The New Cricket Thread

[Pureblood]

11 minutes ago, Captain Turdseye said:

Fuck that. Turned over as soon as the review was done. 

[mgw100]

Pope has to play at the Oval.

[Guest Pistonbroke]

1 minute ago, mgw100 said:

Really? Sure it wasnt the Roooootttt thing? Not watching myself but booing him would be a bit off.

 

Sounded like Boos to me mate. 

[mgw100]

1 minute ago, Pistonbroke said:

 

Sounded like Boos to me mate. 

Fucking hell. He doesn't deserve that even if you're not that into his captaincy. 

[Guest Pistonbroke]

3 minutes ago, mgw100 said:

Fucking hell. He doesn't deserve that even if you're not that into his captaincy. 

 

I agree, but don't take my words for it. It sounded that way to myself but I never gave the Roooooot thing a though tbh. Plus it could have been the Aussie fans as the ground emptied pretty quickly. 

[sir roger]

Yeah re mgw and Jair , wouldn't mind Woakes or Pope getting a go , but feel that Sam Curran deserves a pop , always think he has something about him.

[Brownie]

Absolutely gutted here, tbh.

[Jairzinho]

35 minutes ago, sir roger said:

Yeah re mgw and Jair , wouldn't mind Woakes or Pope getting a go , but feel that Sam Curran deserves a pop , always think he has something about him.

Curran and Woakes are good enough with the bat that they can be seven and eight. It's not like Buttler is currently add a great deal. We can have four quicks if we want, which would take the work load off Stokes. Someone in my opinion should only be bowling occasional spells. He's at absolute worst our second best batsman.

[Jairzinho]

1 minute ago, Brownie said:

Absolutely gutted here, tbh.

I think I would be had I not resigned myself to this weeks ago.

 

We're not very good.

[Brownie]

19 minutes ago, Jairzinho said:

I think I would be had I not resigned myself to this weeks ago.

 

We're not very good.

I know mate, I said before the series that we are average. I fancied us to win though because they also have similar weaknesses. We’ve actually done a bit better with the bat than I expected. Losing Jimmy has killed us really.

[mgw100]

39 minutes ago, Jairzinho said:

Curran and Woakes are good enough with the bat that they can be seven and eight. It's not like Buttler is currently add a great deal. We can have four quicks if we want, which would take the work load off Stokes. Someone in my opinion should only be bowling occasional spells. He's at absolute worst our second best batsman.

Stokes is too good a bowler for that. 

[mgw100]

The wicket keeper, probably still Bairstow for me, should bat at 7. A specialist batsmen should bat at 6. That's where I would have Pope. 

[Jairzinho]

27 minutes ago, mgw100 said:

Stokes is too good a bowler for that. 

Fair enough, I disagree.

[Jarvinja Ilnow]

4 hours ago, sir roger said:

Burns

……...

Denly

Root

Stokes

Bairstow

……...

……..

Archer

Leach

Broad

 

I personally would cover the gaps with Sibley , Foakes and Sam Curran.

 

( I don't think Denly is the answer really , but would be unfair to drop him after two 50's in the last 2 games )

I remember you saying he didn't have the technique, and me saying it was about Roy at number 4; but  you are right, he could be a decent 3, moving Root to 4 and letting Roy go.

 

Roy and Butler might be fucked after the ODI, but Woakes and Stokes are also probably a bit jaded.

 

Leach has a lot of cult status, but Bess might be worth revisiting, just from the bowling point of view.

 

Sam Curan might get a chance in the last test, if Stokes is also fucked, but hopefully they won't replace Root as Capt with Stokes. That's a Bothamesque mess in the making. Root hasn't been a great captain but who do you lot think

deserves a place in the side and can captain, apart from Stokes? Stokes looks really fucked at the moment, but shouldn't ever have the captaincy to worry about.

 

Bairstow is an interesting one, he's not the best w/k, but you could play Olie Pope at 6 instead of him, Foakes at 7 as w/k. I'm sick of his chippy litttle attitude - when he can be bothered making a decent score, he then uses it to hit back at Vaughn and the others. How about just being competitive all the time and not relying on media criticism to make him do his job? Having typed that, it's cathartic - he's a poor w/k and an average test batsman, and he really fucks me off with his 'me against the world' bollocks. I'm beginning to hate the arrogant little fucker - 'I don't bat as well when I'm not qwicket-keeping.' Well fuck off and keep wicket for someone who doesn't mind your sloppiness.

 

 

[sir roger]

Apologies to mgw , had a brainfart & got my Ollies in a twist ( oo-er Missus ) I was thinking of Stone not Pope.

[Guest Pistonbroke]

5 hours ago, mgw100 said:

The wicket keeper, probably still Bairstow for me, should bat at 7. A specialist batsmen should bat at 6. That's where I would have Pope. 

 

If Pope is picked we might have a Prayer. I'm not sure pope will get in ahead of Sam Curran like. 

[Guest Pistonbroke]

 

Unchanged squad for the final test. 

[TheBitch]

12 hours ago, Pistonbroke said:

 

Unchanged squad for the final test. 

What a load of predictable shite.

[Jairzinho]

3-1.

[s(k)aturation]

 

The time for changes was before the Ashes were lost.

 

They were seduced by the Headingley result.  Must admit I was too.

[Guest Pistonbroke]

3 hours ago, TheBitch said:

What a load of predictable shite.

 

Typical ECB mate, it sends out all the wrong messages to players who haven't performed and those trying to get into the fold. Basically the only change squad wise that might happen is Sam Curran replacing one of the batsman out of form and maybe Woakes returning. Nice cushy tours of New Zealand and South Africa over the winter months, I'm sure those within the Root/ECB clique would love to be on. 

[sir roger]

Very disappointing

 

Talk that Stokes may be unable to bowl & played as a batsman only meaning Woakes or Curran S would play( presumably for Buttler or Roy ? )

[Guest Pistonbroke]

44 minutes ago, sir roger said:

Very disappointing

 

Talk that Stokes may be unable to bowl & played as a batsman only meaning Woakes or Curran S would play( presumably for Buttler or Roy ? )

 

Will Woakes get back in though?

 

I'm not sure if any of you kept the analysis on after the defeat the other day but Botham said he met Woakes in the car park and he categorically told him he wasn't injured or carrying a knock. Botham said he asked him what he thought of the decision to drop him but said it was best if he didn't repeat the answer he was given. 

[Spy Bee]

Well, you do get dropped when you play shit, so Woakes should get his head down and work hard to get back in. He's definitely been given chances.

 

I'd imagine with Bayliss going the big changes have been delayed until after his departure. We were a little unlucky in this test match, losing the toss was a huge thing. With that said, we've clearly got a long way to go in this format at the moment.

[s(k)aturation]

2 hours ago, Pistonbroke said:

 

Typical ECB mate, it sends out all the wrong messages to players who haven't performed and those trying to get into the fold. Basically the only change squad wise that might happen is Sam Curran replacing one of the batsman out of form and maybe Woakes returning. Nice cushy tours of New Zealand and South Africa over the winter months, I'm sure those within the Root/ECB clique would love to be on. 

 

Might yet get their arses kicked in both.