[Cricket] Ashes 2021-22

[Deleted member 2719]

We have just been absolutely slaughtered twice. What do you think?

Alright, calm down isn't this a cricket thread?

I admit I know very little about cricket, but I did think cricket squares are very variable in how they play, am I wrong?

I just thought the wicket may suit our batsmen or bowlers?


Can Root pick a better team?

They have to do something, we can't get humiliated again surely.

 

[keaton]

Not that I’m defending England cricket but….

1 did you watch the last Test? Jack Leach was destroyed by the Aussies. They’ve well and truly got his number. He was pretty much unselectable for this test.
.

But doesn't sum up the issues with selection and English cricket? Spinner gets chucked in for one game in unfavorable conditions, has a shocker, dropped. Batsmen and pace bowlers get 5/6 games to prove themselves as we want consistent selection and there's no one better

 

[Lever]

Alright, calm down isn't this a cricket thread?

I admit I know very little about cricket, but I did think cricket squares are very variable in how they play, am I wrong?

I just thought the wicket may suit our batsmen or bowlers?


Can Root pick a better team?

They have to do something, we can't get humiliated again surely.

Something else you know very little about?

Well, at least you admit to it about cricket and here you have kept to the thread topic!

 

[A1X]

Perhaps if we played in pyjamas

Cricket has been so diluted in this country over the years

What's the staple diet of aussie cricket these days,still the Sheffield Shield?

The BBL seems to dominate for them, although it feels like their test match players play more Shield games than ours play CC ones. Probably because they play less cricket generally, only really England and India who play all year round every year.

 

[GREASED WEASEL]

The BBL seems to dominate for them, although it feels like their test match players play more Shield games than ours play CC ones. Probably because they play less cricket generally, only really England and India who play all year round every year.

Thanks for that

Can't help feeling that too much cricket,ironically is to blame

 

[Is it PotG?]

Not sure what the problem is.

Next time we play Germany or Kenya in the T20 we'll show 'em, and score a decent 220.

 

[A1X]

Thanks for that

Can't help feeling that too much cricket,ironically is to blame

Yep, and it’s too much of the wrong sort of cricket.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Yep, and it’s too much of the wrong sort of cricket.

I think we as a country are too hung up on formats. There was a time when specialisms seemed the way to go, but I maybe way off here, but the really top sides in all the formats, namely India, NZ and Aus appear to be having more and more players that cross all formats and get in the international side for each.

We seem to be stuck in the thinking you need a decent first class county average before you get in the test side, not if you are good enough, you're good enough.

I saw people early commenting on Foakes because his county championship batting average is only 38 or whatever it is.

The question is, if the selection criteria is first class county cricket and this is the best we can produce, you have to start looking elsewhere and wonder why we so quickly just consign players to the short form. Perhaps Test cricket expectations need to move on and you take a few dismissals for some fast scoring at the top of the order. I don't know, but if Burns and Sibley are the answers county cricket have given you this year, then you have to wonder if we're asking the right questions?

 

[cjd]

Alright, calm down isn't this a cricket thread?


I just thought ..........

Now....that is where you're going wrong. Schoolboy error.

 

[DJ NOBO]

Re attacking leach. It was a calculated gamble on a flat pitch. It was very clever by Australia. Leach out bowled Lyon in the last ashes series over here and they decided that attacking him on a very flat pitch might come out selectors into thinking he was unpickable on a turning pitch. It was genius.

The mismanagement of English spinners over the last 2 years has been shocking.

Interesting theory.
Another is that Leach could neither contain nor attack in the first test. He played poorly and got dropped.
The spinners have been managed badly but I’m not sure any of them are good enough to take big wickets anyway.
Why would they be, when you see the prep they get in domestic cricket?
Big, deep problems.
Maybe the new Graham Swann will emerge out of nowhere. That’s not impossible.
While the options are Leach, Bess and (until recently) Ali, expect more non-commital management.
I fear the Aussies could keep hold of the urn for a while, and it’s not even as if they’re much cop themselves.

