*Official* Second Test (Lord's, London) 28 June–2 July

[Spark]

Yeah but he's still trying to defend balls that wouldn't hit a second set. That, IMO, is what makes him so suspect around off stump still, not so much the cover drive. You're right those that he's a far easier batsman to contain in normal conditions (as opposed to conditions like Ahmedebad) than he was in his pomp.

To be honest he was never really a great square-of-the-wicket offside player anyway IMO; his grip doesn't allow those shots to come naturally to him.

 

[honestbharani]

Yeah but he's still trying to defend balls that wouldn't hit a second set. That, IMO, is what makes him so suspect around off stump still, not so much the cover drive. You're right those that he's a far easier batsman to contain in normal conditions (as opposed to conditions like Ahmedebad) than he was in his pomp.

To be honest he was never really a great square-of-the-wicket offside player anyway IMO; his grip doesn't allow those shots to come naturally to him.

I was watchin the 2014 BG series highlights and there were a lot of cuts and sweeps tbh. And his 2016 IPL had a lot of that too. I dont think you become a world #1 batsman if you cant play in one of the 6 zones of the ground. He just became a compulsive front foot player and that, added to his grip, has made it almost impossible to play those shot for him. But as a batsman, I think he still has a good enough eye and judgement of length to play those shots. He just has to get himself into better positions and use lesser trigger movements.

 

[Spark]

I was watchin the 2014 BG series highlights and there were a lot of cuts and sweeps tbh. And his 2016 IPL had a lot of that too. I dont think you become a world #1 batsman if you cant play in one of the 6 zones of the ground. He just became a compulsive front foot player and that, added to his grip, has made it almost impossible to play those shot for him. But as a batsman, I think he still has a good enough eye and judgement of length to play those shots. He just has to get himself into better positions and use lesser trigger movements.

No he had those shots, but it was something he had to teach himself. He's spoken in the past IIRC about how those square of the wicket shots on the offside - which is what you really need to neutralise wide-of-off bowling - just aren't natural for him, it's something he he has to force. If he's not feeling as confident in his game as he once did, it stands to reason those would be the first to be shelved.

 

[honestbharani]

No he had those shots, but it was something he had to teach himself. He's spoken in the past IIRC about how those square of the wicket shots on the offside - which is what you really need to neutralise wide-of-off bowling - just aren't natural for him, it's something he he has to force. If he's not feeling as confident in his game as he once did, it stands to reason those would be the first to be shelved.

No, I am not talking about how he learnt to play those. I am talking about how he made changes to his game around 2018 to be very risk free which means he intentionally shelved these shots, not because he could not play them but because he thought he had less chances of getting out if he did not. To me, its fine as a one off or something you do when you are in poor form, like Sachin once did, but to make it a habit and do it when you are in peak form felt a little silly to me. And now it looks like he has lost it totally.

 

[Shady Slim]

Dude... you are like a dog with a bone now with this. Putting 2 boundary riders each on both sides of the wicket when not even a single ball has been bowled is never a good strategy in test cricket. The fact that Australia thought it was, is the proof that they were spooked by Bazball batting. You can argue points no one made but this is just the reality that you fail to accept.

the underlined could just as easily apply to you as it does to me because if it's paining you so much or whatever you're free to stop replying at any time

the bolded again begs the question though. you think the strategy was weak stupid coward ball or what ever, but that doesn't ipso facto mean they were "spooked". what you are really saying is that you disagree with the strategy, and extrapolating from that something that you just can't lmao

 

[honestbharani]

the underlined could just as easily apply to you as it does to me because if it's paining you so much or whatever you're free to stop replying at any time

the bolded again begs the question though. you think the strategy was weak stupid coward ball or what ever, but that doesn't ipso facto mean they were "spooked". what you are really saying is that you disagree with the strategy, and extrapolating from that something that you just can't lmao

When you do something stupid and think its a great strategy when normally you have always shown you are a decent thinker, I think the word spooked is pretty appropriate. And this is my last post on the subject. You can have the last word if you are that desperate.

