Rest of the World

First topic message reminder :

Duty281 wrote:

JDizzle wrote:

Duty281 wrote:So the most likely scenario is an Australia/New Zealand final at Lord's.

There are many things wrong with the WTC - points system is convulsed and perhaps not particularly fair - but Test cricket at neutral venues is something worth getting excited about! Shame it is only one game.

Yeah, I can't personally say that I am a fan of the WTC. The points system doesn't work properly, fixtures are of unequal value and weighting, and boiling an entire test championship down to one solitary fixture to decide the winner doesn't seem right to me.

That said, I think that Australia and New Zealand are the two best test teams in the world right now and, if that is the final, it would be the right fixture. A shame, as you say, that it's only one game and not, at least, a three-game series.

The current system is a temporary fudge to get around the unforseen situation and make the best of whatever fixtures could be fulfilled.

Had it gone to plan all the teams wouldve played home and away fixtures and had equal opportunities to earn points. That hasnt been the case, but at the same time I dont think anyone can argue theres not a clear top 3 teams with England sat just behind them and the rest of the world a significant step back from that.

One off game may be a bit unfair in that the toss could well play a major part in deciding it, but its always been about providing a focused big televised event rather than genuine competition. However the remaining fixtures pan out we should end up with two teams who deserve to be in the final even if New Zealand have just played at home. A long series in a neutral country just isn't viable in the modern calendar or that interesting to anything other than the hardcore fans.

king_carlos wrote:It's the higher risk strategy by Afghanistan. More likely to bring a result either way and all but takes the draw out of things unless Zimbabwe can bat all day tomorrow for only a few down.

A game well set for a fun final two days.

The old follow on debate , eh...whatever the captain decides , someone will say it was wrong ...

Suppose it does give Zimbabwe some chance - but really : they are still 234 behind ; would likely take them most of a day to even make that up and then they'd need to set some kind of target. Reckon there shouldn't be too much risk for the Afghans...they will doubtless be monitoring their bowlers to see how they are feeling - and you'd think batting is likely to get harder on day four.
Could be fun but more likely an innings win ...hope that doesn't jinx them

Z two down at lunch, so still a long way behind.

The follow-on decisions were so much simpler in the days before the scrapping of the rest day.

In England the first side would make,say, 500 on Thursday and most of Friday and then bowl the other lot out for, say, 250 on the Saturday. With Sunday a rest day, the follow-on could be safely enforced without the bowlers getting too frazzled.

Duty281 wrote:Afghanistan and Zimbabwe are playing a two-test series against each other in the UAE, starting tomorrow. Afghanistan's test journey has started out decently with two wins from four (beating Bangladesh and Ireland) and they'll presumably be confident of adding at least another win in friendly conditions, even if the squad is littered with debutants and unknowns. Zimbabwe are eager to rebuild their status as a test nation and seem to have a fairly balanced team, with the young, talented Wesley Madhevere set to make his test debut.

Duty do you want me to delete this for you?

220/7 now so I won't be far off with that innings win prediction...

I'd given up on Zimbabwe - they were 142/7 and heading for an innings defeat, but another century from the experienced Sean Williams, and an unlikely half-century from the number nine Tiripano, has given Zimbabwe a small lead at stumps and still seven down. Seemed Afghanistan got really weary in the final session - the main reason why I don't support enforcing the follow-on unless the need is forced by time and/or inclement weather.

Can they combine for another 120+ runs tomorrow and make it an interesting conclusion?

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Afghanistan and Zimbabwe are playing a two-test series against each other in the UAE, starting tomorrow. Afghanistan's test journey has started out decently with two wins from four (beating Bangladesh and Ireland) and they'll presumably be confident of adding at least another win in friendly conditions, even if the squad is littered with debutants and unknowns. Zimbabwe are eager to rebuild their status as a test nation and seem to have a fairly balanced team, with the young, talented Wesley Madhevere set to make his test debut.

Duty do you want me to delete this for you?

Oh dear! Five balls, no runs, three dismissals. It might just be the worst start to a test career by a specialist batsmen!

