Cricket

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

→ Log in 🔑 Register
Never,, ever thought we could chase that against that attack with the pressure on. Great win.Well done England! Wish I'd cashed in when Pakistan went in to 1-8 but you can't have everything.
 
Chris O'Connor said:
Wow, absolutely brilliant - what an unlikely comeback and what a win. Chris Woakes an absolute hero for getting back his batting form in the nick of time and Jos Buttler went a long way to redeeming himself with a classic knock.

(Kettleborough did his best to make it exciting, continuing his and Illingworth's shocking umpiring. Hawkeye got him out of jail saying it may just have possibly shaved the bails when he gave Buttler out just about umpire's call but a dreadful decision on the pitch from him - Buttler was well down the wicket too, how could he be so certain? - idiot)

For once I agree with Warney, Buttler has to be in the team for the full package, he had a nightmare with the gloves in this one but the critics quickly forgot how he'd performed behind the stumps in the three previously. he is a decent keeper in English conditions standing back with seamers, which is the vast majority of the time.

Chris Woakes how could they even contemplate leaving him or Anderson out if Stokes could bowl, it should have been Archer or Anderson.

Archer and Anderson out for me next test and Crawley and Wood in.
Click to expand...

I think thats very fair re Buttler. You know we both probably disagree slightly on him, but for me when he's confident and playing well he is not only in Englands best 6 Batsman but he gives England nother dimension. There's a very reasonable case, than Crawley coming in it's actually Foakes at 7 and you leave Buttler at 6. He averages well over 40 in that position, and around 30 at 7. What that indicates to me, is that too often he is being left with the tail and unable to play at the right tempo.

Re Anderson, I think a rest and probably rotating with Broad makes some sense, Broad wasnt as good as other tests this time. No issue with that if it's the way they go. And yes a rest for Archer with Wood coming in probably makes sense too.
 
There's quite a bit of humble pie flying about here.

As I said from the start, Buttler has to be in the team.

The 4 man pace attack is sufficient (especially if Stokes bowls too). As a 4 man attack they did well today. If rest if factored in fine, but if they are all ok I'd go with the same aagun, it's a balanced attack.

Woakes remains a very competent number 7, especially in English conditions. I don't understand people who say he can't bat at 7, when he often plays with more authority than the lads at 1 and 2.

The downsides for me. Sibley and Burns again show why they are not good enough for my money. And as I've said throughout, on a very helpful pitch, Bess completely fluffed his lines with bat and ball. I'd go back to a full seam attack at present.
 
Chris O'Connor said:
Opening the innings is not batting in the middle order, it's apples and pears. A brand new dukes ball, seaming and moving in helpful conditions by very skilful bowlers, Abbas reminds me of Philander at his slower pace but deadly in his control accuracy and just enough movement. As I say I agree with you in that they may find it a monumental struggle and are extremely likely to fail, but then in these conditions any openers in the world would imo, even the very best current ones you could name. I think all of them would be unlikely to make many here. Any opener scoring 50 would be equal to a century or far more on here against this attack. England's bowlers bowled too short on day one and even then San had two lives on 45, he took full advantage but he should have been out - but even against the less accurate and slightly too short on length bowling, the 45 was exceptional. I just don't agree with the comparisons and think middle order batsmen moved up the order on the whole struggle and certainly don't thrive as they have a newer ball. Pope was bathed far too high in the order when first tried without success but has now found his middle order slot.

Root hates batting at three, has far better numbers at four - it's not just a mental thing because your far more likely to be in very early at three. He even tried to bat like an opener last innings cutting shots and risk. You can have different styles of opener a Sehwag or Warner are exceptiinal, not the norm, they're world class not just in the time they play but other eras too. Alistair Cook is far more the common template it's a specialist role and should be judged within those parameters.
Click to expand...

I'll try to deal wth each point.

There's no doubt for me its hard in England. It's always been hard. DRS probably makes it a bit harder too. Howver with all that in mind I don't think their technique is good enough. Ben Stokes has a better technique than them, so does Pope, so does Root. I think mentally theyb are gutsy players, and they are making the msot of somewhat limited skills, but technically they are a long way off.

Id add in, neither of them score quickly enough,or are busy enough when they get in. Fine if you take the point you can get out early at opener, but the best Ive seen in England-Cook, Strauss, Trescothic, Vaughan and Atherton once they got ina nd past the new ball period cashed in. Neither of those 2 do. They don't get any better after 50 balls. If you want to be a top test team, you have to have that gear.

I'm just going off my eyes, but Zak Crawley seems to bhave the range of shots and the gears to do that. He plays spin a lot better than them (Burns looks really short on that to me). To me I'd invest more in him.

I appreicate it's a hard place to bat, but it's also a great plce to bat. If you get through the new ball you are then "in" against the change bowlers. The problem is, these 2 don't have the skill to give you that upside.

As for Root, yes completely agree. He's Englands best player and should bat at 4. At some point Pope should be moved up the order. I'm not sure it's just mental with Root either, I think hes better against the softer ball. Kohli, Smith and WIlliamson will bat where they want. None of them have to put out fires for oter players. England should do that with Root.
 
Chris O'Connor said:
As Ivo said, three missed chances of Bess, he has a lot to learn but you can look beyond stats, having three missed of your bowling has an effect not only on the stats but the way you subsequently bowl. Two spinners can also play off each other like a partnership or two great quicks. His figures don't reflect the chances made,.

