** CWXI Tour of India **

[Travis_Teh]

I would just like to disagree with a lot that you have said, but here is the reasoning.

Then either side starts crumbling faster..

That would be less realistic... we are playing a test match here... they wouldnt go for that many runs at the start ie Indian bowlers vs a team like bangladesh and bangladesh wouldnt get that many chances at the start either..

Sorry, I just can't understand this at all. Isn't the entire GOAL of having a new ball in your pacemans hand to take wickets with as much aggression (if they are indeed a quick) as they can muster?
Isn't it when they DO have stamina, and they DO have the sheer intensity to go 110% at the opening batsmen to try and rip through them?
Your trying to tell me that an opening bowler with a new pill would not bowl at top pace, top intensity in their first spell, as that is unrealistic??
As I said, who cares if they go at 4 an over, with that new ball you got to try and take those wickets or suffer later.
I think i've been watching the wrong cricket

If we had max aggression we would have teams crumbling even faster in the lower order.. and that doesnt happen in test cricket where after a day or 2 of bowling , the bowlers can sum up to have max aggression.. but they certainly bowl with a lot of heart which is a low aggression scale.

Not sure if I agree with that either. Last time I saw, when the tail is in, the bowling team throw everything they have at them to get them out, then if -that- doesn;t work (atleast once yeah) then sure they sit back a little more defensively.

Seems to be a lot of conservative cricket in my opinion

(No offence is meant by these posts by the way, clarifying)

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

I'm inclined to agree with Travis_Teh here. A new ball spell in a test match would almost always be at full intensity. Think about it, a test usually starts with a heavy slip cordon, most of the field in catching positions, and few if any people on the boundary or down the ground saving runs. It's about taking wickets, not about being economical.

Perhaps some input from Liam on how he sims it, though?

 

[age_master]

i think that the main thing that Lord is trying to get across here is that, due to the sim that we are using if you play to agressivley the games tend to a) get very one sided and/or b) tend to be over very quickly. and he is trying to sim it to produce more realistic results.

NOW, any further comments about this matter should either go in email to the board, or if you want you can create a thread in the PA area of the forum. NOT in this thread

thanks.

 

[marc71178]

i think that the main thing that Lord is trying to get across here is that, due to the sim that we are using if you play to agressivley the games tend to a) get very one sided and/or b) tend to be over very quickly. and he is trying to sim it to produce more realistic results.

Couldn't disagree more - and I've used the sim a hell of a lot.

 

[Neil Pickup]

I would just like to disagree with a lot that you have said, but here is the reasoning.





Sorry, I just can't understand this at all. Isn't the entire GOAL of having a new ball in your pacemans hand to take wickets with as much aggression (if they are indeed a quick) as they can muster?
Isn't it when they DO have stamina, and they DO have the sheer intensity to go 110% at the opening batsmen to try and rip through them?
Your trying to tell me that an opening bowler with a new pill would not bowl at top pace, top intensity in their first spell, as that is unrealistic??
As I said, who cares if they go at 4 an over, with that new ball you got to try and take those wickets or suffer later.
I think i've been watching the wrong cricket



Not sure if I agree with that either. Last time I saw, when the tail is in, the bowling team throw everything they have at them to get them out, then if -that- doesn;t work (atleast once yeah) then sure they sit back a little more defensively.

Seems to be a lot of conservative cricket in my opinion

(No offence is meant by these posts by the way, clarifying)

Complete agreement. When Harmo had the WI 30-5, what did we do? Seven slips. Get some perspective. Play the sim to win.

 

[thewizard1o1]

Complete agreement. When Harmo had the WI 30-5, what did we do? Seven slips. Get some perspective. Play the sim to win.

I agree, what team wins by waiting for the other side to fight back? Its not like there arn't innings victorys the way its done at the moment. But whatever happens GO CW!

 

[lord_of_darkness]

Originally Posted by age_master
i think that the main thing that Lord is trying to get across here is that, due to the sim that we are using if you play to agressivley the games tend to a) get very one sided and/or b) tend to be over very quickly. and he is trying to sim it to produce more realistic results.

Couldn't disagree more - and I've used the sim a hell of a lot.

That is exactly what my explanation was meant to mean... thanks age.. and as marc said with his use of the sim.. and liam and me have likewise experimented with the sim lots.. and this is the only way to come to some kind of normality..even though it doesnt sound like it..

End of discussion regarding this here aswell.. as said anything else should be directed to the board by email.. or someone create a new super sim

 

[marc71178]

Erm Lord, I said I couldn't disagree more - so how does that back you up?

You can't just sweep something like this under the carpet like that.

 

[roseboy64]

He's not sweeping it under the carpet just transferring it to another medium of discussion.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

CW XI 4th Test XII

PE Young
H Moerk +
BJ Goff *
AP Cloete
CR Butler
DA Kearsley
MJ Robbins
LA Camps
DP Richards
KS Wright
NS Pickup

12th Man: S Bhatia

Unfortunately Bhatia ends his career where he spent most of it, as the 12th Man.

Kearsley and Robbins are recalled, as they add solidity with the bat and some useful tidy seam, whilst Moerk forcibly returns to the top of the order. There was a consideration of perhaps Cloete filling the role, but the realization was that Cloete, unlike Moerk, is not a long term solution at the top.

Wright remains as the sole specialist seamer, whilst Pickup and Richards hold their places in the spin department. Camps bats a spot down and fills in as the second seam option. Goff/Cloete/Butler are maintained, whilst Young holds his number 1 spot.

 

[age_master]

NOW, any further comments about this matter should either go in email to the board, or if you want you can create a thread in the PA area of the forum. NOT in this thread

*clears throat*

 

[marc71178]

He's not sweeping it under the carpet just transferring it to another medium of discussion.

Saying a discussion should end by completely misinterpreting a post suggests other wise...

 

[marc71178]

*clears throat*

If people wish to discuss it, then they have a right to discuss it. As the discussions have started in this thread, why should they move?

 

[age_master]

If people wish to discuss it, then they have a right to discuss it. As the discussions have started in this thread, why should they move?

because this is not the appropriate place to discuss it?

 

[David]

A little surprised that Rose or I weren't called up to replace Bhatia....

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

The tactic decided was to drop a bowler and play a batsman.

 

[David]

The tactic decided was to drop a bowler and play a batsman.

Oh, I understood the reasoning, I was just a bit surprised is all.

 

[roseboy64]

I'm with you there Dave. Still here supporting the team anyway. Hopefully I'll get a game and more in the one dayers. Good luck guys.

 

[Simon]

what a disapointment, very short sighted move imo...

 

[lord_of_darkness]

^ simon brah stay strong.. its only the bottom of the parabola right now.. its gonna go back up..