Cricket

[spook]

On sale now. Actual.

View attachment 19849

Brilliant bit of marketing. I imagine they'll sell out tomorrow and social media will be flooded with pics of Aussie fans enjoying one in front of the telly.

They’ve taken advantage of a guys ignorance and in some ways innocence to the fact he was putting his wicket in danger. It’s cheap. And dishonourable.

It’s nothing at all what test cricket is all about IMO.

Is that what you want to see at your local cricket? Matches decided by sneak run outs? Great examples for the juniors coming through.

How can you say Bairstow was innocent or ignorant given he's tried the exact same thing plenty of times himself, including earlier in the same match? And replied 'bloody oath I would' to Head in the first Test when asked if he'd have whipped the bails off when Head had left his crease early (but quickly got back, because he woke up).

I see the Bairstow-Patel and Prior-Morkel stumpings as sneaky. The Carey-Bairstow one was just smart.

As for 'is this what you want to see at your local cricket?' You do see it. There's nothing wrong with it.

'Spirit of cricket' is horseshit.

 

[tigerdell]

It was premeditated! It’s irrelevant that he threw it straight away! That’s what makes it worse.

Actually its what makes it still in play.
Bairsrow left his his crease with the ball still in play. He took no notice of the fielding team or where the ball was.
If the umpire called over, well he couldnt because the ball was still in play

 

[tigerdell]

Sounds too much like the excuses the morons that booed Goodes used

I kinda agree with both of you.
Broad booing seems to have continued because the crowd loves to hate him.
And I dont get it. He didnt walk and so what?

 

[Leysy Days]

Leysy's take.

When every England captain from N.Hussain, D.Gower, M.Vaughan, M.Atherton and A.Strauss is backing Alex Carey. You know there was nothing untoward in it.

Yet this current pommie regime think it is below board. WTF!

Dangerous (stupid) ground the Poms are getting into. This spirit of cricket thing they trott out. It's going to be thrown at this lot when anything controversial comes up. Against any team. Anywhere.

Its like they think they can choose/dictate where the line on this silly spirit of cricket is. Weird.

Half think they don't even believe what they are saying themselves, but are banding together to fire the crowd/country up in the remaining tests.

 

[tigerdell]

They’ve taken advantage of a guys ignorance and in some ways innocence to the fact he was putting his wicket in danger. It’s cheap. And dishonourable.

It’s nothing at all what test cricket is all about IMO.

Is that what you want to see at your local cricket? Matches decided by sneak run outs? Great examples for the juniors coming through.

Think we should separate professional sports and local cricket.
No doubt both should be played in good spirit.

But pros should know and follow the rules. He wasnt innocent to the danger. He was disrespecting the other team and the umpires. He doesnt get to call over, so pay respect and wait to the umpires call.


But I do agree in general to wanting to win on cricket grounds.
If this was a kids local game its a cheap shot.
But pros got rules. Hard but fair

 

[Leysy Days]

Will say though, there is no way Stuart Broad should ever have walked when he hit it to slip.

Most players would/should do the same. Taking the current England stance out of it. Nothing wrong with it.

 

[TT33]

Bairstow was just plain dumb, not at all aware of the state of play. Especially since he tried the same thing earlier in the same test.

Live by the sword, die by the sword Jonny.

Wait for the umpire to call over you dill. Stop sooking.

 

[tigerdell]

Leysy's take.

When every England captain from N.Hussain, D.Gower, M.Vaughan, M.Atherton and A.Strauss is backing Alex Carey. You know there was nothing untoward in it.

Yet this current pommie regime think it is below board. WTF!

Dangerous (stupid) ground the Poms are getting into. This spirit of cricket thing they trott out. It's going to be thrown at this lot when anything controversial comes up. Against any team. Anywhere.

Its like they think they can choose/dictate where the line on this silly spirit of cricket is. Weird.

Half think they don't even believe what they are saying themselves, but are banding together to fire the crowd/country up in the remaining tests.

