England v New Zealand, 2nd Test, Headingley, 29 May-2 Jun, 2015

beamer wrote:Oh and quit the quntish baiting of the Aussies as well, it's getting tiresome. Shame Dello/Cheesy don't seem to have a ban function on here. Bring back C4.

Isn't that one of the reasons we left C4?

beamer wrote:
As for the abuse - maybe over the top, but when someone's constantly being a qunt you reach breaking point in the end.

Constantly...?!
Funny that, I thought you were the prime candidate for being a qunt by defending the defenceless!
All I was doing was pointing out his obvious (and major) flaw by discarding his "average" and "accumulation" - (both excellent traits btw) - but useless when he bats like he did first up!
And you got all abusive and sweaty about it!

You really are keen on this banning issue aren't you?!

Wassup?
Thin skinned  or what?!
And FFS stop with the "quntish baiting of the Aussies" comment ... trust me, the Aussies can look after themselves and certainly don't need your assistance in that regard!

BTW - there is an ignore button should you wish to exclude my posts.
Just stop being a wussie.

Great, inspiring cricket from New Zealand, and timid, defensive stuff from England. Mccullum's team have completely caught Cook on the hop, and he had no answer to the aggressive approach. The game was in the balance, and it was New Zealand who had the courage to grab it by the throat.

Moeen surely won't be our spinner in the first Ashes test. He's been rubbish since returning from injury in the Caribbean. Bowls two bad balls an over now. Not that it's his fault- He's always been a part-time spinner who was hyped into something more based on a bit of success against India last Summer. Good while it lasted.

Tredwell it is then. Hmm....

Broad and Anderson were yet again too short, too often. One drive down the ground and they pull their length back permanently. Anderson in particular has become too scared of leaking runs. Who cares? Wickets will always be key. I've long accepted that Broad will blow hot and cold. It's frustrating, and I reckon he doesn't put in the work that he should, but it's a fact of his career that he can win a test in a session, but also bowl some dire, hittable filth.

When we got McCullum I still gave us a chance but not having a 3rd slip cost us a couple of wickets and barring records being broken (probably a world record by the time NZ are done) then it's well played NZ. Although the rain could still make a late entrance as England's star player...

Shame it's only a 2 test series but in an Ashes summer what can you do? Are there ever more than 7 tests in a summer? Can't recall it happening.

Sweet Jayzus - 11-435 in the day!! Fook me, that's Test cricket on steroids! Over 2.5 innings done with 2 days to go. Snoozies doing their best to try to square the series. Another 100 or so will be a tough ask for England.

Congrats to Watling on his unbeaten ton.

In fairness to Anderson, he was plagued by the warning from Ump Ravi for "running on the wicket" ...
Kinda lost it  ... always jabbering about it to anyone who'd listen - even the other Ump Tucker!

Broad was okay - just okay - not threatening.
Stokes is also a 4 ball over man - though he did bowl some beauts that had the Kiwis prodding.
Woods was by far the best IMO. Always made the batsmen play - but is restricted to away swing.
Would like to see a few more of his 90 mph effort balls ... one an over perhaps.

I agree with you however, Moeen has "lost it " right now ... and his batting hasn't picked up either
to compensate for his inability to make something happen with the ball.

I thought Root was more threatening TBH ... but giving him the spinners role would be a pox
(possibly) on his batting. So it's Tredwell then ... hmmmmm

Was impressed by Woods. Not every day you get a bowler who can reverse it at 90mph+.

He'll probably never be fit now of course.

vilkrang wrote:When we got McCullum I still gave us a chance but not having a 3rd slip cost us a couple of wickets and barring records being broken (probably a world record by the time NZ are done) then it's well played NZ. Although the rain could still make a late entrance as England's star player...

Shame it's only a 2 test series but in an Ashes summer what can you do? Are there ever more than 7 tests in a summer? Can't recall it happening.

