• 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* Second Test (Lord's, London) 28 June–2 July

Bahnz

Hall of Fame Member
the point we're getting at is if you are great at the shot go for it, but Duckett for one looked hopeless at it.
Yeah, perhaps this is fair. It’s just after a decade of watching Wagnerball and it’s imitators I’ve increasingly come to the view that most batsmen are just as likely pop an armpit ball to short leg or the slips playing defensively as they are to top edge one to fine leg playing the hook shot, and at least the latter approach has the upside of potentially forcing the bowlers to change tactics. I concede it does require a fair degree of confidence, skill and control with the backfoot shots though. Pope’s dismissal was the worst to me. No attempt to keep the ball on the ground or pick a gap, that was always going to be out if it didn’t clear the rope.
 

slowfinger

International Debutant
It's weird he struggles so much in Tests when in domestics he's often a dodgy starter but his whole thing is he goes huge when set.
maybe he just needs to try and visualise all of the International players he sees in the field like a Div 1 Somerset bowling attack. Fill your boots
 

greg

International Debutant
Yeah, perhaps this is fair. It’s just after a decade of watching Wagnerball and it’s imitators I’ve increasingly come to the view that most batsmen are just as likely pop an armpit ball to short leg or the slips playing defensively as they are to top edge one to fine leg playing the hook shot, and at least the latter approach has the upside of potentially forcing the bowlers to change tactics. I concede it does require a fair degree of confidence, skill and control with the backfoot shots though. Pope’s dismissal was the worst to me. No attempt to keep the ball on the ground or pick a gap, that was a pure 6 or out shot.
My point above was that England were taking it on despite there being for the most part no short-leg nor slips. It’s a different situation if the fielding side are presenting a choice of risks.
 

greg

International Debutant
Strangely enough I also thought of 1932/33 when at Lord’s today however it was Bradman who I recall reading stepped away to leg and hit to the offside as Brook did today.
Yep sorry, you’re right, got mixed up. Backing away to leg was Bradman’s (not particularly successful) attempt to combat it. It appears that Fingleton had some success by risking getting killed (aka letting the ball hit him!)
 

Woodster

International Captain
I’m 100% fine with taking on the shortball every ball if the batsmen are confident with the shot. England tried the same tactic against Blundell and Mitchell last summer and it usually just resulted in a flood of runs for 5 or 10 overs until the bowlers changed tack. I guess England should’ve adjusted their tactics after Root’s wicket given he’s the player you’d back to execute that strategy the best, but overall I think it’s more a case of poor execution rather than poor approach.
Yes but if, as you suggest, the England batsman aren’t confident with the shot then it’s highly unlikely they’ll execute it well and be successful, therefore the approach is all wrong. The poor execution is inevitable.
 

hazsa19

International Regular
Disappointed but not surprised to hear Ducketts comments. I think the defenders of ‘bazball’ have got it all wrong. Some of our best moments in the last 2 years have come when they’ve combined attack with common sense. The way they played Cummins and Lyon today was a great example (Crawley dismissal aside). They nullified them and cashed in against Hazlewood/ Starc.

Would it not still have been Bazball to milk the bouncer barrage for a bit then tear into the part timers? Duckett on 110* against Head/ Smith and a tired pace attack wasn’t far away.
 

Victor Ian

International Coach
**** that is awful to watch as the other team. I'm just yelling at my tv telling the bowlers to 'just get him out'. It's fascinating to see how that stupid 'intent' thing can really put a bowler back in their place and stop them building pressure. But fascinating sucks when you are the opposition.
 

Ashes81

State Vice-Captain
There's been alot of talk obviously about the 3 dismissals to the short ball.

Was it simply Bazball in action or a complete lack of game awareness.

I'm very much in the latter camp. There's nothing wrong in playing the short ball if its one of your shots.

But playing it when the odds are not in your favour with 3 fielders in the deep is poor play.

To say as Duckett did in his interview that it's how we play etc simply won't do.

Sport at any level, nevermind at International level, involves game management. You have to know when to attack and when to defend. You have to adjust your game to the circumstances that you face.

We didn't do that today and I don't care what anyone in the England camp says, the way we played in that hour was not correct.

I must also mention Harry Brook. When I first came on here late last year, I said he was a generational talent and that he would lead our batting in all formats for the next decade or so.

I still believe that. But some of his shots today were disgraceful. Today wasn't the time to be stepping outside your leg stump and trying to smack Cummins over long off. Today was not the time for baseball slogs over the infield.

I'm all for entertaining cricket but as an England fan I didn't find anything remotely entertaining about that session of play.
 

GoodAreasShane

Cricketer Of The Year
Damn this really sucks for Lyon. Absolute hammer blow to Australia. And all this after I was talking up his physical resilience just the other day

Although that being said I am less despondent than I would have been 18-24 months ago. Murphy emerging has eased the blow slightly, and while in an ideal universe I would have preferred not to expose him to Ashes cricket at this early stage of his career, it is still a less far grim prospect than had this happened last Ashes in England
 
Last edited:

GotSpin

Hall of Fame Member
Damn this really sucks for Lyon. Absolute hammer blow to Australia. And all this after I was takling up his physical resilience just the other day

Although that being said I am less despondent than I would have been 18-24 months ago. Murphy emerging has eased the blow slightly, and while in an ideal universe I would have preferred not to expose him to Ashes cricket at this early stage of his career, it is still a less far grim prospect than had this happened last Ashes in England
Think Murphy will do well

marnus dropping that catch is even more frustrating
 

Ashes81

State Vice-Captain
Murphy did pretty well in India and he may well perform well in the next Test or so.

But he isn't Nathan Lyon. We will obviously go after him and it'll be a massive task for him to withstand the barrage that will come his way.

It's a massive shame for Lyon, and come the end of the series, his injury may prove to be one of the pivotal moments of the whole series.
 

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Fell asleep just after lunch and saw bugger all. Very good day for England by the looks, the Lyon injury mid-match blows but Murphy will be fine for the rest of the series. Kid’s quality.

Heard Marnus dropped a dolly off Brook. Was it as easy as they made out?

Game is well poised now. With Lyon out Aus will probably only win by a hundred or so instead of 250 given the pitch seems to have flattened out. At least it was an external injury so presumably he can bat at three as usual this afternoon England time.
 

Top