Good recovery by Z. A must be thankful they got seven wickets before the big stand.

A should still win but they must be sweating a bit.

Marvin Atapattu, 1 run in his first 6 Test innings. Had a very odd record even by the end, average of 39 but with 6 double hundreds

Graham Gooch only scored six runs in his first three Test innings and he didn't do too badly after that.

Full marks to those who stuck with Atapattu. If you take out those first six innings he averaged well over 40.

VTR wrote:Marvin Atapattu, 1 run in his first 6 Test innings. Had a very odd record even by the end, average of 39 but with 6 double hundreds

Good call, that. And his first six test innings were spread between 1990-1994, it took until 1997 before he was given a prolonged run!

Duty281 wrote:I'd given up on Zimbabwe - they were 142/7 and heading for an innings defeat, but another century from the experienced Sean Williams, and an unlikely half-century from the number nine Tiripano, has given Zimbabwe a small lead at stumps and still seven down. Seemed Afghanistan got really weary in the final session - the main reason why I don't support enforcing the follow-on unless the need is forced by time and/or inclement weather.

Can they combine for another 120+ runs tomorrow and make it an interesting conclusion?

If they did it would be pretty much a replay of Headingley 1981 ... They are certainly making the Afghans work for it.

Don't know about the win, but Zim have a chance of one of the most unlikely draws of all time

As it stands, with about 50 overs left, they still need to bat probably 30 more overs now with only 2 wickets left

Fascinating Test, with Z now more than 100 ahead. Whoops. The ninth wicket has gone.

LATEST - Z all out, with Rashid Khan taking 7-137 in marathon effort. Williams left unbeaten on 151 and A need 108 to win with plenty of overs left.

Rashid Khan a few balls short of bowling 100 overs in the Test and he has 11 wickets for his efforts. Remarkable given his last red ball cricket was the Afghan vs Windies Test in Nov 2019. He is some bowler.

108 runs to win. This has been a terrific Test match.

Afghanistan had 240 overs in the field. It's not surprising that few sides enforce the follow-on.

A are almost home now. Terrific Test match, as KC says above.

Definitely a match to learn from for Afghanistan. They firstly declared too early and enforced the follow on, on a pitch not doing a huge amount. Both teams need regular matches against each other as well Sri Lanka and West Indies.

Cruel for Williams to be left stranded after such a herculean effort. Another 50 or so runs may have made the difference.

Has been a good test match and maybe Afghanistan have learnt why follow-ons should rarely be enforced!

Pah ! Not enforcing the follow on is for wimps

Got the result so they won't mind...but I reckon Rashid Khan will sleep well tonight after that marathon effort...

In all seriousness : you can say "declared too early , shouldn't have enforced the follow on" ; but how many overs were left at the end ? Had they batted longer , and/or batted again : maybe rested bowlers would have done the job - or maybe this would have ended up a draw. Certainly seems the pitch remained easy for batting right to the end...

I reckon there ARE times when the follow-on should be enforced.

1. If a side is bowled out quickly and is massively behind then it's probably OK to enforce it. (Side A makes 600, then Side B is all out for 120 in 40 overs)

2. It certain should be enforced if there is little time left in the match. Say a team is 250 behind with only four or five sessions remaining then there's really no option.

3. If the weather looks dodgy then that is another time to consider a follow-on. (I still regret Middx bone-headedly NOT enforcing the follow-on against Essex a few years back and then failing to bowl Essex out on a rain-interrupted final day. A win in that match would have warded off relegation.)

Duty281 wrote:Cruel for Williams to be left stranded after such a herculean effort. Another 50 or so runs may have made the difference.

Has been a good test match and maybe Afghanistan have learnt why follow-ons should rarely be enforced!

yes when I looked up the effort of Zim in their second inning and how far they had taken the game.....this is what came to mind
A case Study in why not to enforce a follow-on.....another 50 runs and the fragile Afg batting under fear of defeat could have crumbled.

