England v South Africa, Lords, 3rd Test Thread

[eirebilly]

First topic message reminder :

Yeah, the fielding certainly has left alot to be desired. Still the chances are being created and things must surely stick soon.

[mystiroakey]

KP clearly couldnt be in the side for morale, he hasnt been treated differently at all. Its the way he is.. Fingers crossed everyone can sort out there differences. Not liking a team for this is ridiculas. Nonbe of us know what happened. One thing is for sure- the england team are not stupid enough to drop kp unless it had to be done!

anyway either way its immaterial..

it is what it is.

England can win this but the RR has gone up significantly- if we dont go for it i am gonna be so annoyed. If bell and trott start the way they ended i am gonna break something!

[Shelsey93]

And that RRR for tomorrow is closer to 4 rather than 3!.

I tend to disagree with the assertion that that type of run rate will be tricky. The natural rate of scoring in this match has been about 3 an over, so it surely isn't asking much to push it up a tad when faced with a chase. Even if it drifts to 5 an over that will be easy if we have wickets in hand.

The bigger issue is being bowling out.

[KP_fan]

So we see now getting SA bowled out tonight was as bad a lose-lose situation one can get:
-itop 2 knocked out with negligible runs on the board, pressure and last day to survive with only 8 batters.
--affording SA. 24 overs to SA with a new ball tommorow. Enough for SA to knock out as many as possible 6 remaining wkts iwhen they take the new ball.

Once SA croSsed 300 lead it made tactical sense for Eng to not force their wickets and let them bat on until tommorow morning

[Mad for Chelsea]

RRR is about 3.5 which on paper looks manageable, but this isn't a pitch (or a bowling attack) against which quick scoring is easy.

Important that England be positive though.

[mystiroakey]

my tactics and philosophy for this game is push a little bit on from this positon- after 30(17 tommorow) overs to get to 75, for no loss

then we can look at it asif it is a 50 over odi- with a soft ball.. needing 260 to win..- so we need 5 an over during that spell

then SA will get the new ball and they have 23 overs remaining with it- and we only need 20 for the real win

[Guest]

you cant really look at it as an odi as there is no field restricitions everyone can be back on limit on bowlers overs's etc its not really a logical way to look at it..

[mystiroakey]

Well its my way!!

[Mike Selig]

Tough to score 5 an over on this wicket against an old ball though, particularly as SA can set defensive fields.

I stick by my 230/4 requirement off this ball. Which means tomorrow it's 214/2 off 67. Very very tricky, but not altogether impossible.

[mystiroakey]

btw forget the odi scenario- its not relevant- its about playing aggresive based on the ball. The new ball has been key..
My argument with mikes way is that if he leave it till the end we will be facing the second new ball!!

[Mike Selig]

Suggestion to mods: we should implement an "ignore" button which makes the posts of whoever you're ignoring invisible. I am more than fed up of reading nonsense after nonsense, it is ruining what is the best message board I have participated in.

[mystiroakey]

Mike - best to just deal with it- if you wanna ignore someone the spoiler way is best because occsionally you might wanna get the jist of the conversation

[Mike Selig]

btw forget the odi scenario- its not relevant- its about playing aggresive based on the ball. The new ball has been key..
My argument with mikes way is that if he leave it till the end we will be facing the second new ball!!

I know, but in general the new ball will be easier to score off - we have seen in both innings that with the old ball scoring has slowed (to 2 or less per over for both sides from 70 to 80 overs) even if wickets haven't looked likely; some of this is because both sides have looked to consolidate whilst waiting the 2nd new ball, but it does illustrate that if you bowl tight lines with reasonably spread field scoring isn't easy. Also if England do have wickets in hand when the new ball becomes due, and especially if there is at least one, preferably two well set batsmen then SA will have to set run-saving fields, so edges may not result in wickets.

First things first though, the objective should be 80/1 (or preferably none) in the first session.

[mystiroakey]

I suppose you can get alot of pace of the new ball.. but lets be honest it is killking all the batsmen!!

we are so far behind at the moment I would much rather show abit of intent and really take it to them- if we take this game on- it may freak the saffas out and force them into mistakes- then we have a totally different game on our hands! I know that once this ball is old - we will be so much more comfortable.

Anyway, i just want us to go for it- The last thing we need is what happened 2nd test!!

[ShankyCricket]

Strauss' dismissal today suggests that his eyes are gone. Time to move on.

[Mike Selig]

I actually thought England should have gone harder 2nd test. Less than 7 runs per over in 40 overs is very gettable, and it seemed once KP got out the plan was to shut up shop.

I think England should bat normally until lunch (by which point the ball will be about 40 overs old), then assess. If it's hot again tomorrow the ball will then be old and the bowlers tired (SA won't use Tahir as much as England used Swann). That being the case, being more positive in the afternoon makes sense.