Bess does still need better consistency and control, England are looking long term to build s world class team and have confidence the work in progress is worth it in the long run. These comparisons however, don't look behind the figures at chances missed, how many were missed of their spinners?
Click to expand...

I saw 2 chances missed, and neither of them were absolutely stone dead to me. Second innings in particular he bowled completely the wrong areas. He was miles behind the Pakistan spinners, who also generated a lot more opportunities than him beyond their wickets.

I've put my cards on the table, you don't need a spinner in England. On a perfect pitch, he completely flunked his lines even if every chance had gone to hand, which invariably they never do anyway) the figures and his lack of control is still not good enough. If England had a top spinner, it's a different discussion. If Jack Leach is performing consistently there's a different discussion. But at present I pick 4 of the quicks we have, on a rotation basis.
 
catcherintherye said:
I saw 2 chances missed, and neither of them were absolutely stone dead to me. Second innings in particular he bowled completely the wrong areas. He was miles behind the Pakistan spinners, who also generated a lot more opportunities than him beyond their wickets.

I've put my cards on the table, you don't need a spinner in England. On a perfect pitch, he completely flunked his lines even if every chance had gone to hand, which invariably they never do anyway) the figures and his lack of control is still not good enough. If England had a top spinner, it's a different discussion. If Jack Leach is performing consistently there's a different discussion. But at present I pick 4 of the quicks we have, on a rotation basis.
Click to expand...
Bess was as good as their offie, arguably better than him. Its harsh comparing him to Shah because the leggie is in top 10 international bowlers on the planet. The selectors would have rightly been crucified if they went without a spinner on this pitch. Who knows what might have been had he got the confidence of that early stumping opportunity which was pretty straightforward.

A spinner is required if only to ensure that the team keeps up with the over rate.
 
Fully expected any win to drag out to the late stages of the last day,
So you can imagine my surprise when I saw we'd won on day 4.
The side as a whole is very impressive, the openers and our lack of front line spinners does need addressing however
 
Rory Burns was poorly adjudged to be lbw when it just looked too high to the naked eye - umpire's call rescued Kettleborough, and Buttler was lbw to one that just might possibly have just shaved the top of the stumps, it hit his front foot and he had a good stride in too (also umpire's call for distance down the pitch) Both given by Kettleborough who had a very poor game for me, and may even have allowed himself to be iinfluenced by the over enthusiastic appealing. Meanwhile Illingworth continued to shake his head at appeals hitting middle stump.

One of the three umpire's on duty is very good - Michael Gough, unfortunately the two clowns were united for this match. Watch the standard rise when we only have one clown and one good umpire in the next test.
 
A good point made elsewhere is that one of the common fallacies of test cricket is that test matches are won by the side who wins most sessions. This of course is a nonsense as while you can build up a good position, even a dominant one, over a number of days, test matches can be lost in just one session or one and a bit. Four days of control can be undone in a couple of hours.

All out for 45 or so as Andrew Strauss' tourists were in the Carribbean chasing a small total shows it as does 98 all out from Australia on the first morning if the fourth test down under in our triumphant 2010/11 series. This was just the latest.

You can't win a test in a session but you can lose one, and Pakistan lost this one with poor decision making from their skipper and choosing the wrong options. Bowling quickly and short into Woakes body early in his innings, from over the wicket for the left handed bowler, was a must. Going on the defensive with two sweepers posted and England over one hundred behind and no batting left after these two, was another They became too passive the field deep and England didn't need to go so aggressively anymore but just pick them off in ones and twos, the risk factor became negated.
 
catcherintherye said:
I'll try to deal wth each point.

There's no doubt for me its hard in England. It's always been hard. DRS probably makes it a bit harder too. Howver with all that in mind I don't think their technique is good enough. Ben Stokes has a better technique than them, so does Pope, so does Root. I think mentally theyb are gutsy players, and they are making the msot of somewhat limited skills, but technically they are a long way off.

Id add in, neither of them score quickly enough,or are busy enough when they get in. Fine if you take the point you can get out early at opener, but the best Ive seen in England-Cook, Strauss, Trescothic, Vaughan and Atherton once they got ina nd past the new ball period cashed in. Neither of those 2 do. They don't get any better after 50 balls. If you want to be a top test team, you have to have that gear.

I'm just going off my eyes, but Zak Crawley seems to bhave the range of shots and the gears to do that. He plays spin a lot better than them (Burns looks really short on that to me). To me I'd invest more in him.

I appreicate it's a hard place to bat, but it's also a great plce to bat. If you get through the new ball you are then "in" against the change bowlers. The problem is, these 2 don't have the skill to give you that upside.
Click to expand...

Yes I'm pretty much in line with most on the openers and don't see scoring quickly as a priority at this stage. Burns today proved he's a quick learner and wasn't the lbw candidate he was in the first innings, the fact he was out in that fashion had as much to do with Richard Kettleborough and he was very unfortunate.

Burns also showed in the last test he actually can shift gears but hasn't made runs this test. Even Sibley looked in concert with Root that he was getting on top of the bowling before he was tempted. He has to do something on the closed batting stance and grip he adopts which seriously limits his offside game, but crucial runs and seeing off the new ball today.

No point in answering as we have to agree to disagree on them, there's no way of changing views on them.
 
Back
Top