England's Winter of Cricket 2022/23

First topic message reminder :

Of course we have the World T20 covered in a separate thread, but I thought we should have a new one for England's upcoming games this winter, which feature:

Three ODIs in Australia (17th-22nd November)
Three tests in Pakistan (1st-21st December)
Three ODIs in South Africa (27th January-1st February)
Two tests in New Zealand (16th-28th February)
Three ODIs in Bangladesh (March)

Looking forward to the tests, but I think the ODIs will be instantly forgettable!

guildfordbat wrote:In line with Alfie and VTR, I regard us as favourites but there's still proper work to do.

Re the Pope catch of Shakeel - Atherton rather criticised Wilson on Sky saying he was surprised that the third umpire was 'satisfied Pope had his gloves under the ball'. I'm in turn surprised Atherton said that as it misses the point, albeit a nerdy one. The key thing was the on field soft signal of 'out'. Imo, there wasn't enough evidence to overturn that and so Wilson was correct in the decision he gave. Anyway, more good work by Pope - if he hadn't got to the ball, it would have been another boundary.

Here we go gain. Seam and pace for me please.

A day or so later , I am a little surprised we haven't had much - well , any - discussion re "that catch" . Rest of the net has been going nuts...

I was happy enough with it at the time ; have developed a few more doubts on repeated views. Still think , on balance , that Wilson was correct in refusing to overturn Dar's on field verdict , as just no clear evidence it was wrong : but reading a lot of other opinions I am beginning to wonder if my view is delusional - or biased ? I generally reckon nearly all low catches look dodgy on slow mo and stop vision replay , and a lot of perfectly good catches are questioned unfairly ; but wonder what others think about this one ?

Olly , you are a keeper : what do you reckon ?

JDizzle wrote:Jimmy Anderson is a freak, exhibit 100:

https://twitter.com/ohlookitswill_/status/1602625907583229953?s=46&t=TBtvaP0Lj4o_OUhYK4WqjQ

By the time Anderson is 60 he'll be averaging single digits!

About the soft signal, Cricinfo were speculating that it doesn't mean owt these days, but I haven't heard any more about it.

"We think the soft signal is no longer relevant in decisions like that, and is only used if the technology fails to load - but have asked ICC for clarification"

Looked like it was clearly grassed to me.

Discussing/lamenting the catch to me is best left to Pakistan and India fans trolling each other on Facebook posts, which is something that happens no matter what actual cricket is played. Its one of those where it could have been either and sometimes these 50/50 decisions go your way.

Cricinfo actually confirmed the soft signal is still the default decision - they have considered culling it , as the IPL has done ; but no change to the rules as yet. So under the current rules , Wilson had to be quite sure there was enough evidence to overturn Aleem Dar . He obviously didn't think there was. A lot of people clearly disagree !

I am remaining agnostic on this . Some of the shots do look a bit dodgy - and if the soft signal had been "not out" , I would not have expected the TV umpire to overrule it ; nor would I have felt unfairly treated. But I don't think anyone can be certain ; so I can accept the decision that was made without any real qualms : no different from the umpire's call
effect on lbw decisions really.

As to whether we should even have soft signals : I suspect if we didn't , no batsman would ever walk on a low catch - and a lot of bowlers would feel the game was being rigged further against them ! Same for all , of course ; as it was in all ways before drs. But no matter how you set up the rules , there will always be controversies...

https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/pak-vs-eng-2022-23-test-series-rawalpindi-pitch-earns-second-below-average-rating-of-2022-1349488

The first test pitch only gets rated 'below average', the same as it did when Australia visited. Not good enough by the ICC. Does mean that Rawalpindi is just one 'poor' pitch (that's the ranking below 'below average') away from being suspended from hosting international cricket for five years.

alfie wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:In line with Alfie and VTR, I regard us as favourites but there's still proper work to do.

Re the Pope catch of Shakeel - Atherton rather criticised Wilson on Sky saying he was surprised that the third umpire was 'satisfied Pope had his gloves under the ball'. I'm in turn surprised Atherton said that as it misses the point, albeit a nerdy one. The key thing was the on field soft signal of 'out'. Imo, there wasn't enough evidence to overturn that and so Wilson was correct in the decision he gave. Anyway, more good work by Pope - if he hadn't got to the ball, it would have been another boundary.

Here we go gain. Seam and pace for me please.

A day or so later , I am a little surprised we haven't had much - well , any - discussion re "that catch" . Rest of the net has been going nuts...

