-
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 West Indies
- Thread starter Richard
- Start date
Brett Dale
School Boy/Girl Captain
There will be a collapse by England, still they will get near 400.
pup11
International Coach
I think it was really an ordinary decision from Gayle to field first after winning the toss, the pitch is dead and flat, and the best thing to do would have been to bat first and post a huge 1st innings total and hope that the pitch would break-up or something with time and then put England under some pressure.
Good effort from Strauss too, was under some pressure after the debacle in Jamaica, but he made the most of the flat track and lead his team from the front, England should now be really disappointed if they don't post a 500+ 1st innings total from here.
Good effort from Strauss too, was under some pressure after the debacle in Jamaica, but he made the most of the flat track and lead his team from the front, England should now be really disappointed if they don't post a 500+ 1st innings total from here.
Nate
You'll Never Walk Alone
Written like a novice. Read some of the thread, watch some of the game and get back to us.
four_or_six
Cricketer Of The Year
Yeah, I agree. I though bowling first was a good idea on Friday, but today I think he should have batted. Given everything that had gone on it didn't quite seem like it was WI coming into the game on this huge high, somehow. Also, looks a worse decision in retrospect with those balls shooting through low later on on the first day. That said, it seemed it wasn't just Gayle who read the pitch wrong.
Goughy
Hall of Fame Member
If you choose to bowl and the opposition post a massive score then criticism is wholey deserved.
Should only bowl first on a minefield or conditions are so favourable that the bowlers should run through the oppo. To bowl first for a marginal advantage of because you are not sure of how the track will behave is poor captaincy.
There is litle doubt that WI should have batted first.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Plenty of people saying Gayle "made a mistake". Ridiculous, IMO. I didn't hear so much as one voice suggesting batting first was a good idea yesterday. Any fool can be wise after the event. A decision which doesn't pay-off and a bad decision are two totally different things.
Even more stupid than the criticism of Hussain for putting Australia in at The 'Gabba in 2002/03.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
You were saying that yesterday morning were you?
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
TBH, I was. I can see why they bowled but there's really no way I would have done anything but bat upon winning the toss.
Goughy
Hall of Fame Member
I wasnt on here during the first session. But yeah, I wondered why he bowled. You have to have a massive reason not to bat first. That didnt exist.
Nate
You'll Never Walk Alone
Far out, the point is everyone thought it was going to be seaming around, Strauss would have done the same thing at the toss, but it wasn't. It's not some huge stupid decision.
Craig
World Traveller
How did Benn go? I only saw a little bit when Strauss smashed him for a six and and a dlog sweep for a four over mid wicket in and around his 50? I have been impressed with him and I certainly rate him. He would have to be a threat in India, with his height and if there is any bounce would make life difficult for batsmen. That and I think he is quite economical on the whole.
pup11
International Coach
I think if not anything the history of ARG pitch should have been taken into account, its been infamous for being flat and docile, and even if both captains felt the ball might seam early on, they should have been confident enough to back their bastmen to survive that early period.
As it turned out the pitch had no demons in it, and due to the lack of time that the groundsman had to prepare this pitch, there is a very good chance that the pitch might not last through the 5 days, and it might start playing tricks as the game progresses, and some signs were already visible yesterday by the end of day's play.
I am not only criticising Gayle for this decision, Strauss too pretty much would have done the same thing had he won the toss, so both teams failed to read the conditions, but its Gayle who won the toss, and its his team that's lagging behind in this game now.
Manee
Cricketer Of The Year
Was talking to my cousin who said that he played a fair bit for Bromley and impressed with his swing.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
I think you have to have reason. I disagree completely with the "bat first and then decide otherwise" mantra - it's 100% based on outdated logic IMO. In any case, there was indeed considerable evidence that fielding first would be a large advantage. Every single person consulted on the issue seemed sure the pitch would do plenty. Perfectly enough for my money to merit trying fielding first.
In any case, it's exceptionally unlikely to matter. This pitch seems to fit the Geoff Boycott mantra: I think I'd like a bat on this pitch, I don't mind whether it's first or second, I just think I'd like a bat.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
There's a difference between backing your batsmen and giving them an impossible task. There's no way there could be any ARG history taken account of. The ground had essentially become disused - no-one imagined it was going to have another cricket match played at it. If the pitch looks like it might do plenty early and not much later, fielding first is the only decision that makes sense.