<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  
Guest
(Login sooty-yorkie1)

Re: England v SA 50 overs.

May 30 2017, 10:30 AM 

I think that's always, or at least very common, with batsman more fixed and bowlers dropped /rotated.
I think the feeling is they've performed in the past and he's backing them to do it again. The main theme morgan has brought is one of freedom to play. If we think back 10 years and probably further players looked anything but free to play. He's brought a real change in the way we play limited overs cricket. I think he should be given quite a lot of latitude in team selection.

 
 
Dewsburian
(Login Dewsburian)

Re: England v SA 50 overs.

May 30 2017, 10:56 AM 

"Freedom to play" didn't serve anyone very well in Rabada's third over. Freedom to make some sensible adjustments to the tactics might have been useful.
I can see why you don't want to hoick a player out of the team just because he's had a few failures - especially if he's had some strokes of bad luck - but England have a player opening who has barely reached double figures all year.

 
 
Guest
(Login sooty-yorkie1)

Re: England v SA 50 overs.

May 30 2017, 11:04 AM 

That was one example, of course they aren't perfect but they are playing far better than on the past. They played badly in their last hands. However the mindset has served them well so they'll be days it doesn't work and stupid moments like you say. But they're playing better cricket far better than they have in a long time.
I'd don't think they'll be any changes before the tournament this summer, afterwards quite possibly.


    
This message has been edited by sooty-yorkie1 on May 30, 2017 11:05 AM


 
 
WR_Metcalfe
(Login WR_Metcalfe)

Re: England v SA 50 overs.

May 30 2017, 12:05 PM 

Hales, Buttler and Rashid should have realised in the 5th over that being 3, 4 and 5 wickets down against the swinging ball was the time to just hold on for an over or two. When people were getting out defending outside the off stump, leaves would be better. Morgan's defence that they weren't out playing aggressive drives doesn't really hold water. They were playing balls they didn't need to outside off stump.

Root got a good ball, it happens. The other 5 wickets were all out caught behind from half volleys outside off stump.

If Eoin Morgan can't see that 10/2 off 5 is a lot better than 20/6 then I really question his judgement. He recognised it was a green pitch and he wanted to bowl, why wasn't the instruction to see off the first spells with the swinging ball. We could have got to 280 or so and made a game of it. We lost the game in the first 5 overs.

 
 
Dewsburian
(Login Dewsburian)

Re: England v SA 50 overs.

May 30 2017, 12:59 PM 

I watched the match on live TV, then saw the highlights (with another set of commentators), and listened to the radio commentary this morning while working in the greenhouse. None of the commentators thought this was the unplayable "green-top" that Morgan has described, and since that included Boycott, Alec Stewart, Mike Atherton and Michael Vaughan, there was a bit of cricket knowledge on display. Stewart, in particular, thought most of the movement was down to the slope at Lord's, rather than to swing or seam.
I think some issues need separating out. If the strategy is going to be to bat very aggressively and just assume that at least two or three players will come off, then there still has to be a Plan B if you find that it's going catastrophically wrong. Hales, Buttler and Rashid all perished playing poor shots and, as one of the commentators mentioned (perhaps on the highlights), it was as though they hadn't been watching the previous play.
Second, the selection of Bairstow is completely unrelated to the style of play adopted. If England want him to open the batting and just blaze away like Roy or Hales, then he's perfectly capable of doing that. It may not be the best use of his talents, but at least he'd be getting some cricket.

 
 
Dwight_Schrute
(Login Dwight_Schrute)

Re: England v SA 50 overs.

May 30 2017, 1:27 PM 

Lost all 3 tosses, 2 of them pretty important ones. Won the series 2-1.

 
 

Dave Morton
(Login DaveMorton)

Re: England v SA 50 overs.

May 30 2017, 5:43 PM 

I didn't see the collapse live, so the highlights package was out of context, as always. Clearly, if two previous balls have swung, and you get out to the third one, which doesn't swing, then you have not been given a fair trial by TV.

That said and noted, the two balls that did swing accounted for Root and Morgan. Hales, Roy, Buttler and Rashid all appeared to edge wide deliveries angled across, no feet from any of them.

Now, I don't believe these guys can play any other way. They swing the bat and hope, and when they hit it, it goes miles. Adil is primarily in there for his bowling, of course. A genuine batsman is able to play bowling on its merits. He and the others are all decent players, but International top-order batsmen? Not for me.

On commentary, Michael Holding said that it seems that if the ball moves nowadays - whether swing, or seam, or spin - the batsmen can't play it. He also said some very insulting things about T20, which may upset his Sky bosses.

 
 
Guest
(Login EastYorkshireTyke)

Re: England v SA 50 overs.

