[Cricket] Second Ashes Test - England vs Australia - Lords

[OzMike]

Would have had to score at 3.64 an over to win it.
Funny how it can turn into a 20/20 game, even with all those overs to be bowled.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Disagree entirely. Decent Aussie teams have failed to grind us into the ground over here. As I said, Waugh's team did but that was an exceptional team. Lillee and Thomson you say? They played just two series over here - 11 games - W 2. L3, D 6. - their record in England wasn't that exceptional. And that's been the case for years: decent Australian bowlers have found English pictures hard to exploit - he team of the 90s and Bradman's Invicibles aside.

This team has three decent pace bowlers (as opposed to the L&T years), a steady opening pair (which none of the sides of the 70s and 80s had) and a reasonable spinner. As I said, they're not world beaters but this is a better than average Aussie side. The first game was a team that hadn't adjusted to English pictures (as NZ failed to do in their first test this summer) but they'd give any test side a decent game (they beat SA, the number one side in the world last year)

The impressive thing for me was following Cardiff how quickly the Aussie quicks have suddenly clicked as a bowling unit. In particular Hazelwood's control and accuracy really gave Johnson free license to bowl with real aggression and freedom. Of course leads of 500 runs during the match when bowling helps, but this was an attack that started to work for each other rather than bowling as individuals which I think happened at Cardiff for them.

Quite how Watson was picked ahead of Mitchell Marsh is anyone's guess. 11 overs bowled, 5 maidens, 3 wickets.

Can England ignore their own failing players, especially with Bairstow practically banging on the door of the bus!

 

[OzMike]

Stokes was shocking, more worried about getting hit than grounding his bat, he would have been in by at least half a yard.

 

[severnside gull]

.....

 

[Bold Seagull]

I remember my father saying that nobody trusted Churchill but they elected him because he was a strong leader when one was needed. As soon as the perceived need was over and there was an alternative trustworthy figure they dumped him.

Much the same is true of Cameron I suspect. Nobody believes him or the Tory press but he does at least come across as a leader.

At the same time I would struggle to find anyone in the Labour Party (or Lib Dems) who I would trust to lead my dog across the street. I suspect much of the electorate feels the same way.

To be honest if the SNP fielded candidates in England they would get my vote. The only socialist party in parliament and with strong leadership. - much to be admired and much for Labour to reflect on (not that they will sadly)

That's really interesting, but not sure how that will help England going into the 3rd Test?

 

[Titanic]

I remember my father saying that nobody trusted Churchill but they elected him because he was a strong leader when one was needed. As soon as the perceived need was over and there was an alternative trustworthy figure they dumped him.

Much the same is true of Cameron I suspect. Nobody believes him or the Tory press but he does at least come across as a leader.

At the same time I would struggle to find anyone in the Labour Party (or Lib Dems) who I would trust to lead my dog across the street. I suspect much of the electorate feels the same way.

To be honest if the SNP fielded candidates in England they would get my vote. The only socialist party in parliament and with strong leadership. - much to be admired and much for Labour to reflect on (not that they will sadly)

An interesting analysis... not sure how it relates to England's failure in the 2nd test though

 

[Papa Lazarou]

I remember my father saying that nobody trusted Churchill but they elected him because he was a strong leader when one was needed. As soon as the perceived need was over and there was an alternative trustworthy figure they dumped him.

Much the same is true of Cameron I suspect. Nobody believes him or the Tory press but he does at least come across as a leader.

At the same time I would struggle to find anyone in the Labour Party (or Lib Dems) who I would trust to lead my dog across the street. I suspect much of the electorate feels the same way.

To be honest if the SNP fielded candidates in England they would get my vote. The only socialist party in parliament and with strong leadership. - much to be admired and much for Labour to reflect on (not that they will sadly)

I was expecting a cricket reference in there somewhere.

 

[Mo Gosfield]

Just four days ago everyone was talking about the new era or new brand and were 1-0 up. Amazing that nobody's talking about that now!!!

No one with any common sense or decent cricket experience was getting carried away with the result in Cardiff. This England squad has had a fragility about it for some time and has regularly crumbled under pressure. The abject surrender down under still leaves underlying scars and too many of this squad have too many periods where their game crumbles and they have to rebuild.( Cook, Bell and Broad, to name just three )
Too many of our players lack the ability and mental strength to switch from one form of the game to another. They are losing the art of leaving the ball and play at anything just outside off-stump. A number of these England players have built reputations in a very moderate era of Test cricket, when the standard of bowling has been ordinary to say the least.