I was happy enough with it at the time ; have developed a few more doubts on repeated views. Still think , on balance , that Wilson was correct in refusing to overturn Dar's on field verdict , as just no clear evidence it was wrong : but reading a lot of other opinions I am beginning to wonder if my view is delusional  - or biased ?  I generally reckon nearly all low catches look dodgy on slow mo and stop vision replay , and a lot of perfectly good catches are questioned unfairly ; but wonder what others think about this one ?

Olly , you are a keeper : what do you reckon ?

I don't think I am qualified enough to see whether it was dropped or caught Alfie - but I will say what I always say in these situations, celebrate as if you've bloody caught it! Pope looked far too sheepish to me and was imo quite lucky to get the "soft signal" onfield - which is surely more often than not based on reactions of fielders/catchers.

Also, a total aside - but I am reminded with it being an away tour, just how much better Sky's coverage of England on tour is than BT's. Thoroughly enjoying a lot of the content they are putting on YouTube with Hussain/Atherton out in Pakistan, and would recommend folk catch up if they have the time on interview they have done with various folk.

BT's coverage is a shambles in comparison really

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Also, a total aside - but I am reminded with it being an away tour, just how much better Sky's coverage of England on tour is than BT's. Thoroughly enjoying a lot of the content they are putting on YouTube with Hussain/Atherton out in Pakistan, and would recommend folk catch up if they have the time on interview they have done with various folk.

BT's coverage is a shambles in comparison really

Hussain and Atherton are for me the two worst English commentators/pundits/analyzers out there. Some of the BT masterclasses during previous ashes series have been top notch in comparison.

Morning all

So, another test, another exciting win for Bazball. Certainly staying true to their commitment to playing positive cricket, and to return some excitement to the Test format.

Not much to add to what has already been said really. England's batting was a bit careless at times, although I thought they largely got the tempo right in the second innings up until Stokes got out (daft run-outs aside). Certainly Duckett, Brook and Stokes played with what I would term "sensible aggression". The tail did subside rather disappointingly, and that nearly ended up costing them, but ultimately I tend to agree with alfie on large run chases. Often the chasing side gets on top for periods, and even gets themselves into promising positions, but in the end big targets (300+) just aren't chased down very often. See also debate in first Test on declarations .

Still, when the target was down to 65 with 5 wickets still in hand, it was certainly a bit tense, albeit it did feel that Nawaz was living somewhat dangerously to me. Credit to Wood (and Stokes) for prising the game open at that point. Which leads me onto the Pope catch. I suspect one that might depend on who you want to win. The on-field decision was fair enough, given that the ball carried fairly comfortably, and from then on you need conclusive evidence to overturn (apparently in the IPL this will no longer be the case, hence the Cricinfo confusion). Was the conclusive evidence there? I personally don't think so. There's one frame where the ball looks like it's on the ground, but we all know about camera foreshortening to make this look the case when it isn't (2D image of 3D situation etc.). Pope's left glove then comes across to essentially hide the ball in the next frame, and so it's very hard to tell. In my view that frame is not enough evidence to overturn the on-field decision, so Wilson got it right (although I would have preferred his communication to reflect "not enough evidence" instead of "fingers under the ball" which they weren't quite). And as I said, the decision being out on-field was probably also correct. So the process and decision-making were followed fairly and correctly, even if I'm not completely convinced the final decision was correct, if that makes sense?

Ultimately though, in Tests you're going to win/lose some 50-50 calls, and the match is never decided exclusively by those. Also worth pointing out that it was good bowling from Wood, good captaincy by Stokes, a poor shot by Shakeel (on the stroke of lunch having just lost one wicket), and good work by Pope. If one of those things hadn't happened, the wicket wouldn't have fallen... Incidentally, Pope was very honest in the post-match interview, saying that he knew the ball carried, but that with the gloves on you don't really feel if the ball grazes the ground or not.

