Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 31, 2014 13:18:33 GMT 1
Also, fucking hilarious that almost everything that superlopez said proved to be incorrect Against stronger opposition we might/would have missed a "true front-line spinner", but who's saying that Ali cant become this in time? He needs games like this to refine his game - in interviews this morning he mentioned that he's totally changed the way he bowls to suit the international game. He's on an incredibly steep learning curve, so what a perfect test for him to have to settle in. Woakes was really unlucky, beat the bat so many times, but just wasn't to be. The main concern is Jordan. Unfortunately we look very weak as soon as you take Andersnout out of the bowling lineup. Eh. I was proved exactly correct, If you go into the game with 4 seamers then bowl first, if not you should go in with a frontline spinner, We could have used ali and the other spinner to win the game. You cant rely on a part-time (as he is now) to take 6 wickets everytime on a turning wicket. He bowled well. Jordan bowled 5 overs in the second innings and 17 in the first, So it proves that we got selection wrong and won despite it, not because of it. Anyway. The indians were very poor with the ball without Sharma, their batting also went to pot this morning. Could this be the start of a turn-around. Is captain Cook the man for the job......... We will beat this poor indian team at old trafford, but its just masking the problems.
|
|
|
Post by OneDarrenBullock on Jul 31, 2014 13:24:58 GMT 1
No I was proved correct 7 of the 2nd innings wickets fell to spin. We should have had a full time spinner in the team. Ali bowled well, but its proves we didnt need the 4th seamer, what did jordan or for that matter woakes do? We should have gone in with a proper spinner, or if you maintain we needed 4 seamers bowled first as it should be seeming around day one if you need 4 front line seamers. To be fair to Ali, look how much his bowling has come on. Bring in genuine spinner Rashid or someone and see how he improves. We need 2 spinners in most away tests, so need to fine a genuine front line spinner. Swann was nowhere near the finished article when he started playing for England remember. So you're basically saying that despite Ali taking 6 2nd innings wickets and completely destroying the Indian middle/lower order, you'd have rather have seen a largely untested Rashid bowling in his place? I've read some shite on this board, most of which has been spouted by you, but that takes the biscuit fella.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 31, 2014 13:39:09 GMT 1
Moeen Ali is neither a front-line spinner nor part-time spinner like some on this thread have said. He for me is a second spinner you use on tour in the sub-continent but has done a decent job so far. Today he's got 6 wickets but largely because India played him appallingly for a nation so used to spin.
England in this test have gone back to what makes any side good, getting big first innings runs and creating scoreboard pressure. That's the key difference and why Ali could bowl with more freedom - remember he went at nearly a run a ball at Trent Bridge.
As for Cook, Jadeja's drop could have saved his captaincy career. Getting better with the bat but his captaincy is average at best. A captain is someone who reads the game well and England currently only have one guy who does that but Joe Root's still just 23 and learning his trade.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 31, 2014 13:40:13 GMT 1
No I was proved correct 7 of the 2nd innings wickets fell to spin. We should have had a full time spinner in the team. Ali bowled well, but its proves we didnt need the 4th seamer, what did jordan or for that matter woakes do? We should have gone in with a proper spinner, or if you maintain we needed 4 seamers bowled first as it should be seeming around day one if you need 4 front line seamers. To be fair to Ali, look how much his bowling has come on. Bring in genuine spinner Rashid or someone and see how he improves. We need 2 spinners in most away tests, so need to fine a genuine front line spinner. Swann was nowhere near the finished article when he started playing for England remember. So you're basically saying that despite Ali taking 6 2nd innings wickets and completely destroying the Indian middle/lower order, you'd have rather have seen a largely untested Rashid bowling in his place? I've read some shite on this board, most of which has been spouted by you, but that takes the biscuit fella. No, im saying a frontline spinner should have been selected if we were not going to bowl first at the ageas bowl, not in place of ali, but in place of a seamer. as I quite rightly predicted the spinners would do the damage in the final innings, just as if your going into a game with 4 frontline seamers you would expect them to do the damage first innings. The fact we won the toss and batted with 4 frontline seam bowlers proves selection was wrong. The fact jordan only bowled 17 overs in the first innings and 5 in the second, proves selection was wrong. Ali bowled really well, a credit to him, but that doesnt mean we got selection correct. In fact because we had to rely on a "Part Time" bowler as Ali is, proves we got selection wrong. You obviously dont understand cricket at a great enough level if you wish to argue with that. We won the game, however, on hindsight or as I predicted, you wouldnt have chosen 4 seamers if you planned to have a bat, you would have picked 3 and a spinner and that ultimately would have given us best opportunity to improve the winning margin.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 31, 2014 13:50:53 GMT 1
