***Official** West Indies in England***

[Perm]

How bad is Collymore? Im not even going to say he is bowling badly as by the looks of him he doesnt look capable of bowling much better.

I could have sworn a few years ago he had a bit of nip. Now he is a complete trundler.

He has never had much luck in Test cricket, been the West Indies most consistent and accurate bowler for a few seasons now but has rarely reaped the rewards. He'd be the first bowler to go down on my team sheet if I was a selector. Maybe it's a good thing that I'm not.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Cook is the sort of player you look at to gauge what the bowling has been like so far - he's scoring at a strike rate of around 70.

 

[Richard]

There was no "respectively" on the end of that sentence, though. In a combined effort, they are creating a song and a dance. The sentence never attempted to attributed each action to each player, or even say that one player was doing one while the other did the other.

Hahaha, I know about the "respectively". I was just being pedantic.

 

[Goughy]

The bowling hasn't been too bad really, it was quite tidy early on and beat the edge quite a few times. Just too wayward though, as opposed to lacking in penetration. Quite a few leg side deliveries, and also too many short and wide outside the off stump.

When you go at 4 an over in the 1st hour of a test match in conditions suited to seam and quick bowling and fail to pick up a wicket it is fair to say the bowling has been very poor early.

Just hope for their sake the spinner does a better job...oh wait

 

[_Ed_]

I think the CW 'stating the obvious' award should be named after Jimmy Adams.

"The West Indies will reflect on a session where they perhaps didn't use the new ball as well as they could have."

 

[Richard]

The bowling hasn't been too bad really, it was quite tidy early on and beat the edge quite a few times. Just too wayward though, as opposed to lacking in penetration. Quite a few leg side deliveries, and also too many short and wide outside the off stump.

With the in-form Owais Shah to come, as well as KP and Bell it should be a big score for England.

The point is with a new-ball that, apparently, has been swinging there should be far, far more swing than we've seen so far. And we now finally see one go proper...

EDIT: Nasser Hussain "Michael Vaughan, star performer", hmm; David Lloyd "Owais Shah if he gets in will be hard to get out" - he said exactly that 6 years ago!!!!!!

 

[Perm]

When you go at 4 an over in the 1st hour of a test match in conditions suited to seam and quick bowling and fail to pick up a wicket it is fair to say the bowling has been very poor early.

Just hope for their sake the spinner does a better job...oh wait

The pitch has actually been a touch on the slow side so the ball hasn't really been coming on as well as the bowlers would've liked. The ball hasn't actually done a great deal sideways either, just a bit of swing but nothing to suggest that the bowlers should be dominating.

 

[Richard]

The pitch has actually been a touch on the slow side so the ball hasn't really been coming on as well as the bowlers would've liked. The ball hasn't actually done a great deal sideways either, just a bit of swing but nothing to suggest that the bowlers should be dominating.

What I was getting at is that it's poor bowling for the ball not to be swinging.

 

[Pup Clarke]

This session has been very, very easy batting for England. The WI bowlers have not put them under any pressure whatsoever.

 

[Richard]

I think the CW 'stating the obvious' award should be named after Jimmy Adams.

"The West Indies will reflect on a session where they perhaps didn't use the new ball as well as they could have."

Good spot, will quote it for posterity...

 

[Perm]

What I was getting at is that it's poor bowling for the ball not to be swinging.

True, it'll be interesting to see how much swing the England bowlers get, given that they are likely to be bowling in similar overhead conditions.

 

[GIMH]

I reckon we'll declare at 551-6

Which obviously means we won't win

 

[Richard]

I reckon we'll declare at 551-6

Which obviously means we won't win

Never know, it might not rain on Saturday and Sunday.

EDIT: good to see Harold again.

 

[Perm]

I reckon we'll declare at 551-6

Which obviously means we won't win

Big call, the West Indies batting lineup (Chanderpaul aside) is fairly brittle.

 

[Scaly piscine]

I think the CW 'stating the obvious' award should be named after Jimmy Adams.

"The West Indies will reflect on a session where they perhaps didn't use the new ball as well as they could have."

It's a shame you couldn't name it after about a hundred different football pundits/commentators in England.

 

[Richard]

True, it'll be interesting to see how much swing the England bowlers get, given that they are likely to be bowling in similar overhead conditions.

If indeed that is the case, I'd fancy Hoggard to eat the left-handers for breakfast and if he does I'll be very annoyed we didn't pick Anderson ahead of Panesar who I can't see doing anything of note on this pitch.

Mind, we haven't seen Gayle bowl yet.

 

[Richard]

How bad is Collymore? Im not even going to say he is bowling badly as by the looks of him he doesnt look capable of bowling much better.

I could have sworn a few years ago he had a bit of nip. Now he is a complete trundler.

TBH, it doesn't seem to be just Collymore so far. Taylor, who not long ago was up at 88-89mph, is currently just jogging along (and bowling in a sweater) to produce speeds of 81-82mph.

 

[Prince EWS]

Hahaha, I know about the "respectively". I was just being pedantic.

But you were wrong in you pedantism on this occasion. There is nothing in the laws of English, or in the definition of any of those words, to say that sentence meant what you interpreted as definitely meaning and hence correcting incorrectly.

 

[Richard]

That's the first we see of a real false stroke. And it reeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaallllly is a slow pitch.

 

[Richard]

But you were wrong in you pedantism on this occasion. There is nothing in the laws of English, or in the definition of any of those words, to say that sentence meant what you interpreted as definitely meaning and hence correcting incorrectly.

I know I was. I was just joking around, TBH.