The bowlers (especially senior guys Anderson and Broad) are just as much to blame for a lack of slips as Cook is. Nasser pointed out that Jimmy likes to have protection in the covers so that he can pitch full without going for runs. Problem is, pitching full also means it's more likely an edge will be found. It's a defensive mindset.

If Anderson and Broad put their foot down and demanded more slips, they'd get them.

Merlin wrote:

beamer wrote:
As for the abuse - maybe over the top, but when someone's constantly being a qunt you reach breaking point in the end.

Constantly...?!
Funny that, I thought you were the prime candidate for being a qunt by defending the defenceless!
All I was doing was pointing out his obvious (and major) flaw by discarding his "average" and "accumulation" - (both excellent traits btw) - but useless when he bats like he did first up!
And you got all abusive and sweaty about it!

Well if you'd put it that way as opposed to "he's f*cking shit etc" then fair enough...

You really are keen on this banning issue aren't you?!

Wassup?
Thin skinned  or what?!

Yes and yes. So what?

And FFS stop with the "quntish baiting of the Aussies" comment ... trust me, the Aussies can look after themselves and certainly don't need your assistance in that regard!

BTW - there is an ignore button should you wish to exclude my posts.
Just stop being a wussie.

Just pointing out your general attitude which is filling this whole place with negativity and shit, and that this isn't the first personal feud you are/have been involved in...

Leave it out.
Admit it - you over reacted ... and now it's a case of digging yourself outta the hole.

I forgive you.
At the risk of turning the Tassie fat-boy on... let's 'move on' and stop all this sh*t about having someone banned.

Like I said - use the Ignore button .

BTW - NOTHING I say on here is directed on a personal level.
If you think so then you really are thin skinned.

It also pisses me off that with the game dead even, Anderson and Broad chose that time to trot in and struggle to bowl quicker than 80mph. They've shown in recent times that if they do bend their backs, they can still crank up the pace, which has shown to make them more dangerous bowlers, but they didn't.

Henry wrote:Great, inspiring cricket from New Zealand, and timid, defensive stuff from England. Mccullum's team have completely caught Cook on the hop, and he had no answer to the aggressive approach. The game was in the balance, and it was New Zealand who had the courage to grab it by the throat.

Moeen surely won't be our spinner in the first Ashes test. He's been rubbish since returning from injury in the Caribbean. Bowls two bad balls an over now. Not that it's his fault- He's always been a part-time spinner who was hyped into something more based on a bit of success against India last Summer. Good while it lasted.

Tredwell it is then. Hmm....

Tredwell's effectively a part-timer in the longer game, he doesn't even get in his county team does he?

Just shows there's no real point playing a spinner as there's nobody good enough. Play our best 5 or 6 batsmen, then Stokes and Buttler, and our best 3 or 4 seamers (depending on whether 5 pacemen will achieve anything or if we're best just batting down to 8 ). Root can turn his arm over to keep the over-rate fines at bay. And if Moeen merits a place as a batsman then anything he contributes with the ball is a bonus as well.

Henry wrote:It also pisses me off that with the game dead even, Anderson and Broad chose that time to trot in and struggle to bowl quicker than 80mph. They've shown in recent times that if they do bend their backs, they can still crank up the pace, which has shown to make them more dangerous bowlers, but they didn't.

Saving themselves for tomorrow Trev!

Henry wrote:It also pisses me off that with the game dead even, Anderson and Broad chose that time to trot in and struggle to bowl quicker than 80mph. They've shown in recent times that if they do bend their backs, they can still crank up the pace, which has shown to make them more dangerous bowlers, but they didn't.

Yeah, I wholeheartedly agree. Maybe it's the fact they had little chance to recover from their previous three innings. Either way, your point about bowling too short and 'bowling dry' in general is the reason we're in the position we find ourselves in. F*ck the statistics, I'm saying from memory that it's rarely the most prudent tactic to employ. Maybe on a deady - but with the conditions they could utilise for 60% of the day and given that NZ showed how to bowl in the morning session, it borders on the ridiculously obtuse.

