The summer of cricket 2020

A very strong position for England with runs on the board and a series lead in hand.

Pakistan going to have to produce something special from here to rescue the series

I don't think anyone has suggested the 100 is a perfect solution in and of itself, but it represents an attempt to modernise and save an unsustainable status quo.

Soul Requiem wrote:

king_carlos wrote:

GSC wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:There doesn't have to be an alternative solution to dismiss the hundred for the waste of time that it is, what part of that are you failing to understand?

If you can't acknowledge why extra revenue streams are needed and suggest alternative approaches, then it's not much of a contribution.

Easy to say I don't like something, harder to suggest a resolution

Precisely. If your only intention is to criticise anything new, ignore the fact cricket needs to evolve to survive and make banal observations with nothing more than a surface veneer of understanding then you might as well put mittens on and just angrily mash your fist against the keyboard. The resulting posts would add just as much to the discussion and there's no chance they could display less comprehension of the issues at hand.

Oooh that's me told, you've helped me see the light and now understand the hundred is not a monumental waste of time but is the saviour of all cricket. I'm interested to know what you think the hundred will add that T20 doesn't? A new revenue stream but a diluted product, all hail Colin.

I've explained that in above posts, Soul.

The shorter play time is aimed at families being able to attend after finishing work but getting home early enough to get the kids to bed. Hence targeting younger fans. 10 ball overs is aimed at reducing the stop start nature which can be an issue for engaging new fans, especially younger ones.

The Hundred attracting more overseas stars will hopefully attract more overseas spectators as well. Hence new revenue.

As discussed in mine and Duty's post the dividends the ECB can pay the counties through the broadcasting rights are hoped to allow the counties to develop a more financially viable set-up longer term. Those broadcasting rights are a pretty clear new revenue stream given they wouldn't exist without the competition.

"A new revenue stream but a diluted product". Surely you can at least acknowledge that English cricket needs new revenue streams to be financially viable? If the finances of English cricket don't improve then the product won't be diluted, it will be gone, as the game is drifting towards bankruptcy. It's impossible to have this discussion with fans who aren't willing to acknowledge that the game can't keep operating as it currently does.

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:I don’t know whether I should give credit to the selectors for sticking with Buttler or whether they have been rewarded despite themselves, but it’s a period weathered that has worked.

Credit to him too, he’s been down in the dumps in both parts of his game but has bounced back with both. A very good sign of his character

He’s also come in at crucial moments with the bat in the past three tests, and been part of the crucial partnerships (with Pope in the 3rd test vs WI, Woakes in Manchester, and Crawley here). Certainly seems to have taken the extra responsibility with batting at 6 into his stride.

Hopefully they can pickup where they left off tomorrow morning. If Buttler can get in again in the morning, Pakistan are in a world of trouble (albeit how often do we see the next morning the set batsmen from the day before struggle to get going again)

king_carlos

king_carlos wrote:

Duty281 wrote:
Well the ECB are taking in about £40m from broadcasting, which is the majority part of the projected £51m revenue stream. Out of that, they'll dole the money out to the various counties. When you take it all into consideration, the ECB will lose £12m from the Hundred in its first year. And that's if the tournament is done on budget; if set-up costs are higher, the ECB will lose more money. And if the Hundred is a failure through the five years, which I expect it will be, it could represent a big loss of money for the ECB.

T20 succeeded because it was different enough to forms of the game that already existed. The Hundred will struggle to attract anyone new because it isn't different. If there is an issue with families saying that T20 games finish too late, then start them an hour or so earlier.

I'm no expert on what can be done to revive the financial health of the county game, but I certainly don't think this event is it. Fewer professional counties, as you mentioned, could be one option.

I may be wrong but is the hope not that the dividend being paid to the counties from the broadcasting deal can allow them to build to being more financially viable longer term. Hence the hope is the ECB will have to put less in to propping up the counties with struggling finances in the long run. In essence the ECB taking a hit to make an investment across the board now in the hope it can secure more stability and save money longer term.

When parents who cite the late finish times are asked about earlier start times the response has been that if games start earlier they will struggle to frequently make it due to work. That gives a short window in the evening which the Hundred was designed to fit it.

I've never argued the Hundred will definitely work. It is similar to T20. The games being an hour shorter could solve a significant problem for families of young children however and trying to reach a younger audience is the most obvious way to secure new fans and hence revenue longer term. The 10 ball 'overs' also aimed at keeping play going more continuously with less frequent breaks. The stop start nature of cricket has often been an issue for engaging young new fans.

