*Official* Fifth Test at The Oval

[GIMH]

I think we would have won OT pretty comfortably given a full day's play, tbh. That pitch was starting to do some seriously odd things.

You'd have thought so but it's quite rare that we get bowled out in that match situation. I think it would have gone to the wire for sure.

 

[Spark]

You'd have thought so but it's quite rare that we get bowled out in that match situation. I think it would have gone to the wire for sure.

True, but the pitches you're thinking of have generally been pretty dead. The way that deck behaved in the few deliveries we bowled after lunch... really don't think you'd have got anywhere near saving it, simply because there would have been too many balls with a batsman's name on it.

 

[Uppercut]

I mean, Cook is a bloody good player, but what we've done to him this time is not exactly rocket science, it's not some new and incredible plan that's come out of nowhere. People have been saying for an age that bowling to Cook is simply a matter of staying out of his scoring zones. If you can't blast him out early, starve him so by the time he does get out, as everyone does, he's not made all that many runs - and it just so happens that the area where he's most vulnerable is the area where he can't score. It's almost PEWS's point with Khawaja, just... to a much, much better batsman. The pitches being quicker and bouncier won't really change that.

The point people are making is that pace and bounce shaves a good chunk off your margin for error when executing that particular plan. It's harder to get an lbw and he can cut and pull off a fuller length.

 

[Captain_Cook]

Based on what? The fact we dished up a platter of pies to him last time? Hopefully we bowl better to him this summer. If we do and he still scores a ****load of runs then I'll go with what you said.

I trust Cook's record in the Southern Hemisphere. I can see him getting 450-550 runs and two centuries as his record would suggest. I look forward to being proven wrong, will be a cracking series with a neutered Cook.

And I'm surprised to hear England didn't struggle with the might of the Indian pace attack on green tops whilst they skittled the Indian batsmen on their favourite type of wicket

My point is that aside from Ryan Harris, who is probably 33% likely to play four consecutive tests again, Australia don't have a brilliant pace attack. Consistency has been key and on pitches with a bit more zip and bounce it is much harder to be consistent than on the lifeless roads they have been asked to bowl on in this series. However, credit to the Australian bowlers for being tighter than England.

 

[Spark]

The point people are making is that pace and bounce shaves a good chunk off your margin for error when executing that particular plan. It's harder to get an lbw and he can cut and pull off a fuller length.

True, but it's not significant enough to become anywhere close to outweighing the simple quality of the batting and bowling. I mean, our attack has done well over the last few years at home by pitching it up and getting movement, not banging it in short of a length, so it's not like they don't know how to do it.

 

[Spikey]

you know, Cook's played 4 Ashes series and he's averaged under 30 in 3 of them....

 

[Prince EWS]

The point people are making is that pace and bounce shaves a good chunk off your margin for error when executing that particular plan. It's harder to get an lbw and he can cut and pull off a fuller length.

Yeah, this is true. The ideal length to bowl to Cook is the one that is short enough to not completely come to the bat as a half volley but full enough to still be hitting the stumps. To be fair this sounds like a pretty nifty length to bowl to any batsman but it works particularly well to Cook because he can't drive on the up at all and really relies heavily on the cut. In Australia there's less movement in the air which is a factor but most importantly, the area short of half volley length but still full enough to hit the stumps is really, really small compared to that area on English tracks.

I don't think Cook will be averaging 50+ out here again either unless he actually finds a way to counter the plan, but it's a much harder plan to execute in Australia than England IMO so he should do better.

 

[MW1304]

Yeah, this is true. The ideal length to bowl to Cook is the one that is short enough to not completely come to the bat as a half volley but full enough to still be hitting the stumps. To be fair this sounds like a pretty nifty length to bowl to any batsman but it works particularly well to Cook because he can't drive on the up at all and really relies heavily on the cut. In Australia there's less movement in the air which is a factor but most importantly, the area short of half volley length but still full enough to hit the stumps is really, really small compared to that area on English tracks.

I don't think Cook will be averaging 50+ out here again either unless he actually finds a way to counter the plan, but it's a much harder plan to execute in Australia than England IMO so he should do better.

This was entirely my point. Not a comment on the Australia attack Spark, so I'm not sure why you're bringing them up.

 

[Spark]

Yeah I don't think he'll be averaging 25-odd again. But this idea that he'll most likely have a 450-500+ run series just because the pitches are bouncier seems a bit off-base to me.

