Nintendo
Cricketer Of The Year
I'll delete that bit, got my words a bit jumbled. Shouldn't be typing this while on the treadmillThis is just flat out false dude. People were up in arms here the moment the declaration happened.
I'll delete that bit, got my words a bit jumbled. Shouldn't be typing this while on the treadmillThis is just flat out false dude. People were up in arms here the moment the declaration happened.
That I think you just have to accept though. I think Cummins et al would be even more delighted to see the likes of Crawley, Duckett and Pope - most of whom they were all over 18 months ago - just sitting in and trying to play "normally", because they simply don't have the defensive techniques to withstand bowling of that quality if there's any assistance in the pitch at all (and if there isn't, then why not just attack?). But if they attack then that invites risk and so you just have to accept that there are going to be some dumb looking dismissals every now and then.No doubt England lost because o the 5 or 6 chances we blew.Don’t get me wrong because I still think we throw wickets away with stupid shot selection,The Aussies are quite happy to let us implodez
Sorry for laying into you earlier, hope you have fun hereRe my constant posting
this will subside in the next test
I got a bit excited in this one as I’m new and it’s great to meet everyone
I love the energy and belief each person has in what they are posting
I’m all for it plus a bit of give and take from each other
Let’s hope Lords is as good a game as Edgbaston
Same goes for Head hacking one to midwicket every now and then. Not pretty to watch, but it was the right idea. Just poorly executed.Yeah you just have to accept the dumb shot dismissals as a consequence of bazball.
CondolencesI'll delete that bit, got my words a bit jumbled. Shouldn't be typing this while on the treadmill
An excellent strike-rate; true to Bazball.Bro take a breather, you’ve made like 1.5k posts in 5 days
No problem at allSorry for laying into you earlier, hope you have fun here
Honestly if we're going to go full hindsight bias they shouldn't have taken the new ball at all. It just became too easy to score after that and it's not like they felt they could take "new ball" wickets with slips and gullies; they ended up using exactly the same short ball tactic they were using anyway with the old ball, the only different was that timing was easier.Given the players in the side, I don't think England would have played any better on this pitch with a more conservative batting approach. As we saw, Australia commanded the periods when England were just looking to survive (although obviously the conditions were the biggest factor on day 3). With different players like Hain and Foakes, maybe they would have got away with a draw, but I think Stokes got the most out of the XI. The declaration was the only major tactical decision of Stokes I had a problem with. Even delaying the new ball had some logic to it, even if it ultimately didn't work out.
The OG G.S.K?For context I used to be the one who copped it for spamming tour threads, so I can sympathise
Nah I never posted scores. Just made a **** ton of comments.The OG G.S.K?
It's an interesting point, England are clearly far happier batting second (although the NZ declaration wasn't the issue there, forcing the follow on was). I wonder how this game would've played out if Aus had won the toss.Funny how this is the 2nd time in 3 tests that Eng batted first (bowled vs IRE) and Stokes declared both innings with Root having a not out century, and they lost both
Almost hoping Eng bat first at Lord's with a Root century
I think Aus would have made a biiiiiig score. This pitch on Day 1 was as flat as the Ahemedebad pitch was a few months back and it took a legit masterclass from Ashwin to keep them to "only" 470.It's an interesting point, England are clearly far happier batting second (although the NZ declaration wasn't the issue there, forcing the follow on was). I wonder how this game would've played out if Aus had won the toss.