.
Would you like to concede 4 wides or take a wicket?
0 -
He's currently batting for Surrey with 19 off 50, which is better than half Bairstow's innings. Calvin Harrison probably isn't quite as good as Mitchell Starc though...0
-
Dane Patterson is no mug though with an average in the lower 20s. He's a solid bat and a safe pair of hands behind. Only stubbornness from the selection group will really keep Bairstow in the gloves.bobmcstuff said:He's currently batting for Surrey with 19 off 50, which is better than half Bairstow's innings. Calvin Harrison probably isn't quite as good as Mitchell Starc though...
0 -
I see YJB as the HS2 of cricket. He has cost them so much that they feel they have to keep goingTashman said:
Dane Patterson is no mug though with an average in the lower 20s. He's a solid bat and a safe pair of hands behind. Only stubbornness from the selection group will really keep Bairstow in the gloves.bobmcstuff said:He's currently batting for Surrey with 19 off 50, which is better than half Bairstow's innings. Calvin Harrison probably isn't quite as good as Mitchell Starc though...
2 -
Gives me hope he's not going to make it all the way to the finish in London.surrey_commuter said:
I see YJB as the HS2 of cricket. He has cost them so much that they feel they have to keep goingTashman said:
Dane Patterson is no mug though with an average in the lower 20s. He's a solid bat and a safe pair of hands behind. Only stubbornness from the selection group will really keep Bairstow in the gloves.bobmcstuff said:He's currently batting for Surrey with 19 off 50, which is better than half Bairstow's innings. Calvin Harrison probably isn't quite as good as Mitchell Starc though...
0 -
chapeaukingstongraham said:
Gives me hope he's not going to make it all the way to the finish in London.surrey_commuter said:
I see YJB as the HS2 of cricket. He has cost them so much that they feel they have to keep goingTashman said:
Dane Patterson is no mug though with an average in the lower 20s. He's a solid bat and a safe pair of hands behind. Only stubbornness from the selection group will really keep Bairstow in the gloves.bobmcstuff said:He's currently batting for Surrey with 19 off 50, which is better than half Bairstow's innings. Calvin Harrison probably isn't quite as good as Mitchell Starc though...
0 -
chapeaukingstongraham said:
Gives me hope he's not going to make it all the way to the finish in London.surrey_commuter said:
I see YJB as the HS2 of cricket. He has cost them so much that they feel they have to keep goingTashman said:
Dane Patterson is no mug though with an average in the lower 20s. He's a solid bat and a safe pair of hands behind. Only stubbornness from the selection group will really keep Bairstow in the gloves.bobmcstuff said:He's currently batting for Surrey with 19 off 50, which is better than half Bairstow's innings. Calvin Harrison probably isn't quite as good as Mitchell Starc though...
0 -
https://telegraph.co.uk/cricket/2023/07/10/snubbing-headingley-old-trafford-2027-ashes-insults-north/
The bizarre article here is odd. Does the author think that those that attend Headingley won't attend elsewhere? Why should Hampshire be excluded when they have the facilities? London isn't "The South" and it's irritating when everywhere else south of the Watford Gap gets excluded because The Oval and Lord's must be included in the rotation. Surely its a great thing that we now have grounds around the country that get to spread international cricket around.0 -
England tend to win more up north though.Tashman said:https://telegraph.co.uk/cricket/2023/07/10/snubbing-headingley-old-trafford-2027-ashes-insults-north/
The bizarre article here is odd. Does the author think that those that attend Headingley won't attend elsewhere? Why should Hampshire be excluded when they have the facilities? London isn't "The South" and it's irritating when everywhere else south of the Watford Gap gets excluded because The Oval and Lord's must be included in the rotation. Surely its a great thing that we now have grounds around the country that get to spread international cricket around.0 -
I didn't know the 2027 venues had even been decided!
