[Cricket] The 'Especially for Billy the Fish' 2nd Test Eng v India at Lords thread

[KeegansHairPiece]

Given the choice between sending Anderson and Robinson out to take advantage of whatever movement there is on the first morning, and sending our disaster zone of a top order out to deal with said conditions, I know which one I'd have been more comfortable with. I suspect those two are probably better equipped to deal with any pressure than Burns and Sibley are at the moment.

Sometimes it doesn't work, whether because the bowler's not up to it (cough Curran cough) or because there's not the movement everybody expected, or the ball just beats that bat and the opposition gets through it. But it doesn't mean the decision at the time was wrong.

I would say England's strength is very obviously swing/seam bowling, and our main weaknesses are the top order and spin bowling. Given that, I'd suggest bowling first on a murky day when there's a chance of movement was entirely justified.



We'll see about that

100% this.

It was a fully justified call, and a few too many people categorically declaring it 'wrong' 8 hours AFTER the toss.

1 min after the toss, there is an adage about deciding to bat for a reason. If we had a fully firing bowling and batting line-up I'd agree with you 100%, we don't in either department so the call wasn't justified imho. Don't make a call like that just because you're worried about your batting - rarely ever a good reason to bowl first in any game of cricket.

The thing is, to my mind you need more faith in your batting to win a toss and bowl than you do your bowlers. You are consigning yourself to bat 2nd and last to win the match, you need more faith in your batting to choose to bat second than you do if you put yourself in. It's a double edged sword and always has been, hence I said you really need to be on the top of your game to decide to do it. Your bowlers have to be able to bowl under big pressure, and you'll need to bat against the scoreboard.

 

[Argartu]

Made it to tea with no wickets down, that's a win in my book.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

1 min after the toss, there is an adage about deciding to bat for a reason. If we had a fully firing bowling and batting line-up I'd agree with you 100%, we don't in either department so the call wasn't justified imho. Don't make a call like that just because you're worried about your batting - rarely ever a good reason to bowl first in any game of cricket.

The thing is, to my mind you need more faith in your batting to win a toss and bowl than you do your bowlers. You are consigning yourself to bat 2nd and last to win the match, you need more faith in your batting to choose to bat second than you do if you put yourself in. It's a double edged sword and always has been, hence I said you really need to be on the top of your game to decide to do it. Your bowlers have to be able to bowl under big pressure, and you'll need to bat against the scoreboard.

But you didn't question it at the toss. You first questioned it at 14:36, when Indian were about 100 without loss (and after England's bowlers had beaten the edge about a dozen times in the first hour).

There were plenty of clouds, and a bit of moisture about, and England possess the finest swing bowler of all time. Without hindsight, it was simply not the no-brainer you present.

 

[pasty]

Remarkable symmetry:

 

[Sid in the Sharknado]

there is an adage about deciding to bat for a reason.

Primarily because in the days of uncovered pitches if you bowled first you risked getting the other team out for what seemed a perfectly good score, and then it pissing down and being caught on a drying wicket and bowled out for 30. If you walked into the England dressing room and told them they should bat first by default they'd laugh you out of the room, because it's just not true.

 

[KeegansHairPiece]

But you didn't question it at the toss. You first questioned it at 14:36, when Indian were about 100 without loss (and after England's bowlers had beaten the edge about a dozen times in the first hour).

There were plenty of clouds, and a bit of moisture about, and England possess the finest swing bowler of all time. Without hindsight, it was simply not the no-brainer you present.

Sorry, I watched the whole thing, I just didn't log in to NSC. I can send you my whatsapp messages to a mate if it helps, besides, isn't 2.30pm only 4hrs after the toss?

There were clouds and a bit of moisture, but regardless I think I've stated in detail while mentally it wasn't a thing to do when you're not firing in either department regardless of Jimmy in your side - talk about putting all your apples in one basket. Statistics back this up. I never said it was a no-brainer, I called it a mistake.

 

[KeegansHairPiece]

Primarily because in the days of uncovered pitches if you bowled first you risked getting the other team out for what seemed a perfectly good score, and then it pissing down and being caught on a drying wicket and bowled out for 30. If you walked into the England dressing room and told them they should bat first by default they'd laugh you out of the room, because it's just not true.

But you only win 50% of your tosses, so if most teams bat first, then if for a portion of your toss wins you bowl, then you'll likely bowling first more than you bat first. So not sure where your default comment comes into it, because you only get the choice in half your matches.

 

[KeegansHairPiece]

Sibley - if you're going to step across your offstump, you surely need to be fairly confident / competent off your pads?

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Oh FFS.

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

Oh.

 

[KeegansHairPiece]

Oh FFS.

Oh dear...he could have had a bat twice as wide and would have missed that!

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

Oh dear...he could have had a bat twice as wide and would have missed that!

Yes I was closer to it siting in my lounge

 

[A1X]

 

[big nuts]

Surely Sibley has had his time now for England. I can’t remember many more limited players than him, can barely score on the off side and whilst he survives the scoreboard never pushes on.

I’m not sure who is out there, but wouldn’t be adverse to Crawley or Hameed opening if we can’t find anyone else.

It’s all immaterial anyway, because India are much too good for us.

 

[The Fits]

Shocking miss that but why is he batting 3? A guy we know has been absolutely shot of confidence for huge swathes of his young career...
We don’t help ourselves.

 

[Sid in the Sharknado]

But you only win 50% of your tosses, so if most teams bat first, then if for a portion of your toss wins you bowl, then you'll likely bowling first more than you bat first. So not sure where your default comment comes into it, because you only get the choice in half your matches.

I was taking it as read that we were talking about the decision made when you win the toss, since you obviously can't do anything about it if you lose it.

 

[The Fits]

14th top 3 duck this year. A record.

 

[big nuts]

Shocking miss that but why is he batting 3? A guy we know has been absolutely shot of confidence for huge swathes of his young career...
We don’t help ourselves.

In fairness he has spent most of his career as an opener. Batting at 3 hasn’t caused him to miss a straight one.

 

[Simster]

Surely Sibley has had his time now for England. I can’t remember many more limited players than him, can barely score on the off side and whilst he survives the scoreboard never pushes on.

I’m not sure who is out there, but wouldn’t be adverse to Crawley or Hameed opening if we can’t find anyone else.

It’s all immaterial anyway, because India are much too good for us.

Sibley is absolutely crap but I don't know enough about the county scene to suggest an alternative.

 

[Pavilionaire]

To be fair to Hameed it was a beautiful forward defensive movement, it's just a shame the bat was a foot away from the ball.