 

[Papa Lazarou]

No one with any common sense or decent cricket experience was getting carried away with the result in Cardiff. This England squad has had a fragility about it for some time and has regularly crumbled under pressure. The abject surrender down under still leaves underlying scars and too many of this squad have too many periods where their game crumbles and they have to rebuild.( Cook, Bell and Broad, to name just three )
Too many of our players lack the ability and mental strength to switch from one form of the game to another. They are losing the art of leaving the ball and play at anything just outside off-stump. A number of these England players have built reputations in a very moderate era of Test cricket, when the standard of bowling has been ordinary to say the least.

Even when we were winning tests versus New Zealand and in the Cardiff Test, the fragility of the top 4 was clear to see. We can't keep relying on Joe Root / Ben Stokes to dig us out of a hole EVERY time.

Lyth - vulnerable outside the off stump
Ballance - glaring technical flaws in his technique, which test bowlers can exploit
Bell - out of form or past it?

 

[Mo Gosfield]

Broad will never score big in an innings that matters. He might score a few when we're 7 down and still 300 short of our target but he's far too easy to tie down if need be. A bit of short stuff mixed up with the odd ball at a full length and he's out within half an hour.

Spot on.
In short, Broad is chicken and lacks guts. He won't brave it out. He doesn't like short-pitched rising at the body stuff and takes his eyes off it and turns his back on it. Thats why he gets hit on the helmet so often. He flays away and tries to get quick runs and is happy to walk off with a quick fifteen to his name, rather than try and occupy the crease.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Even when we were winning tests versus New Zealand and in the Cardiff Test, the fragility of the top 4 was clear to see. We can't keep relying on Joe Root / Ben Stokes to dig us out of a hole EVERY time.

Lyth - vulnerable outside the off stump
Ballance - glaring technical flaws in his technique, which test bowlers can exploit
Bell - out of form or past it?

There was a stat somewhere that we have been 3 down before getting to 50 runs something like 8 times in the last 10 tests.

That said that doesn't hide the fact England have looked a better side this summer than they have done for 18months or so. To actually win tests against top sides with that top order is evidence they really aren't very far from being a very good side. However, going through Robson, Carberry, Compton, Root, and now Lyth and still not finding someone who is capable of getting to 50 without loss is depressing.

 

[severnside gull]

That's really interesting, but not sure how that will help England going into the 3rd Test?

An interesting analysis... not sure how it relates to England's failure in the 2nd test though

I was expecting a cricket reference in there somewhere.

Ferked if I know what happened there as I hadn't even been on this thread today!?
Something strange in the ether methinks

Apologies chaps......... Back to the cricket !

 

[Mo Gosfield]

Even when we were winning tests versus New Zealand and in the Cardiff Test, the fragility of the top 4 was clear to see. We can't keep relying on Joe Root / Ben Stokes to dig us out of a hole EVERY time.

Lyth - vulnerable outside the off stump
Ballance - glaring technical flaws in his technique, which test bowlers can exploit
Bell - out of form or past it?

Lyth, I'm afraid is not good enough. Physically, he is small and although some Test openers have been small ( Hanif / Gavaskar etc ) he is a million miles from that class. The big Aussie bowlers will overpower and bully him. He has to go.
Ballance is all over the place technically and at this level is a gimme wicket and Bell is living off the past. Lots of cheap runs, scored generally off moderate Test attacks. With Cook, Strauss and KP, Bell is right up there in the record books but none of them would have prospered so much in earlier years. They have all been lucky to have played when they did. They didn't have to face Warne or McGrath in their pomp or a battery of Marshall, Garner, Holding, Roberts, Ambrose, Walsh or Patterson.
Bell's figures flatter him. He is a good player, without being outstanding. Just lucky to play when he did.

 

[Uncle Buck]

Lyth, I'm afraid is not good enough. Physically, he is small and although some Test openers have been small ( Hanif / Gavaskar etc ) he is a million miles from that class. The big Aussie bowlers will overpower and bully him. He has to go.
Ballance is all over the place technically and at this level is a gimme wicket and Bell is living off the past. Lots of cheap runs, scored generally off moderate Test attacks. With Cook, Strauss and KP, Bell is right up there in the record books but none of them would have prospered so much in earlier years. They have all been lucky to have played when they did. They didn't have to face Warne or McGrath in their pomp or a battery of Marshall, Garner, Holding, Roberts, Ambrose, Walsh or Patterson.
Bell's figures flatter him. He is a good player, without being outstanding. Just lucky to play when he did.