Yeah anytime they go to India etc and *smile* about pitches they'll be seen as hypocrites.

 

[tigerdell]

I think thats fair enough. We've certainly seen what can happen with teams when they free their minds and England need to learn the balance of theis more aggressive approach to cricket, but we also need to learn from the aussies in aspects they do well, and for me thats discipline and fielding. There's a reason why Australia have been so good at cricket for so long, they don't provide freebies to the opposition and they also ensure their fielding is top notch.

This article is actually very good and shows how close to Australia, England are, but also shows in the same article how far away they are, and what they need to focus on to continue to improve. We have come a long way from the pre-stokes and McCullum order, we were playing awful boring cricket. We now aren't, but we need to clean up areas that we are doing poorly and I haven't liked the sooking etc. I suspect part of that though is to ensure that the atmospheres stay like they were at both Edgebaston and towards the end of the Lords test. England seem to galvanise under that energy so part of this rhetoric of how we were wronged (we weren't) is to do with that IMO.

Anyway, back to that article.

Slight better batting average per wicket than Australia - big tick
Way more extras and in particular NB's and Byes (72 to 24 is absurd) - Massive cross. This is a huge area for improvement and is critical in a tight series

View attachment 19844

Again a massive cross for the above. double the number of missed chances and we've seen catches that should have been taken by Bairstow / Pope etc that I'm pretty sure if they were created by the Australians would have been taken. Need to get a lot better with this.

https://www.bbc.com/sport/cricket/66097255

It sounds like England will be bringing in a life for like to replace Pope in Dan Lawrence (who is an ok batsman and depending on the pitch could bowl a bit of spin with Root if we don't go with an outright spinner), but I think the old adage of catches win matches needs to be what they look at, and move Bairstow to 3 and bring Foakes back in.

Woakes Wood and Ali.
Interesting side.

If i recall Woakes is not fast enough to be a frontline bowler and not good enough to be a top order bat.
A classic ok at both allrounder.
And not young /improving either

Read that those 3 havent played much cricket, seems like a side unbalanced and lacking match fitness

 

[23.21.159]

Woakes Wood and Ali.
Interesting side.

If i recall Woakes is not fast enough to be a frontline bowler and not good enough to be a top order bat.
A classic ok at both allrounder.
And not young /improving either

Read that those 3 havent played much cricket, seems like a side unbalanced and lacking match fitness

Wow. Not replacing Pope with a batsman?
They will have six specialist batsmen (two of which are Stokes and Bairstow), Ali and four more right arm fast bowlers.

 

[tigertim]

Anyway… on to the upcoming game. I reckon Cam Green needs to lift his game a bit. Been ordinary this series. 38, 28, 0 and 18 @ 21 from your no.6 bat and 3/171 @ 57 (and going at 5 and 6 an over) isn’t cutting it.

 

[tigersnake]

You are not seriously comparing this to what Carey did?

Yet to see a legitimate comparison.

It is a legit comparison. But only a carbon copy will do it seems, which never happens when comparing anything. Agree to disagree I guess.

 

[tigersnake]

He’s at the *smile* stumps the batsman is in danger of being stumped every ball. He’s aware the keeper is able to stump him, he had basicallY overbalanced. It’s very different to bairstow. Bairstow marked his guard and then went down to do some gardening. I’ll guarantee if Carey was at the stumps though he wouldn’t have walked off before Carey had moved the ball on.

Bizarre

 

[Sintiger]

Will say though, there is no way Stuart Broad should ever have walked when he hit it to slip.

Most players would/should do the same. Taking the current England stance out of it. Nothing wrong with it.

I don’t think that’s the point.

The issue with Broad is that If you don’t invoke the “spirit of cricket” for that then you have no right to bleat about it in this case.

 

[AngryAnt]

It was premeditated! It’s irrelevant that he threw it straight away! That’s what makes it worse.