 

[Seagull58]

I think we as a country are too hung up on formats. There was a time when specialisms seemed the way to go, but I maybe way off here, but the really top sides in all the formats, namely India, NZ and Aus appear to be having more and more players that cross all formats and get in the international side for each.

We seem to be stuck in the thinking you need a decent first class county average before you get in the test side, not if you are good enough, you're good enough.

I saw people early commenting on Foakes because his county championship batting average is only 38 or whatever it is.

The question is, if the selection criteria is first class county cricket and this is the best we can produce, you have to start looking elsewhere and wonder why we so quickly just consign players to the short form. Perhaps Test cricket expectations need to move on and you take a few dismissals for some fast scoring at the top of the order. I don't know, but if Burns and Sibley are the answers county cricket have given you this year, then you have to wonder if we're asking the right questions?

Jason Roy has to be a better batsman than Burns or Sibley across all formats if given a fair opportunity.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Jason Roy has to be a better batsman than Burns or Sibley across all formats if given a fair opportunity.

Exactly. Was 5 tests all Roy got? Sibley got 22. Buttler opens in ODIs, but has only ever been given 2 innings opening in tests. Malan is pretty much opening in this series. I don't know, we just seem to be stuck in an old way of thinking, whereas you've got these other test teams trying stuff out, looking at batting positions and bowling options across formats. Need to embrace the short format as it's here to stay and see how it can benefit test match players, not treat it as the enemy.

 

[Machiavelli]

Interesting theory.
Another is that Leach could neither contain nor attack in the first test. He played poorly and got dropped.
The spinners have been managed badly but I’m not sure any of them are good enough to take big wickets anyway.
Why would they be, when you see the prep they get in domestic cricket?
Big, deep problems.
Maybe the new Graham Swann will emerge out of nowhere. That’s not impossible.
While the options are Leach, Bess and (until recently) Ali, expect more non-commital management.
I fear the Aussies could keep hold of the urn for a while, and it’s not even as if they’re much cop themselves.

Agreed, Swann was our last good spinner, and we haven't exactly been abundant with them over the decades I've been watching the game. Unlike others on this thread, I rated Moeen as a wicket-taking bowler. Utterly hopeless at tying down an end, however. And then look at what Lyon did in that Test, he just bowled, gave very little away, and went past 400 wickets.
I do think the key here is English conditions: it doesn't produce enough decent spinners; it favours swing/seam bowlers; it lacks the bounce that is available elsewhere which affects how batsmen play. Not that NZ haven't found away to transcend their conditions.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Agreed, Swann was our last good spinner, and we haven't exactly been abundant with them over the decades I've been watching the game. Unlike others on this thread, I rated Moeen as a wicket-taking bowler. Utterly hopeless at tying down an end, however. And then look at what Lyon did in that Test, he just bowled, gave very little away, and went past 400 wickets.
I do think the key here is English conditions: it doesn't produce enough decent spinners; it favours swing/seam bowlers; it lacks the bounce that is available elsewhere which affects how batsmen play. Not that NZ haven't found away to transcend their conditions.

I'm not sure of all the background, but losing Rashid from test cricket was a real loss to England.

 

[Arkwright]

Jason Roy has to be a better batsman than Burns or Sibley across all formats if given a fair opportunity.

Jason Roy hardly plays a four day game for Surrey that's why he got found out in Test cricket. Burns is by far a better Test cricketer as is Pope and there County averages prove the point. It's horses for courses.

The problem is the County Championship is poor and the better players aren't tested unlike the Aussies where the Sheffield Shield is full of quality and played on decent wickets and not on green tops to suit average line and length bowlers such as Essex. Better wickets make for better players.

 

[um bongo molongo]

I think we as a country are too hung up on formats. There was a time when specialisms seemed the way to go, but I maybe way off here, but the really top sides in all the formats, namely India, NZ and Aus appear to be having more and more players that cross all formats and get in the international side for each.

We seem to be stuck in the thinking you need a decent first class county average before you get in the test side, not if you are good enough, you're good enough.

I saw people early commenting on Foakes because his county championship batting average is only 38 or whatever it is.