The problem being that, if it is Branderson that are choosing to do so, HTF is any captain going to change that 'habit'?

Since 2010, Jimmy Anderson has bowled more balls in international cricket than anyone else - in that time he's got 254 wickets at 26. So even though his S/R isn't great, his economy is decent. It's doubtful that anyone is going to be able to convince him otherwise and considering how venerated I can't see 'the captain' being strong enough to go against his wishes.

beamer wrote:
Tredwell's effectively a part-timer in the longer game, he doesn't even get in his county team does he?

Just shows there's no real point playing a spinner as there's nobody good enough.

It's barely ever worth playing a spinner against Australia, full stop. Especially an off-spinner. The only reason it was worth playing Graeme Swann was that, over a 5 Test series, he'd win us one game against them. He was contemptuously treated the rest of the time. Were it not for his pot luck tonking and safe pair of hands (and his 'bants' in the dressing room) then he'd pretty much have been a passenger for four of the five Tests.

beamer wrote:

Henry wrote:Great, inspiring cricket from New Zealand, and timid, defensive stuff from England. Mccullum's team have completely caught Cook on the hop, and he had no answer to the aggressive approach. The game was in the balance, and it was New Zealand who had the courage to grab it by the throat.

Moeen surely won't be our spinner in the first Ashes test. He's been rubbish since returning from injury in the Caribbean. Bowls two bad balls an over now. Not that it's his fault- He's always been a part-time spinner who was hyped into something more based on a bit of success against India last Summer. Good while it lasted.

Tredwell it is then. Hmm....

Tredwell's effectively a part-timer in the longer game, he doesn't even get in his county team does he?

Just shows there's no real point playing a spinner as there's nobody good enough. Play our best 5 or 6 batsmen, then Stokes and Buttler, and our best 3 or 4 seamers (depending on whether 5 pacemen will achieve anything or if we're best just batting down to 8 ). Root can turn his arm over to keep the over-rate fines at bay. And if Moeen merits a place as a batsman then anything he contributes with the ball is a bonus as well.

Apart from Tredwell, it seems that Ansari has snuck to the head of the line as far as spinners are concerned. I agree that it would be a massive mistake to go into a test with Root as our sole spinner, especially as the oitches will likely be slow and dry again.

Moeen has been disappointing with the ball. It's a shame because he definitely has a lot of the raw attributes -  really nice strong action, plenty of work on the ball. I don't even think 'inconsistency' is his really his problem, although it is a manifestation of it, it's just that he's trying to bowl too quickly too much. He's firing it in the high fifties and that makes it much easier to drag it down. It's ok having that kind of pace in your range, but I think his average speed should be quite a bit lower, with plenty more flight. Would make him five times more dangerous IMO. Weirdly, he seems to disagree; there was an interview with him with someone (Gower?) last match where the interviewer basically suggested as much and Moeen dismissed the idea out of hand. I assume there's some kind of reason behind that and I'm just an uncoordinated idiot watching on my laptop, but it doesn't really add up for me.

I reckon we will see a WR run chase here.

Brass Monkey wrote:

Henry wrote:It also pisses me off that with the game dead even, Anderson and Broad chose that time to trot in and struggle to bowl quicker than 80mph. They've shown in recent times that if they do bend their backs, they can still crank up the pace, which has shown to make them more dangerous bowlers, but they didn't.

Yeah, I wholeheartedly agree. Maybe it's the fact they had little chance to recover from their previous three innings. Either way, your point about bowling too short and 'bowling dry' in general is the reason we're in the position we find ourselves in. F*ck the statistics, I'm saying from memory that it's rarely the most prudent tactic to employ. Maybe on a deady - but with the conditions they could utilise for 60% of the day and given that NZ showed how to bowl in the morning session, it borders on the ridiculously obtuse.

The problem being that, if it is Branderson that are choosing to do so, HTF is any captain going to change that 'habit'?

