The Official Cricket Thread

[Torquemada 1420]

Trying to block everything on that pitch is unlikely to pay off though. Just inviting more men around the bat.

Brooks hears you and tries to hole out!

[Torquemada 1420]

Retard shot just before tea.

[And 1 guest]

Retard shot just before tea.

Yeah. Tricky short ball to deal with but he knew it was coming, with the break 2 balls away. Hands down and wear it in that situation.

[Torquemada 1420]

Retard shot just before tea.

Yeah. Tricky short ball to deal with but he knew it was coming, with the break 2 balls away. Hands down and wear it in that situation.

Absolutely. The amount of protective gear these guys have now.

[And 1 guest]

That's a pair for Dowrich.

[ScarfaceClaw]

Stokes is an absolute beast in these sorts of situations. Simply will not give up. Losing is just not an option for him.

[dkm57]

Great catch by Pope to wrap it up, well done England

[And 1 guest]

Well played England. Good comeback after Southampton

[Woddy]

Who to bowl for the next test? Difficult to drop Broad or Woakes after that, but also harsh not to bring Anderson back in, or even Wood, or indeed Archer (if not still on the naughty step). Would definitely swap Leach in for Bess - lose some batting but gain more incisive bowling. All the talk on TMS about right-handed Windies sounds like polite covering over a disappointing performance from Bess. He had a big target to defend so full licence to twirl.

Batting line-up seems settled at least.

[Sandstorm]

This is not a world class or even mid-table Windies team. They can’t bat, their fielding is poor and bowling erratic. England should cane them in every Test at home.

[Longshanks]

This is not a world class or even mid-table Windies team. They can’t bat, their fielding is poor and bowling erratic. England should cane them in every Test at home.

So how do you explain the first test?

[Sandstorm]

This is not a world class or even mid-table Windies team. They can’t bat, their fielding is poor and bowling erratic. England should cane them in every Test at home.

So how do you explain the first test?

England were shit and made bad choices like batting first and the wrong bowling attack.

[Ovals]

Excellent from England today.

I think the WI bowlers suffered from the effects of the back to back tests, whereas England had a completely fresh attack - and one that was at least as good as in the opening match.

It's left the selectors with an incredibly tricky choice of which bowlers to pick in the final test. I can't see them leaving Broad out again though.

Stokes was unbelievable in this game - he's been a different player since he came back from his exile.

Hard to see WI winning the match starting Friday - they may have to rest Gabriel - he looked pretty shot during this last game.

[Gumboot]

Stokes was unbelievable in this game - he's been a different player since he came back from his exile.

Yeah, he's been playing the house down for ages (bloody ODI Final - cough, spit). How do you Brits rate him against your last great all-rounder, Feddie?

[Un Pilier]

Stokes was unbelievable in this game - he's been a different player since he came back from his exile.

Yeah, he's been playing the house down for ages (bloody ODI Final - cough, spit). How do you Brits rate him against your last great all-rounder, Feddie?

I would say Freddie was the better bowler for much of his career, but in all other aspects of the game Stokes is the better cricketer. As a batsman Stokes is far superior.

[Sandstorm]

Stokes was unbelievable in this game - he's been a different player since he came back from his exile.

Yeah, he's been playing the house down for ages (bloody ODI Final - cough, spit). How do you Brits rate him against your last great all-rounder, Feddie?

I would say Freddie was the better bowler for much of his career, but in all other aspects of the game Stokes is the better cricketer. As a batsman Stokes is far superior.

He's waaay better than Freddie as an all-rounder. 1 more season and he'll be mentioned in the same breath as Botham.
If he keeps going, he'll be up to Chris Cairns level.

[Saint]

Yeah, he's been playing the house down for ages (bloody ODI Final - cough, spit). How do you Brits rate him against your last great all-rounder, Feddie?

I would say Freddie was the better bowler for much of his career, but in all other aspects of the game Stokes is the better cricketer. As a batsman Stokes is far superior.

He's waaay better than Freddie as an all-rounder. 1 more season and he'll be mentioned in the same breath as Botham.
If he keeps going, he'll be up to Chris Cairns level.

