English cricket - winter 2016/2017.

[Gargamel]

Ballance has a fundamental foot flaw, especially early in his innings, he just doesn't seem to ever come to the crease in form and ready, he either somehow survives five overs and then seems to be very solid (eg he has a good number of half centuries. Or he is dismissed very early looking a total stranger to the process of batting.

Wierd

[Gargamel]

So Bangla ticking along ok, and England (under Cook) once again seem to be content to let it drift. We seem to have a problem with intensity.

Took two wickets, but then within a couple of overs all the heat was out of the situation and we just wait. Not sure why.

[Long Drax]

jet_noise said:

And that's the only thing terrestrial about non-Sky coverage. Neither TMS nor highlights, pah!

Good news! The Test highlights are on ITV4 1900-2000.

[jet_noise]

Long Drax said:

jet_noise said:

And that's the only thing terrestrial about non-Sky coverage. Neither TMS nor highlights, pah!

Good news! The Test highlights are on ITV4 1900-2000.

Yep, watching it now, having seen yesterday's too.
Not that keen on the coverage, bit flat compared to channel 4 or 5's efforts

[spikeyhead]

I've been doing no more than perusing the score occasionally this test.

Is the wicket really as difficult as the scorecard suggests?

[skeggysteve]

jet_noise said:

Yep, watching it now, having seen yesterday's too.
Not that keen on the coverage, bit flat compared to channel 4 or 5's efforts

Have to agree, the ITV coverage is not as good as C4 or C5.

But I did like Matthew Hoggard on todays highlights.

[Amirhussain]

This could be an interesting finish. Bangladesh game to lose

[jet_noise]

Amirhussain said:

This could be an interesting finish. Bangladesh game to lose

And all of a sudden it's for 7!!
Tight.

skeggysteve said:

jet_noise said:

Yep, watching it now, having seen yesterday's too.
Not that keen on the coverage, bit flat compared to channel 4 or 5's efforts

Have to agree, the ITV coverage is not as good as C4 or C5.

But I did like Matthew Hoggard on todays highlights.

Me too, good value is Hoggy

[spikeyhead]

Nothing can go wrong from here (from a Bangladeshi point of view)

[jet_noise]

spikeyhead said:

Nothing can go wrong from here (from a Bangladeshi point of view)

Oops, that man Stokes does the job.

A cracking test. Well done the Bangles for keeping England honest. Odd the number of reviews, down to the number of LBWs or Dharmasena's terrible first day?

The Torygraph really likes the TV coverage. Having watched last night's with Ed Smith & Jonathan Trott it crystalised my flatness observation. If you're going to have Ed Smith you need a Hoggy to lighten things up. If you've Trotty you need an <insert better presenter here than Ed Smith> to generate interest.

For those who've visited the Telegraph report - that's not Ed Smith it's Bob Harris ,

regards,
Jet

[hornetrider]

Never in doubt.

[Gargamel]

hornetrider said:

Never in doubt.

7 wins in 93 Tests says We should have won more comfortably

Never mind the Bangles, what are we doing with the batting line up before we get to India ?

Is G. Ballance get the whole winter to make a mark ? I get he has scored, but I am just not convinced. Root we assume will be ok, Stokes will score a big one in every ten innings, Cook will play fine against India, But I worry that our top five isn't settled.

[Smollet]

Gargamel said:

7 wins in 93 Tests says We should have won more comfortably

Never mind the Bangles, what are we doing with the batting line up before we get to India ?

Is G. Ballance get the whole winter to make a mark ? I get he has scored, but I am just not convinced. Root we assume will be ok, Stokes will score a big one in every ten innings, Cook will play fine against India, But I worry that our top five isn't settled.

Personally I don't think Ballance is a test cricketer. I'd drop Duckett to 4 and bring in Hameed asap at 2

[Smollet]

Ansari and Finn replace Batty and Broad. I was hoping Hameed would get a look in but Ballance keeps his place.

[Smollet]

Now that was a proper collapse that even England in their pomp would've found hard to replicate

[hornetrider]

Smollet said:

Now that was a proper collapse that even England in their pomp would've found hard to replicate

Wow. I flicked on the Beeb and saw they were 155/1, did a rolleyes, and went off for a two hour meeting. Come out and they are all out for 220!!!

[juice]

That's quite the collapse....195-3 to 220 all out..

[Challo]

hornetrider said:

Smollet said:

Now that was a proper collapse that even England in their pomp would've found hard to replicate

Wow. I flicked on the Beeb and saw they were 155/1, did a rolleyes, and went off for a two hour meeting. Come out and they are all out for 220!!!

We are making a good go of not even having a collapse, and just not build anything first. 50-3 at the end of play.

[jet_noise]

Challo said:

hornetrider said:

Smollet said:

Now that was a proper collapse that even England in their pomp would've found hard to replicate

Wow. I flicked on the Beeb and saw they were 155/1, did a rolleyes, and went off for a two hour meeting. Come out and they are all out for 220!!!

We are making a good go of not even having a collapse, and just not build anything first. 50-3 at the end of play.

Until Stokes fails England has a chance.

[Smollet]

Great comeback by England. Some rather odd bowling choices by the Bangles has let us back in.