I have no issue with Hampshire getting a Test, but have to agree that no Northern venue is a daft decision. The venues should be evenly spread around the country, and to have nothing beyond the East Mids is crackers, especially as Yorkshire and Lancashire have always been cricket strongholds.0 -
I don't think that it is intended as a serious articleTashman said:https://telegraph.co.uk/cricket/2023/07/10/snubbing-headingley-old-trafford-2027-ashes-insults-north/
The bizIt really is a kick in the teeth by officialdom and proof that “the northern powerhouse” and “levelling up” are mere political words.arre article here is odd. Does the author think that those that attend Headingley won't attend elsewhere? Why should Hampshire be excluded when they have the facilities? London isn't "The South" and it's irritating when everywhere else south of the Watford Gap gets excluded because The Oval and Lord's must be included in the rotation. Surely its a great thing that we now have grounds around the country that get to spread international cricket around.
It really is a kick in the teeth by officialdom and proof that “the northern powerhouse” and “levelling up” are mere political words.0 -
Has the Rose Bowl sorted out its accessibility issues? Sophia Gardens has been shunned in recent years after huge investment to make it onto the Test ground list and producing a memorable Ashes finale that set the tone in 2009.0
-
I went to that test which was great, but it was a poor pitch. The problem was the ECB auctioned off the tests, so venues needed to ensure five days of action leading to terrible pitches. Not sure on the criteria now, but Cardiff consistently had terrible pitches.Pross said:Has the Rose Bowl sorted out its accessibility issues? Sophia Gardens has been shunned in recent years after huge investment to make it onto the Test ground list and producing a memorable Ashes finale that set the tone in 2009.
0 -
That and the bit about Carey making the catch on a different ground is just odd. To think he is their chief cricket writer has me shaking my head.surrey_commuter said:
I don't think that it is intended as a serious articleTashman said:https://telegraph.co.uk/cricket/2023/07/10/snubbing-headingley-old-trafford-2027-ashes-insults-north/
The bizIt really is a kick in the teeth by officialdom and proof that “the northern powerhouse” and “levelling up” are mere political words.arre article here is odd. Does the author think that those that attend Headingley won't attend elsewhere? Why should Hampshire be excluded when they have the facilities? London isn't "The South" and it's irritating when everywhere else south of the Watford Gap gets excluded because The Oval and Lord's must be included in the rotation. Surely its a great thing that we now have grounds around the country that get to spread international cricket around.
It really is a kick in the teeth by officialdom and proof that “the northern powerhouse” and “levelling up” are mere political words.0 -
I think they still do at County level.TheBigBean said:
I went to that test which was great, but it was a poor pitch. The problem was the ECB auctioned off the tests, so venues needed to ensure five days of action leading to terrible pitches. Not sure on the criteria now, but Cardiff consistently had terrible pitches.Pross said:Has the Rose Bowl sorted out its accessibility issues? Sophia Gardens has been shunned in recent years after huge investment to make it onto the Test ground list and producing a memorable Ashes finale that set the tone in 2009.
0 -
Unchanged squad for 4th test, as expected. I admire the fact that Stokes is backing Bairstow but it really is the wrong decision.1
-
Only change I can see in the XI then is Anderson in for Robinson assuming all are fit.1
-
Yeah, that would be my guess too.0
-
It makes me want to cry as it does not bode well for Bazball evolving, shows a lack of balls, unfair on Foakes and it will cost us the Ashes.MidlandsGrimpeur2 said:Unchanged squad for 4th test, as expected. I admire the fact that Stokes is backing Bairstow but it really is the wrong decision.
I saw a stat that said he has caught 11 of 18 chances and 1 of two stumpings
conceded God knows how many extras
and scored 141 runs from 6 innings0 -
It makes me want to cry as it does not bode well for Bazball evolving, shows a lack of balls, unfair on Foakes and it will cost us the Ashes.
I saw a stat that said he has caught 11 of 18 chances and 1 of two stumpings
conceded God knows how many extras
and scored 141 runs from 6 innings
Agreed. I wouldn't usually say one individual performance can cost you over a five day test, but I think it is fair to suggest that without Bairstow we would be at least 2-1 up in this series.