Sorry MD, but that's a bizarre take. If you notice a batsman has little awareness of what the keeper is doing, just assumes the ball is dead and wanders out of his crease constantly then exploiting that is good cricket. And Bairstow is a keeper!

Hell, even when I played cricket at school I learnt "dont leave your crease unless you know where the ball is".

 

[AngryAnt]

He’s at the *smile* stumps the batsman is in danger of being stumped every ball. He’s aware the keeper is able to stump him, he had basicallY overbalanced. It’s very different to bairstow. Bairstow marked his guard and then went down to do some gardening. I’ll guarantee if Carey was at the stumps though he wouldn’t have walked off before Carey had moved the ball on.

And there it is. Jonny assumed that he couldn't be stumped because the keeper was standing back, even though he tried to stump Marnus in the same way in the same match.

This is a weird hill to die on.

 

[Carter]

Sorry MD, but that's a bizarre take. If you notice a batsman has little awareness of what the keeper is doing, just assumes the ball is dead and wanders out of his crease constantly then exploiting that is good cricket. And Bairstow is a keeper!

Hell, even when I played cricket at school I learnt "dont leave your crease unless you know where the ball is".

Yep, if the ball goes through to the keeper, you watch him flick it on to first slip or whoever the next fielder is before even thinking of moving. It's just ingrained in every kid from day one.

Let's say a batsman caresses the ball straight to short cover. He waits until the fielder has secured the ball and flicked it on before leaving his crease. Why wouldn't this same principle apply to the wicket-keeper? Does the WK exist in Bairstow's dozy world?

Crazy that a professional of his standing would do it and his dismissal has nothing to do with the "spirit" of the game. It's a stumping, just an unusual one due to the high degree of difficulty and the low degree of probability.

 

[Legends of 2017]

For stokes to say that’s not how he would want to win a match, well, I don’t recall him going up to bairstow when he tried the same thing earlier in the game and say “ mate, don’t do that again”
For those defending mccullum doing it years ago but now he’s saying it’s wrong, by saying he’s changed, let’s give Carey the same benefit and ask him in 10-15 years time if he thinks it’s wrong.
What I will find interesting for the remainder of the series, is if something that is “ against the spirit of the game” happens that benefits the poms, will they “do the right thing” and reverse the decision because “ it’s the right thing to do” or be hypocrites and let the decision stand because it’s in the rules?

 

[tigertim]

For stokes to say that’s not how he would want to win a match, well, I don’t recall him going up to bairstow when he tried the same thing earlier in the game and say “ mate, don’t do that again”
For those defending mccullum doing it years ago but now he’s saying it’s wrong, by saying he’s changed, let’s give Carey the same benefit and ask him in 10-15 years time if he thinks it’s wrong.
What I will find interesting for the remainder of the series, is if something that is “ against the spirit of the game” happens that benefits the poms, will they “do the right thing” and reverse the decision because “ it’s the right thing to do” or be hypocrites and let the decision stand because it’s in the rules?

Yeah, the Poms have set themselves as the arbiters of The Spirit Of The Game. Will they now not appeal for lbws clearly missing or “nicks” that never hit the bat?

 

[tigertim]

Yep, if the ball goes through to the keeper, you watch him flick it on to first slip or whoever the next fielder is before even thinking of moving. It's just ingrained in every kid from day one.

Let's say a batsman caresses the ball straight to short cover. He waits until the fielder has secured the ball and flicked it on before leaving his crease. Why wouldn't this same principle apply to the wicket-keeper? Does the WK exist in Bairstow's dozy world?

Crazy that a professional of his standing would do it and his dismissal has nothing to do with the "spirit" of the game. It's a stumping, just an unusual one due to the high degree of difficulty and the low degree of probability.

Yeah, there was an article remembering all the different ways you’d walk out of your crease as a kid. I never knew there were different ways of saying it, I thought it was just “wicket leave” but apparently it was different in each state. “Crease leave”, “stump leave” and others. Bottom line, we all knew not to leave your crease til you were sure the ball was dead.