ITE7376
Member
Devon_Bear wrote:
. Why they think he's better off sitting in the pavilion kicking his heels for 5 days instead of playing for his county side i do not know.
What, you don't think he will grow as a cricketer and, indeed, as a man, just having the chance to be around the stardust-sprinkled charisma, leadership and tactical nous of England's Talismanic Captain, Ben Stokes?
Andy wrote:
It's the lack of front arm that gets me, how is he generating so much pace from that. He's utterly rapid.
yeah exactly there really doesn't seem to be much bodily effort going into it (compared to say Garton who has a huge gather and seems to put a massive stress through his back and shoulders), like i say my best guess is he's a big man travelling through the crease very quickly and loses minimum possible speed from his quick run-up through his delivery stride, it seems very efficient in that way and like I say very similar to Hassan
its fascinating, watching bowlers, how many different actions there are, how everyone exploits their bodily mechanics in different idiosyncratic ways. you could put a blacked-out shadow of Hassan Ali bowling projected against a wall and I'd know it immediately.
It was the first time I have really paid attention to Gleeson and I found it fascinating. For such a big man if you watch him go through the crease he resembles a Hassan Ali type much more than say a Flintoff, there's no big leap and gather, he really has a beautiful nimble, light-footed skip through the crease so his quite fast run-up hardly loses any pace.
Garton's yorker to Buttler, though, eh? what a ball BTW
as well as Mousley timed the ball i thought Wood's poor bowling cost them the game, Mouse got most of his early boundaries off rank half volleys on leg stump and one through the off side and IIRC Latham and Davies also benefitted from him giving too much width through the off side to that short boundary, their boundaries were gimme balls pretty much with that boundary width.
considering how their spinners often manage to restrict us when we play them away from home (and we often aren't the best at capitalising on spin in the middle overs) I thought we did really well to take Green down for 10s Wells for 8s and Hartley for I think 7s, also we targeted and gave their number 3 seamer the treatment in his first over which was smart cricket.
the players clearly felt it was a 200+ par pitch hence how hard they went and, as said above, the only way to prevent getting hammered on that pitch was to take wickets consistently.
If I were a Lancs fan I'd have been very unhappy with Jennings's flick to the one fielder out on that boundary and I thought Turner's shot off i think Briggs's second ball was also a poor decision.
i don't usually say this but i felt they lost it at least as much as we won it, we got far too many boundaries early that we didn't have to really work for.
Tayls79 wrote:
Highest T20 strike rate of any of our top order with the exception of Bethell (who has a smaller sample size). It way well be true to say he isn't performing right now, however. Overall point still holds though, if Mo ain't there we still need a fast scoring batsman.
LeicesterExile wrote:
Post #25 - not sure I understand describing Moeen as an explosive batsman. Since he returned he has done very little to even justify his place and, to me, gives the impression of just turning up for a final pay cheque.
Latham, to me, has been a big disappointment and hardly justifies being selected ahead of Yates.
whilst his career SR isn't that good it really struck my eye that Barnard's has been just over 160 this year, what a fantastic all round cricketer he is
Solbear wrote:
A decent effort but not quite good enough; interesting and somewhat ironic that the two main contributors with the bat today were deemed unfit for T20 under previous management, just a shame that one was for the opposition.
to be fair to management Rhodes wasn't just 'deemed' unfit, his T20 record for us was mediocre. I've trotted his stats out on here before. Barnard was the far more glaring selection mistake last year, who is a better bowler and IMO a better T20 batsman with much better SR than rhodes
. I guess not many feel the same as me but maybe that separates 'Diehard Fans' to ones who just turn up for T20.
or 'people who still have to go to work', in other words
Devon_Bear wrote:
A disappointing result today, although we gave it a good go in the chase. Ultimately, Mousley's 2 overs for 31 cost us in the end.
A strange looking team selection today, with Yates batting at 6. He's hardly the type of player to come in and smash a few sixes about, is he? We'd be better off with Hassan Ali coming in at 6,
or Davies dropping down the order.
yeah, it seems pretty obvious if Yates is to play in T20 then really he needs to open
but then there would be two very similar openers, both left handed, neither being the quickest scorers.
