• 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 Pakistan 2024

wpdavid

wpdavid

Hall of Fame Member
LangleyburyCCPlayer said:
For a long time, the run rate was below 5, it was only when the score became a ginormous one and Pakistan bowlers were shattered that the run rate cranked up
Click to expand...
Not absolutely sure about that. It wasn't far short of 5 an over when Crawley was dismissed and I think it was exactly 5 an over when Ducket went. It was fractionally under 5 an over at the end of Day 3 and then, as you say, they really went for it on Day 4. But most of the time they seemed able to score at around 5 an over without doing anything risky. Maybe Duckett's innings was the one exception, as he looked fairly streaky in the highlights.

At lunch on Day 4 I did wonder if we'd have two triple-hundreds in the same innings. Root only needed another 40 or so, and I fancied Brook to add the 82 still needed before tea. In the event, Joe let the side down badly on that score. But I did wonder how many test innings have seen two triples.
 
L

LangleyburyCCPlayer

State Regular
wpdavid said:
Not absolutely sure about that. It wasn't far short of 5 an over when Crawley was dismissed and I think it was exactly 5 an over when Ducket went. It was fractionally under 5 an over at the end of Day 3 and then, as you say, they really went for it on Day 4. But most of the time they seemed able to score at around 5 an over without doing anything risky. Maybe Duckett's innings was the one exception, as he looked fairly streaky in the highlights.

At lunch on Day 4 I did wonder if we'd have two triple-hundreds in the same innings. Root only needed another 40 or so, and I fancied Brook to add the 82 still needed before tea. In the event, Joe let the side down badly on that score. But I did wonder how many test innings have seen two triples.
Click to expand...
Root’s continuing inability to turn pretty little 200s into 300s is a worry!
 
Howe_zat

Howe_zat

Audio File
wpdavid said:
Anyway, it doesn't look as if there have ever been two triple hundreds in the same test innings.
en.wikipedia.org

List of Test cricket triple centuries - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

Maybe yesterday was as close as there's ever been.
Click to expand...
This came up in the thread yesterday - the closest we've ever come is Jayawardene and Sangakkara putting on the record stand against SA in 2006, when Mahela hit 374 and Sanga a disappointing 287. The latter is the highest ever second-high score in an innings.
 
GIMH

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Seen talk of Stokes for Pope here and elsewhere and I just don’t see it. He tonned up in the match before this.

If Stokes is fit he comes in for a bowler surely. Carse or Woakes.
 
L

LangleyburyCCPlayer

State Regular
GIMH said:
Seen talk of Stokes for Pope here and elsewhere and I just don’t see it. He tonned up in the match before this.

If Stokes is fit he comes in for a bowler surely. Carse or Woakes.
Click to expand...
Woakes you’d think, think Woakes would have been Anderson’ed already if he couldn’t bat, think he bowled dutifully, but Carse’s extra pace does give him that extra dimension (and it’s not as if he can’t bat neither)
 
mackembhoy

mackembhoy

International Regular
GIMH said:
Seen talk of Stokes for Pope here and elsewhere and I just don’t see it. He tonned up in the match before this.

If Stokes is fit he comes in for a bowler surely. Carse or Woakes.
Click to expand...
I'd be surprised if Stokes is fit enough to bowl as you then can't rely on Root as the fifth bowler.

So logic would dictate Pope the one to drop out.

However if Stokes is fit to bowl then it's a different story.
 
Line and Length

Line and Length

Cricketer Of The Year
mackembhoy said:
I'd be surprised if Stokes is fit enough to bowl as you then can't rely on Root as the fifth bowler.

So logic would dictate Pope the one to drop out.

However if Stokes is fit to bowl then it's a different story.
Click to expand...
He is as reliable as Bashir. Stokes in for Bashir could be a viable option.
 
GIMH

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Line and Length said:
He is as reliable as Bashir. Stokes in for Bashir could be a viable option.
Click to expand...
Couldn’t be asking Root to bowl after he’s batted 7 hours or whatever it was though. No coincidence his only recent Medicare series with the bat in recent memory saw him bowling a ****load.
 
GIMH

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
By my reckoning, England will win the next five matches and it will mean only the ludicrous over rate penalties denies us our rightful place in the WTC Final

The WTC is about as prestigious as the Cheshire County League 2nd XI 3rd division title, but still a robbery
 
Hungry Llama

Hungry Llama

U19 Debutant
Brook av in UK 38, abroad 111, that must be the biggest home/away difference ever for an england batter or any batter whos played more than 10 tests [excluding milburn who only had 1 match away].

Cant see them dropping a spinner if the next pitch is a turner, so if Stokes does play it will have to be as 3rd seamer, which is a gamble do they really have to take when theyr 1-0 up?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top