32nd Match - England v Australia

[Daemon]

Catches dropped doesn't mean much without catches created. I want to find that list of fielding runs conceeded. So far, I'm failing.

Yeah, Afghanistan has only dropped a couple but they’re definitely a pretty shoddy fielding unit and haven’t created that many chances either.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Not sure I really understand the flat track bully stuff in this thread

It's pretty self explanatory. England side is full of batsmen who thrive on flat wickets against mediocre bowling but lack the ability to succeed at a relative level otherwise.

 

[Burgey]

Mate of mine is over in the UK atm with this year's iteration fo the Parra Academy UK tour. They played at Merchant Taylor School yesterday and the facitities are apparently first class. There are about a dozen grounds there, and I think Wales under 19s were playing Mumbai under 19s on the field next to them and Sehwag was there, which made for some good pics for the kids.

Anyway, the head cricket bloke at the school said Australia and England both trained there on the weekend. He said the Australian session was the hardest he'd ever seen as a coach. The Poms had a pick up game of soccer. Draw your own conclusions.

 

[trundler]

All this talk about England having redefined the format is bollocks. They've perfected flat track bullying, sure and that's creditworthy but they're way too one dimensional.

 

[Isura]

Finch
Warner
Smith
SMarsh
Maxwell
Carey
Coulter Nile
Cummins
Starc
Berendorf
Lyon/Zampa

This looks perfect. Although I would not trust zampa in a big match so Lyon all the way.

 

[Gob]

Can't bring explosive Shaun Marsh in without knowing what sort of a form he is in. Team for the last game was ideal no changes needed tbh

They just have to be more flexible with the batting order like sending Smith if the openers put on 100 plus etc.

 

[Prince EWS]

They just have to be more flexible with the batting order like sending Smith if the openers put on 100 plus etc.

Haha when they did this the commentators spent most of the innings completely baffled as to why Khawaja had been selected to bat at number five. They dedicated about an hour to discussing it, totally ignoring that he ****ing hadn't been selected to bat there but circumstances changed the batting order.

They should be ignoring that crap and doing what is best for the team but it's not hard to see how that sort of terrible media 'scrutiny' would put them off.

 

[Burgey]

Agree to an extent, however, you surely want to do what the opposition doesn't want you to. Any opposition team will be relieved to see Ussie walk out instead of Smith. It's that simple. You can't be preoccupied with what might happen down the order in terms of who bats where, when you really need to be backing your best options in at the stage of the game you're faced with. So logic says it has to be Smith, who has a game which allows him to adapt to all sorts of conditions and start against all kinds of bowling, He's basically a complete batsman. If he goes cheaply, Khawaja in after him. If he and the other opener put on a big partnership, you adapt the order accordingly. It's just common sense isn't it?

 

[Prince EWS]

Agree to an extent, however, you surely want to do what the opposition doesn't want you to. Any opposition team will be relieved to see Ussie walk out instead of Smith. It's that simple. You can't be preoccupied with what might happen down the order in terms of who bats where, when you really need to be backing your best options in at the stage of the game you're faced with. So logic says it has to be Smith, who has a game which allows him to adapt to all sorts of conditions and start against all kinds of bowling, He's basically a complete batsman. If he goes cheaply, Khawaja in after him. If he and the other opener put on a big partnership, you adapt the order accordingly. It's just common sense isn't it?

Yeah, but the thing about this is that ideally I don't think Khawaja should be playing if he's not opening, and while he gets away with his flaws to some extent at #3 unless Australia end up 170/0 before a wicket falls, if he's batting four I actually think I'd rather have Marsh. And if Khawaja was dropped you'd get even more over the top media 'scrutiny' about how he'd had an amazing year (opening) and how it was harsh. And probably more Shaun Marsh memes.

Khawaja has to bat three to justify his spot in the side IMO. Or at least be scheduled to bat there. Obviously if there's a really good start then you can just skip him over and ideally not to have use him at all, but if there's an early wicket he has to bat three. If batting Smith at three is better for the side then I'd probably just drop him, harsh as it is.

 

[TheJediBrah]

All this talk becomes irrelevant if the Aus lose an early wicket anyway. Khawaja has only really been an issue because Finch and Warner have been dominating.

 

[stephen]

Yeah and it's not like Khawaja has been terrible or slow regardless of where he's batted. Yeah he's suited to batting up the order but if Warner and Finch are taking 30 overs to get out that usually means Australia is in a great position anyway.

I'd rather the Aus hierarchy form some game plans for Khawaja and Smith based on the match condition (instead of simply trying to keep the left/ right combo going as they appear to be now).

Complaining about Khawaja is overblown imo. Stoinis' batting is more of a concern. He's been pretty good at the death though so it's not like he's a complete passenger.

 

[Burgey]

Yeah, but the thing about this is that ideally I don't think Khawaja should be playing if he's not opening, and while he gets away with his flaws to some extent at #3 unless Australia end up 170/0 before a wicket falls, if he's batting four I actually think I'd rather have Marsh. And if Khawaja was dropped you'd get even more over the top media 'scrutiny' about how he'd had an amazing year (opening) and how it was harsh. And probably more Shaun Marsh memes.

Khawaja has to bat three to justify his spot in the side IMO. Or at least be scheduled to bat there. Obviously if there's a really good start then you can just skip him over and ideally not to have use him at all, but if there's an early wicket he has to bat three. If batting Smith at three is better for the side then I'd probably just drop him, harsh as it is.

Yeah but if it's 2/170 I don't want Khawaja or Marsh going in tbh. I'd rather Carey bat there than either of them on current form, and if it's around the 36-40th over, it's Maxwell time anyway. I know its anathema to standard cricketing thinking, but in a situation where Australia is 2/170 odd, I'm happy if Khawaja/ Marsh comes in at eight in the current line up.

Edit: I'm actually happiest if neither of them gets a hit

 

[TheJediBrah]

Yeah but if it's 2/170 I don't want Khawaja or Marsh going in tbh. I'd rather Carey bat there than either of them on current form, and if it's around the 36-40th over, it's Maxwell time anyway. I know its anathema to standard cricketing thinking, but in a situation where Australia is 2/170 odd, I'm happy if Khawaja/ Marsh comes in at eight in the current line up.

Edit: I'm actually happiest if neither of them gets a hit

I was just about to say exactly that. I don't mind Khawaja in the team because more often than not you are going to lose at least one early wicket. But if we don't then just forget Khawaja and tell him "we don't need you today" and move everyone else up a spot

 

[Burgey]

*Bump*

How good was this game?