I agree that fewer counties is likely the significant change that needs to come though.

The problem with the dividend being paid to counties is it's still putting the ECB into the red in terms of finances from the competition. £40 million comes in from broadcasting, about £10m from sponsors/tickets. That £50m revenue stream for the Hundred is then swallowed up mostly by the budget for running the competition, which is currently £39m. The bribe money paid to counties, the dividend, then leaves the competition costs at a total of £64m. And the £39m expenditure for running the competition might be even higher than that in the first year of the competition.

So in a sense, the ECB are taking £11m profit from the competition, to pay out £25m to the counties, which doesn't make good financial sense. I mean they might as well just pay out extra money to the counties without bothering with this new competition, they'll still be in the red either way. This loss might be offset in the long-term if a new audience is attracted to the game, but I think this is rather unlikely, or if the competition is successful and carries on for years and decades to come, but I don't think that's likely either.

And if money is being thrown at the counties, I fail to see how it's making them more financially viable in the long-term. If you put extra money into a business that's making a loss, it's still going to make a loss after the money's put in. And it'll be the same for these county cricket sides, especially the ones who don't host England matches.

In terms of the actual gameplay of the Hundred, I don't think it will be particularly fast or continuous. Ten-ball overs, as far as I see it, are optional, not mandatory. Very few bowlers are going to want to bowl ten-ball overs where they could be slogged for over 30 runs; they'll much prefer to bowl five-ball overs where variety can be maintained. Timeouts of two and a half minutes are also in place for the bowling side, which is definitely strategic and not at all about advertising, and this will slow the game down still further.

Duty281 wrote:The problem with the dividend being paid to counties is it's still putting the ECB into the red in terms of finances from the competition. £40 million comes in from broadcasting, about £10m from sponsors/tickets. That £50m revenue stream for the Hundred is then swallowed up mostly by the budget for running the competition, which is currently £39m. The bribe money paid to counties, the dividend, then leaves the competition costs at a total of £64m. And the £39m expenditure for running the competition might be even higher than that in the first year of the competition.

So in a sense, the ECB are taking £11m profit from the competition, to pay out £25m to the counties, which doesn't make good financial sense. I mean they might as well just pay out extra money to the counties without bothering with this new competition, they'll still be in the red either way. This loss might be offset in the long-term if a new audience is attracted to the game, but I think this is rather unlikely, or if the competition is successful and carries on for years and decades to come, but I don't think that's likely either.

And if money is being thrown at the counties, I fail to see how it's making them more financially viable in the long-term. If you put extra money into a business that's making a loss, it's still going to make a loss after the money's put in. And it'll be the same for these county cricket sides, especially the ones who don't host England matches.

In terms of the actual gameplay of the Hundred, I don't think it will be particularly fast or continuous. Ten-ball overs, as far as I see it, are optional, not mandatory. Very few bowlers are going to want to bowl ten-ball overs where they could be slogged for over 30 runs; they'll much prefer to bowl five-ball overs where variety can be maintained. Timeouts of two and a half minutes are also in place for the bowling side, which is definitely strategic and not at all about advertising, and this will slow the game down still further.

My thoughts with the £11m profit, £25m in dividends is that the ECB know the Counties need investment either way so they are hoping the revenue from the Hundred can cover some of that now and then in long run hopefully pay it back if it becomes more profitable. Basically investing £25m with £11m covered and potential for growth is better than investing £25m with none of it covered. Either way the position isn't great but that's the nature of crickets finances, sadly.

With regards to putting money into a business making a loss, that depends how it's invested. If the counties can invest in infrastructure that can provide income longer term then it might work. For instance many sports grounds have invested in diversifying into using their facilities for conferencing and events to provide alternative revenue year round.

I accept that some counties finances are in such a poor position that moving to semi-pro may be better for their viability long term though. Hence why I favour having fewer fully professional counties. If the counties that move to semi-pro managed to find more stability in the future then the opportunity to become fully professional again could be there further down the line.

In terms of game play I actually think changing ends half as many times in a game could make a difference. Back when I played league cricket in Yorkshire there was a brief trial of playing 16 over games with 8 ball overs, rather than T20, to reduce playing time early and late in the season when light can become an issue with midweek evening games. It made a surprising difference.

As with over rates in all forms of cricket I expect there will need to be strict enforcement of quick play by the umpires to keep things on track. Fitting the games into that 3 hour window to target younger families is a critical focus of the Hundred though so I'd hope it will be enforced.

