NZ Test tour of Eng, June 2-27

[Gingerfinch]

Looks like three consecutive run chases of around 300. 6 months ago, we wouldn't have made one of them!

[Durhamfootman]

An absolute shocker from Crawley

it's one thing to be completely out of form, and sometimes the longer the bad trot goes on the more it gets into the batter's head and parts of his game start to fall apart, but that happens sometimes. It's probably fair to say that it happens to everyone at some stage of their career..... but to sell your opening partner down the river, then start to try and flog your way into some sort of redemption, only to hole out in pathetic fashion for not very many.... well lets just say that it isn't a good look

I fully expected Crawley to play in this test despite his horror series, after all the series was already won, so there isn't a lot of risk in giving him a bit more of a chance, but today might very well be the final straw. The first innings showed how badly he's playing atm and the second innings showed that his head is completely scrambled as well. I feel really sorry for Alex Lees who is also trying to forge a test career and before this test seemed to be making steady, if unspectacular progress. Then he comes to Headingley, gets an unplayable snorter from Boult in the first over of the first innings and then gets stitched up by his partner in the second

[Durhamfootman]

I thought NZ bowled really, really poorly in that final session. They look shot. England look favourites to chase this down. Free entry tomorrow

interesting that MItchell missed/dropped nearly as many catches at first slip as Root did earlier. Both standing too wide. Many of those chances were identical to the ones England missed

[alfie]

Despite those two early wickets , England seem to be on track for another successful run chase. Pope and Root didn't really go full Baz-ball ; but they've been busy , run really well , and cashed in on any loose stuff - particularly from poor Bracewell who looks in over his head. He really ought to be the NZ main threat on this pitch day four/five ; but although he has actually forced a couple of false shots that might on another day have brought wickets , he has leaked runs at such a rate that Williamson has been unable to use him for long periods. More blame on the management for picking a part time spinner only than on him , I think.

113 more really ought to be a walk in the park ; but I never like to call a game when one side has a reputation for flakiness and the other rarely backs down from a fight. Get a wicket or two early in the morning (weather a bit dodgy , no ?) and there might still be some tension before it is done. No Foakes the Finisher this time ; and Billings was struggling a bit as sub keeper so possibly shouldn't be counted on too much with the bat , if he is called upon. These two and the ginger pair need to take the responsibility.

Agree with DFM that the NZ bowlers looked to be running on fumes after tea. Boult has been massive for them across the three games , but even he can't have unlimited energy reserves. In fairness to their selection errors , injuries to CDG and Jamieson haven't helped.

While Leach really stood up to make his contribution to New England in this match , Crawley has had another horror show - though at least he didn't drop any catches this time. I actually think his problems are more mental than technical at present : certainly he has faults that he needs to address - and very possibly he just isn't suited to opening at this level ; but much of his shot selection in these games seems to be the product of a scrambled mind. Probably not easy , being told "go and play your natural game , we are backing you" - while being only too aware of a string of single figure scores since his century in North Sound (only five Tests ago !) : currently doesn't know whether to stick or twist... I never pick a team for one match until the previous one is over ; but it does seem it might be better for both team and player if he was released to work on his game at an easier level for a while. Can't help wondering if he might benefit from a bit of club cricket in Australia during the Northern winter ...

Hopefully the weather won't mess up the end of this very entertaining series. If it does end up 3-0 , NZ might feel the scoreline is just a bit misleading : but they might have a case for the consolation of a PoTS ? Mitchell surely has an excellent case (despite a few clangers in the slips).

[sussexpob]

Wait a minute, Billing's can bat in England's innings?

NZ have lost two bowlers in 4th innings this series, which considering at least one chase was verging on impossible and the other NZ favourites, seems significant in the result (especially in back to back games where the bowlers have had to take on huge work loads, and as acknowledged, look gassed).... and yet couldnt replace them. England lose two guys, and both have been replaced by players who have been able to play a full part in the matches after.

I dont really understand why distinctions are made for this sort of thing. If a player has concussion, covid or a broken leg, why are all not replaced or none? Concussion is argued away on the fact it prevents people being sent back in with injuries covered up, but its 2022.... any evidence of that happening should lead to lifetime bans, so there is no reason to justify an injury replacement. We have a bizarre situation where someone hit by a bouncer in the head gets a sub, someone who has their arm broken doesn't... but both are examples of unfortunate injuries and to me shouldn't be treated differently.

[Arthur Crabtree]

If a player had a strain and missed the rest of the game, presumably he could be replaced if he then tested positive for Covid.

[sussexpob]

If a player had a strain and missed the rest of the game, presumably he could be replaced if he then tested positive for Covid.

Id guess. Obviously these sorts of rules lead to bad blood occasionally. If I remember correctly, and can be corrected on the details, didn't Ravi Jadeja recently injure himself turning for a run and limped off with a bad leg, and India claimed he had concussion because he'd jarred his head diving into the crease and sent on another spinner much to ( Australia's ???) the criticism of pundits and the opposition?

I have no reason to doubt England's honesty and trust they arent abusing any rules, but imagine if Billing's ends up contributing to a win here. Or if they replace players in tests further into the summer.... you end up with questions from fans and teams a like about it, whether justified or not. Its just far simpler to me to allow or not allow replacements irrespective of the reason.