May 30 2017, 8:09 PM 

"They swing the bat and hope"

If it is that easy then why don't we all become International cricketers?

 
 
Dewsburian
(Login Dewsburian)

Re: England v SA 50 overs.

May 30 2017, 8:53 PM 

One of the great ironies of this game was that it was actually an interesting contest between bat and ball (at least for a while). And it was thrilling to watch some really fine batsmanship by Jonny B - and very much using the rapier rather than the sabre. Entirely the equal of Joe Root's elegant innings for Yorkshire at Trent Bridge. I hope it was more than an ironic cheer when Jonny played the first authoritative defensive stroke of the day: if so, then the Lord's crowd has gone up in my estimation.
I don't know who the best batsman in England is, but I suspect he was born in the West Riding and plays for Yorkshire.

 
 

Dave Morton
(Login DaveMorton)

Re: England v SA 50 overs.

May 30 2017, 9:38 PM 

"They swing the bat and hope"

If it is that easy then why don't we all become International cricketers?

EYT - it's because they have huge talent compared with 99.9% of us. [Quibble about the number of 9s, but out of all the serious cricketers in England only perhaps 200 are good enough to play County cricket at any time, of whom a significant number are non-English. I'm not sure what the playing numbers are, but there are about 50 clubs, and therefore around 500 first team cricketers, in the Greater Manchester League, and about a tenth that number in the Premier League of that organisation.]

You have only to play against even 2nd XI County cricketers to know just how much better they are than most of us. And the step up to International class is probably just as big. I would invite you to look at, for example, Hales's scores against Yorkshire in First Class cricket - and they've not been impressive when Sidebottom especially has been against him.

List A cricket is geared towards the batsman, with a non-swinging white ball, flat pitches and short boundaries, and he has had a measure of success. But give the bowler any assistance at all, and the likes of Rabada will always do for him. There are not many Rabadas around, however, and it may make sense to keep playing him. I believe bowling, world wide, is at the lowest ebb of my lifetime.

 
 
East Coast Type
(Login EastCoastType)

Re: England v SA 50 overs.

May 31 2017, 10:20 AM 

Dave, your comment here is interesting: "On commentary, Michael Holding said that it seems that if the ball moves nowadays - whether swing, or seam, or spin - the batsmen can't play it."

Having watched many hundreds of days of cricket in the 70s, 80s and 90s, work and family commitments, plus not having Sky, meant I hardly watched any cricket between about late 1990s and 2012. Watching some of the 2005 Ashes series was about the only exception. I have started watching regularly again (live, still no Sky) over the past 5 years.

Two things struck me when I started watching cricket again. One, the facilities at many grounds had improved a lot since the late 1990s. Two, batsmen seemed to struggle against the moving ball much more than I remembered. My view would be that Michael Holding is not imagining things !!

 
 
Idle Man
(Login Idle_man)

Re: England v SA 50 overs.

May 31 2017, 11:00 AM 

Completely agree with the comments re. dealing with the moving ball. Much has improved beyond measure but today's players react with horror at pitch/atmosphere conditions which would have been a bog standard day's work in the sixties.

As far as the recent batting effort is concerned, I can't believe that things have changed so much that the basic common-sense approach to the innings is out-of-date. Morgan took two steps down the wicket and hit the ball over the top in the 4th over, I think, with two wickets already down. Hales and Buttler were the 4th and 5th wickets to fall with outright aggressive shots and the score still in the 20s. There's no form of cricket which makes that sensible. For a time Jonny and David Willey seemed to be working the ball around and waiting for the bad delivery, but then, well though Jonny played, they were both out badly.

Gary Ballance's recent knock at Northampton was an object lesson in how to recover from a poor start to the innings. No risks, keep it ticking over with ones and twos for 10+ overs, gradual acceleration to establish a genuinely strong base again, then outright assault in the last 10 overs or so.

 
 
Stu
(Login StuartRA)
Assistant Moderator

Re: England v SA 50 overs.

May 31 2017, 12:26 PM 

The main headline on the ECB web-site is "Jason Roy hits 162 off 74 balls v Sri Lanka last year."

Who are they trying to convince - it is current form that matters. If teams were picked on past form, Trescothick (of current players) would get a "gig"!!


    
This message has been edited by StuartRA on May 31, 2017 12:34 PM


 
 

Dave Morton
(Login DaveMorton)

Re: England v SA 50 overs.

May 31 2017, 12:52 PM 

An observation, a memory, from my own playing days. It would have been in the 1970s when Mike Bissex, a stalwart and successful Gloucestershire player, decided to take early retirement from County cricket and to concentrate on building up his business while playing as a league pro - in the league I played in, as it happened.

