as mentioned a few times, those who chose to bat have so far lost every time - dutch may buck that trend even if it is only P4 L4.South Africa won two games convincingly battling first. And choked the only time they chased and that too a modest total against a minnow. And when your batting is relative light today (England's), it makes no sense for them to chase and also because of what happened againsg Afghanistan..
Obsession of teams to continue to blindly choose to bowl first is getting ridiculous imo.
might already be in sight of too big of a target, Coetzee hit 22 in their defeat and Maharaj 40. Not sure you can even argue England's bowling is better than dutch based on 3/4 matches so far!Topley getting England back on top with a couple of crucial wickets.
Now SA's weak lower order is exposed, Jansen is handy with the bat but he is batting at least one or two spots too high.
Wood is the only rapid bowler we have.I thought Atkinson was rapid
Bavuma missing and Reeza Hendricks hit 85 on WC debutJust tuning in, and this scorecard has a very BazBall v BazBall look to it. I guess both teams are disgusting and deserve to suffer? Plz advise if I’ve missed something
He's as quick as Archer but not as skilled.Mark Wood has been a big let down for England , was supposed to fill the boots of Archer
He's nothing like Archer. He's been **** all the same.Mark Wood has been a big let down for England , was supposed to fill the boots of Archer
only on the way to the boundary...........! (as in the ball)I thought Atkinson was rapid
He's quicker than Archer. Archer is a mid 80s bowler with occasional 90+ in him.He's as quick as Archer but not as skilled.
Atkinson had barely played a List A game and has looked miles better than Wood.Mark Wood has been a big let down for England , was supposed to fill the boots of Archer
Archer was still better though.He's quicker than Archer. Archer is a mid 80s bowler with occasional 90+ in him.
Wood has all the fastest spells for England.