He's a much better batsmen for certain (now in the ICC top 3 in test cricket), and his bowling is improving a lot. His fielding is a whole other level.

I think the question is, is this going to be his long term level or is he just having a golden 18 months?

[duke]

I would say Freddie was the better bowler for much of his career, but in all other aspects of the game Stokes is the better cricketer. As a batsman Stokes is far superior.

He's waaay better than Freddie as an all-rounder. 1 more season and he'll be mentioned in the same breath as Botham.
If he keeps going, he'll be up to Chris Cairns level.

He's a much better batsmen for certain (now in the ICC top 3 in test cricket), and his bowling is improving a lot. His fielding is a whole other level.

I think the question is, is this going to be his long term level or is he just having a golden 18 months?

The other question is how long will his body stay in one piece

[sturginho]

Stokes was unbelievable in this game - he's been a different player since he came back from his exile.

Yeah, he's been playing the house down for ages (bloody ODI Final - cough, spit). How do you Brits rate him against your last great all-rounder, Feddie?

I would say Freddie was the better bowler for much of his career, but in all other aspects of the game Stokes is the better cricketer. As a batsman Stokes is far superior.

I seem to recall Flintoff struggling with his bowling early in his test career (I even remember one match where Caddick was giving him a bowling lesson in between overs) but he matured into a very potent bowler, In my opinion better than Stokes. Agree that Stokes is the superior batsman

[Saint]

Yeah, he's been playing the house down for ages (bloody ODI Final - cough, spit). How do you Brits rate him against your last great all-rounder, Feddie?

I would say Freddie was the better bowler for much of his career, but in all other aspects of the game Stokes is the better cricketer. As a batsman Stokes is far superior.

I seem to recall Flintoff struggling with his bowling early in his test career (I even remember one match where Caddick was giving him a bowling lesson in between overs) but he matured into a very potent bowler, In my opinion better than Stokes. Agree that Stokes is the superior batsman

Freeddie's biggest problem early on was his fitness - it took him a long time to realise that if he wanted a consistent bowling action he needed to be in much better shape. Re his batting, he was only ever a real threat with the bat for one or two seasons, mainly around that Ashes series

[And 1 guest]

I would say Freddie was the better bowler for much of his career, but in all other aspects of the game Stokes is the better cricketer. As a batsman Stokes is far superior.

I seem to recall Flintoff struggling with his bowling early in his test career (I even remember one match where Caddick was giving him a bowling lesson in between overs) but he matured into a very potent bowler, In my opinion better than Stokes. Agree that Stokes is the superior batsman

Freeddie's biggest problem early on was his fitness - it took him a long time to realise that if he wanted a consistent bowling action he needed to be in much better shape. Re his batting, he was only ever a real threat with the bat for one or two seasons, mainly around that Ashes series

Yeah, Freddie's peak didn't last long, and as a batsman he never hit the heights that Stokes is hitting at the moment. He played in a better batting side though, so a lot of his runs were
icing on the cake, rather than the match winning innings that Stokes is producing.
At his best, Freddie the bowler was the stronger. He struggled with fitness for a lot of his career since he was a genuine fast bowler, whereas Stokes is used as a fourth seamer with the older ball.
I think both would play in either of their respective teams.

[FujiKiwi]

Assuming Stokes, Freddie and Botham are in the top 5 England all rounders of all time, how would English fans rank them, and who would round out the top 5?

The kiwi top 5 is Richard Hadlee and Chris Cairns.

[And 1 guest]

Assuming Stokes, Freddie and Botham are in the top 5 England all rounders of all time, how would English fans rank them, and who would round out the top 5?

The kiwi top 5 is Richard Hadlee and Chris Cairns.

Good question. Those three are way ahead of anyone else I've seen, but I would suggest Darren Gough and Moeen Ali are the next on the list.

I would rate Lord Botham first, then Stokes then Flintoff.

[Mahoney]

My memory is that Flintoff was very inconsistent with the bat but a world class bowler. I'd have said that at his best he was worth his place for his bowling alone, and the batting was a nice extra, whereas I would pick Stokes just for his batting and view his bowling as nice to have but less potent - certainly not worth his place just as a bowler.

