Would certainly make interesting viewing. Next ashes GIMH vs Watson (Clarke to get the sack after they lose to us this xmas), now there would be a series played in good spirits
!
-
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* First Test at Lord's
- Thread starter James
- Start date
!me too!
Furball
Evil Scotsman
Leave the attempts at stand-up comedy to Manee.Would certainly make interesting viewing. Next ashes GIMH vs Watson (Clarke to get the sack after they lose to us this xmas), now there would be a series played in good spirits
Son Of Coco
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Can't really assume anything past what actually happened though. Tremlett & co might have added extra runs...they might've gone out on consecutive balls.
As others have said, the problem lies with being 72/5...and you can't make declarations (o otherwise) thinking "what happens if we end up 72/5 in the second innings".
Edit: Still don't think England have any massive problems just yet. It is more interesting than it looked a few hours ago though.
Last edited:
slowfinger
International Debutant
Son Of Coco
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I'd make an early declaration on the driving lesson too if I were you.
Furball
Evil Scotsman
Point is, the least amount of runs that England would have scored would still have been 478. With the way Pietersen was going, it was well worth the risk.
Manee
Cricketer Of The Year
You mock me and laugh at me now, but when I'm headlining Live at the Apollo, no one is going to be laughing!
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
DWTA completely. Obviously it shouldn't be a main consideration, but there was nothing to gain by declaring anyway so it was just an unnecessary risk. The possibly of being outplayed as the Test turns is always something that should be considered.
You can't make declarations just assuming you're going to play well for the rest of the match. Test cricket doesn't work like that.
benchmark00
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Anyone wanna give me cliffs on this thread? What've I missed?
Furball
Evil Scotsman
Wasn't mocking you, that wasn't what I was trying to say at all. Been meaning to check the link in your sig anyways.
Manee
Cricketer Of The Year
Yeh, I know, just wanted to use that joke
NUFAN
Y no Afghanistan flag
Yeah but it works the other way too. If they batted reasonably this innings and India manage to draw the Test 8 or 9 down, people will complain that they batted too long in the first innings.
5/260 still sees England in the box seat, but with 170 overs still left to be bowled in this Test it really could go any way. Awesome start to the series so far.
Scaly piscine
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
There would have been another 8-9 overs to bat (given ~10 minutes lost through change of innings and India faced 6 overs that evening), in which India were down to their lesser bowlers, only PK wasn't getting smashed and he'd just finished. Another 50-60 runs was a definite possibility without anything extreme happening. That number of runs has taken the best part of 25 overs to achieve in the 3rd innings. It was always going to take a good 20 overs even with normal play (which it was up to the collapse).
This is why the declaration was monumentally stupid. There's enough evidence of this already that the management should of figured this out by now. Ponting did some even more extremely moronic declarations, later got skittled for 150-160 and nearly lost as a result of it and that was at home against the West Indies I believe. You significantly increase the chance of losing. You don't increase the chance of forcing a result because in the end you lose time in your next innings getting the runs you should have scored in your first innings. In this era I don't think batting a team out of a game is a bad thing, sides aren't that used to just cutting out risks and batting out for a draw and that would help bowlers maintain attacking lines/lengths anyway.
In this era, unless you've lost huge chunks of play to rain there's almost always value in batting well beyond 500. Most of the time you'll need extra runs, once in a while you'll beat a side so comprehensively it won't matter.
Furball
Evil Scotsman
What would be the point of that? Just go Mukund, Gambhir, Dravid (WAG), Laxman, Raina, Dhoni, Tendulkar.
grecian
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Disagree, totally, KP and Tremlett should have just been told to give it a whack, chances are they'd of got out or added 30 or 40 more quickly, which could have made all the difference. I don't much like declarations. I said it before the 5-60 odd too. Always likely with England after all, as I'm sure you know.
Uppercut
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Exactly. There's no good reason not to take the full range of possibilities into account when making a decision.