*Official* England in West Indies

[Briony]

England will surely win, even though Anderson seemed to waste quite a bit of time with the bat.

 

[ozone]

Going back to the discussions of the potential England team without Flintoff, can't believe people are suggesting going in with Bell as a direct replacement to bat at 6. Considering people were discussing whether England had the attack to take 20 wickets when they had a five man attack (albeit on a placid pitch), taking the best bowler out would turn an average attack into a potentially very poor one.

 

[Goughy]

Any team which loses a victory to a draw thanks to the loss of play has been cheated. Often they'll have played a part in their own downfall, but whenever lost play deprives one side of a result they've been cheated, no two ways about IMO. A Test is supposed to last five days, not four-and-a-quarter. That's why I hope someday we might have a situation where the loss of playing time in a Test is removed from the equation.

No, a team has a maximum of 5 days in which to force a result. Things happen within that 5 day period that make it easier or more difficult.

 

[craigyc43]

If they get 50 overs + of play in today and England havent won it by then, then they never will!!

 

[Jigga988]

Going back to the discussions of the potential England team without Flintoff, can't believe people are suggesting going in with Bell as a direct replacement to bat at 6. Considering people were discussing whether England had the attack to take 20 wickets when they had a five man attack (albeit on a placid pitch), taking the best bowler out would turn an average attack into a potentially very poor one.

So who's supposed to replace him then, out of those in the squad, think the batting would be a bit weak if you threw in Rashid

 

[ozone]

So who's supposed to replace him then, out of those in the squad, think the batting would be a bit weak if you threw in Rashid

TBH, Flintoff has contributed next to nothing batting wise in this series (cue someone to argue that he was miles ahead of everyone in the 51ao innings), so losing him from the batting line-up wouldn't be a disaster, and with Rashid, Broad and Swann, it would mean a long, but not neccessarily hopelessly weak tail.

BTW, unless there's injuries to both Swann and Panesar, I can't see England picking Rashid, rightly or wrongly so. It wouldn't surprise (or TBH, overly disapoint me) to see them pick a four man pace attack (Anderson, Sidebottom, Harmison and Broad) with Swann as the spinner.

 

[zaremba]

Any team which loses a victory to a draw thanks to the loss of play has been cheated. Often they'll have played a part in their own downfall, but whenever lost play deprives one side of a result they've been cheated, no two ways about IMO. A Test is supposed to last five days, not four-and-a-quarter. That's why I hope someday we might have a situation where the loss of playing time in a Test is removed from the equation.

No. A Test is supposed to last 5 days maximum. Everyone knows that it might be less than that, due to the weather. Teams therefore should factor that possibility into their strategy.

That's why in the situation England found themselves in during their 2nd innings they should have put their foot on the gas to score runs as quickly as possible. They could have tried to speed things up a bit and they didn't. Sending out Anderson to bat with Cook was a rotten idea.

So while I agree with you that it's a pity when a match is drawn due to the weather, to describe England as potentially "cheated" in this situation completely misses the point.

 

[Jigga988]

No. A Test is supposed to last 5 days maximum. Everyone knows that it might be less than that, due to the weather. Teams therefore should factor that possibility into their strategy.

That's why in the situation England found themselves in during their 2nd innings they should have put their foot on the gas to score runs as quickly as possible. They could have tried to speed things up a bit and they didn't. Sending out Anderson to bat with Cook was a rotten idea.

So while I agree with you that it's a pity when a match is drawn due to the weather, to describe England as potentially "cheated" in this situation completely misses the point.

Agreed, essentially Strauss knew rain was around on the last day and should've factored that in to his tactics, I suppose he didn't want to get further embaressed in his captaincy role with Windies chasing down 450, so he batted on and sent in a night watchman

 

[Jigga988]

Ravi Bopara and Amjad Khan have been called in to the squad as cover for Freddy, would like to see Ravi in For Freddy in the fourth test providing Fred isn't fit

 

[GIMH]

This is just awful umpiring. And listen to hussien saying it's a good decision. I can't watch this robbery anymore.

 

[GIMH]

Re who replaces Flintoff, if necessary? I'm gonna get crucified here, but Sidebottom wouldn't be the worst choice ever. Would leave us with the following

Strauss
Cook
Shah
Pietersen
Collingwood
Prior
Broad
Swann
Sidebottom
Anderson
Harmison

I might be the only one, but I see nothing to suggest Broad isn't more capable of batting 7 than some of the other people that have batted there in recent years (eg everyone apart from Prior). Prior is averaging around 40 and is good enough for 6 IMO, Swann is a capable 8, Sidebottom a decent enough 9.

Ho hum, won't happen, not necessarily suggesting it should but as far as I can see it would be better than bringing in Rashid, or Ian Bell

 

[Jigga988]

Sweeeet delayed start due to rain... due to restart some time but outfield needs to be dry...

 

[Richard]

Dire; I obviously knew about that.

That was, y'know, kiiiiiiiinda the point I was making.

 

[Richard]

No. A Test is supposed to last 5 days maximum. Everyone knows that it might be less than that, due to the weather. Teams therefore should factor that possibility into their strategy.

I never like strategems being defined on "it might rain". I don't disagree at all with what you write below:

That's why in the situation England found themselves in during their 2nd innings they should have put their foot on the gas to score runs as quickly as possible. They could have tried to speed things up a bit and they didn't. Sending out Anderson to bat with Cook was a rotten idea.

but it doesn't change the fact that only rain will have denied England if it does rain. Because but for the rain, you can say with near-certainty that they'd have won.

 

[Richard]

Ravi Bopara and Amjad Khan have been called in to the squad as cover for Freddy, would like to see Ravi in For Freddy in the fourth test providing Fred isn't fit

I wouldn't. Bopara ahead of Bell right now would make absolutely no sense whatsoever. And how on Earth Amjad Khan is anywhere near the England side continues to baffle me, and it's nothing to do with the fact he's Danish.

 

[Jungle Jumbo]

According to Flower, Flintoff is "going to give it a go today". Worrying.

 

[Richard]

Always been the trouble with Flintoff. He sees a team in need and a match right now potentially to win, and he just can't think long-term.

 

[ozone]

Re who replaces Flintoff, if necessary? I'm gonna get crucified here, but Sidebottom wouldn't be the worst choice ever. Would leave us with the following

Strauss
Cook
Shah
Pietersen
Collingwood
Prior
Broad
Swann
Sidebottom
Anderson
Harmison

Agree that this would be the best option. If Flintoff has to bowl today despite the fact he's injured, why are they (i.e. the Pundits on Sky) suggesting going in with only four bowler in the next test.

 

[GIMH]

I wouldn't. Bopara ahead of Bell right now would make absolutely no sense whatsoever. And how on Earth Amjad Khan is anywhere near the England side continues to baffle me, and it's nothing to do with the fact he's Danish.

It would in a way, in that Bell has been dropped due to poor performance. There is nothing yet to suggest he would perform any better, much in the same way as Vaughan hasn't been drafted in.

 

[GIMH]

Start delayed, goddamn I only just realised