Moeen Ali is neither a front-line spinner nor part-time spinner like some on this thread have said. He for me is a second spinner you use on tour in the sub-continent but has done a decent job so far. Today he's got 6 wickets but largely because India played him appallingly for a nation so used to spin. England in this test have gone back to what makes any side good, getting big first innings runs and creating scoreboard pressure. That's the key difference and why Ali could bowl with more freedom - remember he went at nearly a run a ball at Trent Bridge. As for Cook, Jadeja's drop could have saved his captaincy career. Getting better with the bat but his captaincy is average at best. A captain is someone who reads the game well and England currently only have one guy who does that but Joe Root's still just 23 and learning his trade. Oh come on, you can't criticise Cook's captaincy in this test. The way he rotated bowlers in India's second innings to removed their top order was excellent
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 31, 2014 13:52:22 GMT 1
Easy to be proactive with 550 on the board. Its when games are tight that he struggles.
|
|
|
Post by OneDarrenBullock on Jul 31, 2014 13:56:04 GMT 1
So you're basically saying that despite Ali taking 6 2nd innings wickets and completely destroying the Indian middle/lower order, you'd have rather have seen a largely untested Rashid bowling in his place? I've read some shite on this board, most of which has been spouted by you, but that takes the biscuit fella. No, im saying a frontline spinner should have been selected if we were not going to bowl first at the ageas bowl, not in place of ali, but in place of a seamer. as I quite rightly predicted the spinners would do the damage in the final innings, just as if your going into a game with 4 frontline seamers you would expect them to do the damage first innings. The fact we won the toss and batted with 4 frontline seam bowlers proves selection was wrong. The fact jordan only bowled 17 overs in the first innings and 5 in the second, proves selection was wrong. Ali bowled really well, a credit to him, but that doesnt mean we got selection correct. In fact because we had to rely on a "Part Time" bowler as Ali is, proves we got selection wrong. You obviously dont understand cricket at a great enough level if you wish to argue with that. We won the game, however, on hindsight or as I predicted, you wouldnt have chosen 4 seamers if you planned to have a bat, you would have picked 3 and a spinner and that ultimately would have given us best opportunity to improve the winning margin. Which part of "we don't currently have a better option with spin than Ali" is the bit that is confusing you? I asked you to clarify whether you were stating that Rashid should have been given the role but all you have countered with is a statement claiming we should have selected a frontline spinner. Who? Also, do yourself a favour and remove the "News network official reporter" signature from your profile please. It makes it very difficult to take someone seriously and engage them in a sensible debate when the obvious symptoms of their delusional lunacy are in front of you in black and white. Thanks ODB
|
|
|
Post by gledholt terrier on Jul 31, 2014 13:58:57 GMT 1
Easy to be proactive with 550 on the board. Its when games are tight that he struggles. Not easy to get 550 on the board if he'd batted second as you advocated. It's the same on this with some folk as it is with Town - anything that disproves their closely held views is an aberration and not to be taken as an indication that things are getting better.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 31, 2014 13:59:02 GMT 1
Moeen Ali is neither a front-line spinner nor part-time spinner like some on this thread have said. He for me is a second spinner you use on tour in the sub-continent but has done a decent job so far. Today he's got 6 wickets but largely because India played him appallingly for a nation so used to spin. England in this test have gone back to what makes any side good, getting big first innings runs and creating scoreboard pressure. That's the key difference and why Ali could bowl with more freedom - remember he went at nearly a run a ball at Trent Bridge. As for Cook, Jadeja's drop could have saved his captaincy career. Getting better with the bat but his captaincy is average at best. A captain is someone who reads the game well and England currently only have one guy who does that but Joe Root's still just 23 and learning his trade. Oh come on, you can't criticise Cook's captaincy in this test. The way he rotated bowlers in India's second innings to removed their top order was excellent Just because we won doesn't mean you can't still look at the negatives. Cook isn't a captain that's why he needed Matt Prior this summer until he knew his body wasn't able to cope at the top level. The one positive though is that he now trusts Ali more and hasn't with anyone except Swann but it's been said that is largely due to the influence of Ian Bell
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 31, 2014 14:05:43 GMT 1
Easy to be proactive with 550 on the board. Its when games are tight that he struggles. And by batting first we were able to build that scoreboard pressure. If we'd send them in, saw them get 350/400/450, then the pressure would have been on us, rather than the other way around.
