It's The Ashes (again)

[rsbaggy2]

So much outrage. But it's justified when roles are reversed.

Eh?

I think I'm more outraged by the Australian's getting all upset at being called out for it. If you don't want people to call you a cunt, don't act like one.

Ted, you know perfectly well that the Aussies objected to being verbally abused as they walked through the Long Room back to their dressing room. Nowhere else in top level sport can the public get so close to the players. If MCC members can't show a bit of decorum in that situation, then maybe MCC will have to change their rules and keep the members away from the players.

Every action has an equal and opposite reaction? Did none of the Australians as they walked through the long room at any point think "blimey mate, wonder why Horatio is so ticked off?" - if you play stupid games you win stupid prizes and after all it was just a bit of name calling. I suggest they suck it up and carry on as it's Headingley next. As I said play stupid games, win stupid prizes and all that.

RS - I too find myself agreeing with a lot of your cricket chat, so apologies for the industrial terminology, wasn't aimed at your good self... was however aimed at Cummins & Co.

No apologies needed. You are (nearly! ) always a good egg and your posts have me nodding in agreement most of the time.

If I misunderstood then I am sorry for that also.

[CA Baggie]

So much outrage. But it's justified when roles are reversed.

Eh?

I think I'm more outraged by the Australian's getting all upset at being called out for it. If you don't want people to call you a cunt, don't act like one.

Ted, you know perfectly well that the Aussies objected to being verbally abused as they walked through the Long Room back to their dressing room. Nowhere else in top level sport can the public get so close to the players. If MCC members can't show a bit of decorum in that situation, then maybe MCC will have to change their rules and keep the members away from the players.

Every action has an equal and opposite reaction? Did none of the Australians as they walked through the long room at any point think "blimey mate, wonder why Horatio is so ticked off?" - if you play stupid games you win stupid prizes and after all it was just a bit of name calling. I suggest they suck it up and carry on as it's Headingley next. As I said play stupid games, win stupid prizes and all that.

RS - I too find myself agreeing with a lot of your cricket chat, so apologies for the industrial terminology, wasn't aimed at your good self... was however aimed at Cummins & Co.

No apologies needed. You are (nearly! ) always a good egg and your posts have me nodding in agreement most of the time.

If I misunderstood then I am sorry for that also.

Speaking for Ted I think he was calling the Aussies cunts not you.

It's cricketing etiquette, they've admitted it was pre-planned and they did it without warning.  The Mankad is hugely frowned upon, especially if done without warning and that IS to stop someone taking an advantage.  To me that's fair game, once you've warned them.

There was no advantage being gained whatsoever, we all know that technically the ball isn't dead but given this has never ever been done before in the history of cricket in this manner then it's safe to assume that players have enough respect for each other to recognise the situation.

Foakes stumping an overbalanced batsman when playing spin bowling is slightly different.  But you know what, I didn't like that either with the feint.

[Cheshire East Baggie]

I think what's most annoying about being 2-0 down is that we are so close to the Aussies (on balance). First Test was a narrow defeat, but brought upon ourselves by wasting an opportunity to bat them out of the game and then failing to deal with the tail. Note that Jimmy hardly bowled towards the end, even though we were effectively a bowler down with Moeen's finger.

Second Test was close because of Stokes' superhero performance, but we didn't need to be that far behind. First innings batting was largely poor. Bowling bouncers for long periods basically put Jimmy out of the game (see above). Could we have saved crucial runs by taking the new ball and bowling properly at their tail-enders? It just seemed muddle-headed and self-destructive, but the power was clear to see when the guys got angry.

Positives so far:
Josh Tongue - a young bowler who is quick and has time to get quicker. Potts maybe won't achieve the same pace, Robinson bowls like a much older man and will get slower with his build - Tongue is important. Great start for him.
Ben Duckett - pleased to see him getting runs against a strong bowling attack. He was the sacrificial victim as a junior member of a squad which was way off the rails back in 2017-18, and seems to have been tainted by that reputation.
Stuart Broad - is on fire. He always turns it on for the Ashes. I wish it didn't take anger to make him play like this.
Ben Stokes - well we know what he can do, and he's done more of it this weekend.