I do agree with Olly that often on-field calls for these (the "soft decision") are made, or seem to be made, based on the fielding team's reaction. This is probably my one quibble with the "soft decision" system to be honest, as it slightly encourages fielding teams to try it on. But still a much better system than relying entirely on the third umpire to make the decision IMO. For instance, there's a frame in the Root second-innings dismissal where the ball also appears to be on the ground (the fielder's fingers slightly press into the ground after hitting it), but I think most would agree that this was a fair catch. If there was no soft signal, you could point to that frame and bang on about benefit of the doubt and all that. So I don't want the system to change, but would like umpires to aim for making the soft signal more based on their view of events. It might also be worth considering a genuine "don't know" type of soft signal when both umpires are unsighted or something.

https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/what-india-australia-south-africa-need-to-do-to-make-the-world-test-championship-final-1349445

WTC scenarios and it seems Eng inspite of their fantastic run have no chance of making it to finals
Aus are all but thru
India and SA are in close fight......where SA has tougher assignment of Aus in Aus , while Ind has two tests vs BD and 4 home games vs Aus

Regarding the Pope catch, and indeed many ow cathes, I think it's been fairly well established that the camera angle and foreshortening effects make clean catches look marginal and marginal ones look like they are down. It's only occcasionallyyou see ones where the ball clearly hits the ground and starts rising beforepassing the end of the fielder's fingers. I do woner if there should be a side on view, at least for the wicket keeper, but that also raises the question of whether the ground is sufficiently flat to allow a reliable camera view from that angle.

I suspect over time there will be some tech that will clearly sort it out - at present it is a subjective decision for the third umpire from less than perfect information. I agree with MfC above that the process was followed correctly, and that there were no obvious errors made, and yet there's a reasonable chance that the wrong decision was made. Then again, England had a catch not given earlier that they chose not to review, so perhaps it evened out.

Sounds like Rehan Ahmed is going to play in place of Will Jacks for England in their only change. JDizzle it’s happening!

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Sounds like Rehan Ahmed is going to play in place of Will Jacks for England in their only change. JDizzle it’s happening!

Thought that would please you , Olly

Will wait and see if that is actually the case. They still have to look at the pitch. Slightly surprised if all the pace bowlers are deemed to be fully rested - though the extra day off will have helped. But still wouldn't be surprised to see Overton play in this one. Foakes missing out again ? May well be as they really want the extra bowling ; and it appears Stokes is a bit reluctant to risk his body in that role at present. All a bit hard on Foakes - and perhaps on Pope too as he might find three long efforts in the field in such a short time , on top of his batting , rather taxing. Still I guess he can put his feet up afterwards...

As to Ahmed : two edged sword , this. Great opportunity ; but could also set him back if it goes badly (though I am sure this England team is quite the best I can remember for supporting players who struggle , so don't think he would be likely to suffer like Kerrigan or Crane) My main reservation is that he got smashed everywhere in the warm up - and Pakistan have a few bats who can carve up visiting spinners if they get set. Leach has collected unflattering figures in these matches (not that he will care too much as he had "the last laugh" in Rawalpindi !) and Jacks , despite six wickets on debut has since been found out a bit. I will watch with great interest if Ahmed does play ; but caution that we probably shouldn't expect too much.

With the series won it will always be a tough one with selection of bowlers in particular.

If Wood plays and his ankle goes some will look at that further down the line and think what a waste to risk him when the series was won. If he doesn't play off the back of his T2 performance and the attack is lacking oomph in T3 then many of the same fans will probably talk about disrespecting the Test game, always play your best XI, etc.

A bit of a damned if you do damned if you don't.

Impossible to say with no hints on the pitch but if it's looking like a turner I'd ere towards giving Rehan a whirl. If it's looking flat I wouldn't though. Rehan is clearly a massive talent but does, at this stage at least, bowl with a fairly low arm and relies heavily on the googly. Those two things wont usually lend an 18-year-old to being frugal when needed on a road.

I'd probably protect Wood. Anderson and Robinson only bowling 21 and 19.1 overs respectively across T2 is definitely useful from a workload perspective. Wood's 32.5 overs is in no way mammoth but given the speeds he was doing that at and his injury record I'd take no risks. It's not often England have had the fastest bowler in the world at their disposal. Let's use him when most needed is my view.

If it's looking very flat I'd probably go:

1.Crawley 2.Duckett 3.Pope (wk) 4.Root 5.Brook 6.Stokes 7.Jacks 8.Overton 9.Robinson 10.Leach 11.Anderson

If it's looking like more of a turner then:

1.Crawley 2.Duckett 3.Pope 4.Root 5.Brook 6.Stokes (c) 7.Foakes (wk) 8.Rehan 9.Robinson 10.Leach 11.Anderson

Foakes also in for Jimmy

I'm surprised Wood is playing, given that England have quite rightly made a couple of changes, which possibly weaken the side, why not make another? No one is going to complain even if they lose this one by an innings!