Interesting point with regards Bazball. Bairstow is clearly an emotionally based decision, the desire to back a player even when not performing. I do understand that, but cold hard logic based on performance also needs to be at the forefront, as with any elite sport. Yes, you don't want to shunt players in and out all the time as it effects consistency but Bairstow is not an emerging talent. He is a proven player that is not performing at the moment, pick the man (Foakes) who is.0 -
They have adopted NZ thinking but NZ use this model because there is a lack of alternatives so they stick with and try and develop the players they identify as being the best.MidlandsGrimpeur2 said:It makes me want to cry as it does not bode well for Bazball evolving, shows a lack of balls, unfair on Foakes and it will cost us the Ashes.
I saw a stat that said he has caught 11 of 18 chances and 1 of two stumpings
conceded God knows how many extras
and scored 141 runs from 6 innings
Agreed. I wouldn't usually say one individual performance can cost you over a five day test, but I think it is fair to suggest that without Bairstow we would be at least 2-1 up in this series.
Interesting point with regards Bazball. Bairstow is clearly an emotionally based decision, the desire to back a player even when not performing. I do understand that, but cold hard logic based on performance also needs to be at the forefront, as with any elite sport. Yes, you don't want to shunt players in and out all the time as it effects consistency but Bairstow is not an emerging talent. He is a proven player that is not performing at the moment, pick the man (Foakes) who is.
IMO - with Foakes playing to his average we would have thrashed them in all three tests and that is just counting the missed opportunities and extras.
How do you quantify the morale shift in favour of your bowlers and away from the batsmen0 -
100% agree with this. Strong argument to say he has personally cost us the Ashes - conceded 49 more extras, dropped what, 8+ more chances, and only 34 more scored runs than Carey - he's conceded more than that in extras so he's net cost us runs!surrey_commuter said:
IMO - with Foakes playing to his average we would have thrashed them in all three tests and that is just counting the missed opportunities and extras.
Apparently Ali has been in the nets a lot, potentially coming back in at 3.0 -
Whilst I admire his courage Ali can not bat against Starc/Cummins.Stokes should put his big boy pants on and step into the breach.bobmcstuff said:
100% agree with this. Strong argument to say he has personally cost us the Ashes - conceded 49 more extras, dropped what, 8+ more chances, and only 34 more scored runs than Carey - he's conceded more than that in extras so he's net cost us runs!surrey_commuter said:
IMO - with Foakes playing to his average we would have thrashed them in all three tests and that is just counting the missed opportunities and extras.
Apparently Ali has been in the nets a lot, potentially coming back in at 3.
BTW - one of my bros posed the question of whether he is a bit of a drama queen0 -
I think their philosophy of backing players to the hilt in order to instill confidence and free them up mentally did not quite envisage having someone perform as badly as Bairstow has.MidlandsGrimpeur2 said:It makes me want to cry as it does not bode well for Bazball evolving, shows a lack of balls, unfair on Foakes and it will cost us the Ashes.
I saw a stat that said he has caught 11 of 18 chances and 1 of two stumpings
conceded God knows how many extras
and scored 141 runs from 6 innings
Agreed. I wouldn't usually say one individual performance can cost you over a five day test, but I think it is fair to suggest that without Bairstow we would be at least 2-1 up in this series.
Interesting point with regards Bazball. Bairstow is clearly an emotionally based decision, the desire to back a player even when not performing. I do understand that, but cold hard logic based on performance also needs to be at the forefront, as with any elite sport. Yes, you don't want to shunt players in and out all the time as it effects consistency but Bairstow is not an emerging talent. He is a proven player that is not performing at the moment, pick the man (Foakes) who is.0 -
I think their philosophy of backing players to the hilt in order to instill confidence and free them up mentally did not quite envisage having someone perform as badly as Bairstow has.
This is an interesting point. Under this approach at what point does form, or a lack of, tip the balance and require a player be dropped? I think it comes down to a question of buy in amongst players. Stokes and BM have quite clearly set their stall out and everyone has bought into it. The problem is they have backed themselves into a corner, drop a player and it looks like you are going against your commitment to back players no matter what. This could undermine morale or affect other players experiencing a dip who suddenly become fearful for their place.
You are right, there doesn't seem to be a clearly defined line drawn as to when a player's form becomes an issue. There is no line at the moment which is a problem.0 -
Hasn't Foakes lost confidence after being dropped?0