Negatives:
Cronyism - debatable whether Anderson should even have played at Edgbaston. After that performance he should have been replaced by Woakes for Lords. Moeen was also a ridiculous choice, his finger issues have been going on since about 2018, which is why he likes the shorter formats. Crawley got some runs, but still doesn't look like a Test batsman. Jury's still out on him.
Stokes' knee - this guy is walking wounded. He could barely run during the run chase yesterday. Bowling 12 overs straight off (largely because Anderson's 78mph bouncers weren't going to achieve much) could have a big influence on the rest of the series.
Tactics - there's a bravado about everything England do, whether it works or not. A determination not to mix things up, so if it isn't working they'll just go harder at it. Situations get out of control in a Test match and you have to be flexible in your response. I don't see much of that from Baz'n'Ben. And persistent short-pitched bowling will kill the game, as it did to a large extent in the 80s.
Approach - unless I misunderstood him, Stokes appeared to say that the players were free to do what they thought, without fear of criticism. For me, Stokes could have had a word with some of his batsmen in the first innings, got them to calm down and play with patience, as he did himself. Seems strange to me that this is apparently contrary to the ethos.
Joe Root - and this is the big one. Of all the players Joe Root, best batsman in the world, seems to be the one who feels pressured into not playing his normal game. Stacks of runs in the 1st test, but the 2nd passed him by. Joe Root not scoring runs is like Jimmy Anderson being on the field but not taking the new ball. Just not right. But Joe has years ahead of him, unlike Jimmy. He needs to find the right balance, or maybe just ride out Bazball and wait for common sense to break out (I give it 2 years max).

[Tom Joad]

I think what's most annoying about being 2-0 down is that we are so close to the Aussies (on balance). First Test was a narrow defeat, but brought upon ourselves by wasting an opportunity to bat them out of the game and then failing to deal with the tail. Note that Jimmy hardly bowled towards the end, even though we were effectively a bowler down with Moeen's finger.

Second Test was close because of Stokes' superhero performance, but we didn't need to be that far behind. First innings batting was largely poor. Bowling bouncers for long periods basically put Jimmy out of the game (see above). Could we have saved crucial runs by taking the new ball and bowling properly at their tail-enders? It just seemed muddle-headed and self-destructive, but the power was clear to see when the guys got angry.

Positives so far:
Josh Tongue - a young bowler who is quick and has time to get quicker. Potts maybe won't achieve the same pace, Robinson bowls like a much older man and will get slower with his build - Tongue is important. Great start for him.
Ben Duckett - pleased to see him getting runs against a strong bowling attack. He was the sacrificial victim as a junior member of a squad which was way off the rails back in 2017-18, and seems to have been tainted by that reputation.
Stuart Broad - is on fire. He always turns it on for the Ashes. I wish it didn't take anger to make him play like this.
Ben Stokes - well we know what he can do, and he's done more of it this weekend.

Negatives:
Cronyism - debatable whether Anderson should even have played at Edgbaston. After that performance he should have been replaced by Woakes for Lords. Moeen was also a ridiculous choice, his finger issues have been going on since about 2018, which is why he likes the shorter formats. Crawley got some runs, but still doesn't look like a Test batsman. Jury's still out on him.
Stokes' knee - this guy is walking wounded. He could barely run during the run chase yesterday. Bowling 12 overs straight off (largely because Anderson's 78mph bouncers weren't going to achieve much) could have a big influence on the rest of the series.
Tactics - there's a bravado about everything England do, whether it works or not. A determination not to mix things up, so if it isn't working they'll just go harder at it. Situations get out of control in a Test match and you have to be flexible in your response. I don't see much of that from Baz'n'Ben. And persistent short-pitched bowling will kill the game, as it did to a large extent in the 80s.
Approach - unless I misunderstood him, Stokes appeared to say that the players were free to do what they thought, without fear of criticism. For me, Stokes could have had a word with some of his batsmen in the first innings, got them to calm down and play with patience, as he did himself. Seems strange to me that this is apparently contrary to the ethos.
Joe Root - and this is the big one. Of all the players Joe Root, best batsman in the world, seems to be the one who feels pressured into not playing his normal game. Stacks of runs in the 1st test, but the 2nd passed him by. Joe Root not scoring runs is like Jimmy Anderson being on the field but not taking the new ball. Just not right. But Joe has years ahead of him, unlike Jimmy. He needs to find the right balance, or maybe just ride out Bazball and wait for common sense to break out (I give it 2 years max).

