Cricket-Match-Special ... A forum for discussion

I have no idea either. I was just amused at the article as nine of the pros have any idea, yet presumably they were all paid to pull a guess out of some orifice.

McGrath was as definite as ever

But I suspect he just didn't want to disappoint anyone.

Seems reasonable as there really are too many imponderables this time around. Unusual timing , cluttered schedule , unknown pitches , players with "unorthodox" preparations...and the clash of two different systems yet untried against each other. Should all make for a fascinating series - which really could go in any direction.

I don't think it will be one-sided , either way. Hope not as we all love those classic tight contests...

Aussies haven't won a series in Blighty since 2001 and England have only won 2 of the last 15 ashes tests, I think, so one of those is going to have to change

We watched England obliterate New Zealand, India and SA last summer (it only going t1ts up once), but that has to be balanced with the high number of injuries/fitness worries they now have. Add in to the mix, no time in the middle for Brook, Root or Mo and with a big daft turnip opening and anything could happen

I have a feeling it'll be Australia who'll make the change.

Had this been last winter in Australia, I think England would have scared them to death and rolled them over, but it feels like that winning momentum may have passed now...... too many imponderables, for me

I'm very happy to be wrong

Under Stokes captaincy we have played 13 Tests and the only fast bowlers have been Wood 2 Tests and Overton and Tongue 1 Test.

That has been a surprise as I assumed that in nearly all those Tests we had a fast bowler most times. I think Stokes has taken on that role, not by his speed but by making the batsmen uncomfortable.

https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/the- ... ut-1381508

ah well, they've opted for Broad in the 1st test

I think that makes sense.... see if he can put Wee Davey back in his top pocket straight away

Slipstream wrote:Under Stokes captaincy we have played 13 Tests and the only fast bowlers have been Wood 2 Tests and Overton and Tongue 1 Test

I wouldnt say Tongue was an out and out Fast bowler, imo. 85-87 is nippy, but I wouldn't have said outright fast.

It made me laugh, because with Jamie Overton the story at the time was England went around the county grounds with a sophisticated speed gun, and as soon as Jamie Overton topped 90mph, he got a test cap.... then bowled like a drain vs NZ. So maybe they have realised that isnt a good idea, basing everything on speed?

Seems England have given up on Craig Overton too, for the opposite reason of being too slow. Although tbf, he was poor in his outings in an English shirt - maybe a horses for courses use in the future if its a raging green top, but on a flat deck in Asia, you could have a cup of tea and a sandwich before the ball gets there.

Did anyone in Strauss bowling attack for the future make it out the first series?

sussexpob wrote:

Slipstream wrote:Under Stokes captaincy we have played 13 Tests and the only fast bowlers have been Wood 2 Tests and Overton and Tongue 1 Test

I wouldnt say Tongue was an out and out Fast bowler, imo. 85-87 is nippy, but I wouldn't have said outright fast.

It made me laugh, because with Jamie Overton the story at the time was England went around the county grounds with a sophisticated speed gun, and as soon as Jamie Overton topped 90mph, he got a test cap.... then bowled like a drain vs NZ. So maybe they have realised that isnt a good idea, basing everything on speed?

Seems England have given up on Craig Overton too, for the opposite reason of being too slow. Although tbf, he was poor in his outings in an English shirt - maybe a horses for courses use in the future if its a raging green top, but on a flat deck in Asia, you could have a cup of tea and a sandwich before the ball gets there.

Did anyone in Strauss bowling attack for the future make it out the first series?

I wouldn't call Tongue fast either but the media/England say so just like Mahmood, J Overton etc. They all start bowling one or two that is 90 and at the end of the Test revert to 85/86/87mph. Only two I consider fast are Archer and Wood.

I was just looking at the last Ashes in Australia and thinking Strauss wanted to try his bowling attack of the future leaving Broad and Anderson out. Woakes and Robinson played at Brisbane. I would have left Anderson out anyway as it is his worst ground.

Since back from the West Indies Woakes and Robinson have not played together. I think Woakes excuse to Strauss that he didn't do well overseas because he didn't get the new ball. Well no Test since March 22.

Will Robinson get the new ball tomorrow with Anderson? Stokes placated Broad by telling him if he bowls first change he will get more overs which Broad liked. I think it will be Broad/Anderson because of Warner. Anderson will get about 4 overs. Hope Stokes wins the toss and bowls first. The batsmen will be too nervous to bat first.

I'm not even that convinced about Archer being an out and out fast bowler either

Root is No 1 in the rankings

Independent inquiry discovers English cricket is a lot like England.

and as I predicted, it recommended a really heavy points deduction for just the season that is already dead for them. No recommendation to start next season with a points deduction, which is fair enough because there is no precedent for that........ oh wait!

I keep being told that 2 wrongs don't make a right, but I'm finding it hard to swallow

Durhamfootman wrote:and as I predicted, it recommended a really heavy points deduction for just the season that is already dead for them. No recommendation to start next season with a points deduction, which is fair enough because there is no precedent for that........ oh wait!

Durham got an all format points deduction last year because of their poor on field discipline, the ECB report cited Ben Raine bowling a beamer accidentally and Paul Coughlin swearing at someone, and that was worth a total of about 25 points. They then got an additional points deduction for Maddinson having a slightly bigger than regulation bat.

All in all, the ECB have judged these offences to be roughly the same worth in punishments to a sustain and brutal racist culture at a club that lasted years, and involved multiple players and incidents.

They described it as "hefty"... I would describe it as laughable.

If they want a make an example of Yorkshire on a day English cricket has been open about its racist problems, then even a token make sure they finish bottom of everything type punishment would have felt at least more suitable.

One mitigation may be that the report found the same issues endemic throughout the game, but Yorkshire were exceptional because one of their players resisted the generally tolerated norms.

The ECB have an opportunity to end this endemic culture now. They should be actively encouraging the respondents in their surveys to come forward with specific cases, and be ready to hear every single one. Those people in the game who allowed this to happen or played active parts in it should be shamed and eradicated from the game. Nothing is going to change by simply saying "everything is wrong" without being specific or seeking justice for those who were victims, or punishment for those who engaged in this behaviour. Deep down maybe Yorkshire are unlucky because Rafiq had the balls to speak out about it, while it happens everywhere - but that's not a satisfactory ending. The punishment should be harsh, and if evidence existed to suggest it has happened elsewhere, punish those the same. Even if we end up with 18 teams next year with points deductions.

On a positive, the acknowledgement of classism in the game is in part some form of comfort. While I never suffered from it personally, it made sure my brother with learning difficulties never got an opportunity to play at a level he deserved.... like a few others.