GSC wrote:A very strong position for England with runs on the board and a series lead in hand.

Pakistan going to have to produce something special from here to rescue the series

Very much so.

Brilliant effort from Crawley. I liked the way he combined defence and aggression during the day whilst also - and this is probably more difficult during those two extremes - regularly looking for singles and running them quickly.

I often bang on about the importance of ''going big'' when reaching a ton. Anyway, despite all the p* out being taken out of me by goose for doing so, textbook example of that today which should go a long way to making the match and the series safe.

Wonder if Crawley can reach 200? The last two England players I can recall doing so in the same innings that they scored their maiden Test century were Rob Key and David Lloyd. Unfortunately, neither scored another Test ton. I'll be surprised if the same fate befalls Crawley. Think he has a few more Test centuries in him.

Serious credit as well to Buttler. Worth recalling that we were in a spot of bother when he walked to the crease at 127/4.

Yasir Shah put in a proper shift for Pakistan. 28 overs in the day. Two wickets and as a bowler you never say no to that. However, he needed more than his 3 maidens to keep the score down and the pressure more on.

GSC wrote:I don't think anyone has suggested the 100 is a perfect solution in and of itself, but it represents an attempt to modernise and save an unsustainable status quo.

Going out now. I'll try and throw the odd comment into the mix tomorrow.

It represents a half baked acceptance of the status wuo rather than a genuine acceptance of the inevitability that the county system which currently forces a permanent disenfranchisement of huge swathes of the country whilst breeding mediocrity and failing to be economically sustainable.
The alternative to the slow death by cuts and invention of a format noone has ever said they genuinely wanted, be that players (surely that's who the game is really for), existing spectators or the mythical unicorn that is potential spectators who exist in the minds of speculators.
The 100 exists only because they ecb couldnt or wasnt willing to break the County stranglehold on t20 , or go even further and just regional franchise all formats of cricket raising the standard in fewer teams.
Instead they are go half cocked expanding D1 and letting " first class" cricket in a handful of counties decline into even more of a joke whilst doing little to genuinely push conpetition at the top. Consigning one day cricket to the dustbin at the time its become the most succesful product for the national team, and internationally is seen as the most profitable form. On top ofnthet the one bit ofn county cricket that was being successful is now confused with a product the existing viewers are openly hostile to and the wider public still have zero idea about.
Being a positivist you can see it as a slow step toward the inevitable .fewer domestic teams concentrating talent and the death of the County sytsem, but really it represents a failure to address the bigger picture.

As it is its quite clear that Crawley and Buttler are the only hope for English cricket. If you simply got rid of everything else, including Ben Stokes and even that one test that Chris Woakes won singlehandedly , and just had this partnership then everything would be absolutely perfect.
The last I checked Crawleys innings resprents the return of King Arthur and a goose laying a platinum egg. Never one for hyperbole or exaggeration I think it's safe to say that he an Buttler are the greatest double act since Morcambe and Wise, nay since a custard and apple crumble!
This is how strong a United England ( and Wales) can be when freed from the shackles of the EU.

Wiping the tears from my eyes I can only hope the Jolly British weather doesn't spoil things from here. Or that Dom Bess doesn't get a fivefor and make me look like a plum for pointing out his figures this summer have been dreadful.

Glad to see you enjoyed the day so much , goose

I intend to follow my usual policy of not suggesting team changes until after the match ; but after reading a lot of posts from yesterday I am led to wonder how many new players will be required - since it seems Duty wants Burns axed , Soul would dispense as soon as decently possible with Root and Buttler , and Goose clearly has Bess on the next bus out. Two failures from Pope would suggest his infallibility is lost , contrary to church doctrine , so there's another vacancy...  And with Anderson and Broad shortly applying for the pension Ed Smith will have his work cut out !

Actually rather a good day for England . Barring a total collapse they really ought to secure their first objective and ensure they can't lose this one - which will formalize a series win over Pakistan for the first time in quite a few years.  I suppose a total collapse is still possible so should not be counting my chickens yet ; but on the balance of probabilities...

Road map for today should be to avoid immediate meltdown then proceed rapidly to lunch and a little beyond and get Pakistan batting in search of 250 plus to avoid a follow on.  Then the hard work can begin.
Pakistan of course will hope to regroup , grab both these wickets quickly , roll over the tail under 400 and set about making a big first innings themselves. Written down it doesn't seem that far fetched so I guess I had better rein back the optimism.

