Pevenseagull
meh
- Jul 20, 2003
- 20,840
Warner will.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Cricket] The Ashes- England v Australia- 1st Test, Birmingham, June 16 - 20, 2023
- Thread starter Eeyore
- Start date
I have a feeling he won't play all 5. He's Broad's bunny, would not be surprised if he gets dropped after 3 tests worth of being worked over.
I'm hoping he does the classic trick of making contributions just large enough to keep him in the team but not large enough to actually effect the result.
OzMike
Well-known member
The odd declaration in the first innings probably didn't help.
An extra 30 or more runs could have tipped the balance.
An extra 30 or more runs could have tipped the balance.
Same can be said for Pope. Goes completely to water against the Aussie attack.
Warner looked comfortable against Broad, unless you are trying to say a chop on trying to smash him through mid wicket in the first innings is working him over?
Smith and Marnus won't have a combined total of less in the rest of the series.
I honestly can't see Anderson being a major factor if these are the types of pitches rolled out for the rest of the series, Wood has to come in, who has a good record on flat pitches in Aus.
- Apr 5, 2014
- 26,363
- Thread starter
- #826
He's only toured the once, and his figures were skewed by a six fer at Hobart. Not the most batsman friendly of surfaces.
His inclusion may have value, especially against someone like Head, but I wouldn't start him ahead of Anderson.
The problem is England's issue was not scoring enough runs. The bowlers did pretty well, considering. Robinson took 5-90 odd at pedestrian medium fast. For me, the best bowler of his type since Glen McGrath. Although his lack of 'pace' seems to blind people to his 70 odd wickets at 21. Strange game these days.
Last edited:
nwgull
Well-known member
Oh well, you won’t be bothering watching the rest of the series then. It’s a foregone conclusion.
Mo Gosfield
Well-known member
- Aug 11, 2010
- 6,376
Who knows how many more Root/Robinson/Anderson would have contributed but history indicates that once Root passes 100, he usually fills his boots. He is skillful enough to manouvere the strike. Robinson looked comfortable. The pitch was flat. The Aussies were on the ropes.
Then the declaration, which felt like a boxer standing off a reeling opponent and not finishing him off. The opponent recovers and thinks..." 393.....hmm...take that......if we can get over 300 we are back in this ".....and they were.
When you bat first in a Test, the primary object is to score 450. That means the opposition have to get 250+ to avoid the follow on. It is pyschological. .
Geez....we had only batted 78 overs. We had thrown our bats at everything in a gung ho fashion. Two players stumped on the first day of a Test on a good surface. We underworked the Aussie bowlers. None bowled more than 15 overs. It allowed them to be fresher in the second innings and roll us over for a lower total than we would have liked. Bazball takes no consideration of that.
Ultimately, we didn't pay the Aussies enough respect. At 227-8, late on the last day, Stokes thought he had the game won. Having bowled Ali too much, he then compounded it by giving Root one over too many. That cost 14 runs and set the Aussies on a victory path.
Bazball doesn't deal in fine margins. Its death or glory. It is about taking risks. Test cricket is a five day battle between bat and ball and its about playing the percentages. We are not playing Ireland here. This is the best team in the world. You can't give them an inch. We did.
SweatyMexican
Well-known member
- Mar 31, 2013
- 4,160
I don’t know a lot about cricket, but I feel like Smith and Labuschane (?) won’t have bad games like that together again.
- Feb 22, 2014
- 2,870
i enjoyed that and as it went to twenty past seven on the fifth day before being decided I don’t know how people can ask for more. As Mark Taylor said there is no right or wrong way to play cricket. I know who I prefer to watch but each to their own.
We forfeited two wickets and lost by two wickets.
We had a chance to put scoreboard pressure on Australia and 450 would have done that much more than 393.
The pitch was flat and the sun was out at the time of declaration, it made little sense not to keep scoring.
With more runs to defend we could have been more aggressive with field positions, rather than spread the field.
