It was Kane Williamson’s birthday yesterday.
So the crowd brought him a cake.
England’s squad named:
Joe Root, Jofra Archer, Jonny Bairstow, Stuart Broad, Rory Burns, Jos Buttler, Sam Curran, Joe Denly, Jack Leach, Jason Roy, Ben Stokes, Chris Woakes.
No Foakes, no Malan, but Leach in for Ali and Archer for Anderson. I wonder who Sam Curran thinks he’s got a shot at replacing?
Also, I believe that seven players with the same first initial is the record. If we’ve lost the series by the Oval I think the selectors should go for the clean sweep.
That’s a lovely little moment.
Can someone tell me if there is much to choose between Bairstow and Buttler behind the stumps? Because if it’s marginal, I’d bring in Curran for Bairstow, which strengthens the bowling (and, on recent form, the batting too).
In modern parlance , the question is is Bairstow’s keeping sufficient to justify what is considered superior batting?
I though his keeping in 1st Test was sub par. He’s adequate standing back but doesn’t have the hand speed or footwork over the stumps. He’s not of Test standard with the gloves in the hardest keeping task. There was one instance were he gave away 4 byes after being nutmegged. He missed two routine stumping.
Now I thought Paine was sub par with his glove work too, so that might indicate the variable bounce might have taken the Mickey out of any keeper.
#1 son is a keeper in the lower grades with his club.
I told him this standing back keeping to Test standard pace bowlers on Test standard pitches is a doodle compared to what he has to handle.
Sure the 130-140 pace is hot but they can stand back 30m, it comes through waist height with even bounce and consistent off/outside off line. Why wouldn’t you be expected to glove them clean?
He has to stand 5m back to 110-120 pace because the pitches are so dead and it won’t carry any further. Some overs have 3-4 shooters way down leg side and they bounce off the pot holes and ditches in the field. He comes in after 40 overs and he’s green all over from grass stains.
I am with you. Players biting cricket balls, rubbing lollies on them and then you get this from the Australian players- which I totally disagree with and abhor- produce sandpaper and rub the ball and get rubbed out for 12 months when others are called poohs or such and glossed over. The whole episode was hypocritical and now we get to hear now sponsors threatened to refuse provide funding- where were these sponsors from the other countries when the transgressions happened? Oh, only Australian sponsors have a moral compass? Horse shit. What about the sponsors when Mark Waugh and Warne were providing info to Indian bookies or Warne taking a banned substance? It was a total panic response and not consistent with other countries.
Anyway, the Lords Test and it is likely it will be ruined by rain. I can’t fathom how Australia can exclude Starc when his Test bowling average is around 28 and a strike rate of around 50. Plus I don’y like how Australian batting revolves around one player who can always have an off game.
Pet peeve time: seriously, if today’s going to be a write-off, why not just tack a day on and make tomorrow Day One? Unless Lord’s is already booked (haven’t checked) what’s to be lost here? Sure, it’ll mess up broadcasters schedules but just because there might be difficulty broadcasting the game doesn’t necessarily mean that you shouldn’t play the game. A little bit of flexibility from all sides and we could achieve the sporting contest we all ostensibly want.
(Edit - have checked now, and in fact Monday is the MCC vs MCC match. So, in this instance, there’s nothing to be done. But in general, I’m sticking with my point. Also, always check first.)
Also I believe rain is predicted for most days. Going back some years a friend applied for a first day ticket at Lords and it had to be in writing- as in a letter- not a fax so it would create logistical problems for those and probably tour groups as well.
New Zealand in a bit of trouble at Galle, although they have now also gone off for rain. They are 203/5, with Ross Taylor struggling to find someone to stay with him.
Well - no rain tomorrow, some on Fri, none on Sat and showers on Sun. But sure, if it’s rained off, it’s rained off.
As for tickets: you can now buy Lord’s tickets online! But sure, it would be difficult or impossible to make tickets transferable. That’s no loss compared to the current situation. The point is, we’ve planned a 5-day game so we should try to have a 5-day game. The idea of reserve days is perfectly feasible, more so if you plan for it in advance.
Let’s say there was a reserve day on Monday, and the powers-that-be decided to use it. Everyone with tickets for Thurs, Fri and Sat would turn up as usual. Tickets for Sun (Day 5 originally) would now go on sale. Day One holders have first refusal to swap at no cost for Sunday’s tickets or any other unsold ones. Monday would be a normal Day 5, tickets on the day. The broadcasters might have to scramble a bit (but again, knowing a reserve day was a possibility, they’d have contingency plans), but a full Test match would be played and we’d avoid a washout draw.