Follow-On has too many risks in the modern game where teams bat deep and have stroke players who can take the game away very fast.
If follow-on is the be revived then there should be an incentive attached to it....like BONUS points in the WTC upon enforcing follow-on and additional bonus points if winning by an innings margin.

Soul Requiem wrote:Shai Hope continues to confound all logic by being a very good ODI player and a garbage test player. He's very much in the Root mould of holding an innings together through accumulation rather than brute power, that in theory should make the switch to tests easier.

He got another half-century yesterday. That makes it six ODI innings in a row (all against Sri Lanka; three home, three abroad) where he's made 50+, two of which he's made into tons.

It was good to see Darren Bravo get runs as well in that 3rd ODI. He hasn't fulfilled that early promise but I still think he's a better player than his diminishing returns at international level have shown. It would be great for the Windies if he could have a bit of a Indian summer and push his Test average back into the higher 30s and his ODI average to around 35.

KP_fan wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Cruel for Williams to be left stranded after such a herculean effort. Another 50 or so runs may have made the difference.

Has been a good test match and maybe Afghanistan have learnt why follow-ons should rarely be enforced!

yes when I looked up the effort of Zim in their second inning and how far they had taken the game.....this is what came to mind
A case Study in why not to enforce a follow-on.....another 50 runs and the fragile Afg batting under fear of defeat could have crumbled.

Follow-On has too many risks in the modern game where teams bat deep and have stroke players who can take the game away  very fast.
If follow-on is the be revived then there should be an incentive attached to it....like BONUS points in the WTC upon enforcing follow-on and additional bonus points if winning by an innings margin.

Can't have that , KP_fan. No need to mess around with the laws re Test Cricket - unlike the gimmick ridden t20 game. Regardless of people's opinions re the follow on , it is like every other choice facing a captain (what to do at the toss , when to take the new ball etc) a matter of risk v reward.

I do also find it just a little amusing to see posters claiming this match as a vindication of their advance suggestion that it might not be a good idea because of the risk it entailed .Certainly it did permit Zimbabwe to bat long and force their opponents to bat again ; but in the end it resulted in a (reasonably comfortable) win for Afghanistan. We cannot know for certain what would have happened had the Afghans chosen to bat again ; so I wouldn't go so far as to say "this proves you should always enforce the follow on "...But to claim the opposite is ridiculous. "If" they'd made another fifty runs ? "Could have crumbled" ? Better to deal in facts...

Follow on is less common today , for the very good reasons advanced. But there are times it is the better choice - or at least arguably so : and it can make for added interest in an otherwise predictable game trend.

Plus it gives internet users another weapon to bash captains they don't approve of when it goes wrong either way

I'm not sure you can say it was a bad decision when the pitch clearly didn't fall apart late on and they won the game with only a small amount of time to spare. Lots of ifs and buts but its pretty clear that Zimbabwes first innings batting display was woeful.

Im not sure it needs reviving with artificial bonuses, it an oddity it exists at all. Day night tests and a desire to bowl under lights (or avoid batting under them) could play into teams decisions. A big part of it no longer being used is that far less tests are drawn and weather plays less of a part (the English summer this year an exception!) with better drainage and lights, theres juts less need to find ways of trying to force results.

Some test cricket today to cleanse us all of the sin of watching T20s - the West Indies v Sri Lanka in the Caribbean. Two tests which the home side are favourites for, even if test cricket has been a touch mad in the past couple of years. Kraigg Brathwaite is starting out as a permanent test captain, replacing Jason Holder, which is an interesting change because I always thought Holder was a strong authority for his side, and he seemed to flourish with the role.

Lanka at 4-84 fighting for the wooden spoon with WI

WI just won two tests (out of two) away from home in Bangladesh with a second string side, bit harsh to say they're fighting for the wooden spoon!

James100 wrote:WI just won two tests (out of two) away from home in Bangladesh with a second string side, bit harsh to say they're fighting for the wooden spoon!

Yes I realize that...credible wins those were.....as WI every now and then surprises us with
Lanka also made a memorable chase in SA not too long back.