Good post. I would add to the negatives, Harry Brook's crazy dismissal and the done to death Foulkes/Bairstow situation. I also feel both games were closer than many would have us believe and both could have gone either way. Now, with added edge we go to Headingley, The closest ground there is to an Edgbaston type atmosphere. We have tried everything to get tickets but sadly, only the official ticket touts-Viagogo and co- have any to spare and even they are odds and ends at silly money. If England can get one back, I would really fancy us to win another.

[Beachboysbaggie]

I think what's most annoying about being 2-0 down is that we are so close to the Aussies (on balance). First Test was a narrow defeat, but brought upon ourselves by wasting an opportunity to bat them out of the game and then failing to deal with the tail. Note that Jimmy hardly bowled towards the end, even though we were effectively a bowler down with Moeen's finger.

Second Test was close because of Stokes' superhero performance, but we didn't need to be that far behind. First innings batting was largely poor. Bowling bouncers for long periods basically put Jimmy out of the game (see above). Could we have saved crucial runs by taking the new ball and bowling properly at their tail-enders? It just seemed muddle-headed and self-destructive, but the power was clear to see when the guys got angry.

Positives so far:
Josh Tongue - a young bowler who is quick and has time to get quicker. Potts maybe won't achieve the same pace, Robinson bowls like a much older man and will get slower with his build - Tongue is important. Great start for him.
Ben Duckett - pleased to see him getting runs against a strong bowling attack. He was the sacrificial victim as a junior member of a squad which was way off the rails back in 2017-18, and seems to have been tainted by that reputation.
Stuart Broad - is on fire. He always turns it on for the Ashes. I wish it didn't take anger to make him play like this.
Ben Stokes - well we know what he can do, and he's done more of it this weekend.

Negatives:
Cronyism - debatable whether Anderson should even have played at Edgbaston. After that performance he should have been replaced by Woakes for Lords. Moeen was also a ridiculous choice, his finger issues have been going on since about 2018, which is why he likes the shorter formats. Crawley got some runs, but still doesn't look like a Test batsman. Jury's still out on him.
Stokes' knee - this guy is walking wounded. He could barely run during the run chase yesterday. Bowling 12 overs straight off (largely because Anderson's 78mph bouncers weren't going to achieve much) could have a big influence on the rest of the series.
Tactics - there's a bravado about everything England do, whether it works or not. A determination not to mix things up, so if it isn't working they'll just go harder at it. Situations get out of control in a Test match and you have to be flexible in your response. I don't see much of that from Baz'n'Ben. And persistent short-pitched bowling will kill the game, as it did to a large extent in the 80s.
Approach - unless I misunderstood him, Stokes appeared to say that the players were free to do what they thought, without fear of criticism. For me, Stokes could have had a word with some of his batsmen in the first innings, got them to calm down and play with patience, as he did himself. Seems strange to me that this is apparently contrary to the ethos.
Joe Root - and this is the big one. Of all the players Joe Root, best batsman in the world, seems to be the one who feels pressured into not playing his normal game. Stacks of runs in the 1st test, but the 2nd passed him by. Joe Root not scoring runs is like Jimmy Anderson being on the field but not taking the new ball. Just not right. But Joe has years ahead of him, unlike Jimmy. He needs to find the right balance, or maybe just ride out Bazball and wait for common sense to break out (I give it 2 years max).

Agree with much of that except about Root. He’s averaging around 65 under Macullum/Stokes which is about 14 higher than his career test average

[CA Baggie]

I think what's most annoying about being 2-0 down is that we are so close to the Aussies (on balance). First Test was a narrow defeat, but brought upon ourselves by wasting an opportunity to bat them out of the game and then failing to deal with the tail. Note that Jimmy hardly bowled towards the end, even though we were effectively a bowler down with Moeen's finger.

