Cricket
- Thread starter summerisle
- Start date
That would have been my team to be honest. I'm surprised Broad has kept his place, and there is certainly some pressure on him to deliver now.
I am very surprised they've gone with 3 quicks and Stokes. Doesn't feel like the right balance unless they are sure the ball will move. Only 1/3 sessions every day is under lights so I hope they haven't got carried away by it.
Chris O'Connor
Player Valuation: £35m
It's a day nighter with a pink ball, every single time that's been the case it helps the seamers, including the one test in the subcontinent. In practice it's been swinging all over the place.
This is the one test the toss hardly matters, so trust Joe to pick this one to win it when it's barely any advantage at all. It's more like a toss in England which is seldom anything like as decisive. In fact It's virtually an even split between winning and losing the toss in pink ball day night cricket.
I would expect low scores all round and a test over in four days at max. The only advantage to batting first is the insurance policy of the twilight zone which offers you a way straight back into the test if you get skittled in no time.
Wouldn't be surprised to see plenty of wickets from the off with runs hard to come by. Dusk (the twilight zone) just as the lights are coming on is usually when the ball hoops around, and batsmen well down the order start padding up even if there are several wickets to fall before they're due in.
Great start... Sibley gone for nought.
Pathetic from Sibley again really. Just nowhere near good enough at this level.
I've said since I first saw him, that Zak Crawley is a very fine cricketer. This looks another very good innings thus far.
Only just seen the wickets - been out.
Please stop persisting with Bairstow
Please stop persisting with Bairstow
Chris O'Connor
Player Valuation: £35m
With Leach possibly as high as number eight (and really he should be before the other three walking wickets as at least has a semblance of a defence), India know they only need 5 wickets to be one away from the tail and almost batting themselves. The couple of early wickets and umpire's call upholding the Root one means they're almost all out already.
You don't win test matches by just taking 20 wickets!!!!!
You don't win test matches by just taking 20 wickets!!!!!
Oh dear... Win toss and lose 4 wickets in first session is very poor. Especially given the last 4 wickets will pretty much go for nothing
Big turn already.
This is going to be embarrassing
Have we misread the pitch going with a pace/seam heavy attack? Or is that were our strength lies regardless of the pitch? Their spinners are looking unplayable on the morning of day 1!
Chris O'Connor
Player Valuation: £35m
How do they even begin to justify (Archer batting average of 8) down to come in at eight!
Even our true number 11 and confirmed bunny Anderson has a better one. The truth is only Broad has looked to have the ability to hit any runs and Leach has the best defence, you can put Archer or Anderson at 10 or 11, it hardly matters.
Even our true number 11 and confirmed bunny Anderson has a better one. The truth is only Broad has looked to have the ability to hit any runs and Leach has the best defence, you can put Archer or Anderson at 10 or 11, it hardly matters.
Chris O'Connor
Player Valuation: £35m
It's always important to realise hindsight is never available about the future but you have to go on the evidence available without it.
I posted
'The only advantage to batting first is the insurance policy of the twilight zone which offers you a way straight back into the test if you get skittled in no time.
Wouldn't be surprised to see plenty of wickets from the off with runs hard to come by. Dusk (the twilight zone) just as the lights are coming on is usually when the ball hoops around, and batsmen well down the order start padding up even if there are several wickets to fall before they're due in.'
It really was always likely to be one were the toss hardly mattered, even the skipper's unsure. Kohli though pertinently said it's one were the lower order runs could be the major difference. Sundar was almost certainly included on the strength of his lower order batting rather than his rather more dubious claims as a spin bowler.
England meanwhile have tried to include as many number 11s as possible...
That's the big factor for me ... India know a couple of wickets and they're as good as all out, how is taking wickets so important then?
England seem to think bowl them out twice and it doesn't matter about us making any runs, or perhaps they were thinking we can rely on another double hundred from Joe to bail our poor selection out again.