Eng Test tour of NZ, Nov 28 - Dec 18

[Durhamfootman]

Stokesy is whinging about the 3 points docked for over rates, but he can't have any complaints.... not really.... they take the ssip with over rates and afaik seem to show no urgency at all. He pointed out that the match finished early, which is entirely besides the point and he pointed out that it's easier to bowl 90 overs in Asia where spin is predominant than it is in other parts of the world where seam is dominant, completely ignoring the fact that England bowled spin for a quarter of the first innings and still missed the over rate target by the proverbial mile

Dobell is absolutely right... if the ICC, instead of docking points for a comp that nobody really cares about and percentages of match fees for people on very high wages anyway, insisted that punters had to be refunded for every over of play missed, the practice of slow over rates would disappear overnight, because all the boards and certainly the ECB, would insist upon it

I love Stokesy to bits, but he hasn't got a leg to stand on here. When he returned to Durham for 2 matches in the summer, our over rates, which we struggle with at times, plummeted and I think we got docked points for it in the Somerset game

what did England bowl in the first session of the first test? 24 overs? That's not even close. Harmy used to take an age to bowl his overs so I once timed spells from him and Plunkett when Durham were playing Lancs at OT. Plunkett took an average of 3 mins to bowl an over whilst Harmy was closer to 4 minutes. This lot only just about manage to get an over in in 5 minutes.... and nobody, but nobody within the team gives a sh1t about it, so they don't even pretend that they're trying to do something about it, let alone actually make the effort. They can complain all they like about having 19 of their 28 WTC points docked from the last ashes series, but they aren't doing anything about it. It's entirely in their own hands.... nobody else to blame at all

[sussexpob]

I do have a little sympathy for modern players, simply because they are expected to bowl the same speed of overs as their past counterparts did, but they have DRS stoppages, more boundaries scored, and the implementation of drinks breaks 3 times a day. I would suggest all these equate to probably 4-5 overs minimum lost, and can contribute more if DRS has a very sticky decision to make or lots of referrals. Or if batsman keep smashing the ball into row Z ... it might only be 10 seconds extra to fetch the ball, but over a day with someone like England smashing it all over that all adds up.

The game in that way hasn't really adapted. You can't give teams less real time to bowl overs, and then just fine or dock them points for not getting through the overs in time. Its a bit of a stupid solution. And I do take Stokes point - a team with fast bowlers with long run ups against a team with 3 spinners in Asia... not comparable.

[sussexpob]

One thing that does annoy me though is the strict, fixed scheduling. Why in June or July are we coming off for play at 18:30 maximum with overs still to bowl, when it gets dark hours later, and even if it gets dark before that, we have floodlights - finish the overs, people paid to watch 90. I remember that used to be the attitude back in the 90s.... if overs were to be bowled, they would go on later, with the umpire judging the light and what was appropriate.

[alfie]

drs does take up time - sometimes a lot of it. But England made things harder for themselves by bowling a lot of no balls : 11 in each innings , plus a bunch of wides - so about three overs extra ...

I do understand why Stokes finds it all a bit off because of the unequal way in which these points deductions work : only counting if the batting team's innings goes past 80 overs , for example ; and obviously the difference between spin heavy and mainly pace attacks. Don't think it is a huge deal to the players anyway or they'd make more effort to avoid such sanctions. Some spectators may be seriously annoyed at losing half a dozen overs from their day : personally I don't really care as long as I get a day of good cricket to watch.

If you have to set up rules like this , I'd be more inclined to penalise teams with runs(not too many , just enough to raise awareness of over rates) rather than WTC points , : the fact that England lost 19 of their 28 points from the last Ashes seems out of proportion to the offence , and makes a bit of a mockery of the WTC table.

Agree they could be more flexible with finishing times.

[Arthur Crabtree]

It's not so much the spectator losing the overs, as having to watch slowed down action, which is less compelling. Watching players come out after a break and having a team meeting in the middle of the first over, or someone coming on with a pair of loves between drinks breaks. Sometimes it feels witless. This happens whether the spinners are on or not. It should be stopped. And it shows a lack of respect for the spectators.

It's not like there are a lot of genuine fast bowlers around. But the play is slow whoever is bowling. I remember Dhoni just stopping a game once in India. Seemed there was nothing the umpires could do.

[Arthur Crabtree]

TV wanted a definite close of play time for scheduling.

[sussexpob]

I do understand why Stokes finds it all a bit off because of the unequal way in which these points deductions work : only counting if the batting team's innings goes past 80 overs , for example ; and obviously the difference between spin heavy and mainly pace attacks. Don't think it is a huge deal to the players anyway or they'd make more effort to avoid such sanctions. Some spectators may be seriously annoyed at losing half a dozen overs from their day : personally I don't really care as long as I get a day of good cricket to watch

There is that quality of cricket argument that factors in. As an example, I watched Sussex back at the start of the county season, two batsman were hit on the head by bouncers from Seales and neither were hurt, but you then have to have a guy come out and do a concussion assessment, change helmets what not, long delays.... by the end of the day Sussex had two part-time spin options on at either end bowling an over as quick as physically possible to get the overs in..... not trying to take wickets, just churning out balls quickly. I'd much rather watch 1 over at the end of proper cricket than 2-3 overs of part time medium pace being sprayed everywhere just for quantity sake.

[sussexpob]

Agree they could be more flexible with finishing times.

Different issue, but its the same with rain delays. How many times do umpires say play starts at "x time" or they take a lunch break early, and then it rains again. If you want to care about getting overs in, just get out there as soon as the covers are off.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Kiwis unchanged too.

[backfootpunch]

First ball not bowled until 10:04

[backfootpunch]

Crawley obviously feels if he plays normally he will just get out

Currently playing a t20 innings

Though he's missed 12 of the 22 balls he's played

He will need harry brooks luck for this to last any length of time.

The edge behind seems inevitable. But I guess he's scored 16 more runs than the last test match.

[backfootpunch]

Didn't take long.

Was a good ball from henry tbf.

Big job for root and bethell. You'd imagine it'll flatten out after lunch. Just a question of how much damage is done by then.

[sussexpob]

Not a great start

[Arthur Crabtree]

Nice start for Henry though. 4-4-0-2. Four maidens to England's swinging openers, and both scalps.

[backfootpunch]

Horrendous shot from root

In danger of getting skittled here