Cricket 24/7  

Welcome to the Cricket 24/7.

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, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. There are also more forums available to members, such as the Lounge - where members chat about just about anything under the sun except cricket!

Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.


Go Back   Cricket 24/7 > Cricket Discussion Forums > International Cricket
Register FAQDonate Members List Calendar Casino Articles Terms of Use Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 13th December 2017, 11:07   #721
billyguntheballs
County Pro
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 689
Why not just Root at 3.......
__________________

I can accept failure...I can not accept not trying again.
billyguntheballs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2017, 14:59   #722
Sir Virgs and Zamora
Posting God
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,995
This is quite interesting.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/42287181

However...how fast are these guys? Lots of discussion about overton of the j variety and even though some might say that I might occasssionally over claim about Somerset players, you won't find me saying he could consistently bowl 90 in tests. Possibly 87 but not having that he will get back to 90. Hope I am wrong.
Sir Virgs and Zamora is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2017, 15:11   #723
Jock McTuffnel v3
World Class
 
Jock McTuffnel v3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Cambridge
Team(s): England
Posts: 6,780
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Virgs and Zamora View Post
This is quite interesting.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/42287181

However...how fast are these guys? Lots of discussion about overton of the j variety and even though some might say that I might occasssionally over claim about Somerset players, you won't find me saying he could consistently bowl 90 in tests. Possibly 87 but not having that he will get back to 90. Hope I am wrong.
Interesting but why no focus on length ?

This from the 2nd test

The Cricket Prof.‏
@CricProf
Follow Follow @CricProf

England's average new ball length was 7.363m from the stumps. Australia's length is 5.87m from the stumps. #Ashes
__________________
Jock McTuffnel v3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2017, 15:26   #724
Sir Virgs and Zamora
Posting God
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,995
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jock McTuffnel v3 View Post
Interesting but why no focus on length ?

This from the 2nd test

The Cricket Prof.‏
@CricProf
Follow Follow @CricProf

England's average new ball length was 7.363m from the stumps. Australia's length is 5.87m from the stumps. #Ashes
Exactly. The length is the key thing. Bowling back of a length means the ball is travelling slower for longer. Anyone with a basic grasp of physics knows that when someone like Darren gough says "I picked up pace off the pitch as I was skiddy bowler" know he actually means "my deliveries don't slow down as much as others"
Sir Virgs and Zamora is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2017, 17:18   #725
oldandfat
County Pro
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 822
Philander did well when he toured Australia and he is certainly not express. Build pressure by bowling threatening deliveries and extract what you can out of the pitch. A ball only has to deviate/swing a little to be dangerous.
You have to know your strengths and limitations and play to them.
oldandfat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2017, 17:28   #726
geoff_boycotts_grandmother
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 28,227
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Virgs and Zamora View Post
Exactly. The length is the key thing. Bowling back of a length means the ball is travelling slower for longer. Anyone with a basic grasp of physics knows that when someone like Darren gough says "I picked up pace off the pitch as I was skiddy bowler" know he actually means "my deliveries don't slow down as much as others"
I'll be honest: I really wasn't expecting "like Darren Gough" to follow "Anyone with a basic grasp of physics".

One of the big differences between watching a quality team in Essex and a mediocre one in England is how much more someone like Jamie Porter hits the stumps than Jimmy Anderson. So many of Anderson's deliveries with the new ball can be left and by the time Jimmy pitches them up England have a massive first innings deficit.

(Obviously there's still room for short pitching bowling with the old ball, you only have to look at Neil Wagner's success).
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michelle Fivefer
It was a poor innings by Bell with the bat.
geoff_boycotts_grandmother is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2017, 17:50   #727
Bestie
International Material
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Exeter
Posts: 1,468
I find the criticism of Jimmy slightly odd. Been a one-man bowling attack this series and is averaging 15(!) with the ball this year; I wouldn't say he's consistently any worse with the new ball than anyone else in the world and given Broad's struggles is way down my list of concerns. He's allowed not to be perfect every now and then (and surely the way he builds pressure with leave-able outswingers is part of why he's so successful?).

That said if Porter bowls like he did this year again next season I wouldn't mind him coming in - an accurate, pitch-it-up seamer would go very nicely in our attack.
Bestie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2017, 17:55   #728
Bestie
International Material
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Exeter
Posts: 1,468
Part of the trouble is that Anderson can build all the pressure he wants outside off and be wonderful all by himself but when the rest of the seamers do the same thing and only Broad has the quality to concede runs as rarely as Jimmy (if they're all that miserly then against this Aussie side that's a pretty good tactic).
Bestie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2017, 19:04   #729
geoff_boycotts_grandmother
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 28,227
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bestie View Post
I find the criticism of Jimmy slightly odd. Been a one-man bowling attack this series and is averaging 15(!) with the ball this year; I wouldn't say he's consistently any worse with the new ball than anyone else in the world and given Broad's struggles is way down my list of concerns. He's allowed not to be perfect every now and then (and surely the way he builds pressure with leave-able outswingers is part of why he's so successful?).

That said if Porter bowls like he did this year again next season I wouldn't mind him coming in - an accurate, pitch-it-up seamer would go very nicely in our attack.
Jimmy
Brisbane
1st innings no wickets with 1st new ball, did however get Paine with the 2nd new ball.

2nd innings no wickets with new ball (Aus 170-0)

Adelaide
1st innings no wickets with new ball (Woakes took first wicket to fall to a bowler 86-2 in 33rd over); no wickets with 2nd new ball

By this stage the Ashes are more or less over and with 5 new balls he's managed a single wicket of a non-specialist batsman. He did bowl very well in the second innings when he pitched it up but by then it was too late.

And yes Broad's not been much better - 3 wickets with the new ball, but 2 of them are with the second new ball.

