• 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.

**Official** Pakistan and England in the UAE 2015/16

Biryani Pillow

U19 Vice-Captain
So how could the rule be changed to have allowed more play?

The ONLY way would have been with floodlights (if available and good enough) and changing to a pink/ornage ball during the innings - which IMO would constitute too big a change in playing conditions.

And plenty of perfect hindsight from a few on this thread btw.
 

pietersenrocks

U19 Vice-Captain
This is a joke right? At 400 we were still 120 behind the first inning total.
Nah, if England lost quick wickets in the process, they could go back to playing for the draw. And watching the game, it never looked like they would get bowled out for under 500. So I think Cook missed the opportunity there.
 

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
Firstly, I don't recall being on CW during that test match. So you are assuming you know what I said back then. I actually did not watch that game..so I am not fully aware of the circumstances of that game. Holding that against me now is absolutely ridiculous. You are not replying to me, you are replying to my passport label.
that's fair, I don't know what your thoughts on that match were. But I don't get why you keep ramming home to England fans that they should not be upset at what they can't control.

Playing 5 days of boring bat **** cricket and then going off with 30 runs to win is not going to cut it in this modern world with competitors to cricket everywhere. Telling those people that they should be angry at the way England batted a day earlier is irrelevant and condescending. I'm not even an England fan and I think today was **** for cricket.
 

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
So how could the rule be changed to have allowed more play?

The ONLY way would have been with floodlights (if available and good enough) and changing to a pink/ornage ball during the innings - which IMO would constitute too big a change in playing conditions.

And plenty of perfect hindsight from a few on this thread btw.
I've long said that players should just cop it if it's dark for the last twenty minutes of a day's play if there are floodlights, and that it wouldn't represent an unfair change in conditions any more than the difference between batting first and second on a lot of pitches, but I realise that's not a popular view.

Failing that (or at least getting a bit closer to that by telling the umpires to change their definition of 'dark' a bit), I'm cool with the rule the way it is. I definitely wouldn't want special exceptions carved out from it to specifically handle what happened today or anything like that.
 

MW1304

Cricketer Of The Year
Not losing after conceding a huge first innings total is itself a huge improvement. I know the pitch was ridiculous but remember Lords and the Oval this year, or any other time we have got behind the game in recent times.
I don't even know the last time we managed to exceed such a large first innings total, or even get this many runs at all actually.
 

Fusion

Global Moderator
that's fair, I don't know what your thoughts on that match were. But I don't get why you keep ramming home to England fans that they should not be upset at what they can't control.

Playing 5 days of boring bat **** cricket and then going off with 30 runs to win is not going to cut it in this modern world with competitors to cricket everywhere. Telling those people that they should be angry at the way England batted a day earlier is irrelevant and condescending. I'm not even an England fan and I think today was **** for cricket.
Is that the overwhelming sentiment you are getting from Pakistani fans in this thread though? I'm not. I think you are taking it more negatively than most. I'll wager most Pakistani fans are in the "we were VERY lucky to survive that" camp.
 

grecian

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Nah, if England lost quick wickets in the process, they could go back to playing for the draw. And watching the game, it never looked like they would get bowled out for under 500. So I think Cook missed the opportunity there.
Disagree Piers......;
 

duffer

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I've long said that players should just cop it if it's dark for the last twenty minutes of a day's play if there are floodlights, and that it wouldn't represent an unfair change in conditions any more than the difference between batting first and second on a lot of pitches, but I realise that's not a popular view.

Failing that (or at least getting a bit closer to that by telling the umpires to change their definition of 'dark' a bit), I'm cool with the rule the way it is. I definitely wouldn't want special exceptions carved out from it to specifically handle what happened today or anything like that.
If it's dangerous for the batsmen they they have to go off. No chance of risking another Prince like situation.
 

Biryani Pillow

U19 Vice-Captain
I've long said that players should just cop it if it's dark for the last twenty minutes of a day's play if there are floodlights, and that it wouldn't represent an unfair change in conditions any more than the difference between batting first and second on a lot of pitches, but I realise that's not a popular view.

Failing that (or at least getting a bit closer to that by telling the umpires to change their definition of 'dark' a bit), I'm cool with the rule the way it is. I definitely wouldn't want special exceptions carved out from it to specifically handle what happened today or anything like that.
The closest I've ever come to taking the players off for bad light happened when players on the boundary had, for a while found difficulty in picking up the ball. It got to a point where fielders on the single, and the umpire at the striker's end were struggling on some deliveries (the batsmen were fine - they had sight screens). On reflection we should have left the field as soon as the striker's end umpire noted a problem.

I have stood at several county (and one Test) ground as the presence of stands exacerbates such problems. What might appear playable when watching in TV (or even in the crowd) when you desperately want play to continue might not be if you were on the field.
 

flibbertyjibber

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I am going to take the positive outlook and say that we have done better here on this tour than last time with what according to Misbah is a less talented side.
 