Second Test was close because of Stokes' superhero performance, but we didn't need to be that far behind. First innings batting was largely poor. Bowling bouncers for long periods basically put Jimmy out of the game (see above). Could we have saved crucial runs by taking the new ball and bowling properly at their tail-enders? It just seemed muddle-headed and self-destructive, but the power was clear to see when the guys got angry.

Positives so far:
Josh Tongue - a young bowler who is quick and has time to get quicker. Potts maybe won't achieve the same pace, Robinson bowls like a much older man and will get slower with his build - Tongue is important. Great start for him.
Ben Duckett - pleased to see him getting runs against a strong bowling attack. He was the sacrificial victim as a junior member of a squad which was way off the rails back in 2017-18, and seems to have been tainted by that reputation.
Stuart Broad - is on fire. He always turns it on for the Ashes. I wish it didn't take anger to make him play like this.
Ben Stokes - well we know what he can do, and he's done more of it this weekend.

Negatives:
Cronyism - debatable whether Anderson should even have played at Edgbaston. After that performance he should have been replaced by Woakes for Lords. Moeen was also a ridiculous choice, his finger issues have been going on since about 2018, which is why he likes the shorter formats. Crawley got some runs, but still doesn't look like a Test batsman. Jury's still out on him.
Stokes' knee - this guy is walking wounded. He could barely run during the run chase yesterday. Bowling 12 overs straight off (largely because Anderson's 78mph bouncers weren't going to achieve much) could have a big influence on the rest of the series.
Tactics - there's a bravado about everything England do, whether it works or not. A determination not to mix things up, so if it isn't working they'll just go harder at it. Situations get out of control in a Test match and you have to be flexible in your response. I don't see much of that from Baz'n'Ben. And persistent short-pitched bowling will kill the game, as it did to a large extent in the 80s.
Approach - unless I misunderstood him, Stokes appeared to say that the players were free to do what they thought, without fear of criticism. For me, Stokes could have had a word with some of his batsmen in the first innings, got them to calm down and play with patience, as he did himself. Seems strange to me that this is apparently contrary to the ethos.
Joe Root - and this is the big one. Of all the players Joe Root, best batsman in the world, seems to be the one who feels pressured into not playing his normal game. Stacks of runs in the 1st test, but the 2nd passed him by. Joe Root not scoring runs is like Jimmy Anderson being on the field but not taking the new ball. Just not right. But Joe has years ahead of him, unlike Jimmy. He needs to find the right balance, or maybe just ride out Bazball and wait for common sense to break out (I give it 2 years max).

I wouldn’t expect him to criticise any of them in public or even infer that.  What gets said inside the dressing room is maybe a different matter.

[AnelkasBeard]

I think what's most annoying about being 2-0 down is that we are so close to the Aussies (on balance). First Test was a narrow defeat, but brought upon ourselves by wasting an opportunity to bat them out of the game and then failing to deal with the tail. Note that Jimmy hardly bowled towards the end, even though we were effectively a bowler down with Moeen's finger.

Second Test was close because of Stokes' superhero performance, but we didn't need to be that far behind. First innings batting was largely poor. Bowling bouncers for long periods basically put Jimmy out of the game (see above). Could we have saved crucial runs by taking the new ball and bowling properly at their tail-enders? It just seemed muddle-headed and self-destructive, but the power was clear to see when the guys got angry.

Positives so far:
Josh Tongue - a young bowler who is quick and has time to get quicker. Potts maybe won't achieve the same pace, Robinson bowls like a much older man and will get slower with his build - Tongue is important. Great start for him.
Ben Duckett - pleased to see him getting runs against a strong bowling attack. He was the sacrificial victim as a junior member of a squad which was way off the rails back in 2017-18, and seems to have been tainted by that reputation.
Stuart Broad - is on fire. He always turns it on for the Ashes. I wish it didn't take anger to make him play like this.
Ben Stokes - well we know what he can do, and he's done more of it this weekend.