|
|
menstonterrier
Darren Bullock Terrier
[M0:0]Aye, them were t'days lads
Posts: 866
|
Post by menstonterrier on Jul 31, 2014 14:24:16 GMT 1
So an ordinary England team have thrashed a poor Indian team.
So what. The crowds (or lack of) reflects the true standard of cricket.
|
|
menstonterrier
Darren Bullock Terrier
[M0:0]Aye, them were t'days lads
Posts: 866
|
Post by menstonterrier on Jul 31, 2014 14:24:27 GMT 1
So an ordinary England team have thrashed a poor Indian team.
So what. The crowds (or lack of) reflects the true standard of cricket.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 31, 2014 14:24:46 GMT 1
Easy to be proactive with 550 on the board. Its when games are tight that he struggles. And by batting first we were able to build that scoreboard pressure. If we'd send them in, saw them get 350/400/450, then the pressure would have been on us, rather than the other way around. Never said we should have bowled first, I said if you pick 4 seamers like they did, then it should be a bowl first wicket and when we won the toss we should have bowled first. If they didnt want to bowl first they should have picked the extra spinner as it obviously wasnt a bowl first pitch. Also, Cook has shown to be a poor captain, He did better this test as he had runs to play with, when its tight is when captains win games with field positions and the like, which he has shown, when in winning positions over the last 10 tests, he wasnt upto it. We always had too many runs first innings for the game to be anything other than an England victory or a draw, India's poor batting gave us the victory as much as cooks captaincy.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 31, 2014 14:38:25 GMT 1
No, im saying a frontline spinner should have been selected if we were not going to bowl first at the ageas bowl, not in place of ali, but in place of a seamer. as I quite rightly predicted the spinners would do the damage in the final innings, just as if your going into a game with 4 frontline seamers you would expect them to do the damage first innings. The fact we won the toss and batted with 4 frontline seam bowlers proves selection was wrong. The fact jordan only bowled 17 overs in the first innings and 5 in the second, proves selection was wrong. Ali bowled really well, a credit to him, but that doesnt mean we got selection correct. In fact because we had to rely on a "Part Time" bowler as Ali is, proves we got selection wrong. You obviously dont understand cricket at a great enough level if you wish to argue with that. We won the game, however, on hindsight or as I predicted, you wouldnt have chosen 4 seamers if you planned to have a bat, you would have picked 3 and a spinner and that ultimately would have given us best opportunity to improve the winning margin. Which part of "we don't currently have a better option with spin than Ali" is the bit that is confusing you?Are you for real? Ali takes a few wickets against india and is suddenly one of the great test match spin bowlers??? Give it a rest. I could pick any number of county championship spin bowlers who are better spin bowlers, He does a job because he can bat as well, but if your looking for a frontline spinner then he isnt in the equation. Simon Kerrigan first class bowling average is a shade under 28 www.espncricinfo.com/england/content/player/297499.htmlMoeen Ali first class bowling average is nearly 40....... www.espncricinfo.com/england/content/player/8917.htmlRashid, rafiq etc etc all have a better bowling average than Ali.