I know Davies really obviously wants to open but I think his style of batting is clearly better suited to batting in the middle order than Yates
i wonder if the elephant in the room is that our best batsman Hain has never (other than his first season) opened. If you look at James Vince, ever since he established himself as the man at Hants, he opened, and it gave their best batsman the chance to face the maximum number of deliveries. It seems counter-intuitive that our best batsman seems to always either be under pressure to rebuild an innings with wickets down in the power play, or coming in with only 10 overs to go. Considering he almost always takes 10 balls to have a look and get going, if he comes in around 10 overs, he only needs his partner to hog the strike a bit too much and he's coming in to overs 15-20 having barely had time to knock himself in and potentially needing to go at 12/over.
personally it seems to me to have suited him better coming in 2 wickets down in the PP, at least it has given him plenty of time and he has rolled out dozens of big 8-+ innings under those circumstances.
On Mousley- his career SR has dropped as he has gone along it seems to me, and it seems to have coincided with playing him at 3. he seems very much boom or bust and seems to get stuck at the crease playing big shots and missing and allowing too many dots, he doesn't seem adept enough at rotating the strike. i thought he was a better number 5/6 than 3 to be honest.
Muyeye seems to get runs whenever I look at the Kent scorecard
GerryShedd wrote:
Alex Loudon who went out with Pippa Middleton but dumped her because his family said that she "isn't wife material".
ha indeed a man so posh the future queen's sister is too vulgar for him, great stuff
LeicesterExile wrote:
Newver been a fan of his since the way he left to join Worcs at the start of his career.
unless i am remembering wrong, at that time wasn't he behind the unlamented Alex Loudon in the pecking order? I could totally understand him leaving for better opportunities under those circumstances, I never saw a cricketer with the lazy arrogant body language of Loudon***, whose talent came a long way short of matching his own estimation of it.
*** entirely coincidentally Loudon was an Old Etonian, to say his body language in the field or running between the wickets was 'languid' would be an understatement
so, was the pitch that stood 800 runs a week ago suddenly a snakepit, or was it good bowling, or poor batting, or both, from both teams?
The victory last night showed we still have the same fundamental issues with the side, and the mediocre performances of some players.
Yet again Lintott and Hassan were very expensive, Lintotts 3rd over could have cost the game,
Lintott's first two overs were brilliant, though, he was virtually unhittable, i was right behind his arm he was getting vicious drift as well as looping flight, it looked very difficult for the batsman to judge where it would be pitching so i was actually encouraged by Lintott as he landed pretty much every one of his first 12 deliveries and even the poor over, it looked like he was just too full but at least he landed them. At his worst recently he has been sending drag downs down the leg side or full tosses on the stumps but most worryingly he started losing that real zip out of the hand that a leggie needs. he certainly didn't lack that in the first two overs last night.
well we will certainly miss his athletic and enthusiastic fielding
KingofSpain wrote:
Talking about optimism, Bethell should have a chat with McCullum and request to play tonight. He could jump in a car at lunch and be at Edgbaston in good time to play.
but how could he turn down the opportunity to wander around the boundary doing 12th man duties anyone else could do? SMH
KingofSpain wrote:
Bears preview
Same squad. No mention of Dicky Gleeson.
so Bethell is allowed to play in the CC but not the T20? what am I missing here? thanks England. FFS
I'm not sure where he is with availability right now, but I'd like to see Garton do some red ball. Might do him some good to just bowl without someone going after him every ball and he could definitely do a batting job at that tricky number 8 spot.
yeah I'd love to see him really given his head and told to just have a go with the new ball. Knowing his luck, it would be clear blue skies and a thankless task on a flat featherbed
Solbear wrote:
In fact it was a fruitful evening for former Bears with Will Rhodes - supposedly, a non-T20 player here - top scoring with 58no
not too much supposedly about it, he had 2 full seasons in the T20 team batting in a pivotal position at 3/4 and his record pretty much stunk. 2019-21 he had 35 games, averaged under 20, strike rate well under 130.
Hain scored more T20 runs in the 2024 campaign than Rhodes managed across 4 seasons.
I can see why they are loathe to bowl Garton at the death but when he has bowled good, either tight or threatening overs with the new ball, it seems madness to only give him one over and really stores up problems for us later in the innings. must be hell on his confidence to see other go at 15 and he only gets one over