Do think Pakistan suffered by not having a fourth seamer.  Abbas was really the only bowler to offer a hint of control : the fast lads bowl some real snorters , but also go for plenty when it isn't working , especially as they tire. And Yasir for all his wicket taking ability concedes runs far too readily. He also seems to melt down as soon as Buttler comes in , perhaps because he's been savaged before by Jos. You'd think he'd welcome a bit of a duel with a batsman who wants to take him on ; but a couple of sweeps are enough to have him start dishing up pies...If I were Azhar Id have him off immediately and bowl just pace to Buttler for his first five/ten overs. Easy from up here , of course

Have seen a few comments that the weather may have the final say again , but given forecasts are often , shall we say , "inexact" , I'd like to think the chances are there will be enough play to make a result at least possible. The excellent run rate yesterday has helped in this regard - and hopefully there will be enough help for the bowlers over the next couple of days that neither team runs up 600 and kills the match.

Semi seriously I think the only place England have a serious question mark right now is whether they have a legitimate spin option. Talk of bringing in Rashid kinda suggests we're still filling out the batting with the spin choices

The top orders done enough to merit a run of games together given the struggles we've had in that area by chopping and changing.

The talk of Rashid is presumably aimed at the optimistic hope of touring Asia this winter, and also a recognition that currently Mo doesn't justify a position in any format of the game.
The big issue England have with spinners currently is that Bess is the only one to have really done a decent amount of bowling in red ball cricket in the past 18 months plus. Rashid doesn't have a red ball county contract, leach has been injured, ill and now benched and Mo hasn't even been able to look at a cricket ball without cracking up since the world cup.
I guess Parkinson still exists too....but hes ended up injuring himself just when the Bob Willis was about to start.
Which does leave Bess as the "man in" after a succesful winter (against a team notorious for being absolutely incapable of batting against spinners ) , and noone really having the opportunity to make the external case to replace him.
I'm a big advocate of positive change, bringing in players because they deserve to be capped rather than replacing someone in the hope that the player you didn't think was good enough might be after all, sonI don't have a huge issue with the way england have gone about things with the likes of Bess. Even the continued flogging of the Denly horse had some merit and arguably contributed more to englands improvements in batting than his number of runs would suggest.
Again looking forward to the winter I in no way see a scenario where a fit Bess isn't in the tour squad, barring a night out with Alex Hales or Harry Mcguire, and frankly he's pretty much given as a starter.
And to clarify for the 99th time my continued questioning of him this summer is not a pathological hatred but significantly based on the notion that right arm orthodox spinners have an incredibly tough time challenging anoyone (other than South Africa unless theres a lot of help from the pitch or they bowl in the very aggressive but costly way Mo did. Bess did bowl that more attacking length and flight in his succesful innings in SA but this summer has consistently bowled flat and as a containing spinner. Which could well be direction from the top, but its hard to see that when they were desperately chasing wickets to save/win tests in second innings. He has skill which we saw glimpses of, including a very good wicket with a top spinner in one of the early tests, but the vast majority of his bowling has been easy for batsmen to play risk free even when theres been a lot of turn. Most damming is that hes bowled in a containing role but not been cheap doing it.
At risk of sounding like I'm defending Mo the figures Bess has produced this summer are in line with the sort of thing that got him endless abuse and led to his many breakdowns in confidence. There was a really good interview with the Pakistani coach england had mentoring Mo a few years back (Saqlin? my memory fades) where he talked about the flight he used and why it was he had so much success against good players of spin ( notably India) who felt they had to be playing big high risk shots against him and specifically the difference between what they worked on in terms of drift and dip vs the way Bess is tending to bowl which is meat and drink to the Pakistan batsmen.
A bit like Mo again Bess' batting has been pretty handy on the quiet ( he has an absurd average this summer driven by being not out most times hes batted) but even without Stokes his place in the side has to be down to what he offers with the ball rather and batting contributions seen as a nice bonus. For both that is different if they are playing as part of a two or three spinner attack like the one that bought success in Sri Lanka. But for home summer tests I find it at odds with the generally aggressive nature of the sides england are picking and the five bowler philosophy where they are looking to win tests with the ball rather than worrying about losing them with the bat.
My questioning for this specific test was also based on Roots reluctance to use Bess as a bowler which has been increasingly evident as the series has progressed. If hes not going to use a spinner why are we picking one? I get the feeling there's a disconnect between root and the head selector on the spinner issue and that hes lost a bit of faith in Bess.
Its not black and white by any means and again I'm not trashing him as a player, just really noting that its going to be incredibly difficult for him to be a success in these home tests. England have had success from their strength, seam bowling. Sometimes dropping or not picking a player doesn't have to be down to hating them or thinking they are rubbish, just that there's not a requirement for them in the XI for a specific game. Ask Chris Woakes!
Going without a spinner is a thing Fletcher England find very hard to do, which is understandable but this summer to me feels like a point of dogma to some extent. I also find it a touch triggering that people are so far up Bess' cavities at times vs the overly aggressive vitriol we ( myself included) had for Mo during his lean spells. It just feels like the defence of him at times is very blind and full of favouritism. Even Leach got a much harder time from the Internet, despite being a better bowler. So maybe I do find myself playing devils advocate to some degree and coming across as. Bess hater when really all I'm trying to do is open people's minds up to the reality that he isn't our Lord and saviour. That's clearly Broad/Stokes/Woakes/ Crawley.