Since 2010, Jimmy Anderson has bowled more balls in international cricket than anyone else - in that time he's got 254 wickets at 26. So even though his S/R isn't great, his economy is decent. It's doubtful that anyone is going to be able to convince him otherwise and considering how venerated I can't see 'the captain' being strong enough to go against his wishes.

There's no denying that there are problems with the England attack Dan, but the bit I've highlighted suggests that Jimmy Anderson isn't really that big a part of it. This isn't a dig at you - but it seems to me that he's expected to perform miracles every time he's thrown the ball. Add the fact that he's one of our top fielders (doesn't spill many does he?) he has more than his share of chances put down ...... not least by his captain. I'll take his (relatively) poor S/R for his economy, since if he was going the same rate as the rest of the attack most matches, our feeble, fragile top order would have had to set/chase even bigger totals than they must already.

Growler wrote:
There's no denying that there are problems with the England attack Dan, but the bit I've highlighted suggests that Jimmy Anderson isn't really that big a part of it. This isn't a dig at you - but it seems to me that he's expected to perform miracles every time he's thrown the ball. Add the fact that he's one of our top fielders (doesn't spill many does he?) he has more than his share of chances put down ...... not least by his captain. I'll take his (relatively) poor S/R for his economy, since if he was going the same rate as the rest of the attack most matches, our feeble, fragile top order would have had to set/chase even bigger totals than they must already.

He's criminally wasted new balls with great frequency over the last year, theories are because he's dropped a yard of pace his fuller length is more driveable and hence he's had to drag his length back. Regardless, there have been numerous situations where conditions and match precedents have cried out for fuller pitched bowling, making the batsmen play.

It is frustrating after seeing the opposition reap the rewards of the obvious tactic of such bowling, only to see the opposition batsmen be able to coast through the new ball by having to play at 6 deliveries per spell. Even more frustrating when bouncer after bouncer gets despatched and seeing another bouncer served up.

Don't get me wrong, a bit part of the problem is our feeble batting collapses that precede such bowling spells. I'm also aware of how well he has gone in the last year, 56 wickets at 21.39 - all three series before this one he averaged 21.5 or less, so it's not a criticism I'd dish out lightly. I expect it is more conspicuous when it happens with him because of the aforementioned green patch in his previous year of Test cricket. But at the same time, I'm not expecting miracles from him at all - just the application of common sense - just to do what has made him successful - just hit his naturally full length in swinging conditions. I don't think that's a big ask, from a person with 100+ Test matches under his belt.

Merlin wrote:In fairness to Anderson, he was plagued by the warning from Ump Ravi for "running on the wicket" ...
Kinda lost it  ... always jabbering about it to anyone who'd listen - even the other Ump Tucker!

you mean: in fairness to anderson hes a soft qunt who cant cope with being told off for breaking the rules
guy whinges even more than you do. and thats saying something

*reply to Monkeh*

Oh I don't disagree with anything you've said in that reply. It is frustrating to realise that he's done so well in spite of bowling too short - Geoffrey, Aggers and other commentators have said the same as us on here.

He needs a stronger captain, for sure. Someone like maybe Athers - or definitely Nasser, who would simply have told him .....

OK Jimmy, you're getting four slips, gully and short fine leg. This is your field for this spell - bowl to it, and keep it pitched up. Had he then bowled short shite, I'm sure he'd have had his oracle read.

Growler wrote:Oh I don't disagree with anything you've said in that reply. It is frustrating to realise that he's done so well in spite of bowling too short - Geoffrey, Aggers and other commentators have said the same as us on here.

kinda frightening to think of the figures if he would consistently pitch it up more. be in mcgraths class

Maybe not quite as good as McGrath - but almost certainly not far off.

One thing Im sure of though ...... if he bowled fuller, there'd be a lot fewer instances of opposition 8 - 9 - 10 - J hanging around with No 3,4 or 5 and turning 180odd/6 into 350+ all out. A bowler of his ability should clean out the tail of a side more often than not.

JGK wrote:I reckon we will see a WR run chase here.

Sometimes extra insurance cover is wasted expense.