mackembhoy
International Regular
Which is wishIn fairness to that guy, actual Ben Duckett looks like Ben Duckett from Wish
Which is wishIn fairness to that guy, actual Ben Duckett looks like Ben Duckett from Wish
An argument can be made that Kuldeep's 97 runs were significantly more impactful that Stokes' 199 runs this series.Stokes did score 199 runs to Kuldeep's 97 so cool or otherwise runs matter more than BF and SR in Tests
That Kudeep scored 97 runs off six innings at 16.17 per innings to Stokes' 199 off 10 at 19.90 per innings is the more worrying fact - for Stokes.... (and England)
**** off. Stokes 80 in the first test was more impactful than kuldeeps whole series with the bat.An argument can be made that Kuldeep's 97 runs were significantly more impactful that Stokes' 199 runs this series.
Nah. In the context of India’s 1st innings lead, it wasn’t all that impactful. That was single-handedly won on the back of Pope’s freak knock and India’s ineptitude chasing in the 4th innings.**** off. Stokes 80 in the first test was more impactful than kuldeeps whole series with the bat.
This doesn't make any sense. If Stokes doesn't make that first innings 80 then India's first innings lead would have been even bigger and England's chances of winning even lower.Nah. In the context of India’s 1st innings lead, it wasn’t all that impactful. That was single-handedly won on the back of Pope’s freak knock and India’s ineptitude chasing in the 4th innings.
But then from your perspective no runs are valuable except the second innings?From that perspective all runs made by everyone in both innings were super-impactful. Even Stokes’ 6 in the 2nd innings was so valuable given the small margin of England’s victory.
Correct! In a game decided by small margins, small things count. Big things count a lot.From that perspective all runs made by everyone in both innings were super-impactful. Even Stokes’ 6 in the 2nd innings was so valuable given the small margin of England’s victory.
Yeah especially when batsmen are set. I mean, look, I am not against the odd funky declaration. But for me, the Faf declaration in that day/night game made a bit more sense than Stokes' declaration in that Ashes first test.This is why I always get really frustrated by premature first innings declarations unless there are really specific tactical reasons like the night session of a D/N Test and you know it's going to hoop around compared to batting on until the next day. In a game of small margins, all runs count equally on the scoreboard, so you want to maximise the profit you obtain out of the time when batting is easiest and bowling is at its worst.
I know you are replying him angrily and you are partly right but Kuldeep’s partnership with Jurel in 4th Test while IND were 170/7 was the key to reducing first innings deficit to 45 runs .**** off. Stokes 80 in the first test was more impactful than kuldeeps whole series with the bat.
Don’t be a sore winner. Series is done and dusted . Let this thread die peacefullyThat test was won because of bridging down the first innings lead to under 50 and Ashwin's two bouncy unplayable top spin deliveries back to back to dismiss Ducket and Pope before they could settle. Rohit tossing the ball to Ashwin set the tone. Early in the innings to a 500 club bowler, the bazballers were caught lacking technique in defence. I could see a fear in the eyes of the English batsmen like it was snakes in the pitch but they were playing in fair well curated pitches actually. The sheer suoremacy of Indian bowlers skittled and obliterated the puny vulnarable English line up.
Pretty sure its an Indian sounding multi of Burgey.. So much England hate.Don’t be a sore winner. Series is done and dusted . Let this thread die peacefully
It's almost certainly someone from India.Pretty sure its an Indian sounding multi of Burgey.. So much England hate.