Boo that we don’t get to see Jimmy play a Test with a man who wasn’t born when he debuted!

Ahmed is so exciting. Hopefully they don’t expect him to bowl lots of ‘dry’ overs an innings as that isn’t his role. He should be treated as a like for like replacement for Jacks - he is a man who bats 7 on merit and can bowl some overs to relieve the strain on Leach and the seamers.

alfie wrote:

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Sounds like Rehan Ahmed is going to play in place of Will Jacks for England in their only change. JDizzle it’s happening!

Thought that would please you , Olly

Will wait and see if that is actually the case. They still have to look at the pitch. Slightly surprised if all the pace bowlers are deemed to be fully rested - though the extra day off will have helped. But still wouldn't be surprised to see Overton play in this one. Foakes missing out again ? May well be as they really want the extra bowling ; and it appears Stokes is a bit reluctant to risk his body in that role at present. All a bit hard on Foakes - and perhaps on Pope too as he might find three long efforts in the field in such a short time , on top of his batting , rather taxing. Still I guess he can put his feet up afterwards...

As to Ahmed : two edged sword , this. Great opportunity ; but could also set him back if it goes badly (though I am sure this England team is quite the best I can remember for supporting players who struggle , so don't think he would be likely to suffer like Kerrigan or Crane) My main reservation is that he got smashed everywhere in the warm up - and Pakistan have a few bats who can carve up visiting spinners if they get set. Leach has collected unflattering figures in these matches (not that he will care too much as he had "the last laugh" in Rawalpindi !) and Jacks , despite six wickets on debut has since been found out a bit. I will watch with great interest if Ahmed does play ; but caution that we probably shouldn't expect too much.

No I am not expecting much, if anything, from Ahmed in terms of results Alfie - but it is exciting they have identified a talent they clearly believe in, and will invest in over the coming years...which will hopefully produce a true world class cricketer in half a decade's time. I suspect his figures may end up looking quite Crane-esque, but as you say, I think this setup is well built to support and nurture more than previous ones.

A bit surprised Jimmy is rested, but he was talking after the last game about how his "body won't like the next 2-3 days" so assuming he's not pulled up as well as Wood after the last test. I also wonder if Stokes wasn't fully fit to bowl in the last game? I suspect not...and he might well be now, hence being able to "drop" a seamer.

Good news for the Foakes crowd that he is back in - potentially a sneaky big game for him, and NZ tour for him...with Brook doing so well and a Bairstow return next summer, he looks most "at risk" to me long term - I put "at risk" in quotation marks because he has done nothing wrong per se! We might be in a position where we have too many bats for the middle order roles...a good position to be in

Not too surprised Jimmy is having a rest. Think I might have had Overton in too , and let Wood put his feet up - but that might have been a bit too like taking this game as unimportant.

Foakes coming back in for Jacks makes sense. He is arguably just as likely to be effective as a number seven bat ; and it allows Pope to just concentrate on his batting. Which if this is a real turner (as maybe implied by the selection ?) might be important. Jacks didn't really bowl in Multan so no real difference to the attack. Suppose , on the face of it , rather
strange to have someone debut , take six wickets , and be gone again so soon - despite doing OK with the bat ... but I think we all recognize the reality behind those figures. That he has had an introduction to Test Cricket at all will be of future benefit to Jacks , I think.

Agree with Olly that it appears Stokes now likely feels more up for doing a stint with the ball. Otherwise I doubt they would have gone down to just two seamers. Overall you'd think the batting is probably stronger for this one with Wood and Leach ten and eleven ; and if it does favour the spinners they have a bit more variety.

One concern I do have is that Leach may struggle. Can't help but think he was looking rather a tired boy in Multan - certainly didn't bowl nearly as well as he can. All those overs in Rawalpindi , and very little rest between games was always likely to affect him so I hope the little break before Saturday will have refreshed him - as I think he may need to do a lot of work this time , while the new lad will probably be used a bit more sparingly.

Will be tough to win three in a row here . But Stokes and his team seem to like setting new standards...

Another remarkable year for Anderson is over. 36 wickets @ an average of 19.8 with a strike-rate of below 50 and an economy of below 2.5. All done with a pretty rubbish set of duke balls, some flat pitches at home and the dead pitches in Pakistan. Nice that his titanic efforts with the ball this year have been rewarded with lots of wins.

