Page 230 of 240 FirstFirst ... 130180220228229230231232 ... LastLast
Results 3,436 to 3,450 of 3591
Like Tree308Likes

Thread: *Official* Fifth Test at The Oval

  1. #3436
    Hall of Fame Member NUFAN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Marrickville
    Posts
    18,237
    Quote Originally Posted by Ruckus View Post
    Because you said "It's because we realized that a draw was better than a lose after all, which basically rendered our second innings rubbish attempt at posting a sizable total, useless.". I.e. it can only be rendered a rubbish attempt in hindsight. Before Eng started the chase there was a small chance of victory, or at least that's how it was perceived by most involved.
    Ah okay. That wasn't me talking with hindsight, it was more of a see 'the tactic which I didn't like, proved to be stupid if bad light didn't intervene'.


    Quote Originally Posted by Dan View Post
    Would you prefer to support a country who, when 3-0 down, are happy play out a tame draw; or a country who, at 3-0 down, do everything in their power to make that scoreline 3-1?

    Neither.

    If we finished the day at 175-2 it doesn't necessary have to be tame. If you're asking if I would prefer to lose 3-1 or 3-0, I would prefer 3-1 obviously.


    I don't understand how this argument works. He was told to go out there and make runs quickly, and he did that well. One innings isn't going to suddenly rework his technique so he can only play in that manner in the future, nor are the selectors going to use it to judge his batting ability. Are we really suggesting that the selectors and the public are so intellectually vapid that they can't take the context of the performance into account when forming opinions? It's playing for the team, and nobody will ever be penalised for that.*

    And in terms of bad light making it "a little bit better", I wholeheartedly disagree. The scoreline reads exactly the same as it did coming into the Test match. It looks no better on paper. If England made the extra 20 runs, it doesn't mean the positives of the series (Rogers proving himself, Smith's development, Harris proving his class, Lyon proving himself, Watson finally doing something) are all completely lost.

    *Or more accurately, I refuse to believe any selection panel, even if they don't have a modicum of common sense, would penalise a player for following the captain's orders.

    I'm an advocate of aggressive captaincy and nothing will change that. I'd risk a loss to try and win a game any day. Playing out pointless draws doesn't cut it for me. I'm guessing you're not one to share that view.
    There are many comments going on that Faulkner should not be batting at 6 or 7 at the Gabba. He had an excellent opportunity to face Broad, Anderson and Swann and bat properly and finish on 65* if he was good enough. Not that it makes a massive difference, but the general public can make a big deal out of one innings. Of course Faulkner may have gotten out first ball, who knows, but for an all rounder to give himself room stepping away from the steps from the first ball of the innings was just ordinary for me.

    Bad light made it 3-0, no bad light would make it 4-0, that is a little bit worse than 3-0 which is a little bit better.
    NRL Tipping Champion 2014

    Over 0.2: Putland to Nevill, OUT, no run, full ball swings in late to crash into his pads. Nevill is almost falling over trying to get bat on it but can't. Huge shout for LBW and Umpire Martell eventually raises the finger! P.Nevill - lbw b:Putland 0 (1 ball, 1 minute).

  2. #3437
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Flem274*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    ksfls;fsl;lsFJg/s
    Posts
    28,553
    Quote Originally Posted by Son Of Coco View Post
    Do the minnows lose more games than they win due to an attitude problem or a lack of ability though? You can have the best attitude in the world, but if the other team is better than you are then you'll still lose 9 times out of 10.
    They go hand in hand. If you conduct yourself like a loser then you will lose. Lack of ability is the excuse of the loser.
    Quote Originally Posted by Athlai View Post
    Jeets doesn't really deserve to be bowling.
    Quote Originally Posted by Athlai View Post
    Well yeah Tendy is probably better than Bradman, but Bradman was 70 years ago, if he grew up in the modern era he'd still easily be the best. Though he wasn't, can understand the argument for Tendy even though I don't agree.
    Proudly supporting Central Districts
    RIP Craig Walsh

  3. #3438
    Hall of Fame Member Son Of Coco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    17,227
    Quote Originally Posted by Flem274* View Post
    They go hand in hand. If you conduct yourself like a loser then you will lose. Lack of ability is the excuse of the loser.
    Yes, generally because if you have a lack of ability you lose
    "What is this what is this who is this guy shouting what is this going on in here?" - CP. (re: psxpro)

    R.I.P Craigos, you were a champion bloke. One of the best

    R.I.P Fardin 'Bob' Qayyumi

    Member of the Church of the Holy Glenn McGrath

    "How about you do something contstructive in this forum for once and not fill the forum with ****. You offer nothing." - theegyptian.

  4. #3439
    Cricketer Of The Year Cabinet96's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    9,814
    Quote Originally Posted by Ruckus View Post
    na don't you understand. GF has actually enlightened us that Eng were in fact maximizing the chances of a result by batting slower than molasses on days 2 and 3. So really we should be thanking Cook for that exciting finish to the series.
    *Sigh* Lets use a different example shall we. Remember the first test of the England v New Zealand series in May? England scored at two an over for the duration of the first day. Two an over. Now it wasn't a particularly impressive batting display, people regularly threw away starts, but New Zealand bowled well in what were at times helpful conditions. Fast forward a few days though, and when New Zealand got bowled out in 20 overs, no one was criticising England's approach.

