The Ashes (NOT!) -England v Australia at the Ring of Fire, Dubai- 10/30 Saturday (N), 26th Match, Group 1

[Fuller Pilch]

Fairly ominous that from England. Not too good for the Aussies' net run rate either.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

I've just heard two guys in the pub talking about the 2016 final and one of them claimed 'Kraigg Brathwaite' hit the winning runs against Stokes

The irony that he didn't remember the name

Has Kraigg Braithwaite even played T20 or hit 4 6s in his career?

 

[GIMH]

Lovely

 

[grecian]

Just so ya know, this is how it's done:

View attachment 29726

Fair comparison that Maldives team, and this Oz T20 line up TBH.

Hopefully we won't get complacent after thrashing some minnows.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

What did I miss?

Getting a bit too easy against this lot in pyjama cricket.

 

[smash84]

wow, what a dominant performance from England

 

[Pup Clarke]

Australia just way too conservative with their selection. Easy to say in hindsight but they have too many passengers in that XI - with many of them playing due to reputation
Finch, Phillippe, Marnus, Maxwell, Marsh, Inglis, Renshaw?, Agar, Jhye Richarson, Hazlewood, Zampa

That XI would probably still get pasted but just looks fresher and more dynamic. Maybe Sams/Ellis or Swepson as another spinner

 

[Victor Ian]

England are just a wrecking machine here. Can anyone stop them? They decimated Australia's nrr.

 

[Victor Ian]

I want to see England bat first to see how much they might score. @howe, can you extend your graph to 20 overs just for the lols?

 

[Gnske]

We deserve this.

 

[honestbharani]

I am still not very sure we learn too much about the sides given how lopsidedly advantageous batting second seems to be, especially in the night games and especially in Dubai. Sharjah is so slow that even with the dew balls can stop on the batsmen and stroke making can be difficult (of course, its far more difficult batting first) but Dubai goes from sligthly tacky (which is the worst for T20 batting) to properly fast and one paced for the side batting second and the dew means no movement (seam or spin or swing) is available too. Between reasonably good sides, this all sets up for curbstompings like we have seen so far in this tournament. But I wont rule out each of the opponents winning had they been batting second, may not be by the same margins, but winning nonetheless.

There was a quadrangular back in 97 at Sharjah between Sri Lanka, Windies, Pakistan and South Africa and every team that won the toss batted second and won. In the end, in the finals, Sri Lanka who kept winning batting second had to bat first and lost pretty bad. Expect something similar to happen in this WT20 too.

All that said, why bring in an extra spinner when dew is the achiles heel and the spinner is only of the quality of Agar? England, and especially Buttler, look like the only ones who can stop Pakistan in this tournament.

 

[cnerd123]

Did anyone catch the big 'aww no' from Smith's dismissal? @Spikey @Spark

 

[mackembhoy]

I am still not very sure we learn too much about the sides given how lopsidedly advantageous batting second seems to be, especially in the night games and especially in Dubai. Sharjah is so slow that even with the dew balls can stop on the batsmen and stroke making can be difficult (of course, its far more difficult batting first) but Dubai goes from sligthly tacky (which is the worst for T20 batting) to properly fast and one paced for the side batting second and the dew means no movement (seam or spin or swing) is available too. Between reasonably good sides, this all sets up for curbstompings like we have seen so far in this tournament. But I wont rule out each of the opponents winning had they been batting second, may not be by the same margins, but winning nonetheless.

There was a quadrangular back in 97 at Sharjah between Sri Lanka, Windies, Pakistan and South Africa and every team that won the toss batted second and won. In the end, in the finals, Sri Lanka who kept winning batting second had to bat first and lost pretty bad. Expect something similar to happen in this WT20 too.

All that said, why bring in an extra spinner when dew is the achiles heel and the spinner is only of the quality of Agar? England, and especially Buttler, look like the only ones who can stop Pakistan in this tournament.

Well our next two games are at Sharjah and likely playing at Abu Dhabi in the semi.

So should be a good litmus test for us.

 

[Burgey]

I am still not very sure we learn too much about the sides given how lopsidedly advantageous batting second seems to be, especially in the night games and especially in Dubai. Sharjah is so slow that even with the dew balls can stop on the batsmen and stroke making can be difficult (of course, its far more difficult batting first) but Dubai goes from sligthly tacky (which is the worst for T20 batting) to properly fast and one paced for the side batting second and the dew means no movement (seam or spin or swing) is available too. Between reasonably good sides, this all sets up for curbstompings like we have seen so far in this tournament. But I wont rule out each of the opponents winning had they been batting second, may not be by the same margins, but winning nonetheless.

There was a quadrangular back in 97 at Sharjah between Sri Lanka, Windies, Pakistan and South Africa and every team that won the toss batted second and won. In the end, in the finals, Sri Lanka who kept winning batting second had to bat first and lost pretty bad. Expect something similar to happen in this WT20 too.

All that said, why bring in an extra spinner when dew is the achiles heel and the spinner is only of the quality of Agar? England, and especially Buttler, look like the only ones who can stop Pakistan in this tournament.

Tbh it’s the uae. Everything there is tacky

doesn’t detract from this Australian outfit being a disgrace to its people

 

[slippy888]

Is cummins out of shape since his come back

 

[wpdavid]

I want to see England bat first to see how much they might score. @howe, can you extend your graph to 20 overs just for the lols?

I think he borrowed the graph from cricinfo.

 

[Victor Ian]

I think he borrowed the graph from cricinfo.

Going by England's run rate it would have been 216. Considering Bangladesh made England work another 3 overs for that 126/2, can Australia get over them? Even the Windies made England work harder, sort of, maybe, probably not. But they took more wickets, at least.

 

[wpdavid]

Going by England's run rate it would have been 216. Considering Bangladesh made England work another 3 overs for that 126/2, can Australia get over them? Even the Windies made England work harder, sort of, maybe, probably not. But they took more wickets, at least.

I think our batters were still rusty when we played WI; there's no way their attack is superior to yours. And when Buttler's in that sort of form, most sides will struggle. You'll know better than me, but I don't recall seeing Starc smashed like that before. Watching the highlights just now, I was struck by how England's openers had a look at the bowling for a couple of overs before going on the attack, which isn't the worst idea against your guys even in this form of the game.

 

[Burgey]

Lack of scoreboard pressure chasing such a low total allowed them that luxury. Which is credit to their bowlers tbh. Was a complete pizzling.