Cricket

[jim mk2]

Michael Vaughan sums up the craziness of England's Bazball approach

Well said Michael

 

"That's not entertainment, that was stupidity. England were dominating, did everything you wanted them to do. Baseball batting into St John's Wood. That's not entertaining, that's stupid Test match cricket"

 

[den]

2 minutes ago, jim mk2 said:

Michael Vaughan sums up the craziness of England's Bazball approach

Well said Michael

 

"That's not entertainment, that was stupidity. England were dominating, did everything you wanted them to do. Baseball batting into St John's Wood. That's not entertaining, that's stupid Test match cricket"

 

I guess he was talking about the short ball stuff and the naievity of the batsmen at that time, in that short spell. He wasn’t (I hope) talking about Englands approach since Stokes and McCullum took charge.

 

[wilsdenrover]

Would have taken that at the start of the day.

 

[JohnD]

I don't hear any open minds here.

I understand all the comments and have said every one of them at some point today.

Just try to rid your mind of cricket as it was and take on board the very simple concept of bazball, no ifs or buts, just bazball

I'm still not sure if I would like it to replace the traditional test match philosophy but, hell, it's interesting.

31% of all test matches played since 1877 have been draws.

[jim mk2]

6 minutes ago, den said:

I guess he was talking about the short ball stuff and the naievity of the batsmen at that time, in that short spell. He wasn’t (I hope) talking about Englands approach since Stokes and McCullum took charge.

 

 

It's one and the same. The Bazball mindset caused them to play those shots. I like seeing attacking cricket but giving your wicket away is an absolute sin in my book. And those wickets today (and many in the first Test) were given away

[JohnD]

16 minutes ago, jim mk2 said:

Michael Vaughan sums up the craziness of England's Bazball approach

Well said Michael

 

"That's not entertainment, that was stupidity. England were dominating, did everything you wanted them to do. Baseball batting into St John's Wood. That's not entertaining, that's stupid Test match cricket"

 

Vaughan is a dinosaur 

[jim mk2]

2 minutes ago, JohnD said:

31% of all test matches played since 1877 have been draws.

Some of the best Test matches I have seen have been draws. Some of the best games I've played in during 50 years of club cricket have been draws. Fighting to save a match against the odds is just as satisfying if not more satisfying as winning. And drawing is certainly better than losing

Edited June 29, 2023 by jim mk2

[oldjamfan1]

54 minutes ago, jim mk2 said:

Michael Vaughan sums up the craziness of England's Bazball approach

Well said Michael

 

"That's not entertainment, that was stupidity. England were dominating, did everything you wanted them to do. Baseball batting into St John's Wood. That's not entertaining, that's stupid Test match cricket"

 

Begs the question as to why were England dominating? Also, I cannot believe that people would have preferred us to be 120 for 1 at close of play today with the prospect of another dull day’s play tomorrow while we chipped away at 420?

ETA - If Vaughan doesn’t think that was entertainment then he should stay in that miserable county of his. He talks out of his arse more often than not and is very often wise after the event. He’s lucky to still be employed in the game after some of his reported historical comments.

Edited June 29, 2023 by oldjamfan1

[Gav]

Fingers under the ball?

 

[AllRoverAsia]

19 minutes ago, JohnD said:

Vaughan is a dinosaur 

As well as being one of the best English batsmen ever, also one of the most articulate.

M. Vaughan OBE is a dinosaur at age 48 .... that may me smile. Talk about 'closed minds'

[jim mk2]

3 minutes ago, oldjamfan1 said:

Begs the question as to why were England dominating? Also, I cannot believe that people would have preferred us to be 120 for 1 at close of play today with the prospect of another dull day’s play tomorrow while we chipped away at 420?

 

Has anyone suggested England should bat all day to make 120-1? There is a happy medium here and it is possible to play attacking cricket without the gung-ho mindset that now prevails.

[AllRoverAsia]

4 minutes ago, Gav said:

Fingers under the ball?

 

Smith has form for being a cheating barsteward.

[Ewood Ace]

A good fight back this morning and early afternoon but that batting later in the day was sheer lunacy, Australia set the trap and the England batsmen could not reign their ego's in. To quote the late great Bob Willis it was as simple as 'Put the cheese in the trap, in goes the mouse, off goes his head'.

