• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

**Official** England in New Zealand 28 Nov-18 Dec 2024 - 3 Tests

thundaboult

International Debutant
Only seen Foulkes with the white ball and not sure what to make of him. He's short & not that quick but looks awkward somehow.
Definitely needs to bowl a bit quicker to be a threat on most surfaces at intl level. He's mostly high 127-135. But has the tools and time on his side. He will get there.
 

hendrix

Hall of Fame Member
I'll believe that when I see it. Jamieson has a never-ending list of injuries, and O'Rourke will probably end up being the same. It's the NZ way.
O'Rourke's action and I guess consistency just feels like he might be more robust than Jamieson.

That last test he was still bowling 145 + after 20 overs and it didn't feel like he was pushing it.

I haven't seen that from Jamieson.
 

Zinzan

Request Your Custom Title Now!
It's astonishing just how uncomfortable Conway can look at times for an obviously classy batsman.
 

hendrix

Hall of Fame Member
Yeah, two stress fractures to his back. I honestly doubt he'll play another test, but would love to be wrong.
Man, does anyone know about what exactly the clinical significance of spinal stress fractures is when it comes to fast bowlers?

Like, the amount of times I would even care about an undisplaced back fracture without neurological deficit and even bother with ordering even a plain x-ray in ED is kinda negligible. But these sportsmen get MRIs at the drop of a hate. In normal, every day medicine we would call that over-investigation which is actually straight up dangerous for a regular person.
I wonder to what level it applies to sports people as well?

E.g. I don't know if Shane Bond gets his back fused if he sees an orthopaedic surgeon in the public hospital system. For an every day person this is probably the right call. Not sure if it's truly different for a cricket player.

I doubt we will ever see comprehensive evidence, but here is one I recently found. I suspect if Shane Bond was playing today he might never have had surgery. I know that the idea is that these were non-healing fractures (i.e. not the ones in this study). But what is the actual benefit of surgery here? is there a clinically significant upside?

Participants were elite Australian fast bowlers who sustained a lumbar spine stress fracture confirmed on MRI...

Conclusions
Lumbar spine stress fractures in elite adult fast bowlers are capable of achieving complete bone healing, as demonstrated in the majority of bowlers in this study. Larger fractures, greater bone marrow oedema, and history of previous injury at the same site may require longer healing time which may be monitored with MRI.
 

straw man

Hall of Fame Member
O'Rourke's action and I guess consistency just feels like he might be more robust than Jamieson.

That last test he was still bowling 145 + after 20 overs and it didn't feel like he was pushing it.

I haven't seen that from Jamieson.
There's logic in this and I'd love to believe, but gotta consider the NZ curse - we've never had a consistently fit 140km/h test bowler in our history.
 

hendrix

Hall of Fame Member
Man, does anyone know about what exactly the clinical significance of spinal stress fractures is when it comes to fast bowlers?

Like, the amount of times I would even care about an undisplaced back fracture without neurological deficit and even bother with ordering even a plain x-ray in ED is kinda negligible. But these sportsmen get MRIs at the drop of a hate. In normal, every day medicine we would call that over-investigation which is actually straight up dangerous for a regular person.
I wonder to what level it applies to sports people as well?

E.g. I don't know if Shane Bond gets his back fused if he sees an orthopaedic surgeon in the public hospital system. For an every day person this is probably the right call. Not sure if it's truly different for a cricket player.

I doubt we will ever see comprehensive evidence, but here is one I recently found. I suspect if Shane Bond was playing today he might never have had surgery. I know that the idea is that these were non-healing fractures (i.e. not the ones in this study). But what is the actual benefit of surgery here? is there a clinically significant upside?
by all this I'm saying I have no idea as sports medicine is such a niche field. I just hope that there's a robust level of evidence being applied as there are obvious perverse incentives at play.
 

hendrix

Hall of Fame Member
Will cheating England actually bowl a reasonable over rate this evening?

Doubt it.

Umpires need to have a go at them.
 

_Ed_

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Damn. A couple of those shots almost made me hope Conway was turning a corner.
 

Kirkut

International Regular
This is the thing with bazball, it's entertaining for sure but does end up giving an adequate amount of time to the opponent team to bat long.
 

Top