Black_Warrior

Cricketer Of The Year
I am going to take the positive outlook and say that we have done better here on this tour than last time with what according to Misbah is a less talented side.
Not just according to Misbah but according to a Mr Fllibertyjibber as well who was full on gambhiring mode for a week :p

"oh we won't even come close" :ph34r:

Told you these teams are really well matched and Pak's batting is crap


The only positive that I can take is that the customary collapse has already happened and they got away with a draw.

But then again, sometimes they happen more than once in a series.
 
Last edited:

flibbertyjibber

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Not just according to Misbah but according to a Mr Fllibertyjibber as well who was full on gambhiring mode for a week :p

"oh we won't even come close" :ph34r:

Told you these teams are really well matched and Pak's batting is crap


The only positive that I can take is that the customary collapse has already happened and they got away with a draw.

But then again, sometimes they happen more than once in a series.
Stop being a total **** all your life and have a day off you argumentative ****tard.

We are away from home and got pummelled there last time. I was right to be wary. Happy with the team display. Roll on next week.
 

Black_Warrior

Cricketer Of The Year
Stop being a total **** all your life and have a day off you argumentative ****tard.

We are away from home and got pummelled there last time. I was right to be wary. Happy with the team display. Roll on next week.
I said that as a joke, not to argue. I understand that tone is not always apparent on a forum.

If I were in your position, I would be wary too.
 

wpdavid

Hall of Fame Member
Totally agree, I mean I'm disappointed we didn't win since that could well be our best chance all series but in all honesty I never expected to get close to winning any of these games. Today especially has been such a pleasant surprise.
I'd agree with that. With Pakistan welcoming back their leggie and proper opening bat, they should post a significantly stronger threat in the remaining tests. We were pretty much done for today when we only took the one wicket between lunch and tea. Almost whatever happened afterwards, we were always going to struggle to make the runs before it got dark.

Pleasing to see no major blaming of Misbah and chums for the slow over rate on the last couple of pages. We'd have certainly done the same, as would any test side. Better to blame those in control for not properly penalising sides who don't bowl the required number of overs at any stage of the game. About 10 runs penalty per over short would sort it out. And also for the astonishing refusal to use floodlights when they are available. Only cricket would shoot itself in the foot like this.

Beyond all that, brilliant to see Rashid having a great day out there. Must do his confidence a ton of good, so I look forward to seeing what he has to offer on more helpful surfaces over the next couple of weeks.

EDIT
Just seen FJ's / Misbah's comment about England having a less talented side than in 2012.
Nothing controversial about that, afaics. Can't imagine why anyone would be offended.
 
Last edited:

Lillian Thomson

Hall of Fame Member
I'd agree with that. With Pakistan welcoming back their leggie and proper opening bat, they should post a significantly stronger threat in the remaining tests. We were pretty much done for today when we only took the one wicket between lunch and tea. Almost whatever happened afterwards, we were always going to struggle to make the runs before it got dark.

Pleasing to see no major blaming of Misbah and chums for the slow over rate on the last couple of pages. We'd have certainly done the same, as would any test side. Better to blame those in control for not properly penalising sides who don't bowl the required number of overs at any stage of the game. About 10 runs penalty per over short would sort it out. And also for the astonishing refusal to use floodlights when they are available. Only cricket would shoot itself in the foot like this.

Beyond all that, brilliant to see Rashid having a great day out there. Must do his confidence a ton of good, so I look forward to seeing what he has to offer on more helpful surfaces over the next couple of weeks.

EDIT
Just seen FJ's / Misbah's comment about England having a less talented side than in 2012.
Nothing controversial about that, afaics. Can't imagine why anyone would be offended.
Not sure what you mean about refusal to use floodlights. They were on but aren't good enough for Test Cricket once all natural light has gone.
 

Scaly piscine

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
The 29 runs for 11 overs or thereabouts is part of what cost England (remember there's 2 lost for change of innings, or 10 minutes which is probably slightly worse). Absolutely pointless having your last two wickets prod about like that when you're already ahead and there's only 90 overs (and not even that) in a day. 128 in 22 overs or 99 in 11. Which one do you prefer? Easy to say that now yes, but that was Pakistan scoring relatively quickly. The equation could have been 30 in 1 over vs 59 in 12. 40 in 3 vs 69 in 14. It was captaincy which defied all mathematical sense.
 

AndyZaltzHair

International Coach
The 29 runs for 11 overs or thereabouts is part of what cost England (remember there's 2 lost for change of innings, or 10 minutes which is probably slightly worse). Absolutely pointless having your last two wickets prod about like that when you're already ahead and there's only 90 overs (and not even that) in a day. 128 in 22 overs or 99 in 11. Which one do you prefer? Easy to say that now yes, but that was Pakistan scoring relatively quickly. The equation could have been 30 in 1 over vs 59 in 12. 40 in 3 vs 69 in 14. It was captaincy which defied all mathematical sense.
And of course if England used those extra overs to bowl or even if the tail enders went for slogging that time, you could not possibly say that the match would turn out like this that England needed X runs from that many overs or from X hours or so. These sorts of "ifs" dont really dictate the last outcome with certainty.
 

Top