The question is, if the selection criteria is first class county cricket and this is the best we can produce, you have to start looking elsewhere and wonder why we so quickly just consign players to the short form. Perhaps Test cricket expectations need to move on and you take a few dismissals for some fast scoring at the top of the order. I don't know, but if Burns and Sibley are the answers county cricket have given you this year, then you have to wonder if we're asking the right questions?

I agree with the broader point you’re making. But I’d argue that the fact that most of our top 6 (root and pope apart) don’t have a good FC average is part of the problem. They simply don’t score enough runs - for England or their counties. The county system is broken, very few batsmen averaging even 40+.

 

[Eeyore]

Interesting theory.
Another is that Leach could neither contain nor attack in the first test. He played poorly and got dropped.
The spinners have been managed badly but I’m not sure any of them are good enough to take big wickets anyway.
Why would they be, when you see the prep they get in domestic cricket?
Big, deep problems.
Maybe the new Graham Swann will emerge out of nowhere. That’s not impossible.
While the options are Leach, Bess and (until recently) Ali, expect more non-commital management.
I fear the Aussies could keep hold of the urn for a while, and it’s not even as if they’re much cop themselves.

Aussies haven't won here for 20 years. And in that time we have been smashed 5-0 and 4-0 over there (2010/11 aside).

Folk forget that Test cricket is imbalanced home and away in general. A quick look shows that of the 40 Test series England have played at home in the last 20 years they have lost just six. Two of them this year.

 

[OzMike]

No warm up games in these conditions hasn't helped.
Though when watching, they can still look clueless.
T20 has left England bereft of test match players.
At least the Aussies took time to play themselves in, which is should be done in a test.
With the exception of Travis Head who just plays T20 in every game.

 

[Berty23]

Yep. Not to mention that England insist on picking their bowlers based on how well they bat, and as such picked a poor Moeen Ali repeatedly.

To be fair. Before his last run in the side moeen was dropped after the first ashes test but before that he was leading wicket taker in the world averaging mid 20s wasn’t he? Another example of shocking management where he has batted in every position apart from 10 and 11 for England.

 

[Simster]

I think we as a country are too hung up on formats. There was a time when specialisms seemed the way to go, but I maybe way off here, but the really top sides in all the formats, namely India, NZ and Aus appear to be having more and more players that cross all formats and get in the international side for each.

We seem to be stuck in the thinking you need a decent first class county average before you get in the test side, not if you are good enough, you're good enough.

I saw people early commenting on Foakes because his county championship batting average is only 38 or whatever it is.

The question is, if the selection criteria is first class county cricket and this is the best we can produce, you have to start looking elsewhere and wonder why we so quickly just consign players to the short form. Perhaps Test cricket expectations need to move on and you take a few dismissals for some fast scoring at the top of the order. I don't know, but if Burns and Sibley are the answers county cricket have given you this year, then you have to wonder if we're asking the right questions?

This is absolutely spot on. People are far too quick to blame the short form of the game for England's test woes. I think it is bollocks, frankly. There have always been test players who play brainless shots or are incapable of playing themselves in - long before T20 came along. Jason Roy is a far better batsman than any of our last 5 or 6 openers we've tried I would say. Why the hell has he been consigned to short form stuff? If England batted first and he took the game to Australia he'd be out cheaply sometimes, but he'd also score a quick 40 or 50 fairly regularly I should think, and that is the sort of thing that puts the bowlers on the back foot.

Equally, test cricket has always rewarded seam bowlers who pitch the ball up and "buy" wickets and who don't try and bounce out the last 4 batsmen on a slowish pitch. England's batting has been dreadful, England's bowling has been ok in patches but the tactics have been appalling.

I wouldn't mind if we lost but played greater than the sum our parts and picked our best players for the conditions, but thanks to shit captaincy, poor selections and crap batsmen, we are embarrassing ourselves.

T20 has left England bereft of test match players.

No, it really hasn't. It's a lazy argument IMO that has taken far too much of the blame for the fact we're not competing at the top test level anymore. How come Australia won the T20WC and have a far better and prolonged domestic T20 tournament than we do, AND are embarrassing us in this test series?