[mystiroakey]

I was hoping the contreversy would have elevated him.

If he leaves in this scenario it will be really sad- because he has been such a top captain!

[Mike Selig]

Strauss' dismissal today suggests that his eyes are gone. Time to move on.

He certainly wasn't picking the ball up this evening.

This captaincy thing really seems to destroy all ability of the captain to bat. Do we really want to hand that over to Cook?

[Mad for Chelsea]

Suggestion to mods: we should implement an "ignore" button which makes the posts of whoever you're ignoring invisible. I am more than fed up of reading nonsense after nonsense, it is ruining what is the best message board I have participated in.

pretty sure there's a "foe" button somewhere which does exactly what you suggest. I think you click on the profile of whoever you want to ignore and go from there?

[ShankyCricket]

Well, Cook has done rather well in ODIs.
I believe in picking the best XI and then deciding the captain. Strauss is not even a good on field captain. He is a great man manager but thats no reason to carry him in the playing XI. If his man management skills are so important, have him in the dressing room as an assistant coach/team manager/non playing captain. Can't pick him in the playing XI.

[Duty281]

16/2 chasing 346 with both openers gone. 90 overs left tomorrow I guess. Required run rate of 3.67. Let's be positive here:

At lunch, England 105/3. Then at tea tomorrow 200/4. Before charging in the last session to win with three wickets remaining. I still think England can do just that. Flat pitch, hot weather. Bit of positive batting, field gets pushed back, the singles will flow and the odd boundary here and there. Trott's due a good innings, Bell, Bairstow, Taylor and Prior are all in form. Just believe, it's far from impossible.

[Mike Selig]

Strauss is not even a good on field captain

I disagree with that. I think he's a good on-field captain, sometimes a very good one. I don't think he's a great one, but I think his tactical nous is sometimes underrated.

The rest of the post I pretty much agree with, although the "pick the team, then the captain" is a good soundbite, but thoroughly unpractical in nature (if, as it suggests, it means picking the captain the morning of the game, and potentially you could have 3 different captains in consecutive tests; that I think is a bit silly). What people actually mean (I hope) when they say this is that your captain must be guaranteed selection.

Do people think that is the end of Strauss's test career then? Time for a change at the top of the order for India? And if so, who? The first person to say "Bell" gets... well I'm not sure what.

[Mad for Chelsea]

Bell?

just kidding, James Taylor? England see him as an opener do they not? Trott moving up to open (with Bell at three)? Or a more left-field pick.

[guildfordbat]

Apologies for probably a very basic question but here goes anyway ...

I know that if England fail to win tomorrow, they'll lose their number one ranking as a Test playing nation. There seems considerable concern as to that.

Why such concern?

To explain my question better - is it simply a matter of national pride or are there are cricketing and commercial implications?

In football, FIFA allocate national rankings but they are generally ignored and regarded as of liitle significance by the average supporter. I'm sure that it's only in fairly recent years that the concept of national rankings has been latched onto with such interest by cricket followers.

Thanks.

[Duty281]

Apologies for probably a very basic question but here goes anyway ...

I know that if England fail to win tomorrow, they'll lose their number one ranking as a Test playing nation. There seems considerable concern as to that.

Why such concern?

To explain my question better - is it simply a matter of national pride or are there are cricketing and commercial implications?

In football, FIFA allocate national rankings but they are generally ignored and regarded as of liitle significance by the average supporter. I'm sure that it's only in fairly recent years that the concept of national rankings has been latched onto with such interest by cricket followers.

Thanks.

The Test Rankings are really the only way of knowing who is the best team at Test Cricket as there is no World Cup like in football, the sooner we have a Test Championship the better. But until then, the only way of being the best is topping those rankings.

[Mike Selig]

I like the kid who plays for Hampshire, James Vince? Looks a quality player, but hasn't made many runs in the CC this year I think...

Taylor is an option, especially if he gets runs this innings.

Not sure why anyone thinks pushing Trott up is that good an idea either, he's not exactly a regular opening batsman, and I like his solidity at 3.

The guys opening for the Lions were Root (young Yorkshire kid, also looks a good player but for me not quite ready yet - only 21) and Chopra (a decidedly average player).

Then there's Carberry (who I don't think is very good, but some disagree).

Personally I'd go for Taylor, if he scores in the 2nd innings, out of all of those. Or maybe Vince.

[mystiroakey]

guildfordbat wrote:Apologies for probably a very basic question but here goes anyway ...

I know that if England fail to win tomorrow, they'll lose their number one ranking as a Test playing nation. There seems considerable concern as to that.

Why such concern?

To explain my question better - is it simply a matter of national pride or are there are cricketing and commercial implications?

In football, FIFA allocate national rankings but they are generally ignored and regarded as of liitle significance by the average supporter. I'm sure that it's only in fairly recent years that the concept of national rankings has been latched onto with such interest by cricket followers.

