• 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 Bangladesh Thread

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Top_Cat said:
C7 H8 Cl N3 O4 S2



There you go. :)
Wowee.
And you even got a displayed formula, too.
A fair few functional-groups, there.
Thanks, anyway. Still doesn't help me get much understanding of the thinning of double-chins, but I've never fully understood why any big covalent compound does what it does anyway.:(
I'm no biologist.
 
Last edited:

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
JohnnyA said:
He's another England bowler who has actually gotten worse over the years. I thought spinners were supposed to mature and improve :rolleyes: When he first burst into the team, he spun the ball a lot, and was very aggressive. Then he turned into a negative defensive spinner
I disagree. Croft took 1 for 10 off 3 in his most recent spell, and averaged 28 in the series before that.
Croft has never spun the ball enough to be effective in England - of course he hasn't, he's a fingerspinner - but that shouldn't detract from his performances in more spin-friendly venues. Croft is, IMO, no more or less aggressive than he ever was - it's just not possible to bowl aggressively in England as a fingerspinner, because to bowl aggressively you need to move the ball (in a spinner's case, to turn it). Croft is reasonably accurate and he has done a good job in a containing role, but there's just no place for "containing" bowlers in Test-cricket, IMO. You have to be able to threaten to take wickets in your own right.
 

luckyeddie

Cricket Web Staff Member
Oh the value of an open mind! You of all people, Eddie, I thought would be grown up enough not to resort to petty insults, but I was wrong.

I do not dislike Harmison, but everything I have seen, read, every stat I read, everything I've seen points to the fact that he's a goose who gets a free ride in an England team who arn't strong enough to do what Australia do and pick a young quickie just for the hell of it, regardless of results.

It's interisting how everyone is either ignoring or trying to patch-up the fact that against Test-Class nations he's been dreadful.
Just replying in the correct thread.

I'll put your 'value of an open mind' comment down to the fact that you had a bad day.

Like many people, I have serious misgivings about Steve Harmison. Sure, he's a danger to the square-leg umpire on occasion, but he's taken a few wickets lately.

I certainly wouldn't classify the effort he put in in the first test as a 'free ride' - that kind of comment should be reserved for other players of lesser character (of which there are still some in and around the side).

Anyway, the in-out-in saga regarding his back injury has fallen on 'out' again, so we shall see what happens in the second test. Will his replacements (yes, this will confirm that England go into the game with one spinner only, so two seamers will be called up) go any better? We shall see.

It might be an idea to draft Flintoff into the side. I believe he's there now.
 

Rich2001

International Captain
WOOOHOOO M.Saggers will def' play now :lol: (Fingers crossed)

S.Harmison - OUT - A chance for Rik to see England without Harmy!
1 Spinner - OUT?
R.Clarke - OUT?

Many options have been thrown around with all the above beeing mentioned more than once but who will start tommorow morning

IMO the talk of dropping Clarke for a front-line seamer wont happen now espically if Harmison is out (which from more than one source has been confirmed) England feel his batting will be missed and weaken the batting line up :rolleyes: - Afterall do we really need 5 bowlers to get through this Bangladesh line up! - Just pick Saggers and your fine :P

If Harmison misses out I bet the selectors will refuse to mess with the side to much and leave both spinners in and just bring in Sags or Johny.

M.Trescothick
M.Vaughan (cap)
M.Butcher
N.Hussain
G.Thorpe
C.Read
R.Clarke
G.Batty
A.Giles
M.Saggers ;)
M.Hoggard
 
Last edited:

luckyeddie

Cricket Web Staff Member
Rich2001 said:
S.Harmison - OUT - A chance for Rik to see England without Harmy!
You've got an open mind too, I see:D

Trescothick
Vaughan
Butcher
Hussain
Thorpe
Flintoff (will be Collingwood or Clarke though)
Read
Batty
Johnson
Saggers
Hoggard
 

Rich2001

International Captain
marc71178 said:
Also, Giles is very economical in Tests when he bowls to a plan, so what basis do you have to pick Croft the chicken?
I saw a intresting stat last night that showed Giles is nothing more than a economical bowler in Tests.

Looking at the first choice spinner for every country:

Bowling Avg - Only Zimbabwe's Ray Price has a worse avg @ 47.. but Giles wasn't far behind at a avg of 42/5 (can't remember which)... the closest was nearly 10 points lower in the mid 30's

Strike Rate - A.Giles by far and away the worst strike bolwer in Test cricket with a wicket every 95.7 balls! - That was 20 more than the closest bowler :O

Batting Avg - A.Giles redeems himself by being the 2nd best bat out of the lot with a Test avg of 18ish... Only New Zealand spinner has a better avg.


Talking to Rik last night about this he made a very very valid comment in the Harmison debate... in recent times Marc produced a complete run down of Hamison vs rest... I bet you that if you took Giles out of that Rest side, that they would be far far better and also as a result overtake the Harmison figure.

Strange though you are all calling for R.Croft, but to be fair what has G.Batty done wrong? his bowling well and batting pretty well too.
 
Last edited:

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
Rich2001 said:
Talking to Rik last night about this he made a very very valid comment in the Harmison debate... in recent times Marc produced a complete run down of Hamison vs rest... I bet you that if you took Giles out of that Rest side, that they would be far far better and also as a result overtake the Harmison figure.
The first 5 or 6 matches of his career, Giles didn't play.

But since you asked:

England without Giles or Harmison in Harmison's matches:

124 wickets for 4676 in 1295.5 overs
Average: 37.71 (was 39.59)
Eco: 3.61 (was 3.55)
S/R: 62.71 (was 66.84)

Harmison's obviously remain the same.