    Can you honestly say, that you think England were playing for a draw first day against New Zealand, just like you think they were playing for a draw from day two onwards here? England are a slow scoring side, particularly their top order, so the fact that they occasionally don't score at a rate that'll see them win in three days, is no reflection of their desire to win or not. The worst thing to happen when an opposition puts up a huge score is to lose early wickets. That's a stage where you really can't win. Scoring slowly but getting close to the score puts you in a much better position. It's how Australia won the Adelaide test of 06 (sure they scored a bit quicker, but it was also with a late charge from Gilly, they used up 160odd overs).
    Furball likes this.
    Quote Originally Posted by Flem274* View Post
    This English top three are cornflakes. They're not the most exciting thing out but they're pretty effective. Then the middle order are the sugar. Would be too much on their own but added to the cornflakes they add some much needed interest

    When KP returns he will be the banana..


  5. #3440
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Flem274*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    ksfls;fsl;lsFJg/s
    Posts
    28,553
    Quote Originally Posted by Son Of Coco View Post
    Yes, generally because if you have a lack of ability you lose
    Indeed, which is why you find a way to get able. The alternative is don't bother turning up.

    Do you think the most gifted players are always those who succeed? Do you think Glenn McGrath thought "oh well, I'm not really fast like many before me so I may as well not bother." Malcolm Marshall was five nine, which is unusually short for a fast bowler. He made his height a strength.

    This idea cricketers spring forth from the womb already knowing the perfect outswinger or cover drive is crap. What you don't see of Viv, Kallis, Ponting, Warne, Hadlee or Holding is the hours and hours of practice beginning in their teens honing their abilities and learning the right things so it became instinct. Even at pro level you see the likes of Ryan Harris and Michael Hussey go away and learn new skills to come back better.

    If you can comfortably get bat on ball against 140kph you have the basic hand eye to bat at test level. The relative lack of ability between test cricketers is because one cricketer worked harder and learned the right things, and the other didn't. Is it any wonder the lesser test sides also have the worst batting techniques and the most one dimensional bowlers?

  6. #3441
    International Regular
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    England
    Posts
    3,323
    Quote Originally Posted by Ruckus View Post
    None of the main batsmen except Pietersen were taking excessive risks in the second innings, they were pretty much playing normally. And that was their game plan - they were trying to go along at a pretty standard rate, and then would try and go for the chase when they knew wickets were in hand. Funnily enough as well I actually think Eng looked all the better for it.
    And they lost 4 wickets in 39 overs (aside from KP). That really undermines your point

    "But at the beginning of the day we knew we had to make it as difficult as we could for Australia to push home what they were trying to do. We knew they were going to push for the win, and the harder we made it the easier it would've been for us to win, and that was proven."
    That's a quote from Cook, and it sums up why England played how they did. Its not only about playing the match situation but playing the opposition captain, they knew he would set them a declaration if they got close enough to Australia's score. For the record I think they were over conservative and could have upped the scoring rate a little, particularly against Starc who bowled some filth, but they play hard nosed cricket.
    Last edited by 91Jmay; 26-08-2013 at 04:52 AM.

  7. #3442
    Hall of Fame Member Son Of Coco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    17,227
    This stemmed back to talk of a declaration and a 'losing culture' didn't it? Australia's decision to declare, bringing about the possibility of defeat in an attempt to win, bear no resemblance to what you're talking about though.

    And as for the techniques and abilities of minnows, is the lack of a batting technique and being a one-dimensional bowler simply down to how hard they work? Surely there are other things at play, like regular exposure to top-class opposition all through your development, opportunities to work with good coaches, access to academies that actually help you to develop your game, your governing body having the money to invest in development programs, no outside distractions, living in a country where war and other things don't interfere with your ability to fully realise your talent, and so on.

    When you get two players with equal opportunities then, yes, a large part of it is a mix of talent and how hard you work.

    Edit: This is a reply to Flem by the way.
    Last edited by Son Of Coco; 26-08-2013 at 04:55 AM.

  8. #3443
    Eternal Optimist / Cricket Web Staff Member GIMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    On a trip to the moon
    Posts
    48,889
    Thanks to most of the ****s round these parts for the discussion throughout the series.

    Can't wait to be sleep deprived and posting bollocks in three months...

  9. #3444
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Flem274*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    ksfls;fsl;lsFJg/s
    Posts
    28,553
    Quote Originally Posted by GIMH View Post
    Thanks to most of the ****s round these parts for the discussion throughout the series.

    Can't wait to be sleep deprived and posting bollocks in three months...
    you'll post bollocks long before november.

  10. #3445
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Flem274*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    ksfls;fsl;lsFJg/s
    Posts
    28,553
    Quote Originally Posted by Son Of Coco View Post
    This stemmed back to talk of a declaration and a 'losing culture' didn't it? Australia's decision to declare, bringing about the possibility of defeat in an attempt to win, bear no resemblance to what you're talking about though.