Thanks.



personally I dont care about the rankings i just want a drawn series. However there is an argument the rankings in test cricket is off upmost importance- it is called the test championship and there is no world cup only rankings..

[Liam]

I agree, the Test Championship is needed but it isn't the end of the world if and let's be honest when England lose their no.1 status. If they could go to India and win, it would be a huge win and likely take them to no.1, someone can inform me whether that is a possibility or not.

Tomorrow is a very tough day for England's batsmen. Realistically, both need to score centuries. Or, Bell and Trott put on a big partnership tomorrow, leading England to at least 250 for 3/4, allowing Taylor, Bairstow and Prior to play their shots when they come in.

It all hinges on Bell and Trott, we cannot lose a wicket before lunch tomorrow to stand a chance imo. Very unlikely if the SA seamers bowl as well as they did today.

[ShankyCricket]

I'd go with Trott. Opening in India is actually a lot easier than batting in the middle order with the ball gripping and turning and with men around the bat.

So would be a good idea to have him opening getting his eye in against the seamers. Bell at 3. Hopefully KP at 4 but if not, Taylor and Bairstow at 4 and 5. Prior at 6 and then 5 bowlers or are 4 bowlers enough to bowl India under hot climate on flat pitches.

[Mike Selig]

Suggestion to mods: we should implement an "ignore" button which makes the posts of whoever you're ignoring invisible. I am more than fed up of reading nonsense after nonsense, it is ruining what is the best message board I have participated in.

pretty sure there's a "foe" button somewhere which does exactly what you suggest. I think you click on the profile of whoever you want to ignore and go from there?

Wonderful. Thanks.

[Shelsey93]

The Test Rankings seem a fairly accurate way of giving context to Test cricket in a way that a Test Championship, welcome though it would be, could never do. They have certainly added a dimension to this series, and Test Cricket as a whole over the last few years. The difference with football is that in football the international game only really has any importance in the context of tournaments - people really care about the club game.

----

I'm a big fan of Strauss - as I've said before he's my favourite cricketer, and I also think he's a far better captain than he's given credit for. That doesn't mean that I can excuse him from leaving that ball.

However, I would again remind everyone that he scored 2 Test hundreds in the previous series that he played - not against my bowling, but against Roach, Rampaul, Fidel Edwards and Shannon Gabriel amongst others. He also played a remarkable hand in a Championship game against Notts - whose attack included Andre Adams (quite similar to Philander). Therefore, it would be wrong to say that he is totally out of form.

I think that scrambled brain has had a lot to do with his dismissals in this series and that in itself that is a worry - it might suggest that the relentless pressures of captaining England are starting to wear him down. Right now I see that as a worry rather than a problem. Strauss is an astute man and will be the one that knows first when it isn't the right thing for him to continue any longer. I think he deserves to make that call after all he's done for us. I'd also add that I don't sense he's the type of person who'd go on and on because he couldn't give the game up - as soon as he feels its time to move on he'll move on.

In terms of alternative opening options I like Michael Carberry, although I think his injury record is slightly concerning. Joe Root will be great in a couple of years, though Nick Compton, who could easily make the transition to the top of the order is perhaps a more realistic alternative.

[ChequeredJersey]

Suggestion to mods: we should implement an "ignore" button which makes the posts of whoever you're ignoring invisible. I am more than fed up of reading nonsense after nonsense, it is ruining what is the best message board I have participated in.

pretty sure there's a "foe" button somewhere which does exactly what you suggest. I think you click on the profile of whoever you want to ignore and go from there?

Wonderful. Thanks.

Unfortunately it tells you that the person you are Foes with has posted, just doesn't show you what it is! Which is fine, except their name clutters your feed a little

[msp83]

How many times have a team scored over 300 to win a test match? I am pretty sure there hasn't been many such situation. Against quality attack with both openers back in the hut? Even more dificult. What England can do sensibly is to bat carefully in the first 2 sessions, try to keep wickets in hand, and then try going for it in the last session. If they lose quick wickets, then try bat out the session for a draw. There has to be a real special innings to see England home in a highly unlikely chase of this kind, and I see only Prior and perhaps Bairstow capable of producing that. They would need Bell, Trott and Taylor to provide the platform for the same though.
All that South Africa need to secure the series is to take a couple of wickets in the morning session, scoreboard pressure coupled with their quality bowling unit will take care of the rest.

[ShankyCricket]

Strauss quite simply has to go IMO.
Like Mike, I don't really rate Carbs. Root looks a serious player but not sure how he plays spin so I wouldn't pick him in the full squad for the India tour. Instead, I'd pick him in the Lions squad for the India tour and if he does well, then he can be considered for the full side in NZ.
Compton is an option, yes.

[mystiroakey]

Not sure if i want to bring a new openener in when we have cook trott and bell!!

