England vs New Zealand, First Test at Lords

First topic message reminder :

England: Cook (c), Compton, Trott, Bell, Root, Bairstow, Prior, Broad, Swann, Anderson, Finn.
NZ: Fulton, Rutherford, Williamson, Taylor, Brownlie, McCullum (c), BJ Watling, Southee, Wagner, Boult, Martin

England win the toss and will bat first

Are the English already batting for a draw?

Just a bit of rustiness I'll say. Things will look a lot brighter tomorrow - I just wish we would stop starting a series so slowly, I think it's been that way since the last Ashes series!

Only bright spot today is that this thread has helped take cricket posts on this site past 100,000.

Duty281 wrote:Just a bit of rustiness I'll say. Things will look a lot brighter tomorrow - I just wish we would stop starting a series so slowly, I think it's been that way since the last Ashes series!

Are we playing for the Ashes? Do our players know this?

Root, despite not scoring all that quickly, looked busier than the rest, and Bairstow and Prior usually score at a decent clip. This approach of nothingness will not help England, so one can only hope they all will stick to their natural game.

The Problem England has here is that slow rate, even if they score at 3 runs an over and bat the whole day their score will only be 430 after day 2, that does not leave much time to get the Kiwi's in and bowl them out twice (unless of course there are some serious collapses).

I predict this will be a draw.

It is obvious Englnad is missing KP.
he is the one man that turns an other-wise moderate 10 into a top-11.

All Englnad should be praying that he gets healed......and timely enouhg that he gets some practise also

We need the return of the messiah

God save KP

Morning all,

Didn't watch the whole day yesterday, but thought even early on Cook and Compton were a bit passive. From what I saw, England missed out on the bad balls by trying to hit them too hard (at least 4 or 5 full tosses went unpunished) which follows from not putting enough pressure on the fielding side by not looking to score off their good balls.

KPF is right to some extent in that without KP England's batting order look a bit one-paced and containable, particularly on slow wickets where someone like Bell will always find quick scoring difficult because he relies on timing rather than power. With that in mind I think they missed a trick in putting Bell at 4 and not promoting Bairstow. I've said a few times before that I think he's naturally more of a top order than middle-order (shades of Ponting about the way he bats) who likes to dominate, and here would have been an ideal time to give him a go at 4.

Having said that, the criticism of Bell is harsh. His strike rate wasn't noticeably worse than Compton's or Cook's and he made more runs.

I don't understand how in one breath you can criticise England's slow scoring, and in the next Compton's shot, which was a calculated risk to hit Martin over the top (it wasn't a swipe across the line or anything like that) and put the field back or put Martin off. You don't win any cricket matches without taking such risks, so whilst it is regrettable it didn't come off, the intent was good and to be encouraged.

Similarly I am bemused by some of the criticism of Cook's decision to bat first, by people who also criticised him for bowling first in identical conditions in the final test in New Zealand. Personally I would have bowled first both times, but for people to suggest Cook got it wrong both times is 20:20 hindsight. In fact New Zealand bowled better, and England batted with less discipline which explains the difference in fortunes. Today does show though why it is probably preferable to bowl first on such pitches, because it is probably easier to control the game on slow pitches when you are bowling - in today's game control is paramount, and New Zealand controlled the pace expertly.

The pitch is disappointing.

For England to win now will require either a drastic change in scoring rates today and then a brilliant bowling performance first up, or some pretty ordinary batting from both sides. A New Zealand win is at the moment more likely, but the draw is firm favourite, depending partly on the weather.

A bit disappointed to see Duty is still amongst us I have to say. In real life I would confront such a person, but on message boards it is all too easy to run away or simply repeat the same nonsense over and over again. Time for the ignore button then.

Mike Selig wrote:Morning all,

Didn't watch the whole day yesterday, but thought even early on Cook and Compton were a bit passive. From what I saw, England missed out on the bad balls by trying to hit them too hard (at least 4 or 5 full tosses went unpunished) which follows from not putting enough pressure on the fielding side by not looking to score off their good balls.

KPF is right to some extent in that without KP England's batting order look a bit one-paced and containable, particularly on slow wickets where someone like Bell will always find quick scoring difficult because he relies on timing rather than power. With that in mind I think they missed a trick in putting Bell at 4 and not promoting Bairstow. I've said a few times before that I think he's naturally more of a top order than middle-order (shades of Ponting about the way he bats) who likes to dominate, and here would have been an ideal time to give him a go at 4.

Having said that, the criticism of Bell is harsh. His strike rate wasn't noticeably worse than Compton's or Cook's and he made more runs.

I don't understand how in one breath you can criticise England's slow scoring, and in the next Compton's shot, which was a calculated risk to hit Martin over the top (it wasn't a swipe across the line or anything like that) and put the field back or put Martin off. You don't win any cricket matches without taking such risks, so whilst it is regrettable it didn't come off, the intent was good and to be encouraged.

