Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Test cricket. England-v-Pakistan.



Gwylan

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2003
31,724
Uffern
There is currently a bit of debate over whether he is a chucker I understand.

That's not quite true. He was reported as having a suspect action three years ago but tests established that his action was quite legitimate - there have been complaints since then, so there's certainly no 'current' debate on the matter.

What I don't understand is why he didn't play test cricket until he was 31. He's homing in on a 100 test wickets at about 30 runs in just 18 tests. Considering that he's done most of his bowling on flat, batting pitches that's a fair performance.
 




spring hall convert

Well-known member
Nov 3, 2009
9,608
Brighton
I've always thought Prior is a bit dodgy batting with the tail. Either he puts a little too much faith in the talents of 10 and Jack or he is very worried about his average.
 


CheeseRolls

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jan 27, 2009
6,163
Shoreham Beach
Is Matt Prior the new Ashley Barnes ? 70 Not out but most of them were penalties or something.

Next time England try picking two Sussex players and you may stand a chance
 


CHAPPERS

DISCO SPENG
Jul 5, 2003
45,014
I've always thought Prior is a bit dodgy batting with the tail. Either he puts a little too much faith in the talents of 10 and Jack or he is very worried about his average.

Prior? Worried about his average? That's the single most ridiculous thing I've ever heard on a cricket thread.
 


spring hall convert

Well-known member
Nov 3, 2009
9,608
Brighton
Is Matt Prior the new Ashley Barnes ? 70 Not out but most of them were penalties or something.

Next time England try picking two Sussex players and you may stand a chance

I'm not knocking the 70 very valuable runs but protecting the tail is a pre-requisite of a succesful test match no.7 isn't it?
 












keaton

Big heart, hot blood and balls. Big balls
Nov 18, 2004
9,895
I'm not knocking the 70 very valuable runs but protecting the tail is a pre-requisite of a succesful test match no.7 isn't it?

Swann got out at 151. So he added 41 runs with the 10 and 11 which is pretty good if you look at the scorecard
 


Uncle Buck

Ghost Writer
Jul 7, 2003
28,071
Thought they'd struggle here (and in Sri Lanka), of England's batsmen I only really fancy Pietersen & Morgan against top class spinners and they can lack the patience to build big innings on slow wickets. Ajmal bowled well though, there wasn't even that much turn. There is currently a bit of debate over whether he is a chucker I understand.

I think England's refusal to adapt the 7 batsmen/ 4 bowlers could be made to look silly. Unless you are the West Indies of the 70's & 80's you have to play 2 spinners in the sub continent. England may well be left to bat close to 2 days for a draw. Possible echoes of their last test series defeat in the West Indies where 1 batting nightmare meant they lost a turgid series 1-0.

I suspect if Besnan was fit they would have gone with 5 bowlers (2 spinners) as Bresnan, Broad and Swann are all number 8's if you like.

However the minute he went home injured, to play 5 bowlers would have left us with a longish tail.

Not ideal.
 


Uncle Buck

Ghost Writer
Jul 7, 2003
28,071
That's not quite true. He was reported as having a suspect action three years ago but tests established that his action was quite legitimate - there have been complaints since then, so there's certainly no 'current' debate on the matter.

What I don't understand is why he didn't play test cricket until he was 31. He's homing in on a 100 test wickets at about 30 runs in just 18 tests. Considering that he's done most of his bowling on flat, batting pitches that's a fair performance.

To be honest once they changed the rules to make Murali's action legal, nobody else is really going to have a problem.
 




spring hall convert

Well-known member
Nov 3, 2009
9,608
Brighton
It's decent but I think the original debate was around taking singles off the first or second ball of the over with 10 & 11 at the other end.

Granted there are 2 schools of thought some think you shouldn't turn down a run if it is on offer, I'm very much in the other camp, especially when Prior had his eye in. He's been doing it a long time though so I suspect if Andy Flower had an issue with it Prior would know about it.
 


spring hall convert

Well-known member
Nov 3, 2009
9,608
Brighton
I suspect if Besnan was fit they would have gone with 5 bowlers (2 spinners) as Bresnan, Broad and Swann are all number 8's if you like.

However the minute he went home injured, to play 5 bowlers would have left us with a longish tail.

Not ideal.

I'm not sure they would have done, Flower got badly burnt playing 5 bowlers at Headingly. Still I guess its immeterial now that they couldn't bat with 7.
 


Uncle Buck

Ghost Writer
Jul 7, 2003
28,071
I'm not sure they would have done, Flower got badly burnt playing 5 bowlers at Headingly. Still I guess its immeterial now that they couldn't bat with 7.

2009 Ashes we played 5 bowlers the whole way through, with Prior batting at 6 and Flintoff at 7.

The problem at Headingley was that Flintoff was rested, so Broad came in at 7 and I had tickets for day 3 and the game was over by lunchtime on day 3.
 










CHAPPERS

DISCO SPENG
Jul 5, 2003
45,014
That lack of a second spinner is showing now the ball is old. Anderson was only ever going to be effective whilst the ball was new and Tremlett relies on a bit of pace.

We miss Bresnan massively and as soon as he was unavailable the Panesar option should have been taken. Easy runs now.
 








Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here