-
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** England in New Zealand
- Thread starter James
- Start date
Magrat Garlick
Rather Mad Witch
's right, not been on CW until 20 minutes ago. Lectures and a nice sleep-in.Your morning? Does this mean you didn't notice KiWi's post until now?
(It took two hours from the mail got sent until it was actually published.)
Didn't really expect it to go through.
Pratters
Cricket, Lovely Cricket
There is a subtle difference between being cautious and being too cautious imo and England were too cautious here for mine. They could have always taken a few singles here and there, rotated the strike. The problem with being too defensive is that you can allow the bowlers settle into a line and you can easily allow yourself to go into a shell.Yes, I thought Bumble was talking out of his aess TBH. Oram bowled brilliantly, nothing less, for my money. He was getting bounce, seam, and was dropping it on a sixpence. Pietersen did try to attack him, but even he found it impossible and resorted to trying to play him out (then went after Gillespie, and played around one that swung in which he might have kept-out had he played it more circumspectly...) which he just about managed....
Look around, you'll see scores like Strauss' and Bell's really aren't that unusual. Plenty of batsmen play 30-odd balls for not-that-many. The thing is, good batsmen (better batsmen than Strauss has been of late) stay in beyond this then up their strike-rates as they start to get their eyes in and the bowling becomes less threatening.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Yeah, look I'm not saying it's not possible to be over-cautious of times. Really, though, you can never know for sure where the line is. As I say - to me, looking to put the ball into places where you could take singles would have been a risky business against Oram.
You can always be more cautious, you can always be more assertive. Basically, if whatever tactic is used works it's always right and if said tactic doesn't work it's always wrong - at least, that's they way it'll seem. TBH, I'm happy enough with the way things panned-out. And we'll never know for sure what would have happened if they'd panned-out differently. I reckon, however, that more strokeplay\single-seeking would have resulted in us being all-out for not many by now.
You can always be more cautious, you can always be more assertive. Basically, if whatever tactic is used works it's always right and if said tactic doesn't work it's always wrong - at least, that's they way it'll seem. TBH, I'm happy enough with the way things panned-out. And we'll never know for sure what would have happened if they'd panned-out differently. I reckon, however, that more strokeplay\single-seeking would have resulted in us being all-out for not many by now.
Nate
You'll Never Walk Alone
Who?
Jamee999
Hall of Fame Member
Surely the Basin Reserve employ him, not NZC.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Who are the Basin Reserve responsible to when a Test is being played? NZC. If NZC have given instructions, the authorities at the Basin Reserve should follow them. If the authorities at the Basin Reserve have given the groundsman instructions, he should follow them.
Anything else is insubordination.
BoyBrumby
Englishman
Entirely fictious IMHOMade my morning.
And educated y'all about Ernst Vettori, too.
Actually, would be amusing if he is.
BoyBrumby
Englishman
Fictional. As in Samuel duping cricinfo regarding this imaginary skier who shares a surname with the speccy NZ captain.Is what?
Given the 2 hour delay tho I imagine they checked before publishing.
tooextracool
International Coach
Or if he had decided to play with his bat closer to his body, which is technically the right way to bat. Nonetheless, Pietersen has gotten himself into a rut recently, and hes really been in this stage since the WI series last year.Yes, I thought Bumble was talking out of his aess TBH. Oram bowled brilliantly, nothing less, for my money. He was getting bounce, seam, and was dropping it on a sixpence. Pietersen did try to attack him, but even he found it impossible and resorted to trying to play him out (then went after Gillespie, and played around one that swung in which he might have kept-out had he played it more circumspectly...) which he just about managed.
The rest of the bowlers weren't, for the most part, anywhere near as good, though they all got batsmen to play-and-miss. But Oram was fantastic, there wasn't that much in the surface but he was extracting every last thing it offered him. Trying to attack him would, IMO, have been foolhardy, and if they had tried he might have gone for 19 or 20 off his first 9 overs rather than 4, but I reckon he could've had 4 or 5 wickets (and he should've had 3 anyway). Even trying to pinch singles (which involves opening the face, closing the face, playing slightly accross the line and the like) would not have been wise. For mine, the caution earlier allowed Ambrose to come in and play the innings he did.
Look around, you'll see scores like Strauss' and Bell's really aren't that unusual. Plenty of batsmen play 30-odd balls for not-that-many. The thing is, good batsmen (better batsmen than Strauss has been of late
Magrat Garlick
Rather Mad Witch
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_Vettori
Not got enough imagination to do what Brumby suggested, itbt.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
The point I was trying to make is that he'd have been more likely to have done that had he been attempting a defensive shot rather than a drive at that ball.
More from the Second Test against India onwards, for my money.
tooextracool
International Coach
Can see why too. Looks circumspect on the drive, and plays with absolutely no footwork. Lets see how he pans out when the ball is swinging, but you wont see me trumpeting a very ordinary inning that was played in dire circumstances. Seems like a trend here- Read, Prior and now Ambrose- guess wicket keepers in England tend to favor playing on the back foot.
Barney Rubble
International Coach
Very pleased to get into school this morning and read on BBC that Ambrose was on the verge of a century - hopefully it's not another false dawn like it was with Prior. Anyone shed some light on how his keeping's been, for someone that's stuck in a cricketless country and can't watch?
Barney Rubble
International Coach
I always thought 'keeping was his strong point, from what I'd heard. I take it that means he's not dropped much so far.
tooextracool
International Coach
As the saying goes, one swallow does not make a summer. A perfectly decent innings, but given that his form cascaded from the 2nd test against the WI onwards in both forms of the game i don't think that one inning changes much especially when you consider the mediocrity that followed thereafter. I think Pietersen's issue really is that now that he is capable of playing in 2 different gears (which is a remarkable feat), he finds himself unsure as to which gear to push in many situations, which has affected both his ODI and test form.
I also find it a little hard to fathom why he has removed the slog sweep from his armory over the last couple of years. Whilst risky, I firmly believe that anyone who is capable of playing the shot well has the crucial ability to unsettle bowlers as well as hit the ball in unusual spaces on the ground. Watching Pietersen let bowlers like Vettori and Patel dictate proceedings to him as they did in Hamilton really makes him look like a shadow of the player that has dominated 2 of the greatest spinners in the history of the game.