On the bright side good to see Stokes batting with his brain turned on this evening & playing the situation rather than all this nonsense of not caring about results. That can only bode well for England tomorrow even if it means taking a backward step. 

16 minutes ago, Gav said:

Fingers under the ball?

 

Cleary out

17 minutes ago, oldjamfan1 said:

Begs the question as to why were England dominating? 

Because they were batting well but when Australia changed their plans and went to the short ball with 3 men set back England didn't adapt and needlessly threw 3 wickets away.

Edited June 29, 2023 by Ewood Ace

[oldjamfan1]

9 minutes ago, jim mk2 said:

 

Has anyone suggested England should bat all day to make 120-1? There is a happy medium here and it is possible to play attacking cricket without the gung-ho mindset that now prevails.

If you play attacking cricket it means taking risks. I plucked that imaginary scoreline from thin air granted but would you have been happy if we had looked solid and finished around that mark? 

[Dreams of 1995]

16 minutes ago, Gav said:

Fingers under the ball?

 

I thought this was dropped at the time 

When it got given out I just assumed it was the picture on my laptop confusing me. It looked for all the world to be a dropped catch 

[AllRoverAsia]

Anyway if Brooks, whom I rate highly, gets into full flow and Stokes plays himself into form we could be in for a treat.

Brooks has already had a reprieve so don't push your luck.

For all the Buzz about Bazz we are scoring at just 0.55 RPO more that the Aussies

[JohnD]

15 minutes ago, AllRoverAsia said:

As well as being one of the best English batsmen ever, also one of the most articulate.

M. Vaughan OBE is a dinosaur at age 48 .... that may me smile. Talk about 'closed minds'

Vaughan rarely, if ever, has any relevance in the modern game and his previous excellence in the game is equally irrelevant to this discussion.

[oldjamfan1]

5 minutes ago, AllRoverAsia said:

Anyway if Brooks, whom I rate highly, gets into full flow and Stokes plays himself into form we could be in for a treat.

Brooks has already had a reprieve so don't push your luck.

For all the Buzz about Bazz we are scoring at just 0.55 RPO more that the Aussies

Lords is traditionally one of the faster scoring grounds and I think it’s fair to say that the Aussies are deliberately stepping up their run rate in response to what they see England doing. 

[JohnD]

6 minutes ago, AllRoverAsia said:

 

For all the Buzz about Bazz we are scoring at just 0.55 RPO more that the Aussies

When the Aussies have this wrapped up it would be brilliant if they tried bazball.

[AllRoverAsia]

Just now, JohnD said:

Vaughan rarely, if ever, has any relevance in the modern game and his previous excellence in the game is equally irrelevant to this discussion.

I, politely, think your opinion is wrong. Massively.

[Ewood Ace]

2 minutes ago, oldjamfan1 said:

If you play attacking cricket it means taking risks. I plucked that imaginary scoreline from thin air granted but would you have been happy if we had looked solid and finished around that mark? 

There is a difference between attacking cricket and brainless cricket. Take Joe Root he is a high quality batsman who has always played positively and scored at a decent rate he does not need to be throwing his wicket as he has done in his last two innings.

If this England team lose this series they won't be remembered for playing attacking cricket but as the first England team to lose at home to Australia since 2001.

[oldjamfan1]

Just now, Ewood Ace said:

There is a difference between attacking cricket and brainless cricket. Take Joe Root he is a high quality batsman who has always played positively and scored at a decent rate he does not need to be throwing his wicket as he has done in his last two innings.

If this England team lose this series they won't be remembered for playing attacking cricket but as the first England team to lose at home to Australia since 2001.

It’s still a big ‘if’ though at the minute. 

[AllRoverAsia]

1 minute ago, oldjamfan1 said:

Lords is traditionally one of the faster scoring grounds and I think it’s fair to say that the Aussies are deliberately stepping up their run rate in response to what they see England doing. 

Yes, and in the first Test too.

It's going to be a tough series to win when they are also more aggressive when batting.

Lyon's injury could play a big part, not only in this Test.

[AllRoverAsia]

3 minutes ago, JohnD said:

When the Aussies have this wrapped up it would be brilliant if they tried bazball.

I think they are adapting already

[JohnD]

2 minutes ago, AllRoverAsia said:

I, politely, think your opinion is wrong. Massively.

And, without doubt, you are entitled to that opinion.

Dinosaur - a person or thing that is outdated or has become obsolete because of failure to adapt to changing circumstances.