***Official*** England in Sri Lanka

[Pup Clarke]

The ball swung very late away from Bopara.

 

[Richard]

I haven't seen the ball. Huge call to doubt another player wouldn't be able to keep out a ball. All he has to do is hit the ball, not too hard unless the ball swung late reverse a massive amount.

A Yorker, which wobbles about a bit (though it was the new-ball, so it was conventional rather than reverse swing), in fading light, 1st delivery, from a bowler like Maaalinga... is something that's pretty damn tough to keep out.

It'd be something you'd expect a decent batsman to hit from a more "usual" bowler, if you'd been at the crease for a little while, in good-quality light, and if there was no real swing, yes. That was one hell of a tough delivery, though.

 

[NUFAN]

The ball swung very late away from Bopara.

Ah well. He should have been ready for it.

I like Bopara in the one day set up. But what's he really like in the longer form of the game?

I hope he's not being picked for his bowling, cause I don't think England need another part time bowler.

Besides Shah, who else is close to the Test team?

 

[Richard]

Ah well. He should have been ready for it.

I'd imagine he was. Doesn't make it an easy delivery to play.

As I say - I really think you should take a look at the ball - and bear in mind the light and the typical difficulties involved in sighting Maaalinga with his action. There are many more proven players who've been done by similar deliveries.

 

[Richard]

Haha, just read Will Luke's CricInfo bulletin. Shockingly poor form if I do say so myself to describe a delivery with a brand-new (less than 3 overs old) ball as a "reverse-swinging corker".

I flatter myself CW have done rather better. Though I've done better reports than this, plenty of 'em.

 

[NUFAN]

I don't think I need to see the ball after reading the Richard Dickinson article.

 

[Richard]

Hope that's not a thinly-veiled jab at a less-than-perfectly-constructed sentence.

 

[NUFAN]

Hope that's not a thinly-veiled jab at a less-than-perfectly-constructed sentence.

No well in all honesty I can picture exactly what the delivery was like after reading your report. BTW - How big is the audience that read your reports? I just always go to cricinfo if I want to read a match report.

I like Tests when the score is about 5/250 after the first day. (as long as Australia aren't batting). Means it's very even.

 

[Richard]

BTW - How big is the audience that read your reports?

We've actually been waiting to find that out for a fair while - was discussed in the staff chat a good 4 or 5 months ago now, and hasn't yet been put into practice. You wouldn't believe the amount of time that has to be spent just on maintenance of this site, never mind improvements. And there's enough big ones of those in the pipeline TBH.

I just always go to cricinfo if I want to read a match report.

TBH, I'd imagine most posters here are fairly similar, though I might be pleasantly surprised. The calibre of writing on CW is every bit as good as CricInfo, really - we'd not have people on the team who couldn't do the job. You should try reading a few more CW match reports, 'specially those of games you might have watched, the writers on here - even if they are relatively thin on the ground at present - are excellent.

Only thing I ever use CricInfo for these days is live scorecards and StatsGuru really. CW > CI in most other respects. And CricketArchive > CI for domestic stuff, by miles, and without the annoying age-wait that you get on CI.

BTW - don't suppose you'd be interested in writing for us? We're pretty short of Aussies at present.

 

[Prince EWS]

We're pretty short of Aussies at present.

Not for long, hopefully..

 

[grecian]

Hmm, won't mention the decisions, I'm bored of being a whinging pom.

Just wondering why posters are saying we've got a long tail. I've seen many worse, tbh. The recent Pakistan-South Africa series, both teams really. As for England teams it's really not that poor. Broad looks a decent bat (some would say better then his bowling) and Ryans been decent so far in his test career. I'd prefer to have Harmisons erratic stroke play, to Hoggards nothingness and Monty isn't as bad as cracked up to be, certainly not a chris Martin (but who is), or even as bad as the likes of Malcolm or Tuffers.

I do realise that we'll now get rolled for 280, but ho-hum.

 

[Richard]

Haha, clean forgot about Broad TBH.

 

[Richard]

Not for long, hopefully..

BTW, on that subject there seem to have been problems with the "usual" means of application, so it might be best for any prospective applicant... ahem, making no guesses as to who that might be... to email James with their stuff.

 

[NUFAN]

BTW - don't suppose you'd be interested in writing for us? We're pretty short of Aussies at present.

With my work schedule and lack of pay TV currently I wouldn't be reliable enough.

It would be fun,but i would probably prefer to write up articles talking about selections or why x is better then y rather then doing a match report.

Most match reports I just skim through quickly really. I spend more time looking at a scorecard then the article it self.

 

[cover drive man]

Coming from a pom. I think with the bad decisions we have to except umpires are only human and this sort of thing plagues sport but over time the anger bubbles down.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

One of the best things about watching most of the days play was when England were 1-160-odd just after tea and Botham was raving on and on about how England can't lose the game and that 450+ was almost a certainty, and I'm sitting there thinking "****, you're an idiot Beefy."

 

[JBH001]

Depends on how Prior and Colly bat, surely. I have never seen Prior bat before in a test match, but some of the comments here seem to be a bit harsh. He showed in Kandy that he could handle spin, and moreover seems to possess the right attitude (which goes a long way towards making up for any deficiencies in technique). I dont think they will make 450, but a score within the 300 - 350 range is certainly within the range of decent probability.

 

[Prince EWS]

Depends on how Prior and Colly bat, surely. I have never seen Prior bat before in a test match, but some of the comments here seem to be a bit harsh. He showed in Kandy that he could handle spin, and moreover seems to possess the right attitude (which goes a long way towards making up for any deficiencies in technique). I dont think they will make 450, but a score within the 300 - 350 range is certainly within the range of decent probability.

His technique is actually very good - the main criticism of him seems to be in ODIs where he opens the batting and usually gets a score resembling 25 (40) and then throws his start away. Oh, and his keeping, which is positively dire when he's on a bad day.

He certainly has the technique to average around 40+ in test cricket - whether he does or not is obviously dependant on a lot of other factors and I'd be happy to wager that he wouldn't - but he's certainly a capable bat.

 

[biased indian]

if England score above 350 they are really in with a chance..any thing less than 300 would mean SL will be the happier team

 

[Richard]

Sri Lanka should get plenty more than 350, really - especially against this attack. It'll be very poor batting if they don't.