[sussexpob]

Agreed. That said, he is only 24, so does have time to improve and score those cc runs and win a place back. May not be likely, but you never know.

His FC average was clinging by a decimal point to the 30s before this game, I cant be bothered to do the maths but I'd guess its now in the 20s... at 24 years old, that cannot be justified on any level. While I dont expect a player to reach their full potential at such an age, you would expect them to be somewhere near it or at least good enough to justify their place in the team on more than blind potential.

A sub 30s FC average for an opener is not even justifying a spot in Kent's team, let alone 24 test matches. Lets make no bones about it, his record in professional 4 day cricket is rubbish. And the only real time he looked like a test class player was against a Pakistan team who'd been piloted in with no cricket in an age, no prep, no warm up, and who looked gassed after 10 overs of the series.

His defensive technique is very poor. He alternates between trying to ride the wave and dig in, and mostly fails... or gives up and tries to hit everything, which also mostly fails. And yes, his stroke making ability is lovely to watch, and I get the punt England took... but 24 tests in, its clear it hasnt worked.

He has time to improve, yes... but his FC record is shambolic. He not only has to improve, but transition from someone performing at a level barely worthy of FC games, to one who consistently outperforms the pack. I see no reason why he can.... players dont average 20s with the bat at 24 years old, and 80 FC games for no reason. The natural conclusion is he's obviously not very good, and has never been consistently good enough

[Arthur Crabtree]

Foakes went off with an injury, so it is a coincidence. But I'm not alleging foul play!

[sussexpob]

Foakes went off with an injury, so it is a coincidence. But I'm not alleging foul play!

I was away all weekend at a wedding, so I wasnt aware Foakes also left the field with the back injury. Not so sure that's acceptable, but as stated, the rules seem open to abuse or unfairness.

[sussexpob]

Meanwhile elsewhere, Skipper Morgan calls it a day

[Arthur Crabtree]

Feels sudden, but he's 35 so not unexpected. I thought he said he was going on to the next WC though.

An England great, and most successful ODI skipper. But there's always some regret that Ireland lost his services. He could have been a major figure in their development.

Raining.

[bigfluffylemon]

If a player had a strain and missed the rest of the game, presumably he could be replaced if he then tested positive for Covid.

Id guess. Obviously these sorts of rules lead to bad blood occasionally. If I remember correctly, and can be corrected on the details, didn't Ravi Jadeja recently injure himself turning for a run and limped off with a bad leg, and India claimed he had concussion because he'd jarred his head diving into the crease and sent on another spinner much to ( Australia's ???) the criticism of pundits and the opposition?
.

Yes, he did. I was at that game in Oz. Jadeja didn't even leave the field, he batted until the end of the innings, scoring several boundaries in the last couple of overs then India had a specialist spinner take the field as a 'like for like' replacement on the basis that Jadeja got hit late in the innings. I didn't even notice the hit, so it can't have been that bad (it certainly didn't stop play), and then the replacement spinner took a couple of wickets and derailed Australia's chase.

The match referee permitted the change on the advice of the Indian team doctor that Jadeja had taken a blow to the head. So it was within the rules, but the nature of the sub (specialist spinner rather than part-timer) and the timing of it (Jadeja batted on after he got hit, but then apparently couldn't bowl) were both pretty dodgy in my view.

That said, I've never understood why there are no injury subs in cricket. Especially when a bowler goes down in the first innings like Jamieson did at TB. Doesn't seem fair that a team can field a sub fielder, but be down a batter and a bowler for three or four days.


I guess the opposition is that it could be open to abuse as players who are not truly injured get subbed, but as sp says, you'd get caught quickly. And why do you accept the word of the team that someone has a head injury but not a torn hamstring? Be consistent.

I'd allow one sub between first and second innings at least. And this may be controversial, but why not allow it regardless of injury? We see tactical subs in other games all the time (football teams change formation as a result of substitution to protect a lead, for example). Would it be so terrible in cricket to adjust the balance of the side slightly to take account of the match situation?

[alfie]

The issue of substitutes in cricket is a bit messy , for sure. The trouble is the rules do seem to have been rather made up on the run...

For eons there was no option for a player to be replaced - except by a sub fielder - in any circumstances. Just tough luck if someone got hurt. But then a more enlightened modern sensibility decreed that head injuries were just too much of a threat to health and safety and in came the concussion sub. (and of course at various different lower levels we have seen all sorts of replacements and "designated bat/bowler" in 12 man teams , etc) .
But in the first class game , the old laws remained in the case of other injuries - worse even with runners no longer allowed for hobbling batsmen !

Then along came Covid...and obviously essential safeguards needed to be in place to ensure games could proceed even in the event of an outbreak.

I suppose now the genie is pretty well out of the bottle and we will eventually see rule changes allowing replacement of injured players become more widespread. Like drs though , I suspect that this will cause nearly as many arguments as it settles : who decides when a player is injured enough ? Like for like replacement ? Perfect fairness might be hard to achieve...

And I really do not want to see tactical substitutions infiltrating the Test Match scene. I do admit I am a dinosaur , of course

[bigfluffylemon]

Pope has batted beautifully. I hope this series is the breakthrough for him and he goes on to realise his talent in the test arena at last.

My fault.