GIMH
Norwood's on Fire
England bat: 162-2Let's have a wager.
Score at lunch tomorrow
England bat: 135-1
Australia bat 93-3
Australia bat: England 46-1 having removed Oz for 55
England bat: 162-2Let's have a wager.
Score at lunch tomorrow
England bat: 135-1
Australia bat 93-3
I am as big a fan of Bazball as you can find here, but come on mate, that is just corpspeak bs masquerading as sports journalism.'Bazball is not a synonym for witless slogging, it is about taking the field with an uncluttered, fear-free mindset, with licence to find the very best version of yourself, safe in the knowledge that there will be no dressing-room recriminations for failure.'
unless you are Foakes that is'Bazball is not a synonym for witless slogging, it is about taking the field with an uncluttered, fear-free mindset, with licence to find the very best version of yourself, safe in the knowledge that there will be no dressing-room recriminations for failure.'
I know what you mean but what stops sportsmen performing to their full potential is the fear of failure.I am as big a fan of Bazball as you can find here, but come on mate, that is just corpspeak bs masquerading as sports journalism.
And the relevance to this test is .......?Australia have the World's No.1 (Marnus Labuschagne) , No.2 (Steve Smith) and No.3 (Travis) ranked batsmen in the ICC batting rankings going into the Ashes ..
Last time this happened was 1984 for the West Indies when Gordon Greenidge, Sir Clive Lloyd and Larry Gomes held the top 3 rankings respectively.
First time since 1984 a side will field the top 3 ranked batsmen in a test, not hard to understand .And the relevance to this test is .......?
Dunno about hat MG, Sides lose a couple of wickets in the first few overs and they get cautious. Certainly neither side will be 89-0 at lunch.Barring inclement weather there is no way there's less than 90 runs on the scoreboard by lunch.
i bet you would make great friends with GS KohliAnd the relevance to this test is .......?
i bet you would make great friends with GS Kohli
[/QUOTE
Young whippersnapper. Think more Clive LLoyd
,,,,, you were like me and cowering behind the sofaWatching Edgbaston 05 as a warm up. Simply because...
So a meaningless stat then. Exactly the same as pointing out fastest 100 opening partnership or most rums in a test. Irrelevant.First time since 1984 a side will field the top 3 ranked batsmen in a test, not hard to understand .
Challenge acceptedSo a meaningless stat then. Exactly the same as pointing out fastest 100 opening partnership or most rums in a test. Irrelevant.
I'd take any opener ahead of Crawley. No idea which spinner I'd choose so no issues on Mo getting the nod.Not feeling good about Crawley or Ali playing. Neither merit a place in the side, would be happier with someone unproven in either slot.
I've just never liked Mo as a test bowler, especially when it looks like we may need a lot of overs from him. He produces the magic ball but has never been consistent enough. Can see him getting dominated.I'd take any opener ahead of Crawley. No idea which spinner I'd choose so no issues on Mo getting the nod.
I don't know why you guys insist on bringing 2005 up all the time. Yes, England cheated with their use if Murray Mints to shine the ball. But that is in the past. Let it go!"Ball tampering"
How many rums did he have?Not too sure what challenge you offer. Root, Bairstow and Brook to get more than your 3? Graham Gooch has the most runs in a test. My point was that your srats/rankings are not really relevant. Most "rums" in a test Garry Sobers holds the record