Agree. If we were already 5 down and then went for it maybe but the plan seemed to start when only 2 or 3 wickets had been lost. A more circumspect batting approach and we could be pushing to 300/350 in the first digWell we ended up batting under lights anyway and only got 9 in at them. It might have been a plan but I'm not convinced it was a good one.
Nah bad idea. If your top order can't handle starc moving it around corners @145 with a ball that's hard to see under lights how are the lower order going to do it? Not like the Windies lower order are particularly good blockers bar warrican. Your just risking an injury to your bowlers for no reason.This was the perfect opportunity to reverse the batting order for West Indies , that tactic should be discussed for pink ball tests especially for the first couple of partnerships
I think the idea is that you accept that in these conditions you're going to lose wickets no matter who you face , might aswell not be your best wickets.Nah bad idea. If your top order can't handle starc moving it around corners @145 with a ball that's hard to see under lights how are the lower order going to do it? Not like the Windies lower order are particularly good blockers bar warrican. Your just risking an injury to your bowlers for no reason.
Don't think the point is that they'll handle it, but that they're going to lose wickets anyway so they might as well lose shitter ones.Nah bad idea. If your top order can't handle starc moving it around corners @145 with a ball that's hard to see under lights how are the lower order going to do it? Not like the Windies lower order are particularly good blockers bar warrican. Your just risking an injury to your bowlers for no reason.
Fair point. Still don't like the idea of sending the bowlers out to face a pink ball under lights. The ball is difficult to pickup and one blow to the elbow/glove could leave you a bowler down.Don't think the point is that they'll handle it, but that they're going to lose wickets anyway so they might as well lose shitter ones.
Why did they score only 50 runs in the first session if the plan was to get as many runs as possible before the lights come on? Bizarre. Smith especially just threw it away. Would've gotten way more batting normally.I hope this isn't a set tactic for pink ball tests. Surely you have to learn to bat under lights? You can't really ever score enough runs in two sessions in the hope of bowling the oppo out in the third. Just play the conditions as you find them.
Yeah they probably realised that we were down to 8 men last night with Louis, Campbell and Alzarri unable to bat at that time.Feels like they bought into the idea that this test is destined to be done within three days and they decided to move things along to get there. But it's also now feeling a bit too much like the last pink ball test against WI when Carey and Cummins batted quickly (fair enough for both of them) and then they declared to get more time bowling under lights.
Though the bigger advantage this time seems to have been getting a crack at the makeshift openers. If they picked up King early it probably would have been worth it.
Ah, that's a real shame. Never like it when a team loses a player, especially so early.Yeah they probably realised that we were down to 8 men last night with Louis, Campbell and Alzarri unable to bat at that time.
It sounds like Campbell and Alzarri are ok after scans but Louis has a serious injury and will not bat in this test.
Don't worry, with Kraiggs form we were basically playing with 10 anyway, this just formalises it.....Ah, that's a real shame. Never like it when a team loses a player, especially so early.