England score four runs in 25 minutes, now it's raining.

That wasn't supposed to happen.

Gooseberry wrote:The talk of Rashid is presumably aimed at the optimistic hope of touring Asia this winter, and also a recognition that currently Mo doesn't justify a position in any format of the game.
The big issue England have with spinners currently is that Bess is the only one to have really done a decent amount of bowling in red ball cricket in the past 18 months plus. Rashid doesn't have a red ball county contract, leach has been injured, ill and now benched and Mo hasn't even been able to look at a cricket ball without cracking up since the world cup.
I guess Parkinson still exists too....but hes ended up injuring himself just when the Bob Willis was about to start.
Which does leave Bess as the "man in" after a succesful winter (against a team notorious for being absolutely incapable of batting against spinners ) , and noone really having the opportunity to make the external case to replace him.
I'm a big advocate of positive change, bringing in players because they deserve to be capped rather than replacing someone in the hope that the player you didn't think was good enough might be after all, sonI don't have a huge issue with the way england have gone about things with the likes of Bess. Even the continued flogging of the Denly horse had some merit and arguably contributed more to englands improvements in batting than his number of runs would suggest.
Again looking forward to the winter I in no way see a scenario where a fit Bess isn't in the tour squad, barring a night out with Alex Hales or Harry Mcguire, and frankly he's pretty much given as a starter.
And to clarify for the 99th time my continued questioning of him this summer is not a pathological hatred but significantly based on the notion that right arm orthodox spinners have an incredibly tough time challenging anoyone (other than South Africa unless theres a lot of help from the pitch or they bowl in the very aggressive but costly way Mo did. Bess did bowl that more attacking length and flight in his succesful innings in SA but this summer has consistently bowled flat and as a containing spinner. Which could well be direction from the top, but its hard to see that when they were desperately chasing wickets to save/win tests in second innings. He has skill which we saw glimpses of, including a very good wicket with a top spinner in one of the early tests, but the vast majority of his bowling has been easy for batsmen to play risk free even when theres been a lot of turn. Most damming is that hes bowled in a containing role but not been cheap doing it.
At risk of sounding like I'm defending Mo the figures Bess has produced this summer are in line with the sort of thing that got him endless abuse and led to his many breakdowns in confidence. There was a really good interview with the Pakistani coach england had mentoring Mo a few years back (Saqlin? my memory fades) where he talked about the flight he used and why it was he had so much success against good players of spin ( notably India) who felt they had to be playing big high risk shots against him and specifically the difference between what they worked on in terms of drift and dip vs the way Bess is tending to bowl which is meat and drink to the Pakistan batsmen.
A bit like Mo again Bess' batting has been pretty handy on the quiet ( he has an absurd average this summer driven by being not out most times hes batted) but even without Stokes his place in the side has to be down to what he offers with the ball rather and batting contributions seen as a nice bonus. For both that is different if they are playing as part of a two or three spinner attack like the one that bought success in Sri Lanka. But for home summer tests I find it at odds with the generally aggressive nature of the sides england are picking and the five bowler philosophy where they are looking to win tests with the ball rather than worrying about losing them with the bat.
My questioning for this specific test was also based on Roots reluctance to use Bess as a bowler which has been increasingly evident as the series has progressed. If hes not going to use a spinner why are we picking one? I get the feeling there's a disconnect between root and the head selector on the spinner issue and that hes lost a bit of faith in Bess.
Its not black and white by any means and again I'm not trashing him as a player, just really noting that its going to be incredibly difficult for him to be a success in these home tests. England have had success from their strength, seam bowling. Sometimes dropping or not picking a player doesn't have to be down to hating them or thinking they are rubbish, just that there's not a requirement for them in the XI for a specific game. Ask Chris Woakes!
Going without a spinner is a thing Fletcher England find very hard to do, which is understandable but this summer to me feels like a point of dogma to some extent. I also find it a touch triggering that people are so far up Bess' cavities at times vs the overly aggressive vitriol we ( myself included) had for Mo during his lean spells. It just feels like the defence of him at times is very blind and full of favouritism. Even Leach got a much harder time from the Internet, despite being a better bowler. So maybe I do find myself playing devils advocate to some degree and coming across as. Bess hater when really all I'm trying to do is open people's minds up to the reality that he isn't our Lord and saviour. That's clearly Broad/Stokes/Woakes/ Crawley.

