Skip to main content
Topic: It's the Creekit (Read 13060 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: It's the Creekit

Reply #30
I know it's early, but What's with cook at the moment? Not sure he's made any sort of score yet this tour.

Re: It's the Creekit

Reply #31
Donny must have some sort of a view on this.


Re: It's the Creekit

Reply #33
Moeen at 6 is interesting. I know Stokes isn't there but why haven't they moved Bairstow up a place? Is Wicket keeping in the heat that debilitating? Anyway - I am rooting for Mo as I really want England to win this test.

Re: It's the Creekit

Reply #34
Disappointed to wake up to see the score. Seemed to be a bit more finally balanced than it’s going to end up being

Re: It's the Creekit

Reply #35
Definitely need some quick wickets tomorrow.

Re: It's the Creekit

Reply #36
Amazing how a line up crammed with batting collapses yet again, though the current crapness of the bowling behind Anderson and Broad is equally concerning.

Re: It's the Creekit

Reply #37
Am I the only one who isn't massively impressed by Trevor Bayliss and his input, whatever that is?

Re: It's the Creekit

Reply #38
No, you aren't.

Re: It's the Creekit

Reply #39
Amazing how a line up crammed with batting collapses yet again, though the current crapness of the bowling behind Anderson and Broad is equally concerning.
Perhaps it's a perception as a result of years of being ground down, but it seems like the batting always collapses at one end or the other, just enough to ensure that the total is always just below par.  Often the bowling bails us out, but it probably wont in Australia (given jimmy's apparent ineffectiveness over there, and the absence of anyone beyond the top two).
We won the toss, on a wicket that was comparatively benign (it probably suited us more than a traditional gabba wicket), the opposition gave us chances.  We were not good  to fashion a win. Not terrible, but not good enough.
The areas of concern at the top of the order performed at least to a decent level.  The more experienced players didn't, and nobody made a big score.  So we have lost. 

Re: It's the Creekit

Reply #40
Am I the only one who isn't massively impressed by Trevor Bayliss and his input, whatever that is?

He's made them more competitive in white ball cricket, which seemed to be Strauss' priority when he appointed him.

I'm not sure there's much he can do to get county cricket to produce bowlers who can bowl at 90mph+ or good enough spinners (I think Moeen is ok but there doesn't seem to be many alternatives) and on wickets that don't seam or swing that seems to be necessary.

Amazing how a line up crammed with batting collapses yet again, though the current crapness of the bowling behind Anderson and Broad is equally concerning.

Is it crammed with batting? Broad has been useless with the bat for years now and he's batting at 9, Woakes doesn't look any better than a normal number 8 (averages 30 with a top score of 66). Without Stokes, it just looks like a normal modern batting line-up - batting all-rounder at 6, wicketkeeper-batsman at 7, then into the tail.

Re: It's the Creekit

Reply #41
England regard Woakes as someone who can score runs. Remember last summer they dropped Roland-Jones after a couple of successful tests to get Woakes back in? He scored a 50 but looked no threat with the ball and England lost. But yes, the bottom half now all do look one place too high.

Re: It's the Creekit

Reply #42
England regard Woakes as someone who can score runs. Remember last summer they dropped Roland-Jones after a couple of successful tests to get Woakes back in? He scored a 50 but looked no threat with the ball and England lost. But yes, the bottom half now all do look one place too high.

Roland-Jones is proper tail-ender though, isn't he? Woakes lasted 57 balls in the second innings, so at least gave some support to Bairstow.

In the summer, with Moeen batting at 8, maybe TRJ was treated harshly. But even if he was fit now, it would be madness to put him in ahead of Woakes (presumably with Broad at 8).

Re: It's the Creekit

Reply #43
Wouldn't it be nice if we could pick bowlers just to take wickets and leave the run scoring to the top 7?