Any cricket lovers on here?
Comments
-
Brute of a delivery from Wood for wicket number 6
0 -
He's definitely earned the reward
0 -
7 and 8!
0 -
The overweight lady is warming up her vocal cords....
0 -
Yeah I'd not bother...
0 -
9. Good comeback from Bash after being hit for 6 and 4
0 -
Before the Windies started their 2nd innings, I honesty thought tomorrows play would be a really good watch....
0 -
And thats it.
Bashir gets his 5fer
WI hammered
0 -
All over.
Bashir and Smith both more than justified their selection today IMO.
0 -
Don't know if anyone can confirm this but I'm sure I read somewhere yesterday that this was the first time that England had ever scored 400+ in both innings of a test match.
If true, I find that pretty amazing. (not that they did it but that it was the first time they had ever done it)
Wilier Izoard XP0 -
From the BBC write up: "The home side never fully regained the momentum, but in reaching 425 to go with their first-innings 416 this was the first time England have passed 400 twice in the same Test."
So yep. First time they've done it. The Aussies (shock) hold the record with 6 times I believe.
0 -
Apparently yeah - it doesn't happen very often. It's only happened 12 times in Tests:
Australia 6, India 3, then SA, PAK and ENG all once
5 of the previous 11 occurrences were draws.
It has to be innings 1 and 3 really, and it has to be a 1st innings score not much over 400 (otherwise you'd likely declare), and it also requires quick scoring rates (cos 800 runs at 3 an over is nearly 3 days of batting on its own - about 267 overs).
It's only been achieved in this match because the run rates have been high by Test standards, England got their 841 in 181 overs (4.65/over) - WI were a bit slower at 4.09 for their 457. If England had scored their 841 at WI's rate it adds pretty much another session onto the game just for that drop (206 overs vs 181, so another 25 overs).
If the first 3 innings each go for 400 you need decent run rates for that to give a result - at 3 an over that's nearly 4.5 days of batting (400 overs) - i.e., a nailed-on draw - at 4 runs an over it's 3 days and one session (300 overs) which gives time for a 4th innings chase. Since 4th innings chases over 400 are extremely rare (only once at Trent Bridge, and 21 times in all of Test cricket https://www.espncricinfo.com/records/highest-fourth-innings-totals-222199), you are much more likely to declare before 400 in the 2nd innings just because you run out of time otherwise.
So it's been rare cos
- If you are in that position you are likely to end up either declaring or drawing
- It's very rare that the first 2 innings would both go for 400, making batting on for 400 in the 3rd innings worthwhile - if WI had only made 250 or 300 in their first it seems unlikely that England would have batted on for 400 in the second (as you'd have a lead of 100 or 150 before you even started...).
- You need fairly high scoring rates
2 -
I was genuinely astonished by this. Having watched Test Cricket for years I would just have assumed it had happened dozens of times. Just 12 times is remarkable.
0 -
Yeah me too! I really did find it surprising
Wilier Izoard XP0 -
Anyone watch the Hundred yesterday? Great to have cricket on free-to-air, but the games were quite poor.
I went to Lancs-Notts t20 last week and I have to say it was a very good game... The only thing that's normally better about the Hundred is the crowds are bigger and some of it's on free to air, but those are a function of the schedule (school holidays), marketing, and the business model.
I kind of get the argument that we need a franchise tournament, but the Hundred is competing with MLC now which has a lot of big money backers, so the standard of the overseas players has gone down a lot this year compared even to last year. It's also a dumb format (seen some reports they are considering reverting to a traditional t20)
Personally think there would be more mileage in merging the two and scheduling the Blast/Hundred July-August instead (so it gets a clear run to a conclusion, over the school holidays) and allowing more overseas players to make it more like a franchise league... Would clear more time for county and one-day (not that I care about the domestic one day).
0 -
The franchise and back to back mens' and womens' matches are good. The format changes to stop it being T20 are generally rubbish and the 1990s video game onscreen graphics are annoying. They should scrap it but revamp T20 to a frnachise with mens' and womens' teams.
0 -
What Pross said! This is what I've thought for a while. The format was never going to survive long term.
0 -
Yes - the impact on the women's game has been really good. I basically agree.
Leaving aside the jarring colours, the onscreen graphics seem to be quite for new fans. But I struggle in the 2nd innings as I keep looking for the chasing team total...
0 -
Are they still all named after snacks?
0 -
Huh? They've never been named after snacks.
Cycling is still the only sport I can think of where the team is named after the Sponser
0 -
They all have snacks as their major sponsor... as KP is the main partner.
I don't really mind this, in fact it's probably the least objectionable part of the Hundred? I don't refer to England as the car supermarket team or Lancs as Etihad.
Manchester Originals has McCoy's, for example. If I am watching a random game then I pick my team based on which crisps I prefer...
1 -
Also first Test to be held in Belfast starts tomorrow, Ireland-Zimbabwe - only the second one on the island.
We've got an office there and I keep trying to convince my colleagues to go... I don't think they are keen :D
0 -
Southern Brave have a good bowling lineup - Jordan, Mills, Archer, Ahmed.
I know how old people felt after decimalisation of the currency, had to keep converting back to runs per over.
At one point I saw Mills stats and it was 18 balls for 32 runs, had to think for a second to get about 11 an over... works better for the batters as strike rate is a normal metric anyway.
0 -
Looks to have been a solid day of test match cricket in Stormont, with proper ebbs and flows. Ireland put Zimbabwe in to bat and at one point they were 143/2, but there's been something of a collapse and they're now 207/9 - including 4 wickets for 13 at the end there. Free to watch on Youtube and decidedly better than the Hundred (although I've just had it in the background on a spare phone screen).
0 -
Having grown up listening/watching England playing the Windies in the 80's, I'm used to hearing the word "collapsing"
Not sure I can cope with it not applying to us!
0 -
Your luck is in.
0 -
Pff. That's not a collapse.
Wait till tomorrow morning. That'll be a collapse!
1 -
You shouldn’t have joked about it as it’s happened.
Five down for fifty and change.
"Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.0 -
From 54-5 to 376 all out.
Can't even do a collapse properly.......
0 -
Quite brilliant really, batting under pressure. Although one of those 5 was Wood so wasn't quite as bad as it looks.
Gutted Smith didn't get his ton.
Ireland game looks to have been dramatic, Zimbabwe were 150 odd for 3 earlier and bowled out for 197, which is an England level collapse - but then Ireland chasing 152 managed to get to 21/5... just off for rain.
0