Goose - for the sake of this old man's eyesight, please break up your frigging paragraphs! Thanks.

Its already too bleeding long without double spacing! Bit like this weather break.

Side bets on how long Fawad Alam has to wait to bat vs how long he stays in for?

Ha...thanks goose for that lengthy and comprehensive explanation of your position re Bess...

All joking aside I don't suspect you of having a "get Bess" attitude. You make a good point re his bowling a bit too much of the flat containment type of stuff - and I note also you wonder if it was under direction. Possibly it was : but I'd also draw your attention to that first Test against West Indies , second innings. They'd lost three early wickets in the run chase , and Bess had created a couple of chances that didn't quite result in wickets - by bowling in quite an attacking manner. Then he was hit a couple of times down the ground and bingo - Stokes had him off. (as West Indies went on to run down the target quite comfortably I question the merit of that choice , but of course we'll never know) but more to the point I wonder if that experience hasn't influenced him a bit subsequently ?

Also note that under Silverwood England have deliberately embraced the notion of "control" , batting and bowling - as a bit of a contrast to the Bayliss style. So very possibly he has been urged to aim for more of the Ashley Giles role of containment while relieving the pace attack than being the cutting edge , like Swann - or even Moeen at times   And obviously that's not what will be needed in Asia so new plan needed...

In fairness to the young man this has been an odd summer.  A lot of rain , some low scores. Whoever was in the spinner's spot would have limited opportunity.

I do think he might get a bit more work in this match (if the weather allows !) and if he does he will need to show a bit more . As you say , he will go on tour ; but his place is by no means secure when he does.

As for Mo : I have a lot of time for him. But he seems to have been mentally scarred by his tribulations over the last year or two and I wonder if he is going to be able to get back ? He is very much a confidence player with bat and ball ; and you'd need strong evidence that he's regained his before you'd be comfortable recalling him , I think. And with limited cricket being played that might be hard to arrange...

Yes this weather break is getting a bit ridiculous now. Should be play soon. Must be rough on Crawley who is facing the nagging feeling of starting over again for the third time in whats already the longest innings of his life.

Guess that's lunch ? Just as well they scored quickly yesterday ...eight overs in two hours , for four runs...

Abbas bowled rather well in those mini sessions. Shaheen really didn't attack the stumps enough : I reckon Buttler didn't have to play at his first fifteen balls this morning.

Ah well ...can start at 10.30 tomorrow...

alfie wrote:
They'd lost three early wickets in the run chase , and Bess had created a couple of chances that didn't quite result in wickets - by bowling in quite an attacking manner. Then he was hit a couple of times down the ground and bingo - Stokes had him off. (as West Indies went on to run down the target quite comfortably I question the merit of that choice , but of course we'll never know) but more to the point I wonder if that experience hasn't influenced him a bit subsequently ?

Wasn't a certain forum favourite to blame for Bess not taking a deserved wicket?

alfie wrote:Guess that's lunch ?  Just as well they scored quickly yesterday ...eight overs in two hours , for four runs...

Abbas bowled rather well in those mini sessions. Shaheen really didn't attack the stumps enough : I reckon Buttler didn't have to play at his first fifteen balls this morning.

Ah well ...can start at 10.30 tomorrow...

No, not lunch. Restart at 13:15, lunch at 14:00, because cricket is daft.

This unexpected rain isn't helping...we've still got the expected rain to come!

Why have they not taken lunch? We've lost the best part of two hours and they're still insisting on their 2pm lunch.

Play starting again in a few minutes, lunch is at 2. Worst case scenario for poor crawley whos got stuck a bit.

