New Zealand v England, 2nd Test, Christchurch, 30 March - 3 April, 2018

If it’s to ‘aid concentration’, why is it that fieldsmen rather than batsmen, predominantly, chewing gum etc?

The first 16 wickets in this match have all fallen to the four opening bowlers. Is this a record?

Mark Wood, we are told, was picked to give to give the bowling attack a bit of extra pace. Really? He was barely quicker than Jimmy and without the bowling craft. Stokes was comfortably the fastest of our bowlers and this off a 12 pace saunter to the crease to protect his back.

beamer wrote:The first 16 wickets in this match have all fallen to the four opening bowlers. Is this a record?

It is not a record because this match beats it & there may be others  but maybe it is a record post WW2.

http://www.howstat.com/cricket/Statistics/Matches/MatchScorecard.asp?MatchCode=0066


Australia not opening with the fastest bowler in the team!

WideWally wrote:

beamer wrote:The first 16 wickets in this match have all fallen to the four opening bowlers. Is this a record?

It is not a record because this match beats it & there may be others  but maybe it is a record post WW2.

http://www.howstat.com/cricket/Statistics/Matches/MatchScorecard.asp?MatchCode=0066


Australia not opening with the fastest bowler in the team!

That’s impressive - all but two of the 40 wickets, and one of those was a run out!

BTW ... in Massie's test, the first 14 wickets fell to the opening bowlers.

Basil wrote:Mark Wood, we are told, was picked to give to give the bowling attack a bit of extra pace. Really? He was barely quicker than Jimmy and without the bowling craft. Stokes was comfortably the fastest of our bowlers and this off a 12 pace saunter to the crease to protect his back.

Wood bowled okay, pace-wise. His early spells were high 80s pretty consistently.

He just couldn't keep it up - and rarely looked a wicket threat. Although he did scone BJ a beauty.

beamer wrote:The first 16 wickets in this match have all fallen to the four opening bowlers. Is this a record?

Now 20.

So, England lead by 29 after the first innings. They'd have to be happy with that after their first 5 wickets fell so cheaply on day 1.

Cook's last Test innings about to commence?

lardbucket wrote:

beamer wrote:The first 16 wickets in this match have all fallen to the four opening bowlers. Is this a record?

Now 20.

Third time ever and first since 1912, apparently.

You'd think there might be a few more before NZ's first change comes on to spoil the record.

lardbucket wrote:Cook's last Test innings about to commence?

... and done

write the career obituaries now

This Barmy Army singing and chanting may make for 'terrific atmosphere' but it's getting on my tits, rapidly.

Vince and Stoneman doing enough to make the selectors’ jobs tricky for the first Test of the summer.

Cook might be the one under most pressure now. Of course he could call it a day of his own accord, but that seems about as likely as Wenger walking away from Arsenal without being pushed.

Bit of a lean time for Grandhomme? 53 overs in this series without reward ... didn't have much success in the ODI series either.

So, the future of English test batting is called stoneman and Vince. Looks like I picked a bad day to give up the booze in that case.

I enjoyed Stoneman trying to acknowledge his 50 while Southee was getting in his face.

Basil wrote:Mark Wood, we are told, was picked to give to give the bowling attack a bit of extra pace. Really? He was barely quicker than Jimmy and without the bowling craft. Stokes was comfortably the fastest of our bowlers and this off a 12 pace saunter to the crease to protect his back.

What struck me was the Baldrick-style variation of Bodyline.

Springheeled Jack was introduced to bring a bit more pace and variation to the attack.

"Okay. Good." (As Coney might say, ominously.)

And I think he probably has half a yard over the others. But that is neutralised if he bowls 90% of his output very short. (And not always so accurate in line.)

And the fact he and/or his skipper put FOUR men on the rope on the leg side suggested he was close to 160k, not - as in fact - somewhere scraping 145k. And as if he was unerringly accurate in line, too.

Because every batsman knew what was coming. And if they had any merit (all had some), could either rock casually out of the way, or knock the ball for singles or twos. Or to the rope, as long as they bisected well.

Baldrick's cunning plans.

England on top?

285 ahead, might even have enough already.

clearly, match almost 'in the bag'

Root approaching his recent danger period, but they have nearly enough already.

All on declaration timing. They could bat out 4 sessions for a draw.

If Root is approaching 100 he won't declare.

As I type that, it becomes irrelevant.

OP Tipping wrote:Bit of a lean time for Grandhomme? 53 overs in this series without reward ... didn't have much success in the ODI series either.

I'm glad my comments spurred him into action.

382 to win. Raval and Latham are both way overdue.