"Your averages, captain, coaches and players can probably survive incompetence over a relatively short series, so if you’re going to be rubbish, make sure it’s against Pakistan, Sri Lanka, New Zealand or someone."
Back on now. Bracewell missed that by quite a way. Davis has had a poor game.
Not going to last long here are we? Be off in 5 minutes.
Has Jimmeh picked up a knock?
Its gonna be 9 down, the rain is really coming.
10-fer at Headingley. Superb individual match effort from Swanny, however this ends.
Finn not threatening those three wooden things sticking out of the ground that over.
World Scrabble Champion 2014. National Scrabble Champion 2009, 8th, 11th and 5th in 2009/2011/2013 World Championships, gold medal (team) at Causeway, 2011 Masters Champion
Australia’s Darren Lehmann is a ‘blatant loser’ insists Stuart Broad
Countdown Series 57 Champion
King of the Arcade
Reply from mods to my prank bans in public:
Reply from mods to my prank bans in private:
MSN - evil_budgie @ hotmail.co.uk
What I find interesting is that some of the people who have been very critical of Cook's declaration timing here are the same people who would've applauded Smith's declaration here under the logic of "there's no difference between 2-0 and 1-0." The overall series result is either infinitely more important than the scoreline or it's not; it's not a theory that should change depending on whether it backs up what you want to see as a spectator or not. If there was no difference between 2-0 and 1-0 there then the same logic applies here.
I agree with Howe a bit in that there's an overwhelming discontent among armchair fans about any captaincy decision that isn't aggressive or ballsy. Fans look for any excuse to go for the win, probably because it's more exciting and/or domineering, but they apply completely inconsistent logic to their arguments regarding it.
More than anything though I actually agree with Goughy. England should've gone for the win here but once they didn't enforce the follow on, the pace they batted and the length of time they batted on were completely consistent with that decision. With an uncertain forecast, if you're pushing for a win you should always enforce the follow on as there's then absolutely no risk of batting too long or not batting long enough. You automatically stop batting at the precise moment you've batted long enough if you chase in the second innings - because you've won the game. If England decided to really press for a win after batting again then it'd make little sense as they'd have to declare with a lead that could be hauled in should the weather hold up, just on the chance that it didn't hold up. The best and easiest way to take the weather and the declaration timing out of the game was to just bowl again. If they couldn't get the runs in time after that then so be it.
There was actually a much greater chance of losing by batting again and pressing for a win than there was by enforcing the follow on and pressing for a win, so once they batted again their intentions were clear.
Last edited by Prince EWS; 28-05-2013 at 09:27 AM.
~ Cribbertarian ~
Rejecting 'analysis by checklist' and 'skill absolutism' since Dec '09
Originally Posted by John Singleton
Need these two to change ends really.
This is tense. Both teams can tell its about to rain. Aim for the stumps Finn!
Yeah way too many wasted deliveries.
If the batsmen aren't going to run, switch the bowlers round so that Swann gets a go at Wagner. And I'd take Finn off now, he's had enough chances with the number 10. Jimmy time.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)