Similarly I am bemused by some of the criticism of Cook's decision to bat first, by people who also criticised him for bowling first in identical conditions in the final test in New Zealand. Personally I would have bowled first both times, but for people to suggest Cook got it wrong both times is 20:20 hindsight. In fact New Zealand bowled better, and England batted with less discipline which explains the difference in fortunes. Today does show though why it is probably preferable to bowl first on such pitches, because it is probably easier to control the game on slow pitches when you are bowling - in today's game control is paramount, and New Zealand controlled the pace expertly.

The pitch is disappointing.

For England to win now will require either a drastic change in scoring rates today and then a brilliant bowling performance first up, or some pretty ordinary batting from both sides. A New Zealand win is at the moment more likely, but the draw is firm favourite, depending partly on the weather.

A bit disappointed to see Duty is still amongst us I have to say. In real life I would confront such a person, but on message boards it is all too easy to run away or simply repeat the same nonsense over and over again. Time for the ignore button then.

Mike, agree with most of the things related to the match there, other than the bit on Bell. I think Bell is up for some chastisement not just about the way he batted. Compton and Cook had the new ball in the first session to deal with it has to be remembered. And Bell, the way he got out, and the timing of that wicket left England in a real corner. If you bat that long, you most certainly have to convert it into a substantial effort. So if he's getting some stick, I have to say Bell has deserved every bit of it.

The new ball is possibly the best time to score though, given the nature of the pitch.

Excellent point made by Nasser on sky about the England batsmen running inside the line against Martin, because he bowls further outside off than most spinners.

Surprised the kiwi bowlers have changed ends. Hard to adapt I'd have thought, and particularly given the way they bowled yesterday.

The slope doesn't really help swing, so not sure what the reasoning behind it is.

First 10 overs seen off with no alarm, only 16 runs added though. When will the acceleration come?

More of the same this morning then. The old adage is not to judge until both teams have batted. Everyone has struggled for timing so far, is the pitch really 2-paced?

Mike Selig wrote:
A bit disappointed to see Duty is still amongst us I have to say. In real life I would confront such a person, but on message boards it is all too easy to run away or simply repeat the same nonsense over and over again. Time for the ignore button then.

The last thing this section needs is fewer posters. Considering England were playing yesterday there was only one page of comments which is quite poor. I have never/will never be a regular poster but have noticed a severe decline in activity on this section since last year.

Root's gone, caught down the leg side by Watling of Southee. He goes for 40, and England are 192-5.

Root gone, tickling one down the leg side off Southee. Another start gone, and Prior reaches the crease with plenty of work still to do.

Root's gone caught down the leg side and now, at 192/5, England are in trouble. Prior has to lead the counter-attack now, no more scratching around!

Oh England.

and Prior gone first ball, England in trouble!

Not enough runs on the board, all the hard work of the first hour undone in 2 balls. I thought yesterday morning that 375+ would be a good score, I'd take 300 right now.

while the first wicket had an element of fortune, the Prior wicket was a lovely piece of bowling from Southee.

Nice bowling from Southee to Prior. Root out to one of those things, but both wickets arguably came because Southee had just started to get the ball to move.

England will have to bowl well here, and resist the temptation to be overly aggressive.

Broad's dire batting form continues, England desperately need something from these last three wickets here.

Prior goes first ball, and Broad joins him 3 balls later. South with the wicket of Prior, and Wagner picked up Broad. England in serious trouble at 195-7.

Negative batting, slow scoring, tight bowling, and the decision at the toss to bat, have all contributed to a rather awful display with the bat in this innings. 7 down, our hopes lie with Bairstow to get us as close as possible to 300. England have been overly respectful.

First ball I've seen well timed on the up... by Swann. Good follow-up bouncer by Wagner.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:Broad's dire batting form continues, England desperately need something from these last three wickets here.

Why is above Swann in the order these days is anyone's guess. Its alarming how much he has declined with the bat, I would say he is a number 10 or 11 these days.

England are going to have to be careful with the ball not to be too aggressive. So far it's been mostly the full half-volleys that have been driven, England need to make sure not to go too full in search of the magic delivery...

Just shows the old Boycottism holds true ("add two wickets to the score to see how you are really placed")

One loose shot , one good ball first up , and a reasonably sound position becomes perilous...worse now after Broad follows.
Didn't think much of the Broad footwork there.

Will not get too judgmental until NZ have batted. It is notable all six batsmen got settled in and yet none went on past forty. Have seen plenty of matches in the past where that sort of trend continued throughout.

Nice to see Southee rewarded this morning...thought he bowled pretty well yesterday without much to show for it. Bit lucky with Root , but he probably deserved a break.

Chance for Bairstow to do something here...although now Swann is gone so perhaps he will run out of partners...

The collapse continues, Swann goes. Wagner gets his 3rd.

Swann gone, the procession continues

This is starting to look horribly like this. A terrible match in the worst home series I can remember:

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63842.html

Safe to say, this isn't the best way to approach an Ashes series.

well this is a big worry.

some guys seemed to be in form but the NZ away form is back.

either NZ are bowling very well or we're in a bit of a mess. Not good in an Ashes year if they can't turn this form around.