I like the pro-active approach of batsman and our commitment to taking twenty wickets, but the declaration was bold for the sake of being bold and a huge gamble, which puts us on the back foot.
We also need to find a way to bring Foakes back, but fear we won’t.
We’ve asked for flat pitches and you have to take your chances when the ball isn’t doing much.
We had a chance to put scoreboard pressure on Australia and 450 would have done that much more than 393.
The pitch was flat and the sun was out at the time of declaration, it made little sense not to keep scoring.
With more runs to defend we could have been more aggressive with field positions, rather than spread the field.
I like the pro-active approach of batsman and our commitment to taking twenty wickets, but the declaration was bold for the sake of being bold and a huge gamble, which puts us on the back foot.
We also need to find a way to bring Foakes back, but fear we won’t.
We’ve asked for flat pitches and you have to take your chances when the ball isn’t doing much.
Bold Seagull
strong and stable with me, or...
Subsequent dropped or fluffed chances, mistakes with the bat all contributed to it being a thrilling end to the test match.
You could easily argue that with 440 on the board or whatever, Aussies would have been even more negative and we wouldnt have seen a thrilling end, or England ended up declaring low in the second innings to try to force a result and we end up the same.
The declaration is a fundamental part of England’s philosophy and we cheer from the rafters when it works. I don’t remember us easily beating Australia when not being aggressive or declaring early first innings.
It’s not like we lost this easily. A huge amount of luck for the opposition meant they got over the line. That’s sport for you, hopefully we get a lion’s share at Lords.
Ooh it’s a corner
Well-known member
Both teams have been fined 40% of match fee and acquired two penalty points for slow over rate - whilst clearly correct by the rules it seems harsh bearing in mind how entertaining the match was - them the rules I guess
- Apr 5, 2014
- 26,363
- Thread starter
- #836
The biggest farce is The Hundred itself. Or The Humbug as I call it. I may be a grumpy old man, but I think a lot of nippers are on my side with that one. I'll watch any cricket me, but I refuse to watch that utter tripe. I'll leave it to people whose attention span makes a goldfish look obsessive.
Last edited:
Greg Bobkin
Silver Seagull
- May 22, 2012
- 16,301
This is the key bit for me. No-one knows what would've happened if they'd stayed in or how many runs they would've added. Or, in fact, if those extra runs would've made any difference anyway...
But if it makes people feel better blaming Stokes for the declaration (at the end of the FIRST day of FIVE exhilarating days of cricket) then who am I to judge?
Hotchilidog
Well-known member
- Jan 24, 2009
- 9,164
In the end I would say that the missed stumpings, dropped catches and some very poor stumping dismissals cost us more than the declaration. Just a few too many errors from England and Australia commendably held their nerve and struck back at vital moments in the test when England looked to be really asserting themselves. A terrific game, the Aussies deserved the win but I think I have seen enough from this England side to encourage me for the rest of the series.
Anderson - off form. He’s 40 ffs
Moeen - not match fit
Bairstow - missed stumping/catches
Root - missed catches and expensive at critical time
Stokes - hobbling. Little threat
No real pace, fielding errors, 3 stumpings (!).
Despite Bazball I thought we were quite negative at the end allowing the Aussies singles, twos and threes whilst having few fielders in close catching positions.
All this against the Aussies and we wonder why we lost. Seems we’d rather lose exciting matches than win the Ashes.
Moeen - not match fit
Bairstow - missed stumping/catches
Root - missed catches and expensive at critical time
Stokes - hobbling. Little threat
No real pace, fielding errors, 3 stumpings (!).
Despite Bazball I thought we were quite negative at the end allowing the Aussies singles, twos and threes whilst having few fielders in close catching positions.
All this against the Aussies and we wonder why we lost. Seems we’d rather lose exciting matches than win the Ashes.
Wood bowled well in Australia, even if he didn't always get just reward for it. Took a wicket in every innings (except the one where he only bowled one ball) and was our top wicket taker.
I still think, if everybody is fit and bowling well, that Anderson, Wood and Robinson is our best attack.