If England lose the first Test...

Corcaigh_the_Cat said:
If we're looking at blame then there's the batting performances, the general sloppiness at times in day 2, bringing Palmolive hands back to bowl umpteen overs, putting fat fingers behind the stumps etc BUT the only thing that will be talked about is the early declaration
Click to expand...
Agree with this. In a 5 day test match, there is always a number of contributing factors to a result but a declaration always gets the most focus whether it's right or wrong.

On the flip side, if we win, Stokes will get all the plaudits for the declaration.
 
It is a combination of factors, batsmen (batters does my head in, If offended, tough) giving their wicket away, not having a specialist keeper, some inconsistent bowling and yes, a risky declaration. Australia are not perfect either btw. I support Stokes general approach though. We might still prevail lose or draw mind.
 
We have put ourselves in a great position to win the first test, against the current world test champions whilst playing some of the most entertaining test cricket seen.
If we had batted on in the first innings chances are the draw would be the only outcome.
We need to win the series whist they only need to tie.
And edgebaston represents one of our best chances.
There's a argument to pick foakes over bairstow, but bairstow scores quickly and moves the game along, plus he's just back from injury so bound to be slightly rusty.
Lets face it test cricket is dying , it needs to entertain the casual viewer as well as us test cricket die hards.
This mentality is the only hope test cricket has long term imo
 
Lets face it test cricket is dying , it needs to entertain the casual viewer as well as us test cricket die hards.
This mentality is the only hope test cricket has long term imo

Good point - I think we can safely say Stokes agrees with you. Yes there is the tactical decision of the declaration, but you also know its been done to ignite the buzz into the Test (y)
 
jam69 said:
We need to win the series whist they only need to tie.

Lets face it test cricket is dying , it needs to entertain the casual viewer as well as us test cricket die hards.
Click to expand...
Agree with all of your post except these two lines. The Aussies will reluctantly accept a drawn series but they still desperately want to win here, especially with having not done so since 2001. Keeping the urn isn't that big a deal, its about winning and it always has been to them (and now it is to us just as much).

Test cricket has been 'dying' for about 60 years now, yet certain series are still sell outs. I had a chat with Bumble about it a couple of years back. This line is very overused in my opinion.
 
B_G said:
Really? If we had batted an extra 6 overs?

We have also given Australia a much better chance If winning than they should have.
Click to expand...
Iam not really talking about 6 overs, I mean batted to completion of the innings, not much to gain by declaring overnight, get them in whilst they have spent most of the day in the field. 20 overs less properly wouldn't give us enough time.
Just my opinion
 
atypical_boro said:
Agree with all of your post except these two lines. The Aussies will reluctantly accept a drawn series but they still desperately want to win here, especially with having not done so since 2001. Keeping the urn isn't that big a deal, its about winning and it always has been to them (and now it is to us just as much).

Test cricket has been 'dying' for about 60 years now, yet certain series are still sell outs. I had a chat with Bumble about it a couple of years back. This line is very overused in my opinion.
Click to expand...
Have you seen the attendances outside of England?
Most cricket nations see test matches as a chore, yes people have said test cricket is dying (I would say its more 25 years) since the advent of t20.
I love test cricket but I would say its getting a smaller audience year on year (ashes apart).
I watch lots of test cricket and in places like the WI NZ etc when England ate not there its one man and his dog which is sad
 
jam69 said:
Iam not really talking about 6 overs, I mean batted to completion of the innings, not much to gain by declaring overnight, get them in whilst they have spent most of the day in the field. 20 overs less properly wouldn't give us enough time.
Just my opinion
Click to expand...
An extra 30 runs based on 5 an over... 30 very important runs in my opinion. We could have even got 50. Root was scoring well. The game is right in the balance.

There was very little to gain by bowling 4 overs at the end of Day 1 in good batting conditions. It's not like the light was fading or the ball was nipping about.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top