*Official* Pakistan in England 2010

[Jarquis]

 

[mohammad16]

Do Irish people in general give a damn about cricket now that theyve started producing superstars?

 

[Furball]

Do Irish people in general give a damn about cricket now that theyve started producing superstars?

Cricket in Ireland, Scotland and Wales has always been a reasonably popular minority summer past time - it's just never really taken off as a spectator sport because they've never had a side that competes at the highest level, the way they do in rugby. I'm almost certain that cricket is actually the 2nd most played sport in Scotland.

 

[Shri]

Yeah, I know you are a big fan of that particular shape.

 

[four_or_six]

Great to see Morgan do so well.

Also great to see us start so well against Pakistan's strongest suit. Sets us up for a good series.

 

[social]

If people didnt have questions about the accuracy of hawk-eye after it showed the ball missing the stumps when Strauss was bowled in 2005 then today would've sealed it!

Morgan was dead set plumb, dead to rights against Kaneria

He plonked his foot forward a maximum of 6 inches and we're lead to believe that a ball which hit him in line with middle and off would've missed leg stump by some way

**** off

That was out

 

[Sir Alex]

pitchisflat anyone?

 

[four_or_six]

pitchisflat anyone?

Maybe a bit, but Swann and Broad are both playing at home which should help matters. Fully expect a result from this match.

 

[Avada Kedavra]

Pak wasted their reviews.England def on top atm,hope Asif and Amir can keep them down to 400-420 max.

 

[Jono]

pitchisflat anyone?

Haha it's true. It's flat and low bouncing, but it's getting away with it because of the overhead conditions, and the fact that it's been compared to the Columbo wicket.

Otherwise it's not a good test cricket wicket.

 

[tooextracool]

yeah, could very well end up like this game:

HowSTAT! Match Scorecard

 

[Jono]

I still think Pakistan's batting lineup is that young, inexperienced and crap, that England could dominate, even though the pitch isn't too helpful.

 

[Prince EWS]

If people didnt have questions about the accuracy of hawk-eye after it showed the ball missing the stumps when Strauss was bowled in 2005 then today would've sealed it!

Morgan was dead set plumb, dead to rights against Kaneria

He plonked his foot forward a maximum of 6 inches and we're lead to believe that a ball which hit him in line with middle and off would've missed leg stump by some way

**** off

That was out

Lol. Yeah. Your judgement watching a 2D screen > HawkEye. Sure.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Time to see if Morgan is a Test batsman.

Probably a yes then.

Know everyone keeps saying it, but you have to love the boy's temperament. Little doubt he treats Kipling's twin imposters the same way.

Can't be too many batsmen to have brought up their maiden test tons in the grand manner either.

**** I LOVE ATHERTON!

Just mentioned the book Moneyball, and how Andy Flower has used it.

What a ****ing gun. Would never be mentioned on some of the other ****ty cricket coverage.

Sky ftw!

Never read the book, but would be quite interesting to see how sabermetrics could explain the selection of a player like Morgan. His FC career very ordinary so far.

Cricket in Ireland, Scotland and Wales has always been a reasonably popular minority summer past time - it's just never really taken off as a spectator sport because they've never had a side that competes at the highest level, the way they do in rugby. I'm almost certain that cricket is actually the 2nd most played sport in Scotland.

Harsh on Glamorgan, tbh.

 

[Furball]

Probably a yes then.

Know everyone keeps saying it, but you have to love the boy's temperament. Little doubt he treats Kipling's twin imposters the same way.

Can't be too many batsmen to have brought up their maiden test tons in the grand manner either.

Phil Hughes. IIRC he got through the 90s in the 2nd Test v South Africa by belting Paul Harris for consecutive 6s.

edit: cricinfo commentary:

End of over 37 (1 run) Australia 149/0
PJ Hughes 89* (126b 16x4) DW Steyn 10-1-38-0
SM Katich 51* (100b 9x4) PL Harris 9-3-23-0

37.1


Harris to Hughes, FOUR, Hughes wants to get to three figures fast, he gets his bat down to scoop a flighted delivery on middle and leg and he safely clears mid-on

37.2


Harris to Hughes, no run, thrusts forward and defends

37.3


Harris to Hughes, no run, quicker through the air, he gets forward and smothers the spin

37.4


Harris to Hughes, no run, stays on the backfoot and pushes it to the on side

37.5


Harris to Hughes, SIX, talk about guts! Hughes seizes on another juicy flighted delivery and launches Harris downtown over long-on

37.6


Harris to Hughes, SIX, this young man's lived up to the hype! He takes a couple of paces down the track and lofts him with the turn and deposits the ball on the grass embankment over deep midwicket, Hughes take a bow! All the Australians are up on their feet

There'll be major celebrations in Macksville, New South Wales
End of over 38 (16 runs) Australia 165/0
PJ Hughes 105* (132b 17x4 2x6) PL Harris 10-3-39-0
SM Katich 51* (100b 9x4) DW Steyn 10-1-38-0

Mitchell Johnson did it in the 3rd Test as well. Got stranded on 96* in the 2nd, was on 95* in the 3rd then McDonald and Siddle got out in consecutive deliveries, leaving last man McGain to face 2. 2nd ball of the next over, Johnson smashed Steyn for 6 to bring up his 100.

