• 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* 2nd Test at Lord's

Stapel

Stapel

International Regular
-On England's unchanged 13 squad: well...., as surprising as the outcome of the sum of 1 and 1.

-On Starc: I find it somewhat worrying. Professional top sport (hmmm, even amateur crap level tbh) is the first and foremost thing in the world, to be the victim of opportunistic decisions. Is he really 100% fit? Or 90%, and consequently be half useful and break down? Anyways, the whole prospect of Ryan Harris taking Cook first ball, Mitchel Johnson scaring the bejesus out of any English batsman, and Starc swinging into Ian Bell's off stump, seems so distant now, yet being just a week old.

-On Watson: you can't drop a genuine all-rounder after scoring 30 and 20. Not for his batting. Both LBW-reviews were really must-do's, given the match situation. One might argue it's brave he did so.

-On Haddin: **** off!
 
theegyptian

theegyptian

International Vice-Captain
Doubt Rashid would have made the squad if Yorkshire were playing but as they're not I don't mind him staying in the squad, even though I can't see there being any chance of him playing. Any kind of injury to the fast bowlers will be interesting for England though. They've let Finn play this current Middlesex 4 day game which will ends Tuesday before the Thursday start of the test match - so far from ideal for him to play the test match.
 
Howe_zat

Howe_zat

Audio File
I'd completely forgotten Finn was still around the squad. I'd probably have tried to get Plunkett back as the reserve seamer and test him out in the nets.
 
P

Pothas

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
If the worst possible thing happened and Anderson got injured I would just call for Sidebottom. Yeah sure he is retired and all but who cares.
 
weldone

weldone

Hall of Fame Member
Furball said:
Are you actually watching the series?
Click to expand...
Yes I am. Stokes hasn't been a real strike bowler so far. With the bat, he has made a 50 and a 40 in the test, and has been clean bowled by Starc in both the innings. Stokes is a decent cricketer, made a match-changing century against NZ, and I'm sure Australia was always expecting to see this much performance from him. So, I don't see why they should be more worried now.
 
9

91Jmay

International Coach
weldone said:
Yes I am. Stokes hasn't been a real strike bowler so far. With the bat, he has made a 50 and a 40 in the test, and has been clean bowled by Starc in both the innings. Stokes is a decent cricketer, made a match-changing century against NZ, and I'm sure Australia was always expecting to see this much performance from him. So, I don't see why they should be more worried now.
Click to expand...
He looks in great nick with the bat and was disciplined in spells with the ball. He has been really good so far.
 
weldone

weldone

Hall of Fame Member
91Jmay said:
He looks in great nick with the bat and was disciplined in spells with the ball. He has been really good so far.
Click to expand...
My question is if anybody expected otherwise before the series started. I expected him to play like this. He is a good cricketer. I didn't expect him to play the kind of innings that Root played in the first innings. I didn't expect him to take cheap 5fers. And he isn't doing any of that so far.
 
hendrix

hendrix

Hall of Fame Member
Pothas said:
If the worst possible thing happened and Anderson got injured I would just call for Sidebottom. Yeah sure he is retired and all but who cares.
Click to expand...
I heart sidebottom.

I imagine Woakes would be the best replacement at this point in time.
 
hendrix

hendrix

Hall of Fame Member
weldone said:
My question is if anybody expected otherwise before the series started. I expected him to play like this. He is a good cricketer. I didn't expect him to play the kind of innings that Root played in the first innings. I didn't expect him to take cheap 5fers. And he isn't doing any of that so far.
Click to expand...
I think he could take 5 at Lord's.

Bowled very well against us without any luck at this venue. The way he hits the deck it kinda jumps with the slope and he gets a bit of bounce too. Could be a real threat against the right handers. Particularly Clarke.
 
social

social

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
hendrix said:
I think he could take 5 at Lord's.

Bowled very well against us without any luck at this venue. The way he hits the deck it kinda jumps with the slope and he gets a bit of bounce too. Could be a real threat against the right handers. Particularly Clarke.
Click to expand...
Aside from one spell, he was distinctly average at Cardiff

Oz have more serious things to worry about than Stokes' bowling IMO
 
Burgey

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
ImpatientLime said:
inb4 the only change is siddle for starc

also, am i the only one not quite getting the wood hype yet?
Click to expand...
I like the cut of his jib tbh, but there's a reason why there haven't been many tall blokes with such short, explosive approaches and mixed actions who've lasted. It must place a massive strain on his body to bowl like that.
 
Hurricane

Hurricane

Hall of Fame Member
Burgey said:
I like the cut of his jib tbh, but there's a reason why there haven't been many tall blokes with such short, explosive approaches and mixed actions who've lasted. It must place a massive strain on his body to bowl like that.
Click to expand...
Does he traditionally get through more overs workload wise in FC due to his short run up? ie can he bowl all day. Not directing this at Burgey but his post made me think of the qn.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top