Cricket Thread

Tim of the Oak said:
Not really hate. Just a misjudgment for which Joffrey and Stokes have made Aggers eat humble pie for. Some times pundits trying to be controversial can end up on their arses.
Click to expand...
They all do. None can get every call correct.

Would you be up in arms if Aggers had a comedy bet that Zak Crawley will never get another test century?
 
Alan Harper's Tash said:
They all do. None can get every call correct.

Would you be up in arms if Aggers had a comedy bet that Zak Crawley will never get another test century?
Click to expand...
That would be down to a player’s form that’s a completely different issue. I would have an issue with a pundit saying Paul Lake wouldn’t play again after swallowing his tongue at Maine Road.
 
supercity88 said:
He looked absolutely cooked. I don't think he had it in him to be aggressive. He was in the mentality of staying in for as long as possible and it's not easy to switch into a more aggressive approach. Unless you win the game, you made the wrong call - but he was more likely to hole out giving it a slog. Siraj's wicket was quite ridiculous as well!

Stokes in that monster innings in Headingley had the advantage of playing himself in with others around him initially. It was only when he was with Leach where he had to take the lead and keep him off strike as much as possible. He had a good partnership with Bairstow before the others came in and were skittled pretty quickly.

I just checked the scorecard and he got 135 not out from 219 balls which shows how much time he took to set himself initially, because we still needed 73 runs when Leach came in and Stokes knocked all but 1 of them off in 10.2 overs!
Click to expand...
At the end of the previous day, Stokes was 2 not out off 50 balls!
 
Tim of the Oak said:
That would be down to a player’s form that’s a completely different issue. I would have an issue with a pundit saying Paul Lake wouldn’t play again after swallowing his tongue at Maine Road.
Click to expand...
You mean you would disagree with him.
 
Postman Pep said:
Was also on the back of a marathon bowling spell that restricted the target to something that was at least conceivable.

The final hour in all it's glory.

Click to expand...


That was a brilliant to watch again.

Magnificent by Stokes. Had also completely forgotten about the missed run out when Lyon dropped the ball, and the daft review the Aussies wasted.
 
EastMidlandsBlue said:
Dawson has been added to the Squad and I suspect he might bat at 8, allowing us to replace Woakes with someone who might not provide as much with the bat (Maybe that Sam Cook).

For what its worth I'd be bringing Bethell into the side to replace Crawley or Pope, and I think he could play the role of a 2nd spinner, but I don't like the idea of him being our only spinner. Maybe something like this:

Crawley, Duckett, Bethell, Root, Brook, Stokes, Smith, Dawson, Atkinson, Archer, Cook
Click to expand...

Cook has been released, as has Overton.

If we win the series at Old Trafford then we might see some changes in the 5th test. I think Crawley and Pope will get the series though. Individually Crawley shouldn't be in the side, but as a partnership with Duckett they've been successful. Having to bowl to a left/right handed combination with the height difference makes it very difficult for a bowling attack to settle. I think England like how disruptive they are together. He's an infuriating player though. It's not easy to open the batting at test level but he keeps making the same mistakes time and time again and isn't showing any signs of improvement - in fact he's getting worse if anything!

Pope is a tricky one...number 3 isn't an easy position to bat in. You can be in very early and up against the new ball or come in when things are easier. The contrast between his 1st and 2nd innings (46avg-19avg) is vast though and surely points at a mentality issue?

Bethell hasn't played enough to directly compare, but number 3 is the only place I see him getting in. I can't see Stokes using him as our principle spinner. I checked that NZ series and the latest he came out to bat in the 6 innings he played was the 5th over! So he was thrown in at the deep end! An average of 52 suggests he coped alright with that, but his highest 1st innings score was 16.
 
Wretched Vengeance said:
That was a brilliant to watch again.

Magnificent by Stokes. Had also completely forgotten about the missed run out when Lyon dropped the ball, and the daft review the Aussies wasted.
Click to expand...

It was just absolute drama. It had it all. That lbw shout...my god! If someone had said to the umpire the ball before that Australia had no reviews left but England did, I'm certain he gives that out knowing the right decision could be reached. Luckily he didn't because it was out, even if Stokes disputed the technology on that one!
 
supercity88 said:
He looked absolutely cooked. I don't think he had it in him to be aggressive. He was in the mentality of staying in for as long as possible and it's not easy to switch into a more aggressive approach. Unless you win the game, you made the wrong call - but he was more likely to hole out giving it a slog. Siraj's wicket was quite ridiculous as well!