Negatives:
Cronyism - debatable whether Anderson should even have played at Edgbaston. After that performance he should have been replaced by Woakes for Lords. Moeen was also a ridiculous choice, his finger issues have been going on since about 2018, which is why he likes the shorter formats. Crawley got some runs, but still doesn't look like a Test batsman. Jury's still out on him.
Stokes' knee - this guy is walking wounded. He could barely run during the run chase yesterday. Bowling 12 overs straight off (largely because Anderson's 78mph bouncers weren't going to achieve much) could have a big influence on the rest of the series.
Tactics - there's a bravado about everything England do, whether it works or not. A determination not to mix things up, so if it isn't working they'll just go harder at it. Situations get out of control in a Test match and you have to be flexible in your response. I don't see much of that from Baz'n'Ben. And persistent short-pitched bowling will kill the game, as it did to a large extent in the 80s.
Approach - unless I misunderstood him, Stokes appeared to say that the players were free to do what they thought, without fear of criticism. For me, Stokes could have had a word with some of his batsmen in the first innings, got them to calm down and play with patience, as he did himself. Seems strange to me that this is apparently contrary to the ethos.
Joe Root - and this is the big one. Of all the players Joe Root, best batsman in the world, seems to be the one who feels pressured into not playing his normal game. Stacks of runs in the 1st test, but the 2nd passed him by. Joe Root not scoring runs is like Jimmy Anderson being on the field but not taking the new ball. Just not right. But Joe has years ahead of him, unlike Jimmy. He needs to find the right balance, or maybe just ride out Bazball and wait for common sense to break out (I give it 2 years max).

Not sure what you mean about Stokes not running in the chase? He wasn't running so that he could farm the strike. And he and Broad took several quick 2s, Stokes knee looked absolutely fine?

I'd also echo that Joe Root is batting excellently during "bazball". He'll be fine. The rest, I'd agree with. Been great to see Duckett bat so well, Tongue looks like a find. The rest of the negatives I do probably agree with.

I think I'd take what Stokes is saying to the media with a pinch of salt though. He kept saying "clarity", and "the batsmen can do what they think is right for the situation", in his Sky interview. Doesn't mean that they don't discuss what tactics to use with the batsmen, and don't come up with tactics together. Just that once out there in the middle, it's up to the batsman to implement those tactics/ideas as they see fit, without repurcussions. Take Brook's 50 as a good example of that, he batted differently to the rest of the team but with the same mindset.

They absolutely need to focus more and get bat to "winning" rather than "entertaining" though. Hopefully the back end of the chase will show them this going forward. The Aussies were petrified when Stokes got going. Need more of that mentality.

[SuperBob2002]

I understand the logic of farming the strike, given the form Stokes was showing, but shielding Broad from the strike like a no.11 walking wicket was a little odd to me. He's a capable batsman with a Test Century to his name and a number of 50's. He can bat.

I don't want to be too critical, as I could see the logic.

[AnelkasBeard]

I understand the logic of farming the strike, given the form Stokes was showing, but shielding Broad from the strike like a no.11 walking wicket was a little odd to me. He's a capable batsman with a Test Century to his name and a number of 50's. He can bat.

I don't want to be too critical, as I could see the logic.

Broad is very susceptible to the short ball. His test century and most of his 50s came a long time ago, when he hadn't been whacked on the head and lost a lot of his batting skill.

Also, it's hard for someone to start in that environment. Broad is the perfect WUM to have with him there.

[SuperBob2002]

I understand the logic of farming the strike, given the form Stokes was showing, but shielding Broad from the strike like a no.11 walking wicket was a little odd to me. He's a capable batsman with a Test Century to his name and a number of 50's. He can bat.

I don't want to be too critical, as I could see the logic.

Broad is very susceptible to the short ball. His test century and most of his 50s came a long time ago, when he hadn't been whacked on the head and lost a lot of his batting skill.

Also, it's hard for someone to start in that environment. Broad is the perfect WUM to have with him there.

Don't get me wrong, I get it. It wasn't a criticism per se. I just feel turning down runs when you're chasing and have less than 100 runs to go is odd, especially with a capable batsman at the crease and wickets in hand. It's something I see in all forms and from most teams in cricket so the issue is with my preference, clearly!

I know Broad isn't the batsman he once was, but he's a still better than a true tail-ender, for me.