Brisbane
1st innings Bancroft with the first new ball; Starc with the second new ball.
2nd innings no wickets with new ball (Aus 170-0)

Adelaide
1st innings no wickets with the 1st new ball; Handscomb with the second new ball.


I'd actually give Woakes the new ball and have Jimmy bowling with the old ball where his bowling dry outside off and short of a length is more valuable.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michelle Fivefer
It was a poor innings by Bell with the bat.
geoff_boycotts_grandmother is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2017, 19:08   #730
sharky
Posting God
 
sharky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sunny Sussex
Team(s): Sussex, England
Posts: 10,894
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bestie View Post
Part of the trouble is that Anderson can build all the pressure he wants outside off and be wonderful all by himself but when the rest of the seamers do the same thing and only Broad has the quality to concede runs as rarely as Jimmy (if they're all that miserly then against this Aussie side that's a pretty good tactic).
Yes I think that's a problem with Woakes as he generally has the same plan as Jimmy but without the new ball, and it becomes a bit samey. It was ok when he had an extra few mph and a Duke ball last year. If he is in the team then I think he should get the new ball to maximise any use out of him, then have the taller bowlers bowl first change.
__________________
She was like a candle in the wind...Unreliable
sharky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2017, 20:12   #731
Bestie
International Material
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Exeter
Posts: 1,468
BBC's thing on fast bowlers has Woakes' average speed clocked at 85 for this series with a quickest ball over 90. Haven't actually seen enough of him bowling to know if that's accurate, but if it is then it would at least seem to indicate that he has got back to the pace he was at last summer after looking more sluggish against WI. Still doesn't seem to have bowled all that well this series for the most part, though, and I've seen him criticised for being too short as well.
Bestie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2017, 20:23   #732
geoff_boycotts_grandmother
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 28,227
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bestie View Post
BBC's thing on fast bowlers has Woakes' average speed clocked at 85 for this series with a quickest ball over 90. Haven't actually seen enough of him bowling to know if that's accurate, but if it is then it would at least seem to indicate that he has got back to the pace he was at last summer after looking more sluggish against WI. Still doesn't seem to have bowled all that well this series for the most part, though, and I've seen him criticised for being too short as well.
Who has bowled well in more than one innings for England this series?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michelle Fivefer
It was a poor innings by Bell with the bat.
geoff_boycotts_grandmother is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2017, 20:55   #733
cabinboy
Posting God
 
cabinboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 13,668
England have never won In Australia without at least one genuine quick.

1932-33 Harold Larwood, Gubby Allen

1954-55 Frank Tyson, Brian Statham

1978-79 Bob Willis (even allowing for Kerry Packer)

1986-87 Graham Dilley

2010-11 Steve Finn

This current team of pedestrian seamers and swingers never stood a chance.
cabinboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2017, 21:50   #734
Bestie
International Material
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Exeter
Posts: 1,468
Quote:
Originally Posted by geoff_boycotts_grandmother View Post
Who has bowled well in more than one innings for England this series?
I mean I would say Anderson has. First test first innings he was far, far better than his figures. Just donít foresee Woakes doing better with the new ball than Jimmy, really.
Bestie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2017, 21:57   #735
Summer of '77
Legendary
 
Summer of '77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: London-Essex
Team(s): Kent, Essex, Surrey Stars
Posts: 8,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by cabinboy View Post
England have never won In Australia without at least one genuine quick.

1932-33 Harold Larwood, Gubby Allen

1954-55 Frank Tyson, Brian Statham

1978-79 Bob Willis (even allowing for Kerry Packer)

1986-87 Graham Dilley

2010-11 Steve Finn

This current team of pedestrian seamers and swingers never stood a chance.
Also 1970/71, when John Snow was at his fieriest.

An exception to the rule was 1911/12 (4-1 to England). Frank Foster and Johnny Douglas were highly skilled seam bowlers but I've never seen either described as genuinely quick. Mind, with that pair and SF Barnes taking 81 wickets between them, an all out speed merchant would probably have been surplus to requirements.
Summer of '77 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2017, 22:11   #736
AJ101
International Material
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 1,795
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bestie View Post
I mean I would say Anderson has. First test first innings he was far, far better than his figures. Just donít foresee Woakes doing better with the new ball than Jimmy, really.
He shouldn't replace Jimmy he should be taking the new ball instead of Broad.
AJ101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2017, 22:30   #737
cabinboy
Posting God
 
cabinboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 13,668
Quote:
Originally Posted by Summer of '77 View Post
Also 1970/71, when John Snow was at his fieriest.

An exception to the rule was 1911/12 (4-1 to England). Frank Foster and Johnny Douglas were highly skilled seam bowlers but I've never seen either described as genuinely quick. Mind, with that pair and SF Barnes taking 81 wickets between them, an all out speed merchant would probably have been surplus to requirements.


Meant to include 70/71 - Snow, Willis and Shuttleworth.

Pace matters in Oz.
cabinboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th December 2017, 22:36   #738
Minor Maggie
Buttleresque
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Leeds
Team(s): Lancashire, England
Posts: 26,758
Not just England players making headlines...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...es-blonde.html
Minor Maggie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th December 2017, 23:08   #739
Aidan11
Harmisonesque
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Somewhere cold and wet
Posts: 40,122
Somebody please tell Vince he shouldn't be out there.
Aidan11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th December 2017, 12:16   #740
1000yardstare
Posting Goddess
 
1000yardstare's Avatar
JA 851 Cummins 149 Wagner 147 TCurran 21 SCurran 15
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: London
Posts: 21,009
Overton only managed 1 over today and I don't think he will play in the next Test. Will it be Ball, Curran or Wood?
1000yardstare is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 22:33.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© Cricket247.org