Never read the book, but would be quite interesting to see how sabermetrics could explain the selection of a player like Morgan. His FC career very ordinary so far.

My only exposure to the book is from reading Simon Kuper's Why England Lose & Other Curious Football Phenomena Explained (incidentally a brilliant read, thoroughly recommend it to anyone who loves their football), and the premise of the book seems to be the transformation of a small outfit by rejecting what everyone "knows" about the sport, specifically how the transfer market works. The parallel to Morgan is clear: everyone "knows" that a player with a reasonable at best FC record won't be a success at Test level. The case of Morgan (and Collingwood, Trescothick and Vaughan before him, and conversely, Graeme Hick and Mark Ramprakash) would indicate that the conventional wisdom sorrounding a player's FC record, whilst not wrong, isn't perfect either. Clearly, the England management have seen something about Morgan that they believe makes him suited to Test cricket. It happens to a degree in football - Miroslav Klose and Lucas Podolski shouldn't be as good as they are for Germany based on their club careers.

Harsh on Glamorgan, tbh.

Hah, true. Do Wales have any sort of representation at Minor County level, or are Glamorgan an anomaly in Welsh cricket?

 

[slowfinger]

**** me Malik appeal then...

 

[GIMH]

Just seen Morgan's referral, fairly straighforward decision, not really sure what social was going on about

 

[Furball]

If people didnt have questions about the accuracy of hawk-eye after it showed the ball missing the stumps when Strauss was bowled in 2005 then today would've sealed it!

Morgan was dead set plumb, dead to rights against Kaneria

He plonked his foot forward a maximum of 6 inches and we're lead to believe that a ball which hit him in line with middle and off would've missed leg stump by some way

**** off

That was out

According to Hawk Eye, it would have just missed.

The error was because Hawk Eye wasn't calibrated at the time to account for turn as big as what Warne was getting that series. IIRC he broke it again at the Oval with a delivery that turned about 4 feet.

 

[Neil Pickup]

My only exposure to the book is from reading Simon Kuper's Why England Lose & Other Curious Football Phenomena Explained (incidentally a brilliant read, thoroughly recommend it to anyone who loves their football), and the premise of the book seems to be the transformation of a small outfit by rejecting what everyone "knows" about the sport, specifically how the transfer market works. The parallel to Morgan is clear: everyone "knows" that a player with a reasonable at best FC record won't be a success at Test level. The case of Morgan (and Collingwood, Trescothick and Vaughan before him, and conversely, Graeme Hick and Mark Ramprakash) would indicate that the conventional wisdom sorrounding a player's FC record, whilst not wrong, isn't perfect either. Clearly, the England management have seen something about Morgan that they believe makes him suited to Test cricket. It happens to a degree in football - Miroslav Klose and Lucas Podolski shouldn't be as good as they are for Germany based on their club careers

Kuper's book is a great read, as is Moneyball. The biggest issue I hold with the parallels drawn between Moneyball and cricket analysis is that Moneyball is built around the analysis of statistics that were ignored, or over/under-valued. Effectively, it boils baseball down to a different tactical business than had been otherwise implemented: Beane wanted batters who took bases, allowed balls, didn't strike-out - grinders and percentage players, rather than the flair players who impress with big hits. There was another analysis with pitchers, but I don't recall it as I don't follow baseball closely enough for the specifics to have had resonance.

It is very tough to replicate this in cricket as players like Vaughan, Collingwood, Trescothick and Morgan do not have any statistics, popular or otherwise, that elevate them above your Hicks and Ramprakashes (and Boparas?) I have tried analysing stats like dot ball percentage, runs in boundaries, or even making up my own stats based on combinations of these, and they have indicated kids who have gone on to really kick on with the bat - but I can't help but thinking I was trying to match the stats to my instincts of the kids who would go on and get runs.

I do think that some of the methodology mentioned in Kuper's book is very astute, and certainly correlates with the way I try to coach the game - I've been playing 4-2-3-1 with the school team for two seasons and will certainly give the book a re-read before the new season in January. Cricket wise I vowed to spend the whole winter working on batting, distilled down to playing off the front foot with a straight bat for the most part, with my County U10s having been sick of losing to everybody everywhere: and we have won four out of five this summer to date.

As for the Welsh question, there is one Welsh sides in the Minor Counties championship - Wales Minor Counties, which is an amalgamation of everywhere else outside of Glamorgan. At youth level, Wales is split into nine regions, who play between one another with occasional forays across the border for the honour of being battered - Tom Scriven of Berkshire U10 took 183* off Gwent last year, and they're usually one of the stronger groups. North East Wales lost to Shropshire by 9 wickets last weekend, with the Englishmen taking 12/35 overs to knock off their chase - and then two days later Shropshire were on the end of a similar hiding from Oxfordshire (this time the total was knocked off with 19 overs to spare). There is also a combined Wales side that play friendlies at U11 and upwards, and in the U13, U15 and U17 competitions - where they won the U15 title in 2007 and 2009 and are currently topping the South West group of the U13 comp this year.

 

[Top_Cat]

Gotta love the breezy way Morgan just keeps bashing runs against everyone. Would be one of the toughest players to bowl to in world cricket right now; if you had to, where would you bowl to at least shut him up?

Obviously not being from that part of the world I'm no expert on the bloke but am I right in assuming his cheeky, innovative style is a relatively new thing for him?