Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Cricket

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Svensson View Post
    I have no problem with the short stuff. It's supposed to be a test for all players. The only thing is that is usually shows that the captain is out of ideas.... If you don't like to see the short stuff, go and watch some T20
    To come back to the bodyline comparison (yes I know, I am responding to my own posts....) the thing with bodyline is that the players at the time were not equipped to deal with short balls. They weren't part of the game and no one really practiced them. there were also no helmet or arm guards (I believe). The gloves were probably more of a gesture than real protection.... My point it, I would expect a modern test-cricketer to be able to deal with bouncers. At the same time, they are an opportunity for the batsman. Hook it or top-edge it and it flies for six; tap it on the head and stoll a single. Play the bouncers well and the bowlers will run themselves into the ground even faster. It's an opportunity for the batsman to exert complete dominance over the opposition bowlers and only the best batsmen will succeed.

    Comment


    • #17
      I’ve got no problem with short stuff Svensson as it’s part of the game but I think Bodyline as a tactic was over the top. Just from a cricket fan point of view it would be a bit boring if all that was going on was fast bowlers bowling at the body with a leg side field. Any kind of repetition would be boring so a good mix is needed.
      Regards

      Sir Herlock Sholmes.

      “A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”

      Comment


      • #18
        Aussies are playing the extra batsman by dropping Murphy in favour of Green, so no spinner. They could have brought in Green for Warner, kept the spinner and STILL play the extra batsman.

        and yes, I love the smell of sledging in the morning.
        Last edited by Svensson; 07-19-2023, 05:37 AM.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Svensson View Post
          Aussies are playing the extra batsman by dropping Murphy in favour of Green, so no spinner. They could have brought in Green for Warner, kept the spinner and STILL play the extra batsman.

          and yes, I love the smell of sledging in the morning.
          Poor strategy, but as I expected. Replacing an out of form batsman with an all rounder and retaining the spinner would have been a better move, but perhaps the idea is to equalise the series to increase the interest, and the crowd, for the final Test?
          The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one.

          ​Disagreeing doesn't have to be disagreeable - Jeff Hamm

          Comment


          • #20
            ok, so it ended 2-2. As a former resident of Old Blighty, I'd say much deserved for england who only have themselves to blame for throwing away any realistic change of winning back the Ashes in the first two tests. The day belonged to Stuart Broad which no doubt will seriously wind up the sports editor of Courier Mail But I think Circket lovers around the world will miss this thoroughbred competitor. The series will be remembered for orthodoxy sticking it up to bazball possibly for the final time.

            Word.

            Comment


            • #21
              If someone had told me at the start of this series that Jimmy Anderson would be playing on but Broad would be retiring I wouldn’t have believed them.
              Regards

              Sir Herlock Sholmes.

              “A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”

              Comment

              Working...
              X