It's also been a year where he's averaged just 19 in the third/fourth innings of tests, showing improvement from previous years where this stage of a test has been a struggle for him, and he's only gone wicketless in one third/fourth innings this year and that was at Sydney right in the beginning.

Also just 38 wickets away from becoming the first seam bowler to get 1,000 international wickets, and 23 more tests away from levelling Sachin's all time record of 200 tests played. He'd probably need another three years to reach that.

What extraordinary longevity. None of us could have foreseen this when his career looked over in 2019 due to those troubling injuries.

The bowler who relies entirely on cloud cover, yet again being the best seamer on either side in the subcontinent

I think this young boy will play and, indeed, should play. It's a perfect opportunity for him. The series has been won and the team are on a roll.

They could still leave Wood out. He is amazingly injury prone and he admitted being completely cream-crackered after Multan.

sirfredperry wrote:I think this young boy will play and, indeed, should play. It's a perfect opportunity for him. The series has been won and the team are on a roll.

They could still leave Wood out. He is amazingly injury prone and he admitted being completely cream-crackered after Multan.

They have already announced the team. He is going to play, as is Mark Wood

Apologies. I didn't realise the XI had been announced. Wood should not have played IMHO. Wrap him up in cotton wool and then let him loose on the Ashes.

I can see Pakistan salvaging something from this series. Often when one side has wrapped up a series their intensity goes a bit. There was a time when the only Tests England won in Ashes series were after Australia had already taken an unassailable lead.

Yeah, seems the England way nowadays to announce the team early. I think its part of the confidence they have at the moment, and to give players certainty so they can mentally be ready to play.

Agree on Wood, he did his job and doesn't seem worth the risk to me. I guess Wood must be desperate to play

What better way to spend a Friday than watching Rehan Ahmed clips on YouTube - and he seems to get an a disproportionate amount of his wickets (in both white and red ball) caught and bowled.

The eye catching dismissals are the googlies that rip miles back through the gate - and it is that and the high energy run up that give Rashid Khan comparisons, but Rashid’s arm is more perpendicular and Rehan’s is ‘slingier’ which allows him to get a bit more drift to get the deception to bring in the leading edges for the C&Bs.

I’m excited to see what happens in his international career. As he’s not going to block it with the bat either!

As the SA innings has conveniently ended in time for this to start I can switch my attention...Pakistan winning the toss and choosing (unsurprisingly) to bat .

England as announced. Mass of changes for Pakistan : Azhar back for his final Test , Shan Masood for the injured Imam , Mohammad Wasim Jnr and Nauman Ali the new bowlers.

Robinson opens the bowling...with Jack Leach. Stokes likes to surprise you...

Nothing in this pitch for Robinson . Jimmy will probably be quite happy to be resting this week , I think. 17/0 after three.

Might see Rehan Ahmed pretty early so I hope Olly has set his alarm

Excellent early blow struck for England as Leach traps Shafique lbw with one that skids on...

Review showed closer than it looked , only just hitting leg...but upheld on umpires call. Had looked very good live so not surprised it was given.

Azhar up now for his farewell - well , first innings of his farewell anyway.

Lots of close fielders. 18/1 off six. And Wood replaces Robinson...

Shan doesn't want to let Leach settle. Using his feet well to hit down the ground again...Good , positive cricket. Azhar pretty circumspect so far.

35/1 , Shan has 25 of them.

Good decision by Stokes not to go for a speculative review just then

Would have been wasted. But now they have gone up for lbw...this is close ! Very close ! Shan survives on umpires call on impact , though it was certainly hitting. Good work all round...

Whenever I switch channels , a wicket falls...Shan Masood flicks Wood in the air ...carries nicely to Leach at fine leg and Pakistan are 46/2...

England will be delighted with this. Pakistan have gone quite batting heavy in this game so early inroads are important.

The Old Firm together now for Pakistan with Babar at the crease. Leach might be happy to have two right handers to bowl at.

Wood has bowled four now (with a drink break) ; but Ahmed can't be too far away...

And here he is...Ahmed replacing Wood at 59/2...

Not a bad start. One rank ball went for four but the rest were OK. These two won't be letting him settle easily , I'm sure. Might be an interesting patch of play up to lunch...

Pakistan raise the hundred in 23 overs...brisk , if not quite England's recent pace...let us call it Az-har Ball , perhaps ?