Ballance is likely to be dropped, with Bairstow coming back yet again.

The thing is Bairstow is another lower middle order player, so to accommodate him, we are going to have to tinker with the bit of the batting line up that works, which is not ideal.

 

[vegster]

Ballance is likely to be dropped, with Bairstow coming back yet again.

The thing is Bairstow is another lower middle order player, so to accommodate him, we are going to have to tinker with the bit of the batting line up that works, which is not ideal.

I think Lythe, Ballance and Bell are all worthy of the chop but 3 changes may really mess things up. I reckon its Ballance for Bairstow and Bell given the chance to choose his exit. Lythe will go soonish too if he cocks up again.

 

[Uncle Buck]

I think Lythe, Ballance and Bell are all worthy of the chop but 3 changes may really mess things up. I reckon its Ballance for Bairstow and Bell given the chance to choose his exit. Lythe will go soonish too if he cocks up again.

Unless they go back to Compton, Hales is the only other vague option for an opener, but his average in proper cricket this season is not that great.

 

[fat old seagull]

Unless they go back to Compton, Hales is the only other vague option for an opener, but his average in proper cricket this season is not that great.

In a word.... Abysmal !

 

[sten_super]

Unless they go back to Compton, Hales is the only other vague option for an opener, but his average in proper cricket this season is not that great.

I'd be very surprised if Hales prospers as a Test opener - he looks much more like (yet another) lower-middle order batsman to me. I'd stick with Lyth for this series, then (if he's still struggling) consider bringing in someone like Bell-Drummond, who may not be quite ready but can at least learn on the job.

In terms of the rest of the series, I would bring in Bairstow for Ballance, and see if Root fancies a go at third drop. He's our most authoritative batsman at the moment who could play the role long term. If he really doesn't want to do it then play Bell there - either way, bring in Bairstow at 5 and shift the others up. The bowling was pretty insipid but I don't know who you can change - Broad has looked in good form with the ball, Wood has plenty about him to like - if the ball's not going to seam then I think Jimmy is a passenger, but nonethless I think he's more or less undroppable. I'm not sure there are viable options in the CC who are radically different from those three anyway - there's no out-and-out quick that I'm aware of, maybe Finn is the closest?

 

[Uncle Buck]

I'd be very surprised if Hales prospers as a Test opener - he looks much more like (yet another) lower-middle order batsman to me. I'd stick with Lyth for this series, then (if he's still struggling) consider bringing in someone like Bell-Drummond, who may not be quite ready but can at least learn on the job.

In terms of the rest of the series, I would bring in Bairstow for Ballance, and see if Root fancies a go at third drop. He's our most authoritative batsman at the moment who could play the role long term. If he really doesn't want to do it then play Bell there - either way, bring in Bairstow at 5 and shift the others up. The bowling was pretty insipid but I don't know who you can change - Broad has looked in good form with the ball, Wood has plenty about him to like - if the ball's not going to seam then I think Jimmy is a passenger, but nonethless I think he's more or less undroppable. I'm not sure there are viable options in the CC who are radically different from those three anyway - there's no out-and-out quick that I'm aware of, maybe Finn is the closest?

What you say about the batters is the likely scenario, although the one player I would not move is Root, as he is doing well at 5 and a move might be counter productive.

I suspect Finn will play a part in this series.

Probably too soon for Jamie Overton.

Still not happy with Ali as the spinner.

 

[sten_super]

What you say about the batters is the likely scenario, although the one player I would not move is Root, as he is doing well at 5 and a move might be counter productive.

I suspect Finn will play a part in this series.

Probably too soon for Jamie Overton.

Still not happy with Ali as the spinner.

Root has done amazingly well at 5, but if our top 4 wasn't such a clusterf**k, he wouldn't have had the chance. At some point he's going to have to move up the order, and if we're talking about the end of Ian Bell's career then he's the next most senior in the middle order (amazingly). The other option I suppose is to bring in James Taylor, who might be able to make a decent fist of number 3 and has made 291 today - he's a better long-term bet in that position than Ballance for my money.

I agree on Ali. Rashid is worth a go - I wonder if he might come in if/when we're behind in the series and need to take a few more risks.