Cricket-Match-Special ... A forum for discussion

Arthur Crabtree wrote:

Making_Splinters wrote:Phew, we've won a game.

To be honest, England have competed in every game. If our bowling had been a bit tighter we might have won all three. It was good to see contributions throughout the order. Roy looks very settled at the top of the order, he needs to convert more of his starts but he's giving the inning impetus from the get go, his partnership with Hales looks like a = long term term one.

Stokes has continued his good form from last year, he needs to shore up his bowling which can be expensive, but he's been solid with the bat for 12 months now.

Willey looks a very good bowler in this format, he just needs to be getting all his overs every game.

It was good to see Morgan make an impact again, Root was solid but struggled to turn it on when needed. Buttler had a quiet series but we still posted 300+ in every game. This team's batting is very strong, we just need the bowling to back it up now.

Personally, I'm very pleased with England in this series.

Bowling hasn't really improved since the WC, but hasn't got worse either, even with an overhaul of the attack. A huge backward step for England in this series was the sudden jettisoning of Rashid, and the lack of confidence in Moeen (or Dawson).

A big plus for England has been the batting of Woakes. Often notional lower order all rounders actually do very little with the bat, but Woakes can be a match winner.

Some of the bowling can be excused by the small grounds and flat tracks in this series, but it is actually a long term trend which has been covered up by the batting.

Not just this series. There hasn't been the same improvement for England with the ball home or away that there has been with the bat. Certainly statistically. Yes, a worldwide trend, but England not doing well even within the overall picture. Of course, the batting is a big positive. Given how hard the bowling is, fielding becomes even more crucial, but England are only an ok fielding side.

Making_Splinters wrote:

Arthur Crabtree wrote:

Making_Splinters wrote:Phew, we've won a game.

To be honest, England have competed in every game. If our bowling had been a bit tighter we might have won all three. It was good to see contributions throughout the order. Roy looks very settled at the top of the order, he needs to convert more of his starts but he's giving the inning impetus from the get go, his partnership with Hales looks like a = long term term one.

Stokes has continued his good form from last year, he needs to shore up his bowling which can be expensive, but he's been solid with the bat for 12 months now.

Willey looks a very good bowler in this format, he just needs to be getting all his overs every game.

It was good to see Morgan make an impact again, Root was solid but struggled to turn it on when needed. Buttler had a quiet series but we still posted 300+ in every game. This team's batting is very strong, we just need the bowling to back it up now.

Personally, I'm very pleased with England in this series.

Bowling hasn't really improved since the WC, but hasn't got worse either, even with an overhaul of the attack. A huge backward step for England in this series was the sudden jettisoning of Rashid, and the lack of confidence in Moeen (or Dawson).

A big plus for England has been the batting of Woakes. Often notional lower order all rounders actually do very little with the bat, but Woakes can be a match winner.

Some of the bowling can be excused by the small grounds and flat tracks in this series, but it is actually a long term trend which has been covered up by the batting.

They showed a table since the world cup our batsmen are by far the best of any nation scoring at an average of 6.3 rpo, second was 5.7 rpo I think

But our bowlers were bottom of the other table, though I suppose that is slightly skewed by the fact our batsmen setting big totals forces the opposition to be ultra aggressive

Well done to India on their win too. While recognising that England batted well, it's also true that the best batting of the series was from India and Jadeja maybe the pick of the bowlers. SO a well deserved series win.

You can overstate the importance of the bowling. Tt the end of the day i our batsmen can the majority of the time put on, or chase down more than the bowlers give away, then it doesn't matter.

There is room for improvement, but let's not get overly hung up on it.

Big negative for India was their openers! 40 runs in three games from the top two.

Rohit will walk in playing 11 and solve one opener problem. The other openers spot will be a concern though.

Today our pace bowler were most often generally bowling a similar line and length which suggests a plan probably concocted in the dressing room by ex players who haven't played for many years and certainly not in the modern era. Probably not often in Indian conditions either. To my mind it should be the captain and the bowlers together who should determine how to approach each game.

Well, what do you expect when our pace bowlers are all much the same with just a slight variation in pace?

Making_Splinters wrote:Well, what do you expect when our pace bowlers are all much the same with just a slight variation in pace?

There very little similarity between Woakes and the others neither is Stokes and the only truly common factor for 4 of them is they are right handed, Willey is totally different in addition to being left handed. At times they look much the same because most of the time they're bowling to the same plan.

Making_Splinters wrote:You can overstate the importance of the bowling. Tt the end of the day i our batsmen can the majority of the time put on, or chase down more than the bowlers give away, then it doesn't matter.

There is room for improvement, but let's not get overly hung up on it.

England are in similar pisition we were. Our batting won us the matches because our bowlers mostly gave huge runs or could not defend good totals. We at that time depended on our batting to win matches. So are England at this point of time depending on batting. Or say just like Pak which depends on the bowlers to win matches.

Despite the awkward timing I saw rather a lot of the three matches and I have to say they were all quite entertaining. I would like a bit more for the bowlers - I get that the format is geared to the theory that the fans want to see Big Scores , but still - but each game remained at least theoretically alive right down to the last few balls (certainly on this third game!) and featured some very exhilarating batting.

India 2-1 was the right result , I think. 3- nil would have somewhat understated England's contribution to the series : they deserved the result last night (especially as they were unfortunate to lose the services of the bowler who may well have been the most dangerous in the conditions at a very early stage) though I did feel for Jadhav and Pandya whose contributions were immense in a losing cause.

India can look to the Champions with some optimism as they do have a couple of handy pace men as well as the excellent batting depth : the spinners may be less of a factor in England in June (although we will have to wait on the weather ) but you'd think they'll be right in the mix for the trophy - unless they are unfortunate enough to cop a knock out match on a real swing bowlers birthday perhaps...

England must be happy with the batting : even with Hales and Root out they produced an good score in tough conditions - against a very lively opponent. Both Billings and Bairstow showed they are rather unlucky to be primarily bench strength at the moment. Either can step in with confidence whenever needed.
Bowling less so : wouldn't rule out changes at home. Ball looked promising last night - seems to be learning on the job. But I don't think either he or Plunkett is nailed on yet. Depends a bit on Wood's fitness ; and I wouldn't be shocked if Broad earned a return. Rashid will surely play at least some of the games : I don't really have a problem with his being omitted for these games - horses for courses ; and a squad needs to be developed rather than just an all purpose XI.

Think Stokes must have proved his credentials to everyone (with the possible exception of Sussex) ; though I'd still rather he wasn't automatically expected to bowl ten overs - much rather see him as the wild card. Moeen may come under pressure at home , especially if Rashid is on song ; but I think he still has something to offer , even if the figures aren't spectacular. I think there are grounds for optimism for the summer.

And I reckon Morgan is safe in the chair despite rather a lot of comments to the contrary on here a week or so back. I am still not sure he is any tactical genius ; but he seems to keep his head , and is still well worth his place as a batsman.

Hope Willey recovers quickly.