**Official** England in Bangladesh 2016

[BoyBrumby]

In all fairness Woakes would be in the XI for his bowling alone.

Proved a lot of folk wrong, myself definitely included.

 

[grecian]

That's the trade off innit? Both these blokes have struggled to make an impact with the ball (their primary role) but here they are making up for it with the bat.

Dunno, how long this will work for us, and against (no offence) better opponents if it will. But I do like that you can never write us off until you've got the last wicket.

Well woakes has been doing it with the ball for the last bit as well.

Our problems this series is the top order, talking about anything else is a bit pointless. Yes some of the bowling has been uninspired, but other bits (mainly Stokes, but a little from Moeen and broad) has been inspired, if you keep that up you'll do okay, but if you keep batting like our top order has you will start failing miserably sooner rather than later.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

170-1 versus 144-8 which team gets the first innings lead?

Brilliant partnership by Woakes and Rashid.

Rashid to bat at 4 instead of Ballance in India?

Mushy has been awful since lunch with the choice of bowlers.

 

[Howe_zat]

Lead!

If I went back to the start of the year I think I'd easily find people saying that Woakes should never play for England again.

 

[GIMH]

That's the trade off innit? Both these blokes have struggled to make an impact with the ball (their primary role) but here they are making up for it with the bat.

Dunno, how long this will work for us, and against (no offence) better opponents if it will. But I do like that you can never write us off until you've got the last wicket.

Jeez mate, 3-30 isn't making an impact with the ball?

 

[GIMH]

Lead!

If I went back to the start of the year I think I'd easily find people saying that Woakes should never play for England again.

After getting out to that ball he probably shouldn't

 

[flibbertyjibber]

If I went back to the start of the year I think I'd easily find people saying that Woakes should never play for England again.

I was one of them. I'll have evaporated milk on my humble pie.

 

[grecian]

Ahh, easy full-tosses are his weakness.

Or not, that could be big.

 

[Howe_zat]

After getting out to that ball he probably shouldn't

he knew it was a no ball, about at his nipples

 

[GIMH]

After getting out to that ball he probably shouldn't

Or not then.

I think that's a harsh call. Stood completely upright that's not above waist height IMO

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Lucky to get away there.

 

[cnerd123]

The review system is the worst

 

[indiaholic]

This is amazing is what it is. Depth is such a huge advantage for England. You can never rely on a lollapse to get them out because the number of individuals that will need to have a brain fade is too large.

 

[Howe_zat]

FTR it's the point of impact that counts if the batsman is at the crease, not whether the ball would have descended. Woakes' back foot was well in the crease.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Hope the Bangladeshi PM has a nice wahhh about this no-ball too.

 

[GIMH]

FTR it's the point of impact that counts if the batsman is at the crease, not whether the ball would have descended. Woakes' back foot was well in the crease.

Yeah but it's still at waist height if he's stood upright which he's clearly not

 

[cnerd123]

We were 170/1 and they were 150/8

**** this ****

 

[BoyBrumby]

After getting out to that ball he probably shouldn't

Woakesy knows.

Should've been out for the quality of the shot, regardless of the height.

 

[grecian]

FTR it's the point of impact that counts if the batsman is at the crease, not whether the ball would have descended. Woakes' back foot was well in the crease.

You and your knowing the rules, pfft.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Yeah but it's still at waist height if he's stood upright which he's clearly not

Yeah his leg was bent so he wasn't at his full height. I wouldn't have complained had it been given out for that fact.