The Official Cricket Thread

[Rico1304]

24 minutes ago, Pistonbroke said:

 

 

.....

Back out of your shell?  Dave must be processing your complaint.  

[Rico1304]

Just look back at the comments, it’s hilarious.  Don’t know why we bother turning up. 

[Rico1304]

On 06/08/2020 at 17:00, Jairzinho said:

Ha.

 

Just like the look of this Pakistan side and I think they'll only need to average 450/500 a game (from both innings) to have a real chance of winning them all.

 

Should be a good series. West Indies' first game fooled everyone, they're still not very good.

Not a fucking clue.  None. Zero.  Nada. 

[Jose Jones]

10 hours ago, Stickman said:

Because there has to be benefit of doubt if the ball is clipping the bails which it was,

Decisions like that should always favour the batsmen. 
If the umpire hadn’t given Burns out and Pakistan reviewed then the decision would have been not out...So how can that be right ? 

 

I agree the umpire’s call stuff is bollocks, it shouldn’t matter what the original decision was.

But it annoys me far more when a review shows 49.9% of the ball is hitting leg stump but it’s not out.

If the tracking shows it’s hitting the stumps it should be out. If the tech is only accurate to 3mm or whatever, then make that the variable for getting benefit of the doubt.

[Jarvinja Ilnow]

Ben Stokes is out, due to family reasons. Looks like he's gone back to New Zealand. Poor lad's had a lot of bad stuff to deal with.

[Captain Turdseye]

18 hours ago, Rico1304 said:

Not a fucking clue.  None. Zero.  Nada. 

Pakistan were still odds on even when England were within 90 runs of winning. Seems a weird comment to pick up on when the bookies (and the exchanges) were of the same opinion. 
 

I guess we’ll see how the rest of the series plays out but you don’t look at our current batting line up and expect big scores. 

[Captain Turdseye]

Disclaimer - I’m a casual fan at best.

 

Big match beaut.

[Rico1304]

18 minutes ago, Captain Turdseye said:

Pakistan were still odds on even when England were within 90 runs of winning. Seems a weird comment to pick up on when the bookies (and the exchanges) were of the same opinion. 
 

I guess we’ll see how the rest of the series plays out but you don’t look at our current batting line up and expect big scores. 

One, two poor sessions and we were written off. A decent keeper takes 100 off their score. At home, Duke ball, bowlers in form. 

[Jarvinja Ilnow]

2 hours ago, Rico1304 said:

One, two poor sessions and we were written off. A decent keeper takes 100 off their score. At home, Duke ball, bowlers in form. 

Just say it, you quim - Foalkes for England!

[Rico1304]

13 minutes ago, Jarvinja Ilnow said:

Just say it, you quim - Foalkes for England!

If he’s the best keeper then pick him.  It’s not often a keeper wins a test but he can easily lose you one.  

[lifetime fan]

10 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

If he’s the best keeper then pick him.  It’s not often a keeper wins a test but he can easily lose you one.  

100% agree. 

[Gnasher]

15 hours ago, Captain Turdseye said:

Pakistan were still odds on even when England were within 90 runs of winning. Seems a weird comment to pick up on when the bookies (and the exchanges) were of the same opinion. 
 

I guess we’ll see how the rest of the series plays out but you don’t look at our current batting line up and expect big scores. 

Yeah but Rico knows far more about the game than them, he probably knows far more about the game than anyone on earth. He's probably made a small fortune betting England when they were long odds throughout most of the game, didnt you Rico? Rico?

[VERBAL DIARRHEA]

12 hours ago, Rico1304 said:

If he’s the best keeper then pick him.  It’s not often a keeper wins a test but he can easily lose you one.  

Buttler is shite behind the stumps, absolute dross. His batting is not up to test standard either. The balance of the side will be affected with Stokes out. Some interesting selection posers.

[mgw100]

2 minutes ago, VERBAL DIARRHEA said:

Buttler is shite behind the stumps, absolute dross. His batting is not up to test standard either. The balance of the side will be affected with Stokes out. Some interesting selection posers.

I think that's going too far re his keeping. He had a nightmare in that respect last week, but generally he's been competent.

[VERBAL DIARRHEA]

Just now, mgw100 said:

I think that's going too far re his keeping. He had a nightmare in that respect last week, but generally he's been competent.