|
|
|
Post by gledholt terrier on Jul 31, 2014 15:04:45 GMT 1
And by batting first we were able to build that scoreboard pressure. If we'd send them in, saw them get 350/400/450, then the pressure would have been on us, rather than the other way around. Never said we should have bowled first, I said if you pick 4 seamers like they did, then it should be a bowl first wicket and when we won the toss we should have bowled first. If they didnt want to bowl first they should have picked the extra spinner as it obviously wasnt a bowl first pitch. Also, Cook has shown to be a poor captain, He did better this test as he had runs to play with, when its tight is when captains win games with field positions and the like, which he has shown, when in winning positions over the last 10 tests, he wasnt upto it. We always had too many runs first innings for the game to be anything other than an England victory or a draw, India's poor batting gave us the victory as much as cooks captaincy. That first paragraph is one of the most astonishing examples of word salad, contradiction and nonsense you are ever likely to see. Sporting victories are achieved with many factors. Nobody is saying that it was all down to Cook's captaincy, we are just glad he did things entirely differently to your suggestions.
|
|
|
Post by OneDarrenBullock on Jul 31, 2014 15:30:03 GMT 1
Which part of "we don't currently have a better option with spin than Ali" is the bit that is confusing you? Are you for real? Ali takes a few wickets against india and is suddenly one of the great test match spin bowlers??? Give it a rest. I could pick any number of county championship spin bowlers who are better spin bowlers, He does a job because he can bat as well, but if your looking for a frontline spinner then he isnt in the equation. Simon Kerrigan first class bowling average is a shade under 28 www.espncricinfo.com/england/content/player/297499.htmlMoeen Ali first class bowling average is nearly 40....... www.espncricinfo.com/england/content/player/8917.htmlRashid, rafiq etc etc all have a better bowling average than Ali. Where have I said Ali is one of the great test match spin bowlers? We went with a predominantly seam attack and used Ali as and when it became apparent the pitch was becoming favourable to spin. I don't dispute that having a frontline spinner would certainly be advantageous, perhaps not as crucial in England but in the sub-continent definitely. Kerrigan has been woeful this year and is prone to going into his shell when targeted by higher order batsmen who despatch him early - not the answer. Rafiq is far too inconsistent and not currently a viable option...plenty of promise but as yet a case of unfulfilled potential - too much of a risk. Rashid has simply not done enough to justify his selection IMO. As for bowling averages, lies, damned lies and statistics. You're only as good as your last game. I personally wouldn't have selected Ali in the first instance (and I'd have been wrong...for what it's worth I'd have had Patel in there) but his form in this test has vindicated his selection. I see no reason why he can't move on from a fantastic test, further develop his game and continue to surprise people...maybe even becoming our elusive frontline spinner in time (who also seems capable of batting a bit). Here's hoping.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 31, 2014 17:15:06 GMT 1
Rashid spotted with James Whitaker at Headingley the other day. DOn't be surprised to see him amongst the touring squads this winter and also a lot of journalists are saying hes getting back to his best finally aided by Andrew Gale whose captaincy destroyed Dilly's confidence.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 31, 2014 17:26:38 GMT 1
Easy for Cook to captain when one of his openers gets 160 runs in the match.
The jammy bastard.
|
|
|
Post by impact on Jul 31, 2014 17:47:59 GMT 1
This is what I really hate about this board. People are so willing to criticise but when someone does well rather than praising they still find a way to criticise.
