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

Possibly be more likely to take wickets during power plays, when the batsmen normally take more risks?

Dr Robert wrote:Possibly be more likely to take wickets during power plays, when the batsmen normally take more risks?

Likely yes, but they can leak runs as well when batters are in such mood as the bowler bowls under pressure.We saw that even during test match when Bailey clobbered Jimmy for 28 in one over.He decided to tonk without caring for his wicket.Then the Faulkner innings other night with so high SR without anyone picking his wicket.Then the Corey innings recently.All played with most aggressive hitting one would ever see.So have to give credit to bowlers at least when they take wickets.

Dr Robert wrote:Possibly be more likely to take wickets during power plays, when the batsmen normally take more risks?

It can happen that way, particularly during the five over batting power play. More usually though, whoever's bowling takes no wickets and concedes runs at a faster rate.

The first PP is now the best time to bowl. While the white kookaburra doesn't swing for long, two of them swing for twice as long. Teams don't really hit out in the first ten as per current tactical orthodoxy. Maybe more so in Asia, but everywhere, teams are now trying to keep wickets in hand. There's no bowling PP, so that's not an issue, and even in the batting PP, teams are making sure they don't lose wickets ahead of the final push. The batting PP has proved a good opportunity to take wickets against teams who might have enough wickets in hand to push early.

However, the final ten overs is a very exposing time to bowl, with the new field changes. And to be fair to Stokes, he has been bowling in this time. Attacks are getting shredded in the last ten. And Stokes suffered in this period in Brisbane, as many do generally. However today, he reverse swung the ball and really was hard to get after, though the situation became more desperate for Australia. It seems justifiable to recognise a better performance from Ben in that respect.

The PPs just aren't a big deal anymore.

I'd like to see him bat at four for a while. He's still pretty inexperienced ODI batter, so there's room for improvement. But he seems to have plenty to work with, and can hit well on front and back foot. Not so sure about how well he works the spinners?

D/L wrote:

Dr Robert wrote:Possibly be more likely to take wickets during power plays, when the batsmen normally take more risks?

It can happen that way, particularly during the five over batting power play. More usually though, whoever's bowling takes no wickets and concedes runs at a faster rate.

except when England are batting, when the reverse is often true

Arthur Crabtree wrote:
I'd like to see him bat at four for a while.

me too!

I assume that KP will play in the WIndies series, and I'd imagine, if he does, that he will take the no.3 slot.

It looks like the T20 team is going to the WI, so we may even have Wright at three.

Arthur Crabtree wrote:The first PP is now the best time to bowl. While the white kookaburra doesn't swing for long, two of them swing for twice as long. Teams don't really hit out in the first ten as per current tactical orthodoxy. Maybe more so in Asia, but everywhere, teams are now trying to keep wickets in hand. There's no bowling PP, so that's not an issue, and even in the batting PP, teams are making sure they don't lose wickets ahead of the final push. The batting PP has proved a good opportunity to take wickets against teams who might have enough wickets in hand to push early.

However, the final ten overs is a very exposing time to bowl, with the new field changes. And to be fair to Stokes, he has been bowling in this time. Attacks are getting shredded in the last ten. And Stokes suffered in this period in Brisbane, as many do generally. However today, he reverse swung the ball and really was hard to get after, though the situation became more desperate for Australia. It seems justifiable to recognise a better performance from Ben in that respect.

The PPs just aren't a big deal anymore.

I'd like to see him bat at four for a while. He's still pretty inexperienced ODI batter, so there's room for improvement. But he seems to have plenty to work with, and can hit well on front and back foot. Not so sure about how well he works the spinners?

I'd agree that the first half dozen or so overs of the innings is the best time to bowl. In overs 7 to 10, or thereabouts, it's not unusual to see the attack taken to the bowlers, usually not the opening pair. If a couple of wickets don't fall in the batting power play, the bowlers often go for plenty. Stokes bowled at neither of these times and the Aussies were never really in a position to launch a serious attack for most of the time he was bowling towards the end of the match.

Got to hand it to Ben Stokes, wanting greater responsibility in the England team.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/25894946

Best to keep him hidden away for the tough overs at the moment, I reckon. His bowling hasn't been all that so far.

We don't have any good death bowlers, so it wouldn't be any hardship to give him a chance. If he can get reverse swing like he did yesterday, he has some potential. He was hard to hit. You can't always rely on getting reverse though.

Alviro Patterson wrote:Got to hand it to Ben Stokes, wanting greater responsibility in the England team.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/25894946

He is the highest English wicket taker in this ODI series.But obvious that he is relishing greater responsibility with ball for England.

After being the second best English cricketer in the Ashes test series, time to have a look at how he has done in this ODI series.

He is the highest England wicket taker with 10 wickets. The best bowler in this series. However, he has not had as much success with the bat, scoring one 70 to contribute a total of 120 runs in 5 innings. Although he has not justified his batting position at No 3, the move at least helped England think tank realize that they can expect a 70 from him in some matches in future. That to me is another takeaway even though his batting promotion tactic has not worked because 20 runs per innings is not justified at all in No 3 spot. But still a good ODI series for him as an allrounder.He imo is England's top two players in this series, the other being Eoin Morgan.

He's batted at eight and at three in the series, which are very different challenges. I don't think we can be too critical of his three chances up the order, You can take positives from very few opportunities, but it's too harsh to draw negative conclusions from three innings, one of which was 70.

clubcricketeradi wrote:After being the second best English cricketer in the Ashes test series, time to have a look at how he has done in this ODI series.

He is the highest England wicket taker with 10 wickets. The best bowler in this series. However, he has not had as much success with the bat, scoring one 70 to contribute a total of 120 runs in 5 innings. Although he has not justified his batting position at No 3, the move at least helped England think tank realize that they can expect a 70 from him in some matches in future. That to me is another takeaway even though his batting promotion tactic has not worked because 20 runs per innings is not justified at all in No 3 spot. But still a good ODI series for him as an allrounder.He imo is England's top two players in this series, the other being Eoin Morgan.

Undoubted potential, but we need not to be swayed too much by figures and to remember he will not have been "worked out" yet. and he's definitely had more luck on the credit side than on the debit, particularly with his bowling.

Got out to a very dumb shot today.