    And as for the techniques and abilities of minnows, is the lack of a batting technique and being a one-dimensional bowler simply down to how hard they work? Surely there are other things at play, like regular exposure to top-class opposition all through your development, opportunities to work with good coaches, access to academies that actually help you to develop your game, your governing body having the money to invest in development programs, no outside distractions, living in a country where war and other things don't interfere with your ability to fully realise your talent, and so on.

    When you get two players with equal opportunities then, yes, a large part of it is a mix of talent and how hard you work.


    Edit: This is a reply to Flem by the way.
    I agree with all of this. That's why I said half of it is learning and practising the right things.

    Looks like we've lost each other in translation somewhere.

  11. #3446
    Eternal Optimist / Cricket Web Staff Member GIMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    On a trip to the moon
    Posts
    48,889
    Quote Originally Posted by Flem274* View Post
    you'll post bollocks long before november.
    Yeah but I won't be sleep deprived

  12. #3447
    Hall of Fame Member Son Of Coco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    17,227
    Quote Originally Posted by Flem274* View Post
    I agree with all of this. That's why I said half of it is learning and practising the right things.

    Looks like we've lost each other in translation somewhere.
    We must have. Let's agree to agree.

  13. #3448
    International Captain Ruckus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Yes
    Posts
    7,108
    Quote Originally Posted by Cabinet96 View Post
    *Sigh* Lets use a different example shall we. Remember the first test of the England v New Zealand series in May? England scored at two an over for the duration of the first day. Two an over. Now it wasn't a particularly impressive batting display, people regularly threw away starts, but New Zealand bowled well in what were at times helpful conditions. Fast forward a few days though, and when New Zealand got bowled out in 20 overs, no one was criticising England's approach.

    Can you honestly say, that you think England were playing for a draw first day against New Zealand, just like you think they were playing for a draw from day two onwards here? England are a slow scoring side, particularly their top order, so the fact that they occasionally don't score at a rate that'll see them win in three days, is no reflection of their desire to win or not. The worst thing to happen when an opposition puts up a huge score is to lose early wickets. That's a stage where you really can't win. Scoring slowly but getting close to the score puts you in a much better position. It's how Australia won the Adelaide test of 06 (sure they scored a bit quicker, but it was also with a late charge from Gilly, they used up 160odd overs).
    I can't comment on the NZ match, I didn't see it. I'm sure what point your trying to make with it either tbh, the comments I've been making have been in the context of this match and series alone.

    As for the bolded part, I haven't based my opinion of them playing with a negative mindset simply because they were batting slowly. It's because I think given the pitch conditions and bowling, they could have scored at a better rate without a significant increase in the risk of losing wickets. I think it was a deliberate attempt to bat slower than normal, either because they were playing for a draw or they were simply wanting Australia to force a result upon them (in effect it's pretty much the same though).

    I mean, the quote 91Jmay provided above from Cook completely vindicates that. He was putting the game on Australia's shoulders, instead of trying to play positively and bring about a result himself. It's a negative tactic. Clarke could have easily just decided to bat out a draw in the second innings, or declare with a completely token chase. For a side that's 3-0 up in a series, I just reckon it's a pretty pissweak attitude to have. England will never be anything more than a good side if they are going to be content with letting the opposition bring the game to them.
    Last edited by Ruckus; 26-08-2013 at 05:53 AM.

  14. #3449
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Spikey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    All Glory To The Nev
    Posts
    32,995
    hey guys did you ever consider that maybe clarkeh just wanted to have some fun
    andyc likes this.
    Indians can't bowl - Where has the rumour come from as I myself and many indian friends arwe competent fast bowlers ?

    With the English bid I said: Let us be brief. If you give back the Falkland Islands, which belong to us, you will get my vote. They then became sad and left

  15. #3450
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend andyc's Avatar
    Yeti Sports 1.5 Champion!
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    23,856
    Quote Originally Posted by Spikey View Post
    hey guys did you ever consider that maybe clarkeh just wanted to have some fun
    Heard about PEWS' bet no doubt.
    Quote Originally Posted by flibbertyjibber View Post
    Only a bunch of convicts having been beaten 3-0 and gone 9 tests without a win and won just 1 in 11 against England could go into the home series saying they will win. England will win in Australia again this winter as they are a better side which they have shown this summer. 3-0 doesn't lie girls.



Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. *Official* Fourth Test at The Oval
    By Spark in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 1214
    Last Post: 22-08-2011, 11:37 PM
  2. *Official* Fifth Test at the SCG
    By Craig in forum Ashes 2010-2011
    Replies: 3603
    Last Post: 15-01-2011, 01:07 PM
  3. *Official* Second Test at the Adelaide Oval
    By James in forum Ashes 2010-2011
    Replies: 3905
    Last Post: 13-01-2011, 03:25 PM
  4. *Official* Fifth Test at The Oval
    By GIMH in forum Ashes 2009
    Replies: 2955
    Last Post: 28-08-2009, 12:38 PM
  5. ***Official*** 2nd Test at the Adelaide Oval
    By James in forum Ashes 2006/07
    Replies: 1596
    Last Post: 07-12-2006, 05:20 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •