*Official* Second Test at Lords

[Pizzorno]

I really hope Stuart Broad falls down the stairs tonight or some of his fingers just magically break temporarily. Can't afford his garbage tomorrow. Well we can afford it I suppose, but I still don't want it.

 

[GIMH]

Fred & Jimmeh will bowl them out before Broad gets near the ball tbh

 

[Pizzorno]

And here's a bit of a random comment btw, but for all the stick I give Pietersen over his commitment and his application you can't question his heart for playing on with this injury. It's there for all to see that it's clearly hampering him, yet he still soldiers on.

He's still a nob though...

 

[Uppercut]

I really hope Stuart Broad falls down the stairs tonight or some of his fingers just magically break temporarily. Can't afford his garbage tomorrow. Well we can afford it I suppose, but I still don't want it.

You could have done without his excellent catch and two wickets in the first innings.

Anyway, why did the commentators keep saying KP was crucial to upping the run rate when he was sitting on 44 off 100 balls? Still living in 2005 it seems.

 

[Pizzorno]

Fred & Jimmeh will bowl them out before Broad gets near the ball tbh

Not when Strauss makes Broad open from both ends they won't.

The worrying thing about Broad is that his sister the analyst (who I deffo would by the way) probably knows how to bowl a batsman out more than her brother does.

 

[superkingdave]

Fred & Jimmeh will bowl them out before Broad gets near the ball tbh

Thats if they open...can just see Draco Malfoy taking the new ball.

 

[Prince EWS]

Oh yeah, I was mainly talking about his batting. He should be in the team regardless of the gloves. Part of me wants to see him higher up the order anyway. Things are gonna need a rethink after this series anyway, given Freddie's retirement.

I really wouldn't want Prior batting any higher than six.. maybe five at a stretch. I'm certainly not saying he doesn't have what it takes to be a specialist batsman, but as TEC keeps pointing out, his strengths definitely lie in playing spin and his main weakness is the swinging ball. Plus, as this innings showed, he's an awesome player to have coming in down the order if you need to accelerate, so 5-7 is his go IMO.

It'd be really interesting to see what would happen if he suddenly started keeping poorly again, though. As Richard suggested, you'd be inclined to just bring Foster in for Bopara, but that'd really create some interesting questions regarding the batting order. I don't know about you, but I really wouldn't want to see Pietersen at three and Collingwood at four.

 

[GIMH]

You could have done without his excellent catch and two wickets in the first innings.

Anyway, why did the commentators keep saying KP was crucial to upping the run rate when he was sitting on 44 off 100 balls? Still living in 2005 it seems.

A tad unfair, although he has obviously calmed his game down since then he is still clearly capable of taking the game away from anybody. The thing I didn't understand was when he got out them saying that things would slow down..because Prior & Flintoff are renowned for their pedestrian batting...

 

[Pizzorno]

Anyway, why did the commentators keep saying KP was crucial to upping the run rate when he was sitting on 44 off 100 balls? Still living in 2005 it seems.

Errr no. He's still probably the fastest scoring player in the team barring maybe Prior or Fred. Today and in recent innings he's just been hampered by his achilles problem.

 

[Uppercut]

A tad unfair, although he has obviously calmed his game down since then he is still clearly capable of taking the game away from anybody. The thing I didn't understand was when he got out them saying that things would slow down..because Prior & Flintoff are renowned for their pedestrian batting...

Yeah, that's kinda my point. KP can indeed take the game away from anyone but I wouldn't back him to because he's out of form. Prior emphatically isn't.

 

[Richard]

I really hope Stuart Broad falls down the stairs tonight or some of his fingers just magically break temporarily. Can't afford his garbage tomorrow. Well we can afford it I suppose, but I still don't want it.

Perfect chance for him to get 0-110 and still have it be completely irrelevant to England's comfortable victory.

Mind, presuming we do get said comfortable victory, who is honestly expecting the team to be changed?

 

[Top_Cat]

England just ahead in the match on points.

 

[GIMH]

Yeah, that's kinda my point. KP can indeed take the game away from anyone but I wouldn't back him to because he's out of form. Prior emphatically isn't.

Yeah, fair enough won't disagree with that, don't think that has anything to do with being stuck in 2005 though...more like...2008?

 

[Uppercut]

Errr no. He's still probably the fastest scoring player in the team barring maybe Prior or Fred. Today and in recent innings he's just been hampered by his achilles problem.

Considering Prior and Fred were the two players to follow though, my point still stands. And he's definitely not as likely to score very quickly as he used to be- whether that be due to his achilles, poor form or otherwise.

 

[Richard]

It'd be really interesting to see what would happen if he suddenly started keeping poorly again, though. As Richard suggested, you'd be inclined to just bring Foster in for Bopara, but that'd really create some interesting questions regarding the batting order. I don't know about you, but I really wouldn't want to see Pietersen at three and Collingwood at four.

In said circumstances my honest preference - not that I believe for a second that it's a genuine possibility - would be Foster at three.

Foster's great strength is technical decency and an ability to not give his wicket away. Thus he's probably better-suited to three than Flintoff, Prior, Collingwood or Pietersen are, given none of them want to move. He'd rarely get big scores, but he'd probably hold-up new-ball bowlers with decent regularity.

In any case it would be not Foster but Ambrose who'd be brought in, and damn rightly so too.

 

[Prince EWS]

In said circumstances my honest preference - not that I believe for a second that it's a genuine possibility - would be Foster at three.

Foster's great strength is technical decency and an ability to not give his wicket away. Thus he's probably better-suited to three than Flintoff, Prior, Collingwood or Pietersen are, given none of them want to move. He'd rarely get big scores, but he'd probably hold-up new-ball bowlers with decent regularity.

In any case it would be not Foster but Ambrose who'd be brought in, and damn rightly so too.

Foster should open so Strauss can bat three where he belongs, IMO...

























YES, THIS POST IS IN JEST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Uppercut]

Yeah, fair enough won't disagree with that, don't think that has anything to do with being stuck in 2005 though...more like...2008?

Meh. I think he gave everyone the impression of an ultra-aggressive destroyer back then and it's remained in everyone's minds despite it not really being the case anymore.

Just to put out a few facts to back that up, his ODI strike rate over the past two years is 81. Of players who have batted more than 30 innings in that period, 21 have a better strike rate than that (13 of whom also have a better average, incidentally).

I don't mean to say he isn't a fantastic player- you know I think he is. But he's widely considered "one of the world's most destructive batsmen", when the fact is, he isn't anymore.

 

[GIMH]

Hmm, I disagree. I don't think to be the world's most destructive batsman you have to have a Test SR that is up in the 80s or whatever. He has become a more intelligent batsman and plays to the situation. I think it would be silly to believe he wasn't capable of destroying attacks when required. A fully fit and in-form Pietersen would have scored fast today, for sure.

As for ODIs though, he has been strangely poor in them for a while, but maintains a decent average with a blinding innings every 5 matches or so

 

[Lillian Thomson]

In said circumstances my honest preference - not that I believe for a second that it's a genuine possibility - would be Foster at three.

Foster's great strength is technical decency and an ability to not give his wicket away. Thus he's probably better-suited to three than Flintoff, Prior, Collingwood or Pietersen are, given none of them want to move. He'd rarely get big scores, but he'd probably hold-up new-ball bowlers with decent regularity.

In any case it would be not Foster but Ambrose who'd be brought in, and damn rightly so too.

Yeah, get Foster in at 3. Ideal man to come in at 196 for 1 and blunt the new ball.

 

[Richard]

Yeah, get Foster in at 3. Ideal man to come in at 196 for 1 and blunt the new ball.

If Strauss and Cook can bat that well every innings we can basically pick seven bowlers.