The International Cricket Thread

[Villan For Life]

Ask Andrew Strauss to take over as Coach.  Jimmy as bowling coach. 

No to both. Strauss moved into a “political” role at the ECB because he’s more suited to that kind of role rather than coaching. Plus I’d have thought that he will be preoccupied with the foundation that he started in his wife’s memory.

As Taylorsworkrate said Jimmy’s career is far from over.

I think we need separate coaches and back room staff for red and white ball cricket. I don’t think that Giles will go for that as he had a bad experience when he was white ball coach.

I’d consider Jason Gillespie or Stephen Fleming as test coach and promote Colly as white ball coach. If they want one coach then it’s betw Gillespie or Fleming.

[hilts_coolerking]

As far as I'm aware Strauss has never done any coaching.  What he is is an administrator.

My top choice would be Fleming also.  Usually cited as one of the most progressive coaches in the game.

[tomd2103]

Middle order fuckery once again.  They've been so poor that the top three is no longer the weak link.  Stokes is not a Test number 4 and on current form Bairstow is not a number 5.  Trouble is that those two plus Buttler (if he was keeping wicket) are natural number 7s for me, coming in behind 6 specialist batsmen, followed by the four bowlers.  Stokes could job a job at 6 I suppose but I'd prefer him lurking at 7.

I'd go

1. Burns
2. Sibley
3. ? (I'd try Ballance here but I know some of you disagree)
4. Root
5. Pope
6. Foakes / Stokes
7. Stokes / Foakes
8. Curran / Woakes
9. Archer
10. Leach
11. Broad

Agree with that side.  Came across an online interview with Mark Butcher the other day and he said someone needs to get hold of Bairstow, tell him to ditch the gloves and concentrate fully on becoming a top order batsman.  Like you, I think Stokes would be more suited coming in at 6 and would plump for Foakes at 7.

I would personally keep Denly at 3 for the time being as think Root has got to go back to four.  Hopefully we can find an opening partnership that works and then concentrate on trying to find a number three. 

[taylorsworkrate]

Bright sunny day, road of a pitch.

How the hell are we going to get Smith out on this?

[Monty]

Bright sunny day, road of a pitch.

How the hell are we going to get Smith out on this?

England, meanwhile, find new ways to get out, Buttler going pad-stumps trying to hit one at the International Space Station.

[manic-road]

All out for 294 and a five for Marsh who bowled fantastic. Pity the top order batsmen didn't show the same grit as Leach. Should have got another 200 runs on that pitch.

[taylorsworkrate]

294 woefully inadequate in those conditions. Need Australia to bat very poorly for us to stay in the game.

Lucky to get that in fairness. If Australia weren't so generous with poor catching, it would likely have been below 250.

[taylorsworkrate]

Sorry, I think thats utter bollocks.

I don't think Warner was anywhere near that.

[Dr Butler]

Sorry, I think thats utter bollocks.

I don't think Warner was anywhere near that.

I'm listening to TMS and they reckoned it was nowhere near....but the Technology says otherwise...anyway it's that cheat Warner so he can fuck off. 

UTV
The Doc

[paul_e]

I think there needs to be a review of hawkeye, there's been 4-5 iffy ones so far.


I thought the Bairstow one yesterday was questionable, if you watch how much the ball swung there's no chance it was clattering middle and leg, it was probably out but i think it was clipping leg, hawkeye seemed to suggest ball was going to straighten again and I do wonder if it was because it was pad onto bat.


https://www.skysports.com/watch/video/sports/cricket/11807905/bairstow-goes-lbw


As I say I think it would've hit the stumps but the path just looks wrong to me and I can understand why Bairstow reviewed.

Aside from that, 2 wickets already and the ball was doing loads for Marsh so I'm not sure our score was as bad as some are suggesting, as has been the case all summer it depends on Smith, if he digs them out of a hole again then our score looks poor.

[PaulWinch again]

Here comes the Smith double hundred.

[taylorsworkrate]

Think 294 was a very poor effort. Denly, Burns, Stokes and Curran all got out to poor shots.

Yes Marsh got some movement, but a competent batting line up should be able to cope with some gentle swing from the oppositions 5th bowler a hell of a lot better than we did.

[paul_e]

In a summer with almost no swing I think they just didn't expect movement and were playing as if the ball straight. Sadly that movement seems to have gone today.

Curran is making Smith look a bit uncomfortable here.

[tomd2103]

I think there needs to be a review of hawkeye, there's been 4-5 iffy ones so far.


I thought the Bairstow one yesterday was questionable, if you watch how much the ball swung there's no chance it was clattering middle and leg, it was probably out but i think it was clipping leg, hawkeye seemed to suggest ball was going to straighten again and I do wonder if it was because it was pad onto bat.


https://www.skysports.com/watch/video/sports/cricket/11807905/bairstow-goes-lbw


As I say I think it would've hit the stumps but the path just looks wrong to me and I can understand why Bairstow reviewed.

Aside from that, 2 wickets already and the ball was doing loads for Marsh so I'm not sure our score was as bad as some are suggesting, as has been the case all summer it depends on Smith, if he digs them out of a hole again then our score looks poor.

I agree about Bairstow's decision Paul.  It swung late and I thought, with the trajectory it was on, it would have gone on to miss leg. 

[hilts_coolerking]

Disappointing from Woakes again.