England v India, 3rd Test, Trent Bridge, 18-22 August, 2018

beamer wrote:Rashid now has the most wickets by an English leg-spinner in a home Test series for over 50 years. Takes some effort to surpass such legends as Ian Salisbury and Chris Schofield (not forgetting Mike Atherton of course!)

That is a bleak statistic!

Rain the only thing that can save England now, might be a little on Wednesday but we all know it will be over tomorrow. probably before tea.

Let's take this to day 5 please England at least. Sam Curran won't have changed the result in all likelihood, but he surely must return next test, what says others?

whitburn wrote:Let's take this to day 5 please England at least. Sam Curran won't have changed the result in all likelihood, but he surely must return next test, what says others?

Would put my house on that not happening.

Yeah, they won’t have the motivation to do that. I doubt they will get to tea tomorrow, maybe one or two will make some meaningless runs to cement their places, but they could easily fall in a heap very quickly again.

Curran for Stokes could make sense, I doubt they would seriously consider putting him in for Bairstow and moving everyone up one.

So survival is the order of the day for England. Hard to see them keeping Ashtray at bay for that long.

And just what is wrong with England's slip catching?? Buttler and then the inexplicable Jennings' effort in the gully. From a match perspective it didn't matter but they could've at least said "we stopped Kohli from getting a ton twice in the match".

Kohli is having a great series.

So...can England bat for two days to save the game?

Yeah, it'll be 2-1 to the Poms sometime after Tea tonight.

Anderson is a slightly different bowler when conditions don't suit. Virat is really making merry.

Red wrote:AndersonEvery bowler that has ever played cricket is a slightly different bowler when conditions don't suit.

FTFY.

skully wrote:Yeah, it'll be 2-1 to the Poms sometime after before Tea tonight.

Root gone. Fixed.

Important wicket that. Fair to say that Kohli is having a better series than his counterpart. Pope gone now!

Rash shot that.

Now Pope's gone with a similarly bad waft as Root's. 4-62.

India's slips catching has left England's in the shade.

Not the best 4 days away i have ever had but the city itself is quite good. I'm pleased i threw a £ ton at 4-1 on India before the game. I had a feeling we'd mess up and from the stupid decision not to bat onward it's been little short of sporting suicide throughout. The difference in the run totals is simply alarming yet we're supposed to be the ones good in these conditions? Pressure galore on about 6 players next test.

Is it just me, or does Pandya look a bit West Indian?

It's amazing how England seemed to be bowling pies yesterday, and today India are bowling hand grenades.

Red wrote:Anderson is a slightly different bowler when conditions don't suit. Virat is really making merry.

Come on Red - top class batsmen do make runs against the best bowlers.

Talking of conditions, that applies to batsmen as well. Lets look at the New Bradman ....

In West Indies - a single innings of 199, and 2 not outs in 4 innings gives him a fine average of 141.

In NZ - another big score (138), and a not out from 3 innings played gives a 131 average.

At home, 77 average is impressive for any player, anywhere.

Likewise, an average of 60 in India is good - over 12 innings too. Of course, 178NO, and two more not outs helps.

What a contrast with  the other major nations.

In England - 44 average, in SA 41 average, in SL 41 average, and in UAE v Paksters an average of 43.

In short overall, he averages just 50 abroad, compared with 77 at home ... he's 50% worse, even including those monster scores in WI and NZ. Jimmy is only 25% less effective away from home.

Lokks like Steve Smith is a vastly different batsman when conditions don't suit .... loses his wicket to no end of pie-chuckers.

Growler wrote:

Red wrote:Anderson is a slightly different bowler when conditions don't suit. Virat is really making merry.

Come on Red - top class batsmen do make runs against the best bowlers.

Talking of conditions, that applies to batsmen as well. Lets look at the New Bradman ....

In West Indies - a single innings of 199, and 2 not outs in 4 innings gives him a fine average of 141.

In NZ - another big score (138), and a not out from 3 innings played gives a 131 average.

At home, 77 average is impressive for any player, anywhere.

Likewise, an average of 60 in India is good - over 12 innings too. Of course, 178NO, and two more not outs helps.

What a contrast with  the other major nations.

In England - 44 average, in SA 41 average, in SL 41 average, and in UAE v Paksters an average of 43.

In short overall, he averages just 50 abroad, compared with 77 at home ... he's 50% worse, even including those monster scores in WI and NZ. Jimmy is only 25% less effective away from home.

Lokks like Steve Smith is a vastly different batsman when conditions don't suit .... loses his wicket to no end of pie-chuckers.

Clearly Kohli has mastered the late swing after the ball has pitched.

Some pretty dire batting from England this morning. Yet again.

Growler wrote:

Red wrote:Anderson is a slightly different bowler when conditions don't suit. Virat is really making merry.

Come on Red - top class batsmen do make runs against the best bowlers.

Talking of conditions, that applies to batsmen as well. Lets look at the New Bradman ....

In West Indies - a single innings of 199, and 2 not outs in 4 innings gives him a fine average of 141.

In NZ - another big score (138), and a not out from 3 innings played gives a 131 average.

At home, 77 average is impressive for any player, anywhere.

Likewise, an average of 60 in India is good - over 12 innings too. Of course, 178NO, and two more not outs helps.

What a contrast with  the other major nations.

In England - 44 average, in SA 41 average, in SL 41 average, and in UAE v Paksters an average of 43.

In short overall, he averages just 50 abroad, compared with 77 at home ... he's 50% worse, even including those monster scores in WI and NZ. Jimmy is only 25% less effective away from home.

Lokks like Steve Smith is a vastly different batsman when conditions don't suit .... loses his wicket to no end of pie-chuckers.

I don't disagree with the Smith comments, but Anderson seems more than many others to be a tale of two pitches. In his type of conditions, he's best in the world, save for perhaps Philander, in more benign conditions, he can lack penetration. With others, there isn't the same disparity in performances.

[quote="taipan"

Clearly Kohli has mastered the late swing after the ball has pitched.[/quote]

Except for the time in each big innings he nicked off, only for the slips to fook up, as per normal .

Bumrah really is a fantastic name.

vilkrang wrote:Bumrah really is a fantastic name.

I like to think he screams it out loud at the point of delivery. BumRAAAARRRGHHHH!!!

Henry wrote:Even the joke teams of the mid 90s had more spine than this England side. At least Athers, Nasser, and Ramps would spit on the pitch, stare down the opposition bowlers, and guts their way to 30 off 100 balls in these conditions.

Once conditions are even slightly against this lot’s hard hands, counter-attacking, aggression at all costs mindset, they collapse in a pathetic heap.  

We're a team of one day players. That's where the superstars are in this sport - that's where the money is - and our selectors are utterly in thrall of "star quality".

We shouldn't be surprised that no-one can bat a Test innings properly. They're not Test players. They're limited overs players who occasionally come off in the Test arena - which seems to be enough to justify the selectors' faith in them: "See? That 40-ball cameo half-century is exactly why we believe in (insert name). And the previous ten single figure scores are just the grit we have to sift through to get to the tiny nuggets of gold."

The only guy we've got who can play long-form cricket is Cook, and his game's in pieces.

Four wickets for spit. We're taking a Bum-ing.