It’s not the first time if memory serves, you need a class keeper, he is not that.

[Manny]

Genuinely baffled by England's (although probably read Ed Smith's) obsession with Jos Buttler in the Test side. He's not a dreadful Test keeper but he's not a particularly good one - last week was him at his worst, which is a long way shy of Test standard, but even on an 'average' day he's probably bottom of the range of standards you'd see for a Test wicketkeeper. His Test batting has been alright but generally a mixed bag. He's a smart guy and a cool head, which is useful in the dressing room, but is that worth disrupting his terrific ODI/T20 batting for?

 

Which is my biggest concern - I just don't get why we're messing about with one of the best one-day batsmen in the world, when it's not like we're short of options. Why are we fucking about trying to gain a mediocre Test keeper and batsman at the potential cost of a world-class ODI/T20 wicketkeeper batsman, when in Foakes we've an excellent Test keeper on the books who's - at absolute worst - a mediocre Test batsman himself? It just feels like the setup are desperate for something to click with Buttler and he'll suddenly dominate red ball in the same way he does white, but that's a strange old gamble.

[sir roger]

Is Southampton likely to help a spinner , not been massively impressed with Bess albeit he was unlucky with a couple of drops.

[Captain Turdseye]

There’s a documentary on the iPlayer at the minute called ‘The Edge’ about England’s improvement during the years when Andy Flower was head coach. It’s worth a watch. 

[Rico1304]

At test level, particularly if you’ve an ambition to be the number 1 side, I can’t understand why you wouldn’t have the best player in a pivotal position.  Maybe it’s because the top order can’t be relied upon for regular runs so he’s supposed to be making up for them. To me though you don’t solve that problem by sacrificing the keeper.  It’s such a difficult job, and one mistake can end up costing you a game. 
 

Ask Chris Scott! 

[mgw100]

4 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

At test level, particularly if you’ve an ambition to be the number 1 side, I can’t understand why you wouldn’t have the best player in a pivotal position.  Maybe it’s because the top order can’t be relied upon for regular runs so he’s supposed to be making up for them. To me though you don’t solve that problem by sacrificing the keeper.  It’s such a difficult job, and one mistake can end up costing you a game. 
 

Ask Chris Scott! 

Wicket keepers also need to be able to bat though. It's not a completely specialist role, never has been. How many keepers have batted 9, 10, jack? I can't think of one

[Rico1304]

2 minutes ago, mgw100 said:

Wicket keepers also need to be able to bat though. It's not a completely specialist role, never has been. How many keepers have batted 9, 10, jack? I can't think of one

He can bat though.  I’d take the best keeper who maybe bats at 8 over someone who only comes off as a batsman every 8/9 games.  
 

I love watching Butler bat in 1 dayers, he’s incredible, but I think there’s more chance of him dropping a couple of chances or missing a stumping than there is of him getting big runs.  

[mgw100]

I'm not arguing for Buttler. He does my head in as a test batsmen. I'm just making the point that it's not a specialist role. If a test WK came in at 8, he would need to Russell esque in terms of keeping, i.e easily the best in the world with the gloves 

[Rico1304]

4 minutes ago, mgw100 said:

I'm not arguing for Buttler. He does my head in as a test batsmen. I'm just making the point that it's not a specialist role. If a test WK came in at 8, he would need to Russell esque in terms of keeping, i.e easily the best in the world with the gloves 

How so? We don’t have the best keeper in the world, but there is a best English keeper.   

[mgw100]

1 minute ago, Rico1304 said:

How so? We don’t have the best keeper in the world, but there is a best English keeper.   

Because it would be so unusual. A keeper has to be good enough to bat at 7. It's part of the job

[Jarvinja Ilnow]

6 minutes ago, mgw100 said:

I'm not arguing for Buttler. He does my head in as a test batsmen. I'm just making the point that it's not a specialist role. If a test WK came in at 8, he would need to Russell esque in terms of keeping, i.e easily the best in the world with the gloves 

Ben Foakes    

England

 

 

	Mat	Inns	NO	Runs	HS	Ave	BF	SR	100	50	4s	6s	Ct	St
Tests	5	10	2	332	107	41.50	617	53.80	1	1	29	5	10	2

 

 

Excelent keeper. He's no slouch with the bat either.