Completely agree. If they can put numbers on the players’ backs, and institute video review of umpires’ calls, they should also be be able to make contingency plans that allow the game to be played in the event of some inclement weather.
While you’re waiting for the covers to come off, enjoy the highlights of Sachin Tendulkar’s first test-match century, which happened 29 years ago today. He was 17 years old.
(I’ve started the link 28 seconds in, to avoid a crappy musical intro.)
Oh I agree and it was quite a while ago I was talking about- Steve Waugh was still playing. I guess the guys selling pies may not be happy about how many sales they could make on the final day of a rain affected Test.
In Australia about 40 years ago there was a rained out Test and they simply played another Test. Guess the schedule is so busy now that isn’t possible.
The issue with rain and washouts in cricket, is that it they have always been a part of the culture of the game. Because cricket has the draw - because you run out of time to finish the game - there has always been the narrative of one team ‘hurrying to beat the weather’ and the other side ‘hanging on grimly and praying for rain’. Entire 5-test series have been played where one side got lucky in one test and the other 4 get washed out. Sure, it’s not fair, and extremely frustrating if your team is on the wrong end of it, but it’s part of the game’s fabric.
But, then I guess ‘bad light’ was also a similar factor, and now we are using floodlights regularly, so it’s possible things may change.
Interestingly, at the washed-out match (Melbourne 1970/71), the weather cleared up a bit by about Day 4, and so they hastily scheduled what is recognised as the first-ever One Day International.
I understand that it’s part of the tradition of the game, but that doesn’t mean it can’t be changed, or that it wouldn’t be in everyone’s interests, especially the fans’, to change it. As you’ve already pointed out, they’ve made adjustments for bad light. They’ve also gone with things like the third umpire, decision review, the snick meter, and numbers on the players’ backs. Cricket is big business now. The players get paid a lot of money, and fans often spend not just hundreds of dollars on game tickets but, in the case of something like an Ashes tour, thousands of dollars in airfares and hotel rooms to make a once-in-a-lifetime trip.
I’m not arguing that they need to create domed stadiums, or make up for every single minute of play lost to rain. There would still be room for weather to affect the outcome of games. If you get a one-hour rainstorm, on the afternoon of Day 3, or if rain delays the start of Day five by two hours, then maybe that’s just part of the game, just like it’s always been. But when you know, especially in an English summer, that there’s a decent possibility of losing one or more full day’s play due to rain, you could at least schedule a couple of extra days to allow for that.
Anyway, I thought that today’s play was interesting. The Aussies missed a couple of catches behind the wicket that they really should have taken - one at keeper, and one in the gully, I think. They also needed to have the slips closer to the bat; twice in three overs a solid edge failed to carry to Warner at first slip, and there were other edges that fell short.
England will, once again, be regretting some rather rash shots, but I don’t think they’ll be too upset with their first-innings total, particularly given that they were 6-138 at one stage. In fact, if they had managed to take another Aussie wicket before stumps, I think they would probably feel that they had the better of the day.
I think the Aussie bowlers spent too much time bowling short to the tail end. I’m not especially squeamish about short balls to tail-enders—they’re all pretty well protected these days—but you need to mix it up more, and not send down bouncer after bouncer like they were doing at times.
Overall, I feel like the match is pretty well poised, and if there’s not too much more rain over the next three days, I think there’s still a decent chance of a result.
Yeah, it’s fairly well poised. I’d say England’s batters were a bit disappointing, but that would imply it was fair to expect anything different. They who are they are - largely a mix of ODI players and all-rounders - so looking for technically proficient 120-ball 40s is unfair. You just have to hope that someone comes off big every now and then.
I thought Archer looked pretty decent in his few overs. Beat the bat a couple of times and could have had a wicket if anyone had hear the faintest of faint edges that took. There’ll be a lot of focus on him today, especially if/when he’s bowling to Smith. Should be a good contest.
It is an intriguing Test. Most likely result a draw but I believe the weather is now a lot better. England have now taken a 5th wicket so it seems if they can clean Australia out by lunch time, knock up a quick hundred and declare they could win. And to be honest, they are only Smith’s wicket away from that. However if Australia manage ro bat until tea or later they may be in the better position (seems rather unlikely at the moment).
The batting line-ups for both these teams really is shite, no?
Khawaja seems to have been the only Aussie with positive intent (or lasted long enough to develop one). But if they can hang in there til tea and only be 50 behind the time will probably have run out to get a result.