If you’re in the US, get the Willow channel if you want to watch. I order the sports package from my cable provider, so get like 6 different soccer channels, plus Willow.
I mean all of that is true but it’s even worse for that when it comes to T20 - a whole bunch of them are commentating on a version of the sport that they’ve never played! And, as discussed above, that version is also changing at a really rapid pace.
I don’t think there is a good analogy for what is happening with cricket/cricket commentary in American sports and your version of it is about as good as it can be explained. The nearest I can come to is imagine only being able to get commentary on the 110m hurdles at the Olympics from a 3000m steeplechaser. I mean, there’s hurdles in both races and technique/hurdling form can probably be talked about reasonably enough by the 3ker for the 110m race but, realistically, we’d all be better off with a 110m hurdler talking us through the race.
I’m trying to work out whether I misunderstood you, or was simply spouting nonsense - I’m going to go with the latter.
On your last point, it’s been done hasn’t it - was it Bob Woolmer who as coach of South Africa gave his captain (Hansie Cronje) an onfield earpiece? As I recall it was quickly censured and then banned in short order. We could debate the merits of rescinding this, I suppose - personally I’d rather not, let’s try to keep a little bit of ‘purity’ in the game, a contest of 11 v 11 rather than armies of backroom analysts getting involved.
Just to pick back up on this - this is pretty accurate I think - or rather, it matches what I’ve just listened to on the Wisden podcast (this week’s is a mop up on the T20 series with Pakistan and covers some of what we’ve been discussing here, if anyone is keen for a listen).
On there, they discuss England and their current attack make up. Apparently, England are the worst nation in the world at the moment at taking wickets in the PowerPlay, which, to a degree, is why there is no room for an anchor player like Root in their batting line up, since they can’t get the most dangerous batsmen out early in the innings, so keep facing ridiculous targets. This means that they have to have batters who can go crazy from ball one and also pack the bowling line up with players who can also hit a long ball. England need to work out how to take wickets early so as they can arrest the scoring rate like that, rather than focusing on dot balls.
The player they talk a bit about on the podcast is David Willey who is one of the best wicket takers in the world in the PowerPlay (apparently - so says the podcast) but is useless at the death and teaming him with Jordan (who is a pretty good death bowler but can’t bowl in the PowerPlay) and splitting the overs between the two of them. With Stokes in the attack too, they can probably use those three to get through 8-10 overs, have Archer bowl 4, Rashid bowl 4 and then Moeen or Root (assuming he can then get picked as they won’t be facing as many huge totals) or even another bowler bowl the balance.
Maybe they should bring back Plunkett? They had better time of it bowling wise in the third game, getting ealry wickets, it took a really top inning to get Pakistan to a high total, thats always a risk.
England won the middle game since they had a great start. In the other two, they lost Bairstow in the first over and were in trouble more or less throughout their innings. Its going to encourage their opposition to attack the openers.
Surely they realise the value of agressive bowling now.
.
I think you probably misunderstood because I changed what I was thinking part-way through the post and didn’t make it clear. For the game-plan I ended up with, I agree that 25-off-12 is cutting it a bit fine and 40-off-20 is a more realistic benchmark.
The team I ended up envisaging has 3 specialist batsmen, whose job is to face 50-60 balls between them and score 80-100, while the rest of the side is long-hitting bowlers who will score 120-140 off the remaining 60-70. You expect to lose a pile of wickets but you don’t care unless you’re actually bowled out before the last over and you don’t worry about “anchor innings” because when the objective is 200+ a batsman who takes 40 balls to score 50-60 is a handicap rather than an asset.
If neither opener goes early, then your third batsman is held back (to play the anchor role if you find yourself 6 down off 10 overs and worried you won’t make the full 20) while Disposable Biffer #1 through #8 keep the scoring going at a strike rate of 200.
This lineup gives you 7 bowlers to play with in the field, 8 if you have a wicketkeeper or all-rounder who can fill a batting slot. It also makes it harder for the opposition to keep the scoring rate down by taking wickets - beyond a certain point 4.6W and bring on the next biffer pays better than 211.41
Of course, if you decide 6-7 bowlers might be enough, then you have room for the pinch-hitter, who regards a strike rate of 200 as minimum and whose job is to come in at 170-7 of 17 and hit 20 off the next over.