So that doesn't really make a big difference!
 

Craig

World Traveller
Marc are you calling Croft a chicken because he didnt tour India? So did you call Caddick a chicken because he didnt go? Croft had a choice and he felt his safety was in danger. I dont think you can have a go at him.
 

Magrat Garlick

Rather Mad Witch
Came into cricinfo at 39.0 ovs - England 129/1, Trescothick out for 60, Vaughan well established at 54* - or so I thought.

40.3 ovs: Butcher gone for 6, bowled by Rafique.
41.3 ovs: Vaughan gone for 54, caught by Mashud off Mortaza.
41.5 ovs: Thorpe out for a duck after facing 2 balls.

Rikki Clarke and Nasser Hussain to save England crumbling at 135/4...good luck guys :rolleyes:
 

Rich2001

International Captain
Well I wake up to R.Clarke saving the day, thought I was still dreaming but obviously not :rolleyes: - Then I see the wonderful sight of M.Saggers on the scorecard and all hope of the ablities of the selctors is returned...scans up and down the scorecard oh R.Johnson in too, which spinner missed out? the one in a dire run of form and having a poor tour Nope the inform guy who's been taking wickets and cheaper too :rolleyes: - I don't know what Giles is doing to keep his place, but his one very very lucky feller IMO or his paying the selctors alot of money.

I personally don't have a problem with Giles when he is bowling well, but this is beonyed a joke the guy has taken like 10 wkts all summer and still keeps his spot (a batsman in a poor run normally last about 2 games) :rolleyes: - Meanwhile G.Batty has been bowling well all tour and has out bowled Giles in wkts and runs conceded in all but one innings I blieve. Let the poor guy get his action sorted in the nets and have a break and bring him back in Sri Lanka.

Oh well after M.Hoggard and M.Saggers have blown the top and middle order away there will be no need for a spinner any-how :D (haha they think iam joking too, just you wait)
 

Rich2001

International Captain
Mr. Ponting said:
Hmmm...

R Clarke 51.:lol:

How is the guy playing? Reckon he'll make a century?
Admitty his always been in at a tricky situation but he bats way to slow in Tests last Test he hit like 20 from 92 and today is 51 (121) in a p/ship of 92 (262).

Wont be anywhere near a 100 before about Tea tommorow at this rate :)
 

luckyeddie

Cricket Web Staff Member
Rich2001 said:
Admitty his always been in at a tricky situation but he bats way to slow in Tests last Test he hit like 20 from 92 and today is 51 (121) in a p/ship of 92 (262).

Wont be anywhere near a 100 before about Tea tommorow at this rate :)
Clarke in county cricket goes along at a very good clip - in his test innings so far he has come in at very awkward situations with the 'illustrious' upper middle order (AKA 'losers') having been blown away by the sensational Bangladeshi attack:D.

The evening session was interesting while not exactly gripping - but the way I see it, 132-4 is a losing position and 237-4 is a platform of some potential.

No criticism of Clarke today is valid at all.

Oh my God, I've just defended Rikki twice in a series. Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse to appear in 5....4....3....
 

Rik

Cricketer Of The Year
luckyeddie said:
I'll put your 'value of an open mind' comment down to the fact that you had a bad day.
If you want to know, the last one was last Thursday and the previous one was 2 Saturdays before that...
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Well, having finally managed to wake-up in time and not have to leave before the end on the same day, I have watched my first full day this series.
And an interesting one at that. Trescothick receives his customary luck, Vaughan puts away the rubbish offered to him by Rehman and Haque jnr.
Then Mahmud tries something (I think - we don't know - this may just have been poor bowling and poor batting) to Trescothick that is hardly ever tried - when he's flying along, bowl way outside his off-stump. He can never resist a drive for long, and with his perminant lack of foot-movement one's bound to go in the air before long at all. All you've got to do then is get someone there to catch it, and hope they do. At the second attempt, Rehman did.
Maybe, as I say, I'm blowing this out of all proportion and it was just poor bowling and poor batting, but if it was thought-out I commend Khaled very much.
On his thought, that is, not the bowling - bowling two feet outside off isn't exactly difficult, even I could do that. Do not get the idea for a minute that I think it was good bowling, just clever to this batsman.
And after this pandemonium of Butcher somehow contriving to fail for the 3rd innings in a row against not-exactly-difficult bowling, Vaughan playing a now-customary nick to an fullish away-swinger and Thorpe making an inexplicable mistake (I never, in my life, thought I'd see him trying to drive his 2nd ball off the back-foot) it needed another rescue mission.
And again Mr. Clarke came-up trumps. A tentative moment or two, especially against the might of Alok Kapali, but once again he has allayed my fears that he is too aggressive for Test-cricket - he is clearly perfectly capable of assessing a situation and, more importantly, playing to that assessment.
Nasser did OK, too, but how he escaped 2 chances in 4 runs... one straightforward-ish return-catch and one easy slip chance that was ignored...
Well, he can count his blessings and he'd better make them count, I can tell you.
I really hope Clarke makes at least 66 and gets his average for his first series up to 40.
Anyone else notice that this is the first time Vaughan has made a half-century and been dismissed before reaching a one-fifty for 16 Tests?
Anyway, hope Read makes some runs tomorrow (unless Nasser and Rikki bat all the rest of the innings).
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
Rich2001 said:
Admitty his always been in at a tricky situation but he bats way to slow in Tests last Test he hit like 20 from 92 and today is 51 (121) in a p/ship of 92 (262).

Wont be anywhere near a 100 before about Tea tommorow at this rate :)
It's a 5 day game Rich, and his knock is exactly what was needed - had he gone early, we were in trouble with Read, Giles and the tail.
 

Top