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?
-
@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...
-
-
@chris-b said in England vs BCs ODI series:
Santner wags in the tail to make 63* - England pick up a fourth run out in the 50th over.
I'd say we're 50 odd runs short of par.
For an allrounder that is suspect with the bat Mitch is embarrassing his team mates higher up the order
-
All out for 223. Actually, it's a bit of a miracle we made it up and over 200, cos that wasn't looking likely. Hats off to Santner for again providing heroics at the end. Guptill gets a nod for his 50, and CdG at least made 38 before his run out, but the others were a fucking disgrace. Munro 1. Chapman 1. Nicholls 1.
Taylor gets a pass because he was so great in Hamilton, but damn he was out of sorts today. I hate seeing so many run outs on the scorecard, that just smacks of players losing their head and letting the English bowlers get to them. (Again, Santner showed how to play them. Singles, and smash a few.)
