-
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* Second ODI in Brisbane
- Thread starter James
- Start date
- Status
benchmark00
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I've made a dick load of posts on this topic, but seriously, why teams don't isolate one section of the ground and bowl to it (I.e. Full and outside off) is just amateurish. I can't believe it's just a bowler wilting under the pressure, it must be that they just don't talk about it at training with their plans.
NUFAN
Y no Afghanistan flag
No, but we all remember Forkers!
social
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
vic_orthdox
Global Moderator
They remember. They just tighten up and can't hit them.
andyc
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Yep. They're done for this tour, stick a forkers in them.
Exactly what I came here to say. The lost art of the yorker is my hobby horse and I'm not jumping off it any time soon.
I don't remember Fawkner scooping too many of his hundred in India, yet England bowl the same length he clobbered over there, not yorkers. Absolutely brain dead and deserved to lose.
SOLID MATTIC
Cricket Spectator
One day we will stop bowling length balls at the death...
One day...
One day...
vic_orthdox
Global Moderator
Stokes bowled a couple of good ones, in particular the second ball of the second last over, you reckon he wasn't trying to do it again afterwards?
Scaly piscine
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Daft thing is that's exactly what England did when they actually won something (World T20). But then they had a good captain (Collingwood) instead of Cook who's completely clueless.
Cook's plan seems to be surprise the batsmen by bowling the same bowlers over and over and over and over again, spread the field out and bowl a variety.
I don't reckon they are, a lot of the time. Bresnan's slower balls aren't attempted yorkers, needing 12 why can't he go full, have third man tight and if he manages to squeeze one, it's 1 (2 at the most) and he's welcome to ramp if desired. Maybe Stokes were, but it's so far off it's unreal.
jackbyrne91
School Boy/Girl Captain
Why did Cook take Bopara out of the attack? He had bowled 4 overs for 12 runs and they were struggling to get him away. Then brings back his bumboy Bresnan so he can bowl a few gentle half-volleys and full tosses.
Bresnan is no quicker than Bopara.
Cook is clueless.
Bresnan is no quicker than Bopara.
Cook is clueless.
vic_orthdox
Global Moderator
Bresnan was bowling short slower balls to the longest part of the ground, with three and at some stages four blokes on the fence to defend it. It had worked well, and was tough to score against the rest of the time, hence why Faulkner was targeting Stokes from the other end.
Funnily enough, reckon he stuffed up by bowling a yorker once they put the field back for his slower ball; they had four on the leg side fence and he went for the quicker yorker, which was always going to be easier to get through the off side.
benchmark00
Request Your Custom Title Now!
A Yorker at the stumps still opens up 360 degree scoring opportunities. The margin for error is too low. You have to get it right bang on for a Yorker on the stumps to be good.
- Status