 

[chunksafc]

Who said all that? “Helping the brand” struck me as the biggest sign of a feeble mind captured by an Anthony Robbins YouTube video

That was copy and pasted directly from Crawley's article, so you have to assume it was him

 

[TheJediBrah]

When you do something stupid and think its a great strategy when normally you have always shown you are a decent thinker, I think the word spooked is pretty appropriate. And this is the last post on the subject. You can have the last word if you are that desperate.

Classic hb is back, was wondering where he'd been

 

[Spark]

That was copy and pasted directly from Crawley's article, so you have to assume it was him

All these articles are ghostwritten tbf.

 

[chunksafc]

All these articles are ghostwritten tbf.

To an extent but the bit imposter was in quotes, which again you assume means he actually said it and not paraphrased

 

[Starfighter]

the underlined could just as easily apply to you as it does to me because if it's paining you so much or whatever you're free to stop replying at any time

I would say much more so. No idea why hb wants to persist with this silly line of reasoning.

 

[Prince EWS]

It has been the opposite. Virat himself has been so spooked by that 2014 tour of England that he has now devised his game exclusively around his cover drive and once he lost touch with the covid break, has found it almost impossible to get it back. He has shelved backfoot shots on the offside against seamers and scoring behin square on the on side against spinners (and even on the off to an extent) off either foot and he is now figuring out how strokeless he can be when his scoring zones are cut off and the lengths and lines are targetted either outside off or into the body from the spinners.

IIRC he made most of these changes around 2018 for that entire season of SEA tours for India and he has not been the same batsman since. But the problem with figuring out success of such strategies is that if you look at just scores and results, he did have a great 2018 and 2019. But its evident to anyone who follows him and Indian cricket seriously that the changes that have cost him his game right now started back in 2018.

So good.

 

[Burgey]

That was copy and pasted directly from Crawley's article, so you have to assume it was him

Sad

 

[mustardcharlie]

Who is Virat Kohli? Some new Eng/Aus spin bowler called up? Please explain
Of the 23 pages on this thread, about 20 are absolute tosh with no relevance the Lords test.

Can we discuss this cricket? Teams - Who should/will be in who out? Umpires? Weather? Moeen's finger etc.

 

[Victor Ian]

England are going to smash Australia in this test. We have 1 batsman who can't bazball it if his life depended on it.

 

[Ashes81]

It'll be interesting to see if Aus adopt the sweeper tactics in this test.

You could argue as they won the test, why change. However, I'm not sure it particularly worked. Yes it cut down the boundary count but we still scored more or less 400 in the day.

What it also does is release the pressure on the batsmen. We scored loads of singles that a more orthodox field would have stopped. You can then build pressure on our batters to try to get them to play a false shot.

I think 1st day of the test, you don't want to be handing the initiative to the opposition and the sweeper does that.

 

[Burgey]

It'll be interesting to see if Aus adopt the sweeper tactics in this test.

You could argue as they won the test, why change. However, I'm not sure it particularly worked. Yes it cut down the boundary count but we still scored more or less 400 in the day.

What it also does is release the pressure on the batsmen. We scored loads of singles that a more orthodox field would have stopped. You can then build pressure on our batters to try to get them to play a false shot.

I think 1st day of the test, you don't want to be handing the initiative to the opposition and the sweeper does that.

Maybe, and I know it’s anathema to England these days - maybe they’ll assess the conditions and set their plans accordingly instead of just being one dimensional and not adapting to what’s in front of them.

 

[Michelle Fivefer]

England have also not added a wicketkeeper to their squad. Bairstow missed too many chances at Edgbaston, England need a reliable keeper who can also bat well.

They have a reliable keeper but they just don’t pick him.

 

[honestbharani]

I think Bairstow should be given more than one game before being judged as a keeper as it was an extremely long lay-off.

That said, the idea of picking both Foakes and Bairstow should have always merited more consideration than it seemed to do from the England management.

 

[Michelle Fivefer]

Who is Virat Kohli? Some new Eng/Aus spin bowler called up? Please explain
Of the 23 pages on this thread, about 20 are absolute tosh with no relevance the Lords test.

Can we discuss this cricket? Teams - Who should/will be in who out? Umpires? Weather? Moeen's finger etc.

I don’t want to hear any more about Moeen’s finger, thanks.