England vs BCs ODI series
-
@no-quarter said in England vs BCs ODI series:
@baron-silas-greenback said in England vs BCs ODI series:
@nzzp said in England vs BCs ODI series:
@booboo said in England vs BCs ODI series:
@chris-b said in England vs BCs ODI series:
@hooroo said in England vs BCs ODI series:
@donsteppa T20 aside which I couldn't give a rats about, we are a tidy team at the moment.
We're not too awful at T20s either - would be interesting to see who could beat that Australian team - not so much the bowlers, but that batting line-up is capable of massive damage on any sort of batting-friendly wicket.
We're currently ranked 4th in tests, 3rd in ODIs and 4th in T20s.
That's not shabby
@booboo said in England vs BCs ODI series:
@chris-b said in England vs BCs ODI series:
@hooroo said in England vs BCs ODI series:
@donsteppa T20 aside which I couldn't give a rats about, we are a tidy team at the moment.
We're not too awful at T20s either - would be interesting to see who could beat that Australian team - not so much the bowlers, but that batting line-up is capable of massive damage on any sort of batting-friendly wicket.
We're currently ranked 4th in tests, 3rd in ODIs and 4th in T20s.
That's not shabby
particularly considering how few people play it, and how (relatively) poorly funded we are. When I visited the UK, I couldn't believe the money in the game. We do well to compete, let alone win against the sheer number of professionals.
That said, Australia is on another level with cricket. Their domestic comps throw up so much talent (like the ITM/Super/Club setup in NZ), and generally iron out major weaknesses.
Eh? Sounds like bollox to me. Aus currently are flat track bullies..... and most pitches are flat tracks. They have not had weaknesses ironed out. They just don't get tested. The same reason Guptill is a white ball legend and a red ball under performer.
In tests yes. In T20s.. well basically all tracks are flat and they've got serious hitting power. In ODIs they got found out by England which was interesting.
Sure. I was referring to the claim that the Aus domestic game irons out weaknesses. It doesn't.
-
What T20 has done is produce a current generation of batsmen who have very poor defensive technique. Even some of players who appear to have good/respectable records in test cricket. They plant their feet, have a good eye and hit through the line. If the ball comes on and is not deviating, they marmalise it. They can, and have, scored big in test cricket but also get a lot of low scores when conditions are tricky.
Which is why England's dangerous middle to lower order appear to be a strength in test cricket when it is Bairstow, Stokes, Moeen etc but all of them don't really have the technique to survive the moving ball - hence why there collapses. Same with Australia, Mitchell Marsh is a flat track bully.
It really stands out when you watch the likes of Root, Smith, Kane and Kohli. While Smith is unorthodox, he does know how to stay in for long periods.
Rant over.
-
@kiwipie said in England vs BCs ODI series:
What T20 has done is produce a current generation of batsmen who have very poor defensive technique. Even some of players who appear to have good/respectable records in test cricket. They plant their feet, have a good eye and hit through the line. If the ball comes on and is not deviating, they marmalise it. They can, and have, scored big in test cricket but also get a lot of low scores when conditions are tricky.
Which is why England's dangerous middle to lower order appear to be a strength in test cricket when it is Bairstow, Stokes, Moeen etc but all of them don't really have the technique to survive the moving ball - hence why there collapses. Same with Australia, Mitchell Marsh is a flat track bully.
It really stands out when you watch the likes of Root, Smith, Kane and Kohli. While Smith is unorthodox, he does know how to stay in for long periods.
Rant over.
You really are my favourite cricket ranter!
-
@kiwipie what gets you paid today? The ability to bat time, and play the leave? Or the ability to cream things through the line and score eye-catching 60-odds from 40?
And honestly, when most test pitches are flat as a runway model, why would you learn to play a moving ball?
-
@KiwiPie very good summation of the state of batsmen today, and explains the feast or famine that we seem to see more regularly these days.
I think it has hurt the appeal of test cricket a bit. Nobody wants to see teams rolled for 100, and on the flip-side nobody wants to see 600/3. But it seems if the groundsmen prepare a pitch with anything in it for the bowlers they cop it, instead of more ire being directed towards flat track bullies with shit technique. The best tests are when the batsmen have to work hard to get 350+ with a genuine battle between bat and ball - that sorts the mice from the men.
-
@mariner4life said in England vs BCs ODI series:
@kiwipie what gets you paid today? The ability to bat time, and play the leave? Or the ability to cream things through the line and score eye-catching 60-odds from 40?
And honestly, when most test pitches are flat as a runway model, why would you learn to play a moving ball?
Flat pitches do not prevent a bowler from swinging the ball.
-
@number-10 said in England vs BCs ODI series:
@mariner4life said in England vs BCs ODI series:
@kiwipie what gets you paid today? The ability to bat time, and play the leave? Or the ability to cream things through the line and score eye-catching 60-odds from 40?
And honestly, when most test pitches are flat as a runway model, why would you learn to play a moving ball?
Flat pitches do not prevent a bowler from swinging the ball.
Swing is very different to movement off the pitch.
-
@no-quarter said in England vs BCs ODI series:
@number-10 said in England vs BCs ODI series:
@mariner4life said in England vs BCs ODI series:
@kiwipie what gets you paid today? The ability to bat time, and play the leave? Or the ability to cream things through the line and score eye-catching 60-odds from 40?
And honestly, when most test pitches are flat as a runway model, why would you learn to play a moving ball?
Flat pitches do not prevent a bowler from swinging the ball.
Swing is very different to movement off the pitch.
Exactly, which is why flat pitches do not prevent a bowler from swinging the ball.
-
@number-10 yeah they do actually but overhead conditions mostly affect swing
Flat wickets with little grass deteriorate the shiney side due to the friction whereas greenery preserves the ball so players can swing it for more overs
On flat wickets the bowlers ostensibly give up on conventional swing after about 15-18 overs and start "doctoring" the ball for reverse swing. You can see this when the fielders start bouncing the ball into the keeper (you throw it so it bounces on the side you're trying rough up.)On green wickets, players protect the ball from bouncing and shine up one side. Keep the ball pristine for as long as possible.
Flat wickets, rough up a side for reverse later in the innings
The red leather dye responds best to the ball making process and generates a good shine. White and pink dyes don't hold the shine so need more lacquer during the process, that's why white and pink balls swing so much early. Add to that in Adelaide night tests they need to keep the grass longer to protect the ball which would not last 80 overs on the recent Gabba, Waca or MCG.
A bit of grass makes for generally more compelling test these days (SA/Ind was a beauty), but seaming wickets don't generate 5 days of revenue
-
Further to all that, my original point was swing is also far easier to play than seam.
-
@no-quarter said in England vs BCs ODI series:
Further to all that, my original point was swing is also far easier to play than seam.
Yeah, true. You get swing and seam together and that's called Richard John Hadlee!😁
-
It is also why legspin is so popular in t20 now. Facing it takes an increased skill factor regardless of pitch.
-
141/7 and seems like it's been a bit of a shambles.
Rossco and CdGh have both run themselves out.
Munro, Chapman and Nicholls have all conspired to get themselves out for 1.
Santner and Southee (and Ferguson and Boult) left with nearly 14 overs to bat.
-
England have been pretty good but I can't recall seeing a dumber performance from a cricket team than what the Crappers have delivered today. Guptill and Taylor are meant to be senior players but wasted 50 odd balls between them. Unacceptable from those two. As for DeGrandhome and Southee, those are just unbelievably bad runouts which should never happen at this level.
-
at least we're not making it look as obvious as wandering down the wicket and not offering as shot...
-