Seems an odd decision they've been off more than on so far ; presumably had time to nibble a few protein bars by now. Why not just start the afternoon session at 1.15 or whatever ? Take tea either the usual time or when it rains , whichever comes first...who knows you might nearly have time to get the overs in before bedtime...

And talking of spinners...I see Simon Kerrigan has resumed his first class career ! Playing today for Northants. Has a catch already

Wasn't he a classic case of someone who got ruined by his first experience of the top level ! Wonder if he could get back near his best ? Not that old , is he ?

The Pakistani quicks look a bit one dimensional, if plan A doesn't work they don't seem to have a back up plan which is understandable considering their age.

Buttler to 99...

And saved by drs ! I thought he was gone then...

Gets it now Great relief ! Second hundred in Tests and quite the comeback for a man who was surely poised on the edge of the cliff just two matches ago. Fine innings , this.

Well played Buttler, this series is the first time he's looked like a test class batsmen but ultimately he's not a good enough keeper to the spinners so creates a tricky situation. Root, Stokes and Pope need to be at 4, 5 & 6.

Raining again breifly ... muck about with lunch all you want but the weather is just being a dick!

Soul Requiem wrote:Well played Buttler, this series is the first time he's looked like a test class batsmen but ultimately he's not a good enough keeper to the spinners so creates a tricky situation. Root, Stokes and Pope need to be at 4, 5 & 6.

It will be tricky , indeed - if they ever do decide to replace him as keeper. Because on current form (and considering he is generally strong against spin) Buttler would be a lock at six for those tours.

Which of course renders your preferred 4-6 impossible...

alfie wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:Well played Buttler, this series is the first time he's looked like a test class batsmen but ultimately he's not a good enough keeper to the spinners so creates a tricky situation. Root, Stokes and Pope need to be at 4, 5 & 6.

It will be tricky , indeed - if they ever do decide to replace him as keeper. Because on current form (and considering he is generally strong against spin) Buttler would be a lock at six for those tours.

Which of course renders your preferred 4-6 impossible...

Who are you having at 1-5 then Alfie? On the sub continent Foakes simply has to play so are you dropping Burns and having Root at 3 or dropping Pope?

Abbas has bowled really well today with no reward. Rizwan standing up to Abbas in situations such as this is so fun to watch.

Since getting back out there it's been a really enjoyable passage of cricket.

Soul Requiem wrote:

alfie wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:Well played Buttler, this series is the first time he's looked like a test class batsmen but ultimately he's not a good enough keeper to the spinners so creates a tricky situation. Root, Stokes and Pope need to be at 4, 5 & 6.

It will be tricky , indeed - if they ever do decide to replace him as keeper. Because on current form (and considering he is generally strong against spin) Buttler would be a lock at six for those tours.

Which of course renders your preferred 4-6 impossible...

Who are you having at 1-5 then Alfie? On the sub continent Foakes simply has to play so are you dropping Burns and having Root at 3 or dropping Pope?

I'm not on the selection committee , Soul

But just pointing out that if you get your way with Foakes as keeper then you have a problem with that top six. Root is definitely best at four , Stokes at five ; and Buttler cannot bat higher than six. So if you want to play Pope - and I certainly don't want to drop him unless he has a bad run on tour - then either he has to go up to three or the others play out of position (and that's even if you jettison Burns a little harshly) I honestly don't have a perfect solution.

But what I expect is that they won't pick Foakes - so Buttler needs to improve a lot in his keeping , especially up to the stumps.

king_carlos wrote:Abbas has bowled really well today with no reward. Rizwan standing up to Abbas in situations such as this is so fun to watch.

Since getting back out there it's been a really enjoyable passage of cricket.

Interesting rather than enjoyable , for me. Too frustrating with the on- off ; Abbas really has bowled beautifully and deserved better results : at least he's tied them down.

But only 18 overs and just 41 runs has unfortunately undone a lot of the good work yesterday in advancing the game. Looks as if England are shooting for a giant total and only batting once - and with the poor forecast for Monday/Tuesday that may be the only way to get a result - so they will need to get a move on after lunch. Hope the weather and light allow full play for the rest of the day...

On the keeper debate its worth remembering that the only two games in any format Foakes has played since the end of a poor 2019 domestic season were a warm up in Sri Lanka and one at the start of this summer. Thats it. Its not like hes demanding a place in the side, Buttler was getting close to losing his by his own admission but now theres no real pressure on him from his own performances or from anyone challenging him.
As with the spinners issue its a facet of the way cricket is being played now, especially with concussion subs needed, that some players might find getting any cricket at all extremely difficult and numbers twos struggle to push their case.
The issue with Foakes in Asia comes to how to get a balanced side with the best two form spinners in it (if that can be measured without them playing any cricket ...)