Cook has got a lot of stick recently, and rightfully so. But he's had a very good test match and got the result so equally should be praised for doing so. Do I think he's a captain? No. But he did well this match. And I'll be delighted if he proves me wrong.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 31, 2014 18:27:44 GMT 1
This is what I really hate about this board. People are so willing to criticise but when someone does well rather than praising they still find a way to criticise. Cook has got a lot of stick recently, and rightfully so. But he's had a very good test match and got the result so equally should be praised for doing so. Do I think he's a captain? No. But he did well this match. And I'll be delighted if he proves me wrong. I agree. My above comment was clearly a joke.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 31, 2014 18:36:36 GMT 1
This is what I really hate about this board. People are so willing to criticise but when someone does well rather than praising they still find a way to criticise. Cook has got a lot of stick recently, and rightfully so. But he's had a very good test match and got the result so equally should be praised for doing so. Do I think he's a captain? No. But he did well this match. And I'll be delighted if he proves me wrong. The more games he wins the longer he will be in charge and the closer we will get to an ashes hammering.
|
|
|
Post by gledholt terrier on Jul 31, 2014 18:47:11 GMT 1
This is what I really hate about this board. People are so willing to criticise but when someone does well rather than praising they still find a way to criticise. Cook has got a lot of stick recently, and rightfully so. But he's had a very good test match and got the result so equally should be praised for doing so. Do I think he's a captain? No. But he did well this match. And I'll be delighted if he proves me wrong. The more games he wins the longer he will be in charge and the closer we will get to an ashes hammering. Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc
|
|
|
Post by impact on Aug 1, 2014 8:38:35 GMT 1
This is what I really hate about this board. People are so willing to criticise but when someone does well rather than praising they still find a way to criticise. Cook has got a lot of stick recently, and rightfully so. But he's had a very good test match and got the result so equally should be praised for doing so. Do I think he's a captain? No. But he did well this match. And I'll be delighted if he proves me wrong. I agree. My above comment was clearly a joke. I realised that haha
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2014 9:04:53 GMT 1
The more games he wins the longer he will be in charge and the closer we will get to an ashes hammering. Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc school moto or did you study Latin?
|
|
|
Post by Grandfather Berty of Cleck on Aug 1, 2014 9:25:15 GMT 1
Well I was one who criticised Cook before this game, and suggested that he should be relieved of the captaincy. He did ok in this test (although I would have put them in to bat again). Lets hope this is a turning point, but to be honest, I still have my doubts about him as captain.
|
|
|
Post by goodshot (FGS) on Aug 1, 2014 9:44:36 GMT 1
I'll hold my hand up as well. Something seemed to click with the lad in this match no doubt helped by the runs. A genuinely good piece of captaincy in letting Woakes bowl ahead of Broard yesterday morning. That's where his biggest failure has been in not being able to man manage the senior players. If he has learnt that now - the rest is easy.
|
|
|
Post by 3Pipe on Aug 1, 2014 9:52:44 GMT 1
Ali Bomaye, Ali Bomaye!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2014 10:09:24 GMT 1
I'll hold my hand up as well. Something seemed to click with the lad in this match no doubt helped by the runs. A genuinely good piece of captaincy in letting Woakes bowl ahead of Broard yesterday morning. That's where his biggest failure has been in not being able to man manage the senior players. If he has learnt that now - the rest is easy. I would imaging in a strange way, Prior not been in the team helped. Bell has no opinion and Broad and Anderson are fast bowling warriors who will run in hard hit the correct lengths and bowl folk out if they are happy and motivated (press coverage sledging them was probably motivation enough for them to find better form) the rest of the team is now Cooks. I still dont think he is the man for the job and its a matter of when not if he goes. I hope, he wins this series and then says "You know what, Ive been captain of England, Ive won the ashes, won away in India, and won a home series vs india I have a decent record, but believe that someone else would be better suited to lead England forward."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 9, 2014 17:41:12 GMT 1
Stand in part timer spinner they say. It's good to see us being aggressive in the field for the first time in forever. Think I'm gonna focus on this rather than anything that may have been going on near Leeds Road
|
|
|
Post by gledholt terrier on Aug 17, 2014 17:06:55 GMT 1
Wraps up 3-1 win against an admittedly terrible Indian side.
Not good for anyone with a 4th day ticket. Like me! Still, Town will cheer me up on Tuesday, I'm sure of it.
|
|