These two are still the lowest two in my view their occasional blips notwithstanding( not counting on Zim, afg and Ire)

from 150-5 the lankans have collapsed to 164-9....Holder picking 4-for so far
That WI put SL in would imply its a seaming pitch

West Indies only 13/0 in 13 overs in their reply. Odd for two naturally aggressive batsmen, Brathwaite and Campbell, to be so subdued; even so the West Indies are well on top for now.

I think in the second tier of test nations - Pakistan, Sri Lanka, West Indies, South Africa, Bangladesh - it's difficult to define who is where. Any one of those nations is capable of beating the other over a series and, of course, a lot depends on where said series is being played.

Away from test cricket, I've had my attention drawn to a game played in the Sheffield Shield. Tasmania making a perfectly respectable 333, but New South Wales were bowled out for 32 in response! Jackson Bird taking 7/18 and Peter Nevill top scoring with...erm..10.

Tasmania were dismissed for 191 in the second innings (they chose not to enforce the follow-on), so New South Wales have two days to score 493 and win the game. It would be some turnaround!

https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/sheffield-shield-2020-21-1233442/tasmania-vs-new-south-wales-19th-match-1244510/match-report-2

Jackson Bird made 54 in the first innings too - his highest FC score. Before taking 7/18. So he lead by 22!

Not sure Kraigg B has ever been described as aggressive before though!

Duty281 wrote:  
I think in the second tier of test nations - Pakistan, Sri Lanka, West Indies, South Africa, Bangladesh - it's difficult to define who is where. Any one of those nations is capable of beating the other over a series and, of course, a lot depends on where said series is being played.

I think the world  of test cricket  4 tiered

Ind-NZ-Aus
Eng-SA-Pak with Eng at the threshold of breaking into 1st tier
WI-SL-BD with BD at the threshold of breaking into 2nd tier is they were to win an overseas series
Afg-Zim-Ire

While I would agree that England are probably in fourth place on recent results , I think their long home unbeaten run plus convincing away wins in SA and Sri Lanka entitle them to be considered top tier along with the other three !

One can , of course , slice the pack up to suit one's whims : 3 groups of four , four of three...how about two of six ? End of the day it is always a rather subjective assessment which can be challenged at any moment by the next series result...

I do think one of the good things about the current Test scene is the fact that surprising results are always possible ; even if the better teams tend to prevail over a full length series , as you'd expect.

JDizzle wrote:Jackson Bird made 54 in the first innings too - his highest FC score. Before taking 7/18. So he lead by 22!

Not sure Kraigg B has ever been described as aggressive before though!

Yes, I did that thing where I confused him with the much more aggressive C Brathwaite whilst typing!

alfie wrote:
One can , of course , slice the pack up to suit one's whims : 3 groups of four , four of three...how about two of six ?  End of the day it is always a rather subjective assessment which can be challenged at any moment by the next series result...

Your whim is a qualified Opinion and my Opinion is a whim.
I seeeee

The basis of my "whim" is to be in the top tier...one has to hold on to his home fort and win or atleast go undefeated in one of the top-tier's home.

Duty281 wrote:West Indies only 13/0 in 13 overs in their reply. Odd for two naturally aggressive batsmen, Brathwaite and Campbell, to be so subdued; even so the West Indies are well on top for now.

I think in the second tier of test nations - Pakistan, Sri Lanka, West Indies, South Africa, Bangladesh - it's difficult to define who is where. Any one of those nations is capable of beating the other over a series and, of course, a lot depends on where said series is being played.

Away from test cricket, I've had my attention drawn to a game played in the Sheffield Shield. Tasmania making a perfectly respectable 333, but New South Wales were bowled out for 32 in response! Jackson Bird taking 7/18 and Peter Nevill top scoring with...erm..10.

Tasmania were dismissed for 191 in the second innings (they chose not to enforce the follow-on), so New South Wales have two days to score 493 and win the game. It would be some turnaround!

https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/sheffield-shield-2020-21-1233442/tasmania-vs-new-south-wales-19th-match-1244510/match-report-2

I'm in mourning, Duty.

