• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

1st Test (Leeds) - 20th June

centurymaker

centurymaker

Cricketer Of The Year
OverratedSanity said:
Batting isn't exactly in great shape either. Gill needs to show more consistency over a longer period before I actually trust him to be any good. Apart from Jaiswal and Pant , it's a very shaky lineup.
Click to expand...
Agree.

Played on a highway hence why India got 5 centuries in a test for the first time ever. Make no mistake that if conditions returned to how they used to be in England pre bazball, this same Indian lineup would fold for sub 150 or at best sub 200 totals in most of the innings.

Also, I very much doubt Australia (& Cummins) will give England any real flat decks in the Ashes, so this bazball tactic of out batting the opposition will not be applicable in Australia and pitches will deteriorate (relatively), so chasing will not be a good option there. England's whole strategy would need to be altered. Moreover they need to find (or revive) some quality pacers or I feel Australia will run away with the Ashes despite fragile top order.
 
Last edited:
J

jaydesh

School Boy/Girl Cricketer
I think improvements on the lower order are also needed. Even if India change up their bowling lineup (and I think they should 100% before Edgbaston), there won't be any improvements noticeable in terms of their ability to keep the top/middle order batsman company or even stick around to frustrate the opposition more if need be. Ideally batsmen no. 8 through 10 should be able to score some handy runs similar to what Australia, South Africa, England, and New Zealand already have. Not that it would have made a difference this match, but it adds up in the end with the other mistakes they made at Leeds. It seems the current tail doesn't even have a basic defensive technique, let alone competence to drop it around for 1s and 2s. That has to change. Lower order batting should be treated less an afterthought and more a necessary soft skill. Doesn't have to come off every time, but it can be vital in key moments while also freeing up the batsmen higher up the order.
 
X

Xix2565

International Regular
OverratedSanity said:
Batting isn't exactly in great shape either. Gill needs to show more consistency over a longer period before I actually trust him to be any good. Apart from Jaiswal and Pant , it's a very shaky lineup.
Click to expand...
It's solid enough at the moment. All they need are more games together where they aren't going in and out because of injuries/selection. The bowling's the big problem because most of the prospects atm are underdeveloped due to the pandemic and general reduction of the India A games, along with injury management.
 
X

Xix2565

International Regular
jaydesh said:
I think improvements on the lower order are also needed. Even if India change up their bowling lineup (and I think they should 100% before Edgbaston), there won't be any improvements noticeable in terms of their ability to keep the top/middle order batsman company or even stick around to frustrate the opposition more if need be.
Click to expand...
It doesn't matter if the no. 8/9/10 can hit a few runs or not if those same players are going to give back 60% of the runs when they bowl. I think people worrying about the tail collapses are worrying about a lesser problem, the bigger problem is how they're getting wickets.
 
CricAddict

CricAddict

International Coach
Xix2565 said:
It doesn't matter if the no. 8/9/10 can hit a few runs or not if those same players are going to give back 60% of the runs when they bowl. I think people worrying about the tail collapses are worrying about a lesser problem, the bigger problem is how they're getting wickets.
Click to expand...
Actually true. It doesn't matter if Bumrah is not getting runs. But if Thakur/Prasidh/Siraj can't bat, they should at least be able to bowl.
 
cnerd123

cnerd123

likes this
Should we imitate Bazball and pick bowlers who can bat?

No Bumrah next test, so we go with NKR, Thakur, Harshit and Kuldeep from 8-11. Jadeja 5th bowler. Make Jaiswal bowl if required
 
S

Silly Point 2.0

U19 12th Man
The_Rey said:
Wow.

That was a proper, grown up performance. No hubris, no silly bollocks, that was a proper, mature, superb performance.

Big concerns with the ball, we can't hide that. But batting wise, if this is the new, reformed Bazball, im on board 100%. Positive and attacking without the reckless, brain dead ****. Well, bar Stokes!

Superb.
Click to expand...
Think I'm meant to put some snarky comment about finally some balance or something in reply to this 😉
 
Molehill

Molehill

International Coach
Burgey said:
Dropped catches as well in the first innings. I didn't watch last night as I was out at dinner but it seems the losing or the match was earlier in it rather than on the last day, as you’ve said.
Click to expand...
Given the history of Headingley, the nature of the pitch and the fast outfield, 370 was always going to be an achievable target, more like a 230 in old money. They managed to drop Duckett again (Jaiswal again, although he did already have 98). But yes, the match was more lost earlier in the proceedings than yesterday.

I'd expect the pitches to have a bit more life in them going forward, a concern for India as it will bring Woakes far more into it (just not suited to roads).
 
GIMH

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Molehill said:
Given the history of Headingley, the nature of the pitch and the fast outfield, 370 was always going to be an achievable target, more like a 230 in old money. They managed to drop Duckett again (Jaiswal again, although he did already have 98). But yes, the match was more lost earlier in the proceedings than yesterday.

I'd expect the pitches to have a bit more life in them going forward, a concern for India as it will bring Woakes far more into it (just not suited to roads).
Click to expand...
Still though, at the points Brook and then Stokes got out, India had an opportunity to apply pressure. On any 4th innings chase above 200, how often do we see a team make a great start, get 65% of the way there 2 or 3 down and then not even get close? It’s testament to the way England batted, and yes the paucity of India’s bowling returns, but as much as they made plenty of mistakes throughout the game, that was still there for them to take yesterday.
 
Molehill

Molehill

International Coach
GIMH said:
Still though, at the points Brook and then Stokes got out, India had an opportunity to apply pressure. On any 4th innings chase above 200, how often do we see a team make a great start, get 65% of the way there 2 or 3 down and then not even get close? It’s testament to the way England batted, and yes the paucity of India’s bowling returns, but as much as they made plenty of mistakes throughout the game, that was still there for them to take yesterday.
Click to expand...
Yeah agree, Aus have failed a couple of times in recent history having made decent starts to chases in England.

But I'd also add a word about Jamie Smith. He's the nearest thing to Gilchrist I've seen in a long time. Now pretty much nailed down the opening spots in limited overs matches and that Number 7 Test position could be his for a decade if he wants it. A technically correct batsman with all the shots, he's a cheat code coming in at 5 down. Just needs to tidy up his keeping, but this batting line up is now almost as strong as the 2010/11 version.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top