Pevenseagull
meh
- Jul 20, 2003
- 20,693
Nice pull
Can't see why we're adding a few runs here. If we need to get 20-30 after the Aussie innings, that won't be a problem - it will take the same amount of time out of the game. What we need is their 10 wickets first - that has to be the priority, surely?WTF are we doing, he has 50, get bowling
Will take an extra 2 overs, and we may as well use this last wicket. I think we're just trying to minimise the chances of us having to bat twice.Can't see why we're adding a few runs here. If we need to get 20-30 after the Aussie innings, that won't be a problem - it will take the same amount of time out of the game. What we need is their 10 wickets first - that has to be the priority, surely?
But why do we need to 'avoid' batting a second time? The key factor in this match now is to bowl them out.Will take an extra 2 overs, and we may as well use this last wicket. I think we're just trying to minimise the chances of us having to bat twice.
Exactly - if we don't have enough time to take 10 wickets, nothing else matters.But why do we need to 'avoid' batting a second time? The key factor in this match now is to bowl them out.
What is the point of Jimmy batting now
Combo of stuff: It's easier (and risk-free) to score quick runs now against a disheartened bowling attack than it would be against a fresh one in the 4th innings with a new ball. Also, every over bowled makes the pitch a bit more worn, and an additional change of innings takes another 2 overs out of the game.Exactly - if we don't have enough time to take 10 wickets, nothing else matters.
I think they'll be quite pleased to be taking time out of the game. He could have run in there and made an attempt to catch it - but didn't bother.I mean, it's great fun to watch, but I still don't get the thinking.
The Aussies must be. bit confused by it all too.