They batted so well on the same pitch a few days before in their Marsh Cup ODI match (with Warner and Henriques) v the Tigers.
I'm too scared to check* how close that is to a record low score for NSW in a Shield match; but surely if there was a lower score, it would have been on an uncovered pitch... many, many years ago.

*edit - just checked. The 4th lowest. I see Tasmania bowled them out for 53 (also at Hobart) in 2007.

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/australia/engine/records/team/lowest_innings_totals.html?id=114;type=trophy

Tasmania also bowled NSW out for 64 (24th lowest score in Shield history) in Adelaide last November but Tas still managed to lose by 145 runs.

KP_fan wrote:

alfie wrote:
One can , of course , slice the pack up to suit one's whims : 3 groups of four , four of three...how about two of six ?  End of the day it is always a rather subjective assessment which can be challenged at any moment by the next series result...

Your whim is a qualified Opinion and my Opinion is a whim.
I seeeee

The basis of my "whim" is to be in the top tier...one has to hold on to his home fort and win or atleast go undefeated in one of the top-tier's home.

No , they're both opinions , KP_fan. Honestly only used the term "whim" as it seemed appropriate for any such unofficial division of the Test ranks...

Your definition of requirements for top tier status is convenient to your current purpose , I see

But does that not disqualify Australia after losing at home to India ? And India I guess kind of needed that away win because they've not done so well in England or NZ lately

Opinions ...we can all have them.

@alifie......I will put Eng back up in "my" first tier......let them  come back undefeated from Aus...or let them even run close a lost series

Enjoying this game, Sri Lanka fighting back with the ball nicely. Lakmal has been superb

Its seemingly a seaming & tough pitch.......the give away for which was the decision to put SL in after winning the toss by WI

If the pitch eases Lanka will have to bat big enuf to leave 200ish to chase for WI in 4th inning..... and hope it turns in the 4th inning

Rakheem and D Silva the WK put on nearly a 100 runs and took a closely poised game away from Lanka
Haven't seen him bat but this WK D Silva seems ot have gotten runs all the time he has batted in his short career

Rahkeem the dream! That was a lovely watch, him and Da Silva batted beautifully to put the WIndies in a commanding position

SL did well to polish off WI's last 3 for 10 runs
they need 200 to bowl at in 4th inning to have a chance

Yes, I thought Lakmal bowled very well yesterday, but Cornwall and Da Silva countered to give the West Indies a commanding lead.

Solid start in Sri Lanka's reply, however, Thirimanne and Fernando combining to take Sri Lanka up to 75/1, still trailing by 27. Set up for a close test match.

Ah good, just got to watch a classic Joel Wilson howler. Takes me back to the summer of 2019.

Sri Lanka move to a lead of 46 at tea, still only one down, and the second new ball thirty overs away. Joseph excepted, the bowling from the West Indies has been hopeless. The home team need an inspired effort in the final session otherwise they'll be chasing a 250+ score.

West Indies did take three quick wickets early in the final session - the unlikely figure of Kyle Mayers getting two of them, his bowling action reminded me of Collingwood in his prime - but Sri Lanka rallied in good order. Dhananjaya and Nissanka with an unbeaten 66-run partnership through to stumps.

Means that going into day four Sri Lanka's lead is an impressive 153 and they have still have six wickets remaining. They're clear favourites from here.

last 7 balls have delivered 18 runs.....as Lanka is running away
I think the game will see-saw.....Lanka will get ahead and WI will look down and out ...but eventually WI could still pull it off through its lower order

Debutant Nissanka looking good. Apparently he has a massive first-class average.

SL right back in this now. One result that looked unlikely 24 hours ago is now back in the mix - the draw.

Yes, Nissanka has a colossal FC average of 67.5 after 59 innings, including 13 centuries. How much you can read into it is another matter, though he does appear to open the batting the majority of the time for his side; so his first foray into the test arena, batting at six, must be a little disarming for him, albeit one he's coping with for now.

West Indies getting batted out of this game. It appeared yesterday we were heading for a tight conclusion. Now it seems the West Indies will be reliant on another Mayers masterclass to win from here.