He was exactly my contemporary, within a month or two, still in his prime, and clearly the best batsman in the league. Facing our slow-medium outswing trundler (55 mph, I would guess) he played and missed a couple of times. Crucially, he didn't edge it. Having watched Trescothick and Chanderpaul play recently, against much better bowling, I noted they didn't nick it, either, for the same reason, that they played the line and didn't follow the moving ball.

Bissex also faced our left-arm spinner, playing a whole maiden over out with the utmost caution. Next over, he played another three dots and then, having convinced himself that there was no hidden menace, he hit the final three balls for three effortless straight sixes.

You watch a guy like that and you try to copy. You'd be daft not to. So I learned to play straight, to play soft hands, and not to follow the outswinger. But nothing on earth could have given me the time to play the ball that he had, nor his poise, nor the sweet timing when he struck it.

The modern List A player doesn't have the luxury of leaving the ball too much, and there would be rumblings from the crowd if he played nine dot-balls against the spinner. So when he finds himself up against it, he can't cope. He doesn't have the skills.

Bissex and his generation didn't have the power these guys have, didn't play the variety of sweeps and scoops and ramps that have added to our game, had never heard of reverse-swing. He did, however, play in an era of great fast bowling. Mike Procter was on his own Gloucester side, and most counties had one, if not two, which was when Yorkshire began to struggle.

The game has changed. Some things are better, some not so good.

 
 
Dwight_Schrute
(Login Dwight_Schrute)

Re: England v SA 50 overs.

May 31 2017, 1:34 PM 

Bring in your 'proper' batsmen then. Would have made you 260 at Lord's, would have made 280-290 in the first 2 ODIs.

Solid, steady batting. No collapses, no disasters. But you walk away having lost the series 3-0.

 
 
Guest
(Login ThirdUmpire)

Re: England v SA 50 overs.

May 31 2017, 1:38 PM 

And some is down to coaching, the evolution of the one day game and the focus on economy instead of wicket taking.

A young fast bowler who is erratic will be coached to be more consistent at a slower pace. One of the fastest lads I faced in the 80s at Uni was called Andy Hymer and he sprayed it all over the place very rapidly. I suspect he got told to slow down and aim for a line and length.

Can't remember the guy who was the subject of the tale but apparently a young fast bowler was spraying it everywhere and the coaches got hold of him improved his action and made him slower but more consistent and the line given was that he ended up with Dennis Lillees action but Denis Thatchers pace

 
 
sid
(Login sid-don)
Assistant Moderator

Re: England v SA 50 overs.

May 31 2017, 1:38 PM 

100% agree with the above by Dave. I've played League cricket for 35 years and, although I've never knowingly played against a former pro, I have, especially in evening league games, played against many who play their Saturday cricket at a considerably higher standard. Each 'step' of the game is a huge one, the difference between the county players and the average league player is massive. I'm consequently careful with my criticism.

Back to the Bairstow v Roy debate and the role of Morgan. I actually agree with much of Morgans thinking - settled team, clarity of role, minimal change as you approach a big event, freedom to play etc however the Bairstow / Roy consideration is about seeing the 'wood for the trees'. Bottom line, Bairstow is a SIGNIFICANTLY better player, and it's unfair to continually omit him in favour of Roy.

 
 
Kevin Owens
(Login kevinowens)

Re: England v SA 50 overs

May 31 2017, 1:50 PM 

After reading all these pages of comments it's laughable. You're slating a team that for the last 18 months has been playing really positive cricket. They've had one failure in a dead rubber game and you guys are slating them like this is a regular thing.

 
 
Guest
(Login ThirdUmpire)

Re: England v SA 50 overs.

May 31 2017, 4:16 PM 

No. We are not slating at all but pointing out that good teams have to have a plan B andcthis was lacking on Monday.

Good teams can still get better too and if better players are available and not in the team then why wouldn't you look to strengthen further?

 
 
Idle man
(Login Idle_man)

Re: England v SA 50 overs.

May 31 2017, 5:02 PM 

Exactly Third Ump. I completely recognise that England have benefited from their more positive approach and are a better side for it. To be even better they need some flexibility. To say they should have worked their way to 250 plus iat Lord's if they could get there isn't to say they should settle for that score in general. To keep blasting away at 25-5 is just stupid. It's like a football team with a string of 1-0 wins sticking to a defensive strategy after going 3-0 down and saying 'well, it's worked for us for the last six months.'

 
 
 
< Previous Page 12 3 4 5 6 Next >
  Respond to this message   
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  
 Copyright © 1999-2017 Network54. All rights reserved.   Terms of Use   Privacy Statement  
All IP addresses are recorded. We reserve the right to remove personal attacks, sexist, racist, homophobic, defamatory or abusive comments, comments likely to incite religious hatred, those disposed to wind others up, and unapproved advertising.

Email us: Whiterosecricket@hotmail.co.uk