Cricket

really either need to do tiers, I do wish eg Zimbabwe were better but apart from revenue not sure what they will get from this series (cup upset/giant killing possibility I suppose)

not at all surprised of it being 4 day Test, reinforced by play on 1st day, no point preparing or having to for 5 days if likely to last 3-4 (and Zimmers could get a draw over 4, longer it lasts even more chance the much stronger side of winning)

 

would have been a good chance for a few players to make a debut or try some non-regulars

 

England vs Zimbabwe: Does cricket need substitute Law changes after Richard Ngarava injury at Trent Bridge? - BBC Sport
Is it time for injury replacements in Test cricket?


hail no, let it go!

problems :

- whilst I agree it is unfair to allow subs for some injuries (concussion) and not others, subs were a mess back in 2005?
- a la India in the T20 the "like for like" was not very, whilst both players can bowl one is more of an all-rounder than "can bowl" even if India played him as a bowler one game as if to "prove" they were like for like
- teams might risk a high injury risk a la Archer (name mentioned in the HYS) knowing if he gets injured they can play the alternative they chose not to.
- may be able to diagnose concussion on field with a medical expert, but short of ripped webbing, massive cut to leg, knee or other gaping injury is a doctor going to be able to say "yeah, he is injured" with 100% surety when a man limping saying "I'm dying doc!" will be like diving and feigning injury etc in football if not careful

takes apart much of the balance as well. some in the HYS reference the advantage of winning the toss in the 2005 set up, although frankly the pitch also plays a part in choosing to bat or bowl first

I get what one HYS person said about cricket moving with the times, however it isn't a sport readily lends itself to substitutions as, despite being a team, performances are much individual - bowlers, batsmen (or batters if female) and indeed wicket keepers

one suggestion is top notch, IF they go with it then have the like-for-like subs predeclared, and maybe limit 1-6 to batsmen subs, 8-11 as bowler subs, so no all-rounders replacements unless the player like-for-like replaced has a record of bowling and batting enough would be a clear all-rounder

 

I suspect plenty of teams will now be keen to sign up Brian Bennett after his fabulous hundred today and the Zimbabwean seamers showed they've got something about them by coming back well with the new ball this morning after the hammering they took yesterday. Above all, after the dark times Zimbabwean cricket endured since they last toured this country in 2003, it's great to see them backing Test cricket again.

In principle, I support the idea of having a two-division structure for Test cricket and my preference would be such a structure to be played over a four-year cycle rather than the current two-year World Test Championship. But it has to be based on sporting merit, not on financial considerations. Mike Atherton was absolutely right on Sky this morning when he said a two-tier system risked the big boys being able to play each other all the time and that cannot be allowed to happen.

 

Happy to see Easwaran there. Hope he gets the opportunity to be in the playing eleven.
I am not really sold on Gill the captain. Would be be happy to be proven wrong.
With Shami's fitness issues he doesn't make it, & suddenly the bowling looks a wee bit weak.

Might be a long hard tour, but a great learning experience for these lads.

 

First bit of play i've seen of this test this morning and some nice batting by Zimbabwe. Good to see this pair putting up a fight.

 

And a wonder-catch by Harry Brook

 

Shami is a big miss from that squad as a skilful and experienced campaigner, particularly in English conditions, and there has to be at least some question marks around the top order for the same reason. But it's still an interesting and strong squad to my eye, particularly because of the number of all-round options which could help to mask any issues at the top. Gill as skipper also looks a bold call, especially with Pant as his vice-captain.

As much as the result of this Test match was probably what most people expected, I don't think anyone can say it's been a worthless exercise. There is clearly plenty of talent in this Zimbabwean side and the spirit shown by them and their supporters over the past three days bodes really well for their future. What this cannot be, though, is a one-off that doesn't happen again for another 22 years. Particularly in summers when our main series is against India or Australia, I don't see why we can't help to create combined tours where a Zimbabwe comes here and then goes on to a series in Ireland that will be more important to them and more competitive as a spectacle. I see the West Indies have been in Ireland ahead of their white ball series here that starts next week. If we truly want international cricket to thrive, then the likes of England must help their smaller neighbours to grow and combined tours have to be a way of doing that.

 

3 day Test, not suggesting they should have played 3 days but puts a big line through suggestion should have played 5

gotta love the defensiveness over Bashir's feat, yes it was third day pitch but you can't select that context to hype what he did and ignore the context of opposition

to paraphrase 1984, all cricket is equal but some cricket is more equal than others, and giving teams Test status and not having tiers means best hope of something is in an upset.

To think in the mid to late 90s they had Andy Flower, Alistair Campbell, Grant Flower, Guy Whittall, Heath Streak, David Houghton, Paul Strang, Henry Olanga and of course sometimes the chicken farmer (and the other Strang), held England 0-0 in a two Test series at their's


chucks, no Murali intended, out the stat that England have never beaten Zimbabwe in a Test in Zimbabwe................. only failed to win one of their five home Tests, Schofield making a fifty in that one drawn Test but no wicket (0/73) ever - played (duck) but didn't bowl in the won 1st Test of the two matcher....

 

Our bowling let a lot to be desired, we'd get thrashed by pretty any decent side ATM.

 

I don't think the captain's comments were twisted at all. He may think they were but the inference of what he was saying was pretty clear and the fact he's had to row back as far as he has from them shows that. Bethell may rue going to the IPL in the short term but I wouldn't be surprised if he's back in the side before long.

Bashir is nowhere near the finished article yet and that really shouldn't surprise anyone. He's still only 21 and was plucked from virtually nowhere into the England team little more than a year ago. I think these things are rather conveniently forgotten by people who want to be critical for the sake of it, rather than being constructive. He obviously has weaknesses as a bowler but he also has a happy knack of producing wicket taking deliveries and the England hierarchy clearly believe in his capabilities. What he needs most is regular bowling and it's unfortunate that he's not getting that outside the international arena.

The seamers in particular didn't look to be at their best yesterday but I thought Sam Cook was very unlucky not to pick up more wickets in the first innings. The main issue at the moment, unless Chris Woakes comes back into the side for India, is inexperience at this level, which was inevitable in the period immediately post Anderson and Broad.