I just dont see Buttler going anywhere after this summers batting, unless its to rest him which could be a distinct possibility for Bangaldesh given his importance to white ball and ambitions to play franchise cricket. He should keep working on his keeping too, hopefully England will hook up another consultant coach ( or ask Foakes to justify his bench warming wages)

2 runs off Englands highest ever fifth wicket stand!

There it is! Wow. Crawley really positive and smacking out the 200 without getting stuck...albeit an edge!

Gooseberry wrote:2 runs off Englands highest ever fifth wicket stand!

Past it now...

Has been a bit of a battle at times today , after the fluency of yesterday. But the runs are just starting to flow again now and it is looking like a big total coming up.

Lot of balls past the edge today so maybe there is something there for the bowlers. But by the time Pakistan get in pitch may be so flat that we'll be looking at a bore draw...

Crawley to his double century Ironically with one of the very few false strokes he's played in the innings

3rd youngest double hundred maker ever for England , apparently. Nice stat to have on your cv...

Fantastic from Crawley.

Not just a double ton, but a SR of over 50 as well.

Punishing now, over 400 they only made this much twice through 2018 2019!
Runs flowing, does look like weather is the biggest obstacle to an England win.

Gooseberry wrote:Punishing now, over 400 they only made this much twice through 2018 2019!
Runs flowing, does look like weather is the biggest obstacle to an England win.

Plenty of that around though , is there not ? In this situation I would often prefer a bit of a collapse and a flurry of hitting to finish with , say , 480 and a couple of hours bowling rather than just going on to 600 - which often seems to lead to a stalemate...

Crawley going after Yasir now. Nice six over extra cover

6 for Crawley! Not something many would have expected at the start of this summer. Maybe a slightly unorthodox way of getting one but right now he looks like a player absolutely on top of his game. Pretty mindblwoing just how much hes moved on from the nervy scratcher who guttsed through a few overs in SA.

Yeah Alfie they aren't hanging about though, and one thing that impressed me was that Crawley made a point of not getting stuck waiting for his double century. If anyone tries to critisize this partnership they are wrong.

Another boundary as I type!

300 partnership now...landmarks and records keep coming

Crawelys average now 50 in tests...he started the summer under 30 and got dropped.

Gooseberry wrote:Yeah Alfie they aren't hanging about though, and one thing that impressed me was that Crawley made a point of not getting stuck waiting for his double century. If anyone tries to critisize this partnership they are wrong.

Another boundary as I type!

No they're going nicely...no complaints about the approach once they got into gear today. Just don't want England to bat so long that they end up with a lot of unnecessary runs and insufficient time to get a result before the promised deluge arrives on Tuesday...

But this must be doing a lot of damage to the tourists' morale. Might be a tough job for them to bat in response. And doubtless glad it isn't a five match series.

Gooseberry wrote:On the keeper debate its worth remembering that the only two games in any format Foakes has played since the end of a poor 2019 domestic season were a warm up in Sri Lanka and one at the start of this summer. Thats it. Its not like hes demanding a place in the side, Buttler was getting close to losing his by his own admission but now theres no real pressure on him from his own performances or from anyone challenging him.
As with the spinners issue its a facet of the way cricket is being played now, especially with concussion subs needed, that some players might find getting any cricket at all extremely difficult and numbers twos struggle to push their case.
The issue with Foakes in Asia comes to how to get a balanced side with the best two form spinners in it (if that can be measured without them playing any cricket ...)

I just dont see Buttler going anywhere after this summers batting, unless its to rest him which could be a distinct possibility for Bangaldesh given his importance to white ball and ambitions to play franchise cricket. He should keep working on his keeping too, hopefully England will hook up another consultant coach ( or ask Foakes to justify his bench warming wages)

Calling myself out on this before Guilford sees it... turns out Foakes was released and is playing for Surrey today. Still his first proper game for almost a year!

Crawley is closing in on twice as many balls as hes ever faced in an innings at adult level.

16th highest ever score by and England player!

250 for Crawley...reached in style as he goes after the estimable Abbas

I accept that the Pakistan bowling is pretty worn down now ; but this innings is a bit special. A lot of quite exquisite strokes - and not many false ones in these 374 balls.

Highest score by and england player at 1-3 who isn't Cook since 1990.