I really want to stick with taylor and bairstow- so push trott or bell up to open. Michael carberry has had an amazing year though

[msp83]

Another advantage that South Africa has is that they can push the field back if England get a chance to go for it. Without ODI like field restrictions it would be very dificult to keep the runrate up all the time. Also there are no ODI type stipulations on wides or bouncers either.

[guildfordbat]

Apologies for probably a very basic question but here goes anyway ...

I know that if England fail to win tomorrow, they'll lose their number one ranking as a Test playing nation. There seems considerable concern as to that.

Why such concern?

To explain my question better - is it simply a matter of national pride or are there are cricketing and commercial implications?

In football, FIFA allocate national rankings but they are generally ignored and regarded as of liitle significance by the average supporter. I'm sure that it's only in fairly recent years that the concept of national rankings has been latched onto with such interest by cricket followers.

Thanks.

Guys - thanks for your responses.

To me, each Test series is important in its own right and more so than any possible impact on world rankings. Put another way, I'll be far more disappointed if we lose the series to South Africa tomorrow than any impact on our number one ranking.

I don't know if this could be possible but - if so - it would be a poor state of affairs: a team trailing 1-0 goes into the final Test of a series knowing that a 2-0 loss would result in them losing their number one ranking but that a 1-0 loss would enable them to still retain it. As a consequence, they deliberately play out a draw to lose the series but hold onto their number one ranking.

[mystiroakey]

Msp- we still have to for it, SA are rightly big favs- but it shouldnt stop us trying- If we bat out and dont get the runs- i am gonna be p!ssed

[ShankyCricket]

Don't think any player deserves to make a call on when he should be dropped, no matter what he's done in the past.

[mystiroakey]

"I don't know if this could be possible but - if so - it would be a poor state of affairs: a team trailing 1-0 goes into the final Test of a series knowing that a 2-0 loss would result in them losing their number one ranking but that a 1-0 loss would enable them to still retain it. As a consequence, they deliberately play out a draw to lose the series but hold onto their number one ranking"

yes it could be possible- but the win, loss,drawn record is more important! Its just being billed as the no.1 decider test match at the moment- but its not the be all and end all for the players

[Mike Selig]

How many times have a team scored over 300 to win a test match?

I guess you mean in one day? West Indies at Lords when Greenidge made 211 or whatever it was and they chased down 344 in about 68 overs.

Before that I guess you'd have to go back to the famous Harvey-inspired Australia run chase.

[msp83]

I don't think England should mess about with Bell and Trott. Bell has done really well in the middle order and 3 he did struggle. Trott has done pretty well at 3. Bell has opened in ODIs with some recent success, but opening in tests is a very different thing. Even one of the best ever number 3s, Rahul Dravid opened on the rare situations just because he was an absolute team man, but even he wasn't quite successful making the switch. Root at Yorks seems good, and Taylor has opened in some of the Lions matches. Think England will have to go that way sooner rather than later, although I think Strauss should get the India series at least. I don't think he was at his best during the KP saga as captain, but his record otherwise is pretty decent. Also imortant it is to note that he has had very good success in India. May not be the best place to introduce a new opener, who is unlikely to have seen a lot of spin in domestic cricket. But then Cook made his debut in India didn't he? But anyways, I would give Strauss one more series at least. Hopefully he will be leading England's best team in India.

[mystiroakey]

Well if taylor is gonna be promoted then i am happy with that!

[msp83]

If Trott and Bell could somehow see England through the first session tomorrow morning, then I'd have Prior promoted up the order if they really are even thinking of winning it.

[mystiroakey]

Well if we are not 100% commited to trying our hardest to win this i will question strauss!!

[Mike Selig]

I don't think I'd change the batting order TBH. Taylor and Bairstow can bat quickly, both are very good one-day players, and I'd want the experience of Prior down the order in case things do get close.

[Mad for Chelsea]

Swanny in as a pinch-hitter

just kidding

[msp83]

But it might be asking too much of the 2 youngsters to step into such a demanding situation right away. Bairstow's struggles in the 90s suggests that he's just getting introduced to that kind of pressure, though his comeback from the disasters of the debut series suggests he's quick to learn.

[Biltong]

Like I said before the test series, I don't care about the ranking, test series wins are more important, the rankings are just a moment in time, SA hasn't lost an away series for more than 5 years now, that will always be in the record books.

[Shelsey93]

I think it must mean something to know that your team is, for that moment in time, the best in the world. It also adds the pressure of becoming the hunted, and that has already seen India and probably now England felled relatively quickly. Should they complete the series win tomorrow I'll be interested to see how SA handle that - on paper they shouldn't have a problem but you never know.

[msp83]

SA had in fact become the number 1 side for a little while in 2008 after winning in Australia didn't they? Promptly lost the return series though.

[Sponsored content]