However Flintoff's peak was relatively small, less than 3 years from the summer of 2003 to early summer 2006. 12 series, 41 matches:
https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engin ... iew=series
Looking at those stats his batting was better than I recall through that period; averaging 40 is pretty good. And his bowling perhaps not as good as I remember; 27 is very good, but not exceptional. So perhaps my analysis above is skewed.

[Biffer]

Assuming Stokes, Freddie and Botham are in the top 5 England all rounders of all time, how would English fans rank them, and who would round out the top 5?

The kiwi top 5 is Richard Hadlee and Chris Cairns.

A little unkind to Daniel Vettori. Not in the same class as those two but 362 wickets and 4,500 runs at 30 is a decent bowling all rounder's return.

[Biffer]

Assuming Stokes, Freddie and Botham are in the top 5 England all rounders of all time, how would English fans rank them, and who would round out the top 5?

The kiwi top 5 is Richard Hadlee and Chris Cairns.

Good question. Those three are way ahead of anyone else I've seen, but I would suggest Darren Gough and Moeen Ali are the next on the list.

I would rate Lord Botham first, then Stokes then Flintoff.

I'd have Tony Greig ahead of Ali and Gough.

[FujiKiwi]

What’s the story with you Scots following the England cricket team so closely?

[And 1 guest]

We don't really have one of our own!

I grew up playing cricket (badly) and it was the only sport on TV during the summer.

[Mahoney]

It's a tough one; he was my hero as a very small kid, but my age means that I actually remember watching Botham mostly as he declined. Plus he never really performed against the best (the West Indies). And while it says nothing about his cricketing ability, he's so dislikable...

He was a better bowler at his best than Stokes, but Stokes' batting at the moment is another level.

It's heresy, but I think I'd go Stokes, Botham, Flintoff.

[Sandstorm]

It's a tough one; he was my hero as a very small kid, but my age means that I actually remember watching Botham mostly as he declined. Plus he never really performed against the best (the West Indies). And while it says nothing about his cricketing ability, he's so dislikable...

If likeability is the criteria:

1) Toothache
2) Flintoff
3) Daylight
4) Stokes
5) Moonlight
6) Bads AIDS
7) Botham

[frodder]

Assuming Stokes, Freddie and Botham are in the top 5 England all rounders of all time, how would English fans rank them, and who would round out the top 5?

The kiwi top 5 is Richard Hadlee and Chris Cairns.

Good question. Those three are way ahead of anyone else I've seen, but I would suggest Darren Gough and Moeen Ali are the next on the list.

I would rate Lord Botham first, then Stokes then Flintoff.

I'd have Tony Greig ahead of Ali and Gough.

Gough's batting was not good enough and Ali was short of the mark to be a top class all rounder. Outside of Botham, Stokes and Flintoff there's a massive drop off

[FujiKiwi]

My only memory of Botham is the 1992 World Cup, where he still played well. I was too young to follow him in his prime.

I don't have the stats in front of me, but I wonder if his legend is a bit bigger than his actual achievements. Were his exploits that much greater than Stokes'? I doubt it.

[Biffer]

What’s the story with you Scots following the England cricket team so closely?

Follow is the correct word, not necessarily support!

It's the only place we can easily watch test cricket, and up until the last decade or so, ODIs. I love cricket, as do a couple of my mates, and we go to a couple of days at a test match every year down south - can't really go anywhere else, although we've started talking about going over to Dublin for test matches when they start being played there. I've got my eye on the test match against New Zealand in 2022. In recent times we've done Lords, the Oval, Trent Bridge and Durham, Trent Bridge and the Oval being favourite. We had tickets for Edgbaston this year.

Cricket Scotland are fucking useless, We were the leading associate nation in 2005, having won the one day and four day competition. We had more exposure than ever before, lots of good will and the opportunity to push on. Loads of Scots Asian businessmen were keen to put money in, sponsorship etc, but CS didn't seem to want it (I think there may have been some involved who didn't think they were 'our kind of people' the fucking twats), and we've slipped since then. We could have been entering the Test arena alongside Ireland if we'd been well run and built properly. Twats. Rant that nobody else cares about over.

