Cricket: NZ vs England
-
@Godder said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
316/5 at tea, excellent work by Watling and CdG. Still early in his career, but CdG would be getting up there as a test all-rounder.
He's got a better bowling strike-rate and average than Stokes, and a better batting average, yet somehow stokes is seen as the better all-rounder - usual fallacious case of equating limited over performances with Tests
@SynicBast said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
@Godder said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
316/5 at tea, excellent work by Watling and CdG. Still early in his career, but CdG would be getting up there as a test all-rounder.
He's got a better bowling strike-rate and average than Stokes, and a better batting average, yet somehow stokes is seen as the better all-rounder - usual fallacious case of equating limited over performances with Tests
Stokes has played a lot more tests and against tougher opposition. He's had 26 Ashes innings with the bat, where Colin has never played Australia. Similarly, Stokes has played plenty against India, where Colin never has.
-
@SynicBast said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
@Godder said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
316/5 at tea, excellent work by Watling and CdG. Still early in his career, but CdG would be getting up there as a test all-rounder.
He's got a better bowling strike-rate and average than Stokes, and a better batting average, yet somehow stokes is seen as the better all-rounder - usual fallacious case of equating limited over performances with Tests
Stokes has played a lot more tests and against tougher opposition. He's had 26 Ashes innings with the bat, where Colin has never played Australia. Similarly, Stokes has played plenty against India, where Colin never has.
@Chris-B said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
@SynicBast said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
@Godder said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
316/5 at tea, excellent work by Watling and CdG. Still early in his career, but CdG would be getting up there as a test all-rounder.
He's got a better bowling strike-rate and average than Stokes, and a better batting average, yet somehow stokes is seen as the better all-rounder - usual fallacious case of equating limited over performances with Tests
Stokes has played a lot more tests and against tougher opposition. He's had 26 Ashes innings with the bat, where Colin has never played Australia. Similarly, Stokes has played plenty against India, where Colin never has.
What’s the old saying, you can only play what’s in front of you?
Also the fact he plays for NZ means he’s never going to get the usual plaudits that a good English, Aussie or Indian cricketer are going to get.
-
Completely becalmed. Hopefully a sign that the pitch is starting to wear and get tougher to bat on.
-
I can see why they're digging in. Flailing and being all out for 440 makes no sense given the slowness of the pitch. If they can occupy the crease then the runs will come - still think this is heading for a draw though and the pitch has let down the grand occasion of Bay Oval's first test
-
@Virgil would love to see him go on and get a double. I imagine he’ll have limited time to do it after lunch through so he’d have to up his tempo significantly.
100 odd runs in the next hour, enough for Satnav to bring up his maiden tonne BJ to bring up his double.... wishful thinking I know
-
I can see why they're digging in. Flailing and being all out for 440 makes no sense given the slowness of the pitch. If they can occupy the crease then the runs will come - still think this is heading for a draw though and the pitch has let down the grand occasion of Bay Oval's first test
@KiwiPie said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
I can see why they're digging in. Flailing and being all out for 440 makes no sense given the slowness of the pitch. If they can occupy the crease then the runs will come - still think this is heading for a draw though and the pitch has let down the grand occasion of Bay Oval's first test
I disagree. The pitch is flat so we need as much time as possible to bowl them out. We have zero risk of losing so if the game is heading for a draw, why not go for it?
-
Lunch. 99 run lead.
Would be good to accelerate a bit.
Am not talking flailing but 16 runs in the opening hour is not exactly demonstrating intent.
Picked up a bit without risk in the second hour with 42.
Seems to me though best chance of a win is keep doing what we're doing, put a big lead on and rely on scoreboard pressure, and chase a small total in the last session tomorrow.
I don't thinks there's enough tome to get them out and chase a medium sized total.
-
While the batsmen are in, let them bat. There are still well over 2 days to go, so no real hurry. Declaring at drinks or so in the last session should give a good lead and plenty of time to bowl at them.
