5th Test (The Oval) - 31st July to 4th August

[mr_mister]

Indiaaaaaa India

 

[Darwin Award]

I think the rain really screwed England over thus bringing the 4th day to an early close.

In turn they came back the next day to a 5th day pitch that was more responsive as usual this tour and the lower order couldn't handle it.

I really think even after Root's dismissal and 6 down had the weather not intervened England would have knocked off the remaining 35 runs to win the match on Day 4.

 

[kevinw]

I think the rain really screwed England over thus bringing the 4th day to an early close.

In turn they came back the next day to a 5th day pitch that was more responsive as usual this tour and the lower order couldn't handle it.

I really think even after Root's dismissal and 6 down had the weather not intervened England would have knocked off the remaining 35 runs to win the match on Day 4.

The bowlers were on adrenaline at the time and could come out fresh the next day. Regardless England should have closed the game out yesterday. They should have been patient and not tried to chase the victory.

 

[GIMH]

The bowlers were on adrenaline at the time and could come out fresh the next day. Regardless England should have closed the game out yesterday. They should have been patient and not tried to chase the victory.

I think they just felt like it was a matter of time until they got a ball with their name on so needed the runs quickly.

Really needed Smith to stay out there.

 

[honestbharani]

Yeah conditions definitely favored us in a major way there yesterday but given how often we have been ****ed over by the conditions in England, often getting the worst of both batting and bowling conditions since about 2011, I think its fair play that we got some luck our way finally.

Very unlucky for England to have to face the worst batting conditions of the match there at the end though. The Root dismissal, even more than the Brook one yesterday, proved to be the real gamechanger. Even in these extreme conditions, most likely Root calms them down and gets the runs.

 

[Sunil1z]

About time luck favoured us considering we lost all the 5 tosses . This must be a record of some sorts in a 5 match series

 

[Uppercut]

‘Great counterattacking century but I would simply have not played the shot that got him out’ will never die.

 

[OverratedSanity]

‘Great counterattacking century but I would simply have not played the shot that got him out’ will never die.

I mean it was a diabolical shot and he lost his body shape so badly that his bat travelled further than the ball did. Why exactly should criticism of a terrible attacking shot be out of bounds even if it came at the end of a great attacking innings?

If someone made a great defensive hundred and on the 300th ball he leaves a ball pitching middle hitting middle I'd still call it a terrible dismissal.

 

[Molehill]

About time luck favoured us considering we lost all the 5 tosses . This must be a record of some sorts in a 5 match series

Although, it turned out that the tosses weren't that important and Stokes/Pope probably made the wrong choice on 2 occasions.

 

[zaremba]

Really enjoyed the series. Two good, flawed teams, and a load of good matches and good finishes.

So happy with the bazball approach generally - the idea that decent teams can't feel secure having set us 350 to win is extraordinary. What's even more extraordinary is that it's England* that's doing this, England who throughout my lifetime have been conservative, inflexible, defensive and brittle. And it makes for such entertaining Test cricket.



* With apologies to B McCullum, B Stokes and NZ as a whole

 

[ImpatientLime]

I mean it was a diabolical shot and he lost his body shape so badly that his bat travelled further than the ball did. Why exactly should criticism of a terrible attacking shot be out of bounds even if it came at the end of a great attacking innings?

If someone made a great defensive hundred and on the 300th ball he leaves a ball pitching middle hitting middle I'd still call it a terrible dismissal.

agreed that criticism of the shot in isolation is perfectly valid but there has been a lot of linking the dismissal to the loss. 'if he had not played that shot england would have won', which a) is impossible to prove and b) disregards the fact that england were only in with a chance of chasing an improbable total because of him.

a lot of it is also linked i think to people wanting to clip his wings. i've seen comments on here along the lines of 'he'd be second to bradman if he had a brain', not considering that the reason he's an absolute monster of a batsman is because he plays like this not in spite of it.