[FujiKiwi]

We don't really have one of our own!

I grew up playing cricket (badly) and it was the only sport on TV during the summer.

Is cricket played at school in Scotland? I'm just assuming there's more (but still limited) cricket in the big cities and in the lowlands?

[Biffer]

We don't really have one of our own!

I grew up playing cricket (badly) and it was the only sport on TV during the summer.

Is cricket played at school in Scotland? I'm just assuming there's more (but still limited) cricket in the big cities and in the lowlands?

Aberdeenshire used to have more cricket clubs per head of population than Yorkshire.

East coast, Fife, Central belt and the borders. As with rugby it's not played so much in school due to the facilities being expensive to maintain. There's also a stigma about it being an 'English' sport sometimes as well.

But beating England in an ODI in Edinburgh a couple of years ago had a positive effect

[Ovals]

It's a tough one; he was my hero as a very small kid, but my age means that I actually remember watching Botham mostly as he declined. Plus he never really performed against the best (the West Indies). And while it says nothing about his cricketing ability, he's so dislikable...

He was a better bowler at his best than Stokes, but Stokes' batting at the moment is another level.

It's heresy, but I think I'd go Stokes, Botham, Flintoff.

Freddie had quite a long period, in his youth, when he wasn't allowed to bowl, to protect his body. I remember watching him play for the under 19s at Southampton, where he played as a batsman and didn't bowl at all. He was a very dominant batsman and peppered the boundary with some huges 6s, including one that cleared the Pavillion.

[Mahoney]

Irritatingly the ICC rankings now only graph people's position rather than their ranking points. Which makes comparing cross era pointless - every bat who got to number 1 is the same as Bradman. Only of course they aren't.

[FujiKiwi]

As with rugby it's not played so much in school due to the facilities being expensive to maintain. There's also a stigma about it being an 'English' sport sometimes as well.

So there's less money for facilities in Scottish schools?

I would understand the stigma of it being an English sport, except that rugby, and especially football, are considered OK?

[Smutley]

What’s the story with you Scots following the England cricket team so closely?

Follow is the correct word, not necessarily support!

It's the only place we can easily watch test cricket, and up until the last decade or so, ODIs. I love cricket, as do a couple of my mates, and we go to a couple of days at a test match every year down south - can't really go anywhere else, although we've started talking about going over to Dublin for test matches when they start being played there. I've got my eye on the test match against New Zealand in 2022. In recent times we've done Lords, the Oval, Trent Bridge and Durham, Trent Bridge and the Oval being favourite. We had tickets for Edgbaston this year.

Cricket Scotland are fucking useless, We were the leading associate nation in 2005, having won the one day and four day competition. We had more exposure than ever before, lots of good will and the opportunity to push on. Loads of Scots Asian businessmen were keen to put money in, sponsorship etc, but CS didn't seem to want it (I think there may have been some involved who didn't think they were 'our kind of people' the fucking twats), and we've slipped since then. We could have been entering the Test arena alongside Ireland if we'd been well run and built properly. Twats. Rant that nobody else cares about over.

Didn't know any of that. FFS.

The good thing about the England cricket team is that they are a bit more likeable generally than their output in other sports. Having been raised on a diet of humble pie, they appreciate and respect the opposition more.

Don't understand why indoor cricket isn't massive in the UK, what with the shite weather.

[Biffer]

As with rugby it's not played so much in school due to the facilities being expensive to maintain. There's also a stigma about it being an 'English' sport sometimes as well.

So there's less money for facilities in Scottish schools?

I would understand the stigma of it being an English sport, except that rugby, and especially football, are considered OK?

Wouldn't say there's less, I would say it's spent on other things instead. Football historically is as Scottish as it is English (many of the rules and tactics which made the game in the 1800s were from Scotland). Rugby is a bit different - for most of Scotland it's viewed as a bit of a middle class or posh boy sport, except in the borders for some reason where it's always been very popular. Don't know why, just one of those things.

Did you know Don Bradman played his last international match against Scotland? Scored 123 not out. End of the Invincibles tour 1948, just after he got his duck at Lords to average 99.94.