EDIT: The point about the Australia attack is that they know how to get batsmen out with full-pitch bowling even on Australian decks, so they shouldn't completely lose their minds.

 

[Viscount Tom]

Don't think because England had dry pitches prepared means that those are the conditions they like to bat in. They whitewashed India on green-tops in 2011. The pitches were prepared to confer a spin bowling advantage as it was perceived Swann > Lyon which hasn't bee entirely correct.

I can't speak for Root but Cook would bat in Australia any day. If Cook was playing half his tests in Australia his record would be amazing.

They were standard English pitches, to call them greentops is an excuse trotted out by the Indian side as a reason for why they got beat, while coincidentally not explaining why only one of their bowlers did anything of note.

 

[Spark]

They were standard English pitches, to call them greentops is an excuse trotted out by the Indian side as a reason for why they got beat, while coincidentally not explaining why only one of their bowlers did anything of note.

Yeah IIRC the only really excellent bowling conditions in those series were Lord's and TB on the first day? And given that India were bowling on both those days...

 

[Prince EWS]

Yeah I don't think he'll be averaging 25-odd again. But this idea that he'll most likely have a 450-500+ run series just because the pitches are bouncier seems a bit off-base to me.

Yeah, it'll be somewhere in between. The fact that the pitches are bouncier will definitely make it harder for Australia to execute the plan they've devised for him in this series but he's definitely not going to do what on the last tour of Australia unless Australia bowl rubbish or he starts channelling Justin Langer on his square drives.

 

[Prince EWS]

Yeah IIRC the only really excellent bowling conditions in those series were Lord's and TB on the first day? And given that India were bowling on both those days...

Pitches were flat there too anyway; all the assistance throughout the whole series came in the air. Certainly not greentops by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[Captain_Cook]

They were standard English pitches, to call them greentops is an excuse trotted out by the Indian side as a reason for why they got beat, while coincidentally not explaining why only one of their bowlers did anything of note.

Okay, but would you agree they are greener than the five Ashes pitches? It was a relative statement to emphasis the point that England were seeking to exploit their spin bowling advantage against Australia.

 

[Spark]

The pitches being bouncier and quicker could mean he nicks off too. Quicker pitches helps everyone, though the batsmen should probably enjoy themselves more than the bowlers compared to this series.

Basically, what I'm saying is that slow pitches are the pits.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Okay, but would you agree they are greener than the five Ashes pitches? It was a relative statement to emphasis the point that England were seeking to exploit their spin bowling advantage against Australia.

Not really, they just had more pace in them.

 

[Ruckus]

See when the start of day 3, and the opposition have put 500 on you, you need to get through days 3 and 4 and see where you're at before you can think about winning the Test. That means minimising risks and batting more defensively than normal on day 3.

No it doesn't. There's zero reason why you just can't bat normally (and teams with a positive intent do it all the time. I could link countless examples of matches where teams have started positively when big first innings scores have been posted). That mentality, taken to the extremes that Eng did in this test, is weak as piss for two reasons; 1: it massively reduces the odds of a win and increases the odds of a draw. For a team 3-0 up, there should be no better time to try and finish with some sense of authority. You could argue "they want to make sure the result is 3-0 and not 3-1 and not leave Australia with any momentum blah blah" but that's exactly why it's a negative mindset; you could just as legitimately argue that trying to win 4-0 would leave Australia despondent. 2: it is painful for the spectators, and simply bad for the game. If every team plays like this test cricket will die a quicker death that is probably already on the cards.

As for not wanting to reply anymore, all I can say is good riddance. You're the one who seems to have a raging hard-on for every post I make.

 

[morgieb]

Pitches were flat there too anyway; all the assistance throughout the whole series came in the air. Certainly not greentops by any stretch of the imagination.

If anything some of the Aussie pitches that season were greentops IMO.

 

[Prince EWS]

Okay, but would you agree they are greener than the five Ashes pitches?

Like Spark and flibberty, I don't think they were. They definitely suited fast bowling a lot more than these pitches but that's because the ball was actually carrying through at a decent pace; there wasn't more movement off the deck which is how I'd decipher "greener". In fact we probably saw more movement off the deck in Durham than we did at any time during India's tour of England, not that Durham was its usual self either.

 

[grecian]

Okay, but would you agree they are greener than the five Ashes pitches? It was a relative statement to emphasis the point that England were seeking to exploit their spin bowling advantage against Australia.

Nah, as others have said, England haven't had greentops since the 90s. Wish we did sometimes, reckon Woakes would then be half-decent.....