*Official* England in West Indies

[TT Boy]

I do. Australia ~=~ South Africa, in spite of the evidence from the previous two tests, and England weren't exactly hopeless against them last summer. They're struggled here with slow pitches, lack of swing and severe heat, none of which will be around in England. They've paid the price for starting slowly away from home.

Currently i don't care who wins. Maybe at the time I'll have a preference. If i could pick one thing I want to happen at the Ashes this year it's Simon Jones playing in the first test in Cardiff. But that is most certainly cloud-****oo status.

No but there is a ground in Wales which is slow as ****.

Lord's also isn't famed for being anything over then a road in recent times.

 

[wpdavid]

I would bat for no more then 25 overs. Try and get an extra 150 runs and set 250 odd in 60 overs and see if Gayle fancies that.

Sounds about right. Won't be easy scoring at 6-an-over though, especially with the number of wickets already lost.

 

[Richard]

I reckon England need to set ~200 in ~70 overs. Even that won't be absolutely straightforward to do.

 

[Uppercut]

No but there is a ground in Wales which is slow as ****.

Lord's also isn't famed for being anything over then a road in recent times.

Yeah? I know nothing about the Wales ground.

I think we can write the Lord's test off as a draw and consider the Ashes a 4-match series. The toffs can drink their Pimm's and everyone can get misty-eyed about the beauty of the place for five days then we can move on and get back to cricket.

 

[Richard]

Lord's also isn't famed for being anything over then a road in recent times.

If it doesn't rain for a week before the Test and the team decide they want it, Mick Hunt can prepare a green seamer at Lord's.

England do indeed want, for their benefit, to be looking at pitches with maximum bounce and seam and\or turn (very difficult to get both in the same game, of course).

Anyway, probably best discuss this elsewhere if we want to discuss it.

 

[Richard]

50 off 42 for Pietersen.

 

[four_or_six]

Let's face it, we're only going to win this if WI choke. I reckon about 5 overs before lunch, gives us 65 overs total, which is long enough for a choke if that's going to happen. Also gives us the possibility of a wicket or two before lunch and then 40mins for the next batsmen to think about things.

 

[TT Boy]

Yeah? I know nothing about the Wales ground.

I think we can write the Lord's test off as a draw and consider the Ashes a 4-match series. The toffs can drink their Pimm's and everyone can get misty-eyed about the beauty of the place for five days then we can move on and get back to cricket.

Has a rep of being the slowest county track going and two spinners is usually a must. There was concerns last year when Sky were there for a one day game about the wicket for the Ashes, as there haven’t seen a good wicket with pace since Waqar Younis was there.

 

[Uppercut]

Has a rep of being the slowest county track going and two spinners is usually a must. There was concerns last year when Sky were there for a one day game about the wicket for the Ashes, as there haven’t seen a good wicket with pace since Waqar Younis was there.

It's the rainiest city in the UK too. Absolutely nailed-on draw it seems.

 

[Uppercut]

The over-rate here is a disgrace. I don't care about it when it's a result of a lot of fast bowling or the like, but going at 11 overs per hour to bleed a match dry is horrific.

England can't complain, it's merely karma for Collingwood's abomination in the ODIs against New Zealand last summer.

 

[Richard]

Don't think so. Some micky-mouse non-WC ODIs are utterly irrelevant to Test cricket - one the result matters not a jot, the other the result is huge. Not even like those responsible are the same.

Anyway, much as this session so far is going about as well as we could have expected, it remains (as f_o_s says) obscenely unlikely that WI will collapse.

 

[four_or_six]

Anyway, much as this session so far is going about as well as we could have expected, it remains (as f_o_s says) obscenely unlikely that WI will collapse.

Though it is encouraging that they don't seem to have much of a grip on things atm.

 

[Uppercut]

Don't think so. Some micky-mouse non-WC ODIs are utterly irrelevant to Test cricket - one the result matters not a jot, the other the result is huge. Not even like those responsible are the same.

Well sometimes it bites you in the arse harder than you'd expect. The principle was the same, and it's cheating.

 

[Richard]

Though it is encouraging that they don't seem to have much of a grip on things atm.

Having a grip (or not) on England smashing their excuse for an attack is hardly important to their lengthy batting unit.

It might give England a bit of heart, but it's highly unlikely to dampen West Indies' spirits when they get willow in hand.

 

[Richard]

Well sometimes it bites you in the arse harder than you'd expect.

I doubt West Indies would be acting differently here had England bowled their overs quicker at New Zealand last summer. And as you should know, the notion of karma is utter nonsense.

The principle was the same, and it's cheating.

Of course it is. But one side being cheated isn't relevant to another being cheated. England's ODI team cheating a n\r from a near-certain loss and England's Test team having a remote likelihood of being cheated out of a Test series draw are utterly irrelevant to one another.

 

[Uppercut]

I doubt West Indies would be acting differently here had England bowled their overs quicker at New Zealand last summer. And as you should know, the notion of karma is utter nonsense.

Of course it is. But one side being cheated isn't relevant to another being cheated. England's ODI team cheating a n\r from a near-certain loss and England's Test team having a remote likelihood of being cheated out of a Test series draw are utterly irrelevant to one another.

Nah, they're not though, and i don't mean karma in a sense of its physical existence.

I'm only saying England have zero right to complain about it because they did precisely the same thing themselves less than a year ago. I complained then, and I shall complain now. It should be stamped out.

 

[four_or_six]

I wish the WI would at least have tried to bowl some proper bowlers a bit more this match. Nash and Lendl Simmons operating seems awful.

 

[Prince EWS]

I wish the WI would at least have tried to bowl some proper bowlers a bit more this match. Nash and Lendl Simmons operating seems awful.

I agree, but Simmons surprisingly looks a fraction better than "prank-part-timer" standard. He's obviously not really a bowler but the fact that he's only taken 7 wickets in 55 First Class games, in a competition Nash seems to be bowl pretty regularly in, surprises me.

 

[Uppercut]

Don't think any of us predicted the run rate would be around 7.

 

[Richard]

Nah, they're not though, and i don't mean karma in a sense of its physical existence.

I'm only saying England have zero right to complain about it because they did precisely the same thing themselves less than a year ago. I complained then, and I shall complain now. It should be stamped out.

So us England fans have no right to complain even though we roundly condemned it when England did it last summer?

Every single team would do the same in these circumstances. And it's despicable, really, that they would. How to stamp it out, though, is a difficult question - else, clearly, it'd have been done before now.