NZ in the box seat for this one if they bat with some application.

Oh Boy...I went out for Lunch and came back to see 8 down

I am shocked....but so expected...you dig a hole in cricket...and then you fall deeper and deeper in it.

After two failed attempts in NZ this time...McCullum muxt bee feeling he can nail England.

Only rain can save England

Swann nicks a good one, nothing he could do about that really.

England going down fast.

KP_fan wrote:Oh Boy...I went out for Lunch and came back to see 8 down

I am shocked....but so expected...you dig a hole in cricket...and then you fall deeper and deeper in it.

After two failed attempts in NZ this time...McCullum muxt bee feeling he can nail England.

Only rain can save England

Nonsense. Jimmy Anderson can save England, as can Finn, maybe Swann, or possibly Broad.

Finn needs to find his batting form from the previous series here to save England yet again.

KP_fan wrote:Oh Boy...I went out for Lunch and came back to see 8 down

I am shocked....but so expected...you dig a hole in cricket...and then you fall deeper and deeper in it.

After two failed attempts in NZ this time...McCullum muxt bee feeling he can nail England.

Only rain can save England

far too early to say, let's see what NZ do on this pitch first, and we all know Lords pitches are usually incredibly flat on days 4 and 5 so England could well bat a couple of days to save the game should they need to anyway.

Looks like ANOTHER first innings failure to start a Test Series. Starting become a real issue from England.

absolutely shocking running from the pair there, should easily have got three and got Bairstow back on strike...

nz just look too good.

Englands new team looks a worry. Seems we're on the way down if we can't find some better and more consistent batting.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:

KP_fan wrote:Oh Boy...I went out for Lunch and came back to see 8 down

I am shocked....but so expected...you dig a hole in cricket...and then you fall deeper and deeper in it.

After two failed attempts in NZ this time...McCullum muxt bee feeling he can nail England.

Only rain can save England

far too early to say, let's see what NZ do on this pitch first, and we all know Lords pitches are usually incredibly flat on days 4 and 5 so England could well bat a couple of days to save the game should they need to anyway.

which makes the toss decision even more baffling really.

but yeah we shall see. if they fail in this series then they have problems.

I would like to see a little more credit to NZ. In conditions that haven't really been batsman friendly , they have bowled generally pretty well.
They appear to have had plans for each batsman , and have executed them quite well. Nothing ferocious about their attack , but they have nagged away , not giving easy runs , and you can see the results...

Sure England might have played with a bit more urgency at times (I am a bit critical of some of the running ) , but overall I think NZ have earned their handy position.

Of course , they still have to bat. Will be interesting to see if England can maintain similar control...perhaps the selection of Finn rather than Bresnan might be regretted in hindsight ?

alfie wrote:I would like to see a little more credit to NZ. In conditions that haven't really been batsman friendly , they have bowled generally pretty well.
They appear to have had plans for each batsman , and have executed them quite well. Nothing ferocious about their attack , but they have nagged away , not giving easy runs , and you can see the results...

Sure England might have played with a bit more urgency at times (I am a bit critical of some of the running ) , but overall I think NZ have earned their handy position.

Of course , they still have to bat. Will be interesting to see if England can maintain similar control...perhaps the selection of Finn rather than Bresnan might be regretted in hindsight ?

I agree. NZ have bowled well on a pitch well suited to their bowlers (not much pace but plenty of movement). You're equally right to point out the lack of urgency in England's running between the wickets, which has been pretty poor for an international side.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:

KP_fan wrote:Oh Boy...I went out for Lunch and came back to see 8 down

I am shocked....but so expected...you dig a hole in cricket...and then you fall deeper and deeper in it.

After two failed attempts in NZ this time...McCullum muxt bee feeling he can nail England.

Only rain can save England

far too early to say, let's see what NZ do on this pitch first, and we all know Lords pitches are usually incredibly flat on days 4 and 5 so England could well bat a couple of days to save the game should they need to anyway.

NZ will bat the 2nd and 4th inning............so on D5 it's NZ who is more likely to bat....unless Eng is battling to avoid innings defeat....whihc would imply NZ had a HUGE first inning

Both NZ bowlers doing plenty with the ball at present : credit to Bairstow and Finn for hanging in there and adding a few runs.
On the other hand if conditions are so good for bowling right now England might be wondering if they'd be better off smashing a few and getting in the field...

Won't be long anyway now as Finn goes.

Finn gone, Southee bowls what looks like an outswinger but just doesn't swing and he's trapped plumb in front. I suspect Anderson won't want to be batting for too long here today, get out there and bowl, these are good conditions to bowl in. Yep, wild swoosh at his first ball right there suggests he doesn't want to hang around.

Jimmy certainly looks as if he'd rather a breezy couple of boundaries and off to start bowling...not sure what Bairstow thinks of that plan...especially as Jimmy has nicked the strike...