Not quite happening for the spinners : Ahmed has been a bit expensive , with a couple of wrong-uns dragged down short - and these fellows haven't missed out. Leach relieved now as Robinson (who was off the field for a while with a tummy bug) taking over. Draws an edge , too ...but no slip , so safe and runs down for four... Looks to be getting a bit of reverse now which will keep him interested.

Still young Rehan at the other end...

And on the stroke of lunch , we have a reverse-Multan ! Azhar glances Robinson , Foakes takes it low ...and despite the soft signal of "not out" , Marais Erasmus rules it carried...

117/3 and that makes it England's session on a pretty flat deck.

Think that was the right call, Foakes glove clearly underneath

After an hour of safe batting , Pakistan may have lost another one...umpire catch check ...and that is clearly out so Rehan has his First Test Wicket !



Great catch by Pope at short leg and Shakeel is on his way...162/4

Great moment for the young man. He's gone for a few today ; but worked that well with a mix of googly followed by leg break : got his length better in this spell.

Four down on a flat pitch. Pakistan scoring at a good rate but they'll perhaps be disappointed to have lost so many wickets. Rizwan in now ; and Salman still to come . But England will be pleased to be making progress towards the bowlers...

alfie wrote:Great moment for the young man. He's gone for a few today ; but worked that well with a mix of googly followed by leg break : got his length better in this spell.

Four down on a flat pitch. Pakistan scoring at a good rate but they'll perhaps be disappointed to have lost so many wickets. Rizwan in now ; and Salman still to come . But England will be pleased to be making progress towards the bowlers...

Do you mean Olly or JD?

Anyway, good morning / evening Alfie - just up and watching to see Rehan's googly and then the wicket ball next delivery. Lovely bowling in those two balls. Guessing from his figures he was a bit short and/or wide before that.

Excellent catch, btw, from Pope to make the young spinner's day. Inspector Gadget type take with his arm extending further and further to grab the ball.

Again, no bowling again from Stokes - hmm.

Amazing ! A rank full toss from Root and Rizwan will be fuming with himself after swiping it into the safe hands of Ben Stokes running around at mid wicket... 196/5

Oh hi , Guildford. Yes I'm sure Olly and JD will be thrilled !

Young Rehan was indeed a bit too often short in his first spell , and Azhar and Babar took full advantage. He's been better in this session. Expect a wrist spinner to concede a few anyway on day one ...and he's got one important wicket.

No Stokes yet , true. I feel that is largely because he doesn't think there is much here for the seamers and Wood and Robinson can do whatever is needed. Still expect to see him bowl if and when he feels they've hit a road block.

200 up. Game is moving on.

Good over just now from Wood. Lovely bit of play between him and Salman. Near perfect inswinging yorker at pace skillfully dug out. 

Looking at his figures, Wood has kept it dry in his 10 overs. Conceding just 22 for his one wicket. Even when more amongst the wickets, you would normally expect him to be going for a fair few more.

Gonna be the odd long hop and poor spell from Rehan but that one before the stroke of tea was a glimpse of what he can do - past the outside edge multiple times and the fact he can bowl the googly round the wicket to the lefties and get it to spin by the outside edge is extremely promising - and how he got that Shakeel wicket I suspect.

Decent couple of sessions for England - pitch looks to be in between the Multan and Rawalpindi ones? Not quite as much in it as Multan but not as dead as Pindi?

Rizwan and Babar have gifted England their wickets here - 230-6, and Pakistan struggling to approach par. They do have a longer batting lineup in this one with Faheem at 8 and Wasim at 9 though

230/6. England doing well.

Disaster for Pakistan earlier this session with Babar run out. Brook quick to get the ball in. Foakes doing well to take it and remove a bail - for once, luck going his way as he knocked the other bail off before he took the ball. Atherton confirming - I wasn't sure - that it can be out if one bail remains and that is then removed with the ball. Foakes was fortunate he didn't dislodge both bails accidentally first.

Foakes hearing things , it seems... Bit of a wasted review .

guildfordbat wrote:230/6. England doing well.

Disaster for Pakistan earlier this session with Babar run out. Brook quick to get the ball in. Foakes doing well to take it and remove a bail - for once, luck going his way as he knocked the other bail off before he took the ball. Atherton confirming - I wasn't sure - that it can be out if one bail remains and that is then removed with the ball. Foakes was fortunate he didn't dislodge both bails accidentally first.

Was a brilliant bit of work, catching with one hand and in one fluid motion taking the other bail off. If both bails had come off I believe he'd have had to take a stump out the ground but one is fine.