 

[Uppercut]

I mean it was a diabolical shot and he lost his body shape so badly that his bat travelled further than the ball did. Why exactly should criticism of a terrible attacking shot be out of bounds even if it came at the end of a great attacking innings?

If someone made a great defensive hundred and on the 300th ball he leaves a ball pitching middle hitting middle I'd still call it a terrible dismissal.

I have no problem at all with criticism of the technical execution, but I haven’t seen any before your post. I also have no problem with criticism of the shot selection that’s well thought out i.e. based on how well he plays the shot, how often it gets him out if he gets it wrong, what he could play instead, what initiative he’d be giving the bowler by not playing an attacking shot, etc. I have seen none of that either.

 

[Spark]

agreed that criticism of the shot in isolation is perfectly valid but there has been a lot of linking the dismissal to the loss. 'if he had not played that shot england would have won', which a) is impossible to prove and b) disregards the fact that england were only in with a chance of chasing an improbable total because of him.

a lot of it is also linked i think to people wanting to clip his wings. i've seen comments on here along the lines of 'he'd be second to bradman if he had a brain', not considering that the reason he's an absolute monster of a batsman is because he plays like this not in spite of it.

Yeah from what I've seen, his defensive technique is frankly merely okay; he stays legside of the ball and can at times push with hard hands away from his body. On those few occasions where he's tried to play "normally" against the moving ball (a few innings in the 2023 Ashes come to mind) he looked a far lesser player than he does when he's whacking blokes over extra cover. Absolutely a player who thrives on the mental clarity of "if you hit it, make sure it stays hit"

 

[Gob]

Yeah very fair call on the 2019 v 23 Ashes. The 2019 scoreline was largely dependent on an ATG 4th innings performance from Stokes. Otherwise Australia looked much the better side and were well deserving of something like a 3-1 scoreline. In 23 on the other hand, England generally had the upper hand, and it was only that braindead day 1 declaration and the 4th test being rained out that kept the series to a draw

I won't say England had the clear upper hand in any game except the 4th test in 23. Aust got themselves in to some great positions both at Headingley and Oval but ultimately pissed them away

Also what is with the declaration? They were 9 down ffs. Its not like they were going to add another 50

 

[Molehill]

Also what is with the declaration? They were 9 down ffs. Its not like they were going to add another 50

They were 8 down and Root was on 118. It's like if Aus had declared at say 200-8 at Edgbaston in 2019 when Smith was still not out, you'd have been fuming about that no doubt.

 

[Spark]

I won't say England had the clear upper hand in any game except the 4th test in 23. Aust got themselves in to some great positions both at Headingley and Oval but ultimately pissed them away

Also what is with the declaration? They were 9 down ffs. Its not like they were going to add another 50

I absolutely think Root could have added 50 more runs, the way he was batting. It's not likely but it was certainly possible.

 

[Gob]

They were 8 down and Root was on 118. It's like if Aus had declared at say 200-8 at Edgbaston in 2019 when Smith was still not out, you'd have been fuming about that no doubt.

****ing hell I could swear it was 9 down. Still though it's not like they were 5 down which is what most people made it look like

 

[Spark]

****ing hell I could swear it was 9 down. Still though it's not like they were 5 down which is what most people made it look like

It was still one of the dumbest captaincy decisions I've ever seen tbh; just a truly catastrophic error. I agree with you re: the Headingley and Oval Tests though, Aus could very easily have won both of them.

 

[Gob]

I think they just felt like it was a matter of time until they got a ball with their name on so needed the runs quickly.

Really needed Smith to stay out there.

Huh things I never thought I would hear on Cricketweb.net

 

[centurymaker]

Really enjoyed the series. Two good, flawed teams, and a load of good matches and good finishes.

So happy with the bazball approach generally - the idea that decent teams can't feel secure having set us 350 to win is extraordinary. What's even more extraordinary is that it's England* that's doing this, England who throughout my lifetime have been conservative, inflexible, defensive and brittle. And it makes for such entertaining Test cricket.



* With apologies to B McCullum, B Stokes and NZ as a whole

*Exclusively in English home conditions