Cricket Thread

ancoats said:
So we can debate about how Bazball is good for Tests Cricket in getting results, But we still don't have any plans in place for an extra day because of the weather,

we all want boring Tests and draws taken out of the game, so why not have a rain-affected test that can add an extra day so the results can happen, if it rained for more than 90 over in the 5 days then add it to the day after
Click to expand...
Is that not what they had for the world test final? I am sure there was an extra day provisioned.
 
Nightmare Walking said:
Is that not what they had for the world test final? I am sure there was an extra day provisioned.
Click to expand...
I think there’s no extra day as a draw is deemed a proper result in cricket. There was an extra day in the world test championships as that was a one off event that needed a winner. A bit like a one round knockout tournament
 
Said it before, and I stand by it. We batted for too long on friday. Yes; there was a chance we might have been in arrears come yesterday (but that was unlikely, given the washout that was predicted for the weekend). We were never likely to be in a position where we could lose the game, given the likely loss of playing time. And anyway, a defeat wouldn't really have mattered greatly, compared to a draw. We had to win the game, and needed to try to force that win. Nearly 300 of a lead was way more than was needed. If we'd had an extra hour bowling at them on fridy evening, when they were a shambles, who knows what might have happened? Would we have taken the 6 wickets in that extra hour? More than likely, not. But we really had to gamble, knowing what we did about the weather that was coming, and knowing that we needed the win. If the weather had been set fair for the weekend, then yes; the gameplan would have been perfect. But it was known from early in the week that the weekend was promised to be dreadful. Incredibly frustrating.
 
Nightmare Walking said:
Is that not what they had for the world test final? I am sure there was an extra day provisioned.
Click to expand...
It would make lots of sense to have a reserve day. This series has been crammed into a period of 6 to 7 weeks to accommodate the 100 which is of little interest to anyone.
 
jimharri said:
Said it before, and I stand by it. We batted for too long on friday. Yes; there was a chance we might have been in arrears come yesterday (but that was unlikely, given the washout that was predicted for the weekend). We were never likely to be in a position where we could lose the game, given the likely loss of playing time. And anyway, a defeat wouldn't really have mattered greatly, compared to a draw. We had to win the game, and needed to try to force that win. Nearly 300 of a lead was way more than was needed. If we'd had an extra hour bowling at them on fridy evening, when they were a shambles, who knows what might have happened? Would we have taken the 6 wickets in that extra hour? More than likely, not. But we really had to gamble, knowing what we did about the weather that was coming, and knowing that we needed the win. If the weather had been set fair for the weekend, then yes; the gameplan would have been perfect. But it was known from early in the week that the weekend was promised to be dreadful. Incredibly frustrating.
Click to expand...

The forecast at that point was washout on Saturday, sunny periods for Sunday, possibly as much as a session. It's finer margins than you seem to think. Stokes's decision can be defended.
 
Nightmare Walking said:
Is that not what they had for the world test final? I am sure there was an extra day provisioned.
Click to expand...

yep they had an extra day provisioned

am not a fan of Bazball, but Test Cricket needs to keep up with what the people want and the fast-moving world we live in demands results, Tests Cricket and the Ashes need the fan's money coming in from both on the gate and tv money so it would work having that extra day because of the weather,

Only the Aussies are happy with the rain because they did the damage early on in the first 2 tests
 
Lovebitesandeveryfing said:
The forecast at that point was washout on Saturday, sunny periods for Sunday, possibly as much as a session. It's finer margins than you seem to think. Stokes's decision can be defended.
Click to expand...
I saw both scenarios for sunday; occasional heavy showers along with the sunny periods you mention, or a washout, which has seemingly come to pass. As I said in my post; if the weather had been okay, the game plan was perfect. Put them in, dismiss them relatively cheaply, get a decent lead and then try to get them out cheaply again. The game management would have been spot on. I'm not arguing that at all.
 
shemnel said:
that's exactly the ongoing debate. the 2027 series will not have either of the 'northern' grounds, but Brum and Notts will be involved.
Click to expand...
Yes, I’d heard about that, and in terms of pure fairness in relation to supporters and access, it doesn’t seem right to have no matches up here, but I just think when Lancs/Yorks are used they need to be given dates in June or early July at the latest, as the weather gets progressively wetter after that.

I guess it’s always having 2 matches in London, along with a reduced number of 5 tests instead of 6 that really puts a squeeze on the rest of the country. I believe Hampshire are hosting one in 2027 is that right?
 
jimharri said:
I saw both scenarios for sunday; occasional heavy showers along with the sunny periods you mention, or a washout, which has seemingly come to pass. As I said in my post; if the weather had been okay, the game plan was perfect. Put them in, dismiss them relatively cheaply, get a decent lead and then try to get them out cheaply again. The game management would have been spot on. I'm not arguing that at all.
Click to expand...

I didn't. And I checked it on Friday and yesterday. That's not the way the figures looked to me. In any case, predicting the weather is not an exact science, in either direction.
Look, we could argue till the cows come home. It's now immaterial to me. My broader point is that Stokes's general style involves a measure of risk-taking — it's what you get with the package, the whole man: the previous captain had a cautious style which got us pretty much nowhere, and Stokes's style has brought us and the world an immeasurably greater degree of success (and entertainment).
And the even bigger picture beyond that: if cricket is to survive as a sport in the modern world, if the five-day format is to survive, well, this just isn't good enough. This is the Ashes on the line, here. It has been settled, not by excellence by one side or the other, but by something entirely extraneous. If a club ends up at the top of the table in football, there is no rational arguing about it — their team was the best that year.
There is nothing even vaguely exciting or uplifting about the way this series is being resolved. A very exciting series is sputtering out into, literally, a damp squib. Who, if they were thinking of following test cricket as a novice, would be convinced to part with their hard-earned cash by such a prospect? I cannot imagine that even the most rabid Australian fan is excited by looking at rain at Old Trafford (although they'll probably be smug about it). There are a number of variables that can be thought about to take account of very poor weather for one day out of five. They must be thought about at the highest levels. This has been the Ashes. It just hasn't been good enough.
I've said my piece, and this will be my last word in this particular exchange.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top