Stokes in that monster innings in Headingley had the advantage of playing himself in with others around him initially. It was only when he was with Leach where he had to take the lead and keep him off strike as much as possible. He had a good partnership with Bairstow before the others came in and were skittled pretty quickly.

I just checked the scorecard and he got 135 not out from 219 balls which shows how much time he took to set himself initially, because we still needed 73 runs when Leach came in and Stokes knocked all but 1 of them off in 10.2 overs!
Click to expand...

He went like 50 balls without scoring a run at the start of that innings!
 
Alan Harper's Tash said:
Not really seeing the hate. It’s a bit like a football pundit questioning whether Darren Anderton would have been ever be fit enough to play for England again.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Talk about massive over reactions. Archer is a top bowler and England need him as he proved this game, but he also sounds and looks like a bit of a mard arse at times -like many of us ;)
 
wattle said:
Exactly. Talk about massive over reactions. Archer is a top bowler and England need him as he proved this game, but he also sounds and looks like a bit of a mard arse at times -like many of us ;)
Click to expand...

Can't remember many great fast bowlers who weren't angry most of the time tbh
 
supercity88 said:
It was just absolute drama. It had it all. That lbw shout...my god! If someone had said to the umpire the ball before that Australia had no reviews left but England did, I'm certain he gives that out knowing the right decision could be reached. Luckily he didn't because it was out, even if Stokes disputed the technology on that one!
Click to expand...
He wasn't the only one tbf. Jim Maxwell posted this picture at the time which suggested it flicked his front pad first.

Whether it would have been picked up during a formal review process is anybody's guess.

IMG_20250715_165913.jpg
 
Tim of the Oak said:
No I’m saying don’t be a shithouse who bets against England players recovering from serious injury. Aggers is an ex England player so it’s akin to a City player blaming Bell, Lake or Rodders for being injured.

Yes he’s a boring twat too but I have quite liked his commentary / punditry over the years. He was a bang average bowler though.
Click to expand...

He didn't actually bet against and England player returning though did he?

I listened to TMS all week and I'm sure they played the interview from Hobart when him and Stokes had the conversation. He asks how confident Stokes is, Stokes says I bet my hat he'll play Test cricket again, Agnew accepts.

Agnew never even really made the counter-bet, and then he was a pretty good sport about the whole thing, bought a hat for Stokes and clearly used it as a prop to get more out of him in an interview, Stokes cleverly IMO told Archer to fire him up for the game.

I also think that, as bloke who was the lightning quick young bowler that got loads of hype in the early 80's and never fulfilled his potential because of repeated injuries, Agnew is pretty sensitive to that kind of thing, and knows exactly what Archer has been through better than most people now commenting on the exchange.
 
domalino said:
He didn't actually bet against and England player returning though did he?

I listened to TMS all week and I'm sure they played the interview from Hobart when him and Stokes had the conversation. He asks how confident Stokes is, Stokes says I bet my hat he'll play Test cricket again, Agnew accepts.

Agnew never even really made the counter-bet, and then he was a pretty good sport about the whole thing, bought a hat for Stokes and clearly used it as a prop to get more out of him in an interview, Stokes cleverly IMO told Archer to fire him up for the game.

I also think that, as bloke who was the lightning quick young bowler that got loads of hype in the early 80's and never fulfilled his potential because of repeated injuries, Agnew is pretty sensitive to that kind of thing, and knows exactly what Archer has been through better than most people now commenting on the exchange.
Click to expand...
All’s well that ends well. Hopefully, Joffrey will play in the next 2 tests and acquit himself well.

Yes Aggers has taken it on the chin even if it’s been embarrassing for him. It was clearly a powerful motivational tool Joffrey.
 
Tim of the Oak said:
All’s well that ends well. Hopefully, Joffrey will play in the next 2 tests and acquit himself well.

Yes Aggers has taken it on the chin even if it’s been embarrassing for him. It was clearly a powerful motivational tool Joffrey.
Click to expand...
Reckon Jofra would be more offended about the repeated misspelling of his name tbh ;-)
 
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