-
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* South Africa in England Thread
- Thread starter Rik
- Start date
Mr Mxyzptlk
Request Your Custom Title Now!
That's why they have a toss...
Neil Pickup
Request Your Custom Title Now!
"Great attacking bowling"
?!? Kirtley himself said it was boring...
It was a 300 pitch nonetheless on day one and it's SA's fault they bowled poorly all the first afternoon and evening.
Besides, I fail to see the difference between preparing an unacceptable pitch like this (or those in NZ last winter) and a pitch that is flat as Norfolk.
A pitch like Taunton is just as detrimental to cricket and the match as a spectacle.
?!? Kirtley himself said it was boring...
It was a 300 pitch nonetheless on day one and it's SA's fault they bowled poorly all the first afternoon and evening.
Besides, I fail to see the difference between preparing an unacceptable pitch like this (or those in NZ last winter) and a pitch that is flat as Norfolk.
A pitch like Taunton is just as detrimental to cricket and the match as a spectacle.
luckyeddie
Cricket Web Staff Member
Bad pitches do not necessarily make for great cricket.
However, they invariably bring about exciting matches - and the Trent Bridge game was certainly that. Not a classic - it didn't go close enough in the end - but not far short.
However, they invariably bring about exciting matches - and the Trent Bridge game was certainly that. Not a classic - it didn't go close enough in the end - but not far short.
Tim
Cricketer Of The Year
What did you guys make of the Christchurch pitch last year for the 1st test between NZ & England.
It went in reverse..Day 1 was poor for batting with all the seam movement..Hussain gutsed out a century then NZ came back and I think fell 20 runs short of England.
Thorpe & Flintoff came out & took NZ to the cleaners followed by Astles double century and I believe the pitch was taking a bit of turn on day 5 although it was hard to tell because Astle was hitting anything.
That pitch was a drop-in and I thought it was quite a decent one because it offered the bowlers & batsmen something as long as they worked hard for it.
It went in reverse..Day 1 was poor for batting with all the seam movement..Hussain gutsed out a century then NZ came back and I think fell 20 runs short of England.
Thorpe & Flintoff came out & took NZ to the cleaners followed by Astles double century and I believe the pitch was taking a bit of turn on day 5 although it was hard to tell because Astle was hitting anything.
That pitch was a drop-in and I thought it was quite a decent one because it offered the bowlers & batsmen something as long as they worked hard for it.
there is nothing wrong with an all seam lineup, some teams do it a heap and are really successful.
marc71178
Eyes not spreadsheets
If it was just 4 I'd agree, but this would be 5 men, which isn't necessary.Craig said:
Vaughan has enough to do with captaining and opening the batting, without having to think about bowling himself.
I would only drop Giles for an extra batsman at the moment since if 4 seamers can't do the job, I don't see how a 5th will add anything out of the ordinary.
Mr Mxyzptlk
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Yet 4 seamers and Giles can?marc71178 said:
Neil Pickup
Request Your Custom Title Now!
The point is that if the four best seamers can't break through then the fifth best won't but the variety with the spin might.
SpaceMonkey
International Debutant
Picking 5 seamers over 4 means you have more chance of one of them having a good day come the day of the test.
Also theres more chance of having a bowler whos style suits the pitch (providing the 5 bowlers all vary in style which if England do play the 5 i think will be the case).
Also theres more chance of having a bowler whos style suits the pitch (providing the 5 bowlers all vary in style which if England do play the 5 i think will be the case).
Mr Mxyzptlk
Request Your Custom Title Now!
But that's like picking 5 bowling types for the sake of it in hope that one of them will be suitable. That's a very ineducated means of selection. The selectors should have a good idea of the conditions of the pitch and weather before the Test actually begins so that they can pick bowlers who should perform in such conditions.
Craig
World Traveller
Well if Hoggard and Johnson were fit, and it is in swinging conditions, then those two would be deadly.
This would be my currant bowling line-up counting for Gough to be retired and Caddick, Johnson and Hoggard being injuried:
Anderson
Harmison (if fit)/Kabir Ali
Kirtley
Flintoff
Bicknell
For this Test. I suggested Vaughan to bowl as I have no doubt that he will do a lot of bowling during the winter tours to Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and the Caribbean. All have spinner friendly conditions. If England bowl well Vaughan wont be needed.
This would be my currant bowling line-up counting for Gough to be retired and Caddick, Johnson and Hoggard being injuried:
Anderson
Harmison (if fit)/Kabir Ali
Kirtley
Flintoff
Bicknell
For this Test. I suggested Vaughan to bowl as I have no doubt that he will do a lot of bowling during the winter tours to Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and the Caribbean. All have spinner friendly conditions. If England bowl well Vaughan wont be needed.