For the last point, I know it’s been tried and banned - and I don’t support it - but if we get to the point where everyone is talking about how hard it is for captains to make these complicated tactical calls in the field - and especially if teams start cheating with sideline signals and messages smuggled onto the field - then someone (probably the IPL) will throw up their hands and legalise it. A few more years and captains who make their own bowling choices or bowlers who set their own fields will be considered quaint anachronisms. 
PSL will conclude in November, and both Zimbabwe and South Africa are to visit Pakistan in the winter. January? Seriously? Unless they intend to hold the entire series in Karachi and maybe Multan, it will be too cold, foggy and damp.
Covid is for now under control and thing are slowly returning to normal, but even money we are in a major second wave at that time.
I hope not. Watching a tactically astute skipper is a privilege. Eoin Morgan and Kane Williamson battle in the World Cup final last year, or Dhoni throughout his reign, or Steve Waugh.
Australia were walking this game, and then lost 24/5 in a few overs and now they need 15 off the last over and it doesn’t look like they are going to do it…
And then Stoinis hits a 6! 9 from 4!
Thats what I said about agressive bowling. Well done. Very impressed with Tom Curran, especially as he challenged Stonis to hit it. He got one, but not much else.
Yeah, that’s an example of what’s been discussed over the last few days. Aus have packed their team with bowlers, and really pegged England back in the first innings, with only Joss and Malan resisting. Aus were completely walking it with what, 5 overs to go? Then they started losing wickets to some tight bowling, and it ended with Stoinis trying to score quick at the end.
Finch and Warner put on 98 for the first wicket, in a chase of 168, and they still couldn’t get there!
Yes, that was quite some win by England - as AK84 said, the bowlers came through as requested. I’m sure they get most of their coaching from this thread, of course.
Early wickets the key to winning, is it?
It mean, it helps, in all forms. But the commentators banged on a little bit in this game how little England have been doing that in the past few years, and we’ve turned into a pretty useful T20 side, just by backing our batsmen to outscore the opposition.
It was really, really good to see Archer and Wood at the top of the Aus innings though.
I was not watching, so did the line judge that he hit make any call that he felt was wrong? Was there any reason at all that he would target that line judge? If not, the penalty was way overboard. It’s a freakin tennis ball, and it was hit pretty slow. If the ball missed the line judge, what would have happened?
Apologies, was meant for another topic.
Whilst I agree that we’ve become a decent international T20 side without taking a load of wickets in the PowerPlay, I agree more with your final sentence - we really need those guys to come good at the top of the innings.
It all comes back to something I said about Ben Stokes’ innings at Headingley. It’s great to win - but how realistic is it to win like that all the time? Not very - and whilst it’s more likely than pulling the greatest innings by an English batsman out of your backside every time you get skittled for double digits in a Test match, having a team that can chase 200 in a T20 is obviously worthwhile to have but it isn’t going to come off all the time. It’s simply more repeatable to chase 160-180 having bowled competently.
England have given me enough heart attacks over the last 18 months, so slotting in the final pieces of decent bowling at the beginning of an innings will at least spare me a trip or two to A&E and is, as you state, to be welcomed.
I didn’t watch any of last night’s (almost - #1 ranking aside) dead rubber, but from the Cricinfo report it seems Australia were good in the field and England were lacklustre. The positive for England is they showed that with a couple more catches they might have defended a pretty low total. And it was far from their strongest line-up. Bairstow needed that score to stay in the mix. Nice knock by Marsh, he could be quite a key player for Australia for some years.
He could have been quite a key player for Australia some years ago.
Given the endless opportunities he has been gifted you’d expect one swallow per summer. But barely anything more and only then when conditions are singularly favourable.
He’s in the team due to the Western Australian “jobs for the boys” cabal led by Langer.
I imagine you’ll be suitably unimpressed with England, and Malan more specifically, for dropping Marsh twice on single figures last night. After the 5 fer we let him have at The Oval last year in The Ashes, we seem to be the one side in international cricket allowing him performances that are keeping him around the Australian set up.
We didn’t score enough in the PowerPlay last night and fielded like idiots. I thought Moeen did a pretty good job with the captaincy - kept it simple by using his spinners to turn the ball away from right and left hand combinations when he had opportunity, was unafraid to bowl 7 bowlers to achieve this, and picked well when to bowl Denly as part of that plan. He was then let down by hands like feet in the slips; then he made one error and brought Wood on to bowl to Marsh, who likes the pace, and that was game over.
Be interesting to see how the ODIs go. England are almost going full strength by the looks of the squad and Australia have now had some T20s under their belt to blow some cobwebs off from their Covid enforced break from playing, so it could be tasty.