Eng v Lanka...first test

First topic message reminder :

Eng lose debutant Robson......on seemingly a seaming pitch inserted in after lanka won toss

kingraf wrote:WG Grace has apparently been itching to get a run. All you need do is scream beetlejuice three times at his gravesite

  You beat me to it. The openers are looking shaky, what is Jack Hobbs up to these days?

wonder what WG Grace would have made of the review system...

The ECB might have finished KP's international career, but they just can't wish him away can they!? At the first sign of England faltering, he's back with a vengeance!. He's not going to come back, and Swanny too is gone, but this England side will continue to miss them both for some more time!.
Why can't good old KP play some county cricket for Surrey and score some runs? Will be so much fun over here, and Mr. Downton wouldn't want to go to town blowing his stupid little trumpet!.

Like the during the good old days of England cricket that ended in 2011, the lower order is yet again giving them a significant advantage. Jordan already gone pass 20, and his knock is regaining some of the lost initiative after Prior's fall.
Credit to Ballance as well, this has to be a real pressure situation.......

The 7th wicket partnership has already put on a very crucial 41 runs so far. Could be the difference at the end.......

alfie wrote:See this is why I rarely come on here with detailed predictions about when declarations should be made , etc ( says he smugly) : cricket has a knack of confounding expectations...

Hi Alfie - the last bit is very true and why most of us love it so much. Nothing wrong though in having a plan - even from the armchair - and seeing if things work out or, more often, how badly it goes wrong.   

That said, England do seem here to have got ourselves into something of a pickle. I don't know when wickets started tumbling but my plan / hope was to bat sensibly up to an hour after lunch and then go hell for leather with a late declaration tonight. Looking a different game now ....

Another 23 overs remaining today. Perhaps England will have to bat may be 10 of those and try and score another 50 runs. If they bat beyond the 10 overs, they'll have to bat the day. Because the overs are not going to be bowled within the scheduled close and we will go into extra time yet again. If they declare during the extra time, there wouldn't be any point to that.......
With Broad and Plunkett to come, think England should just go for it now.

when will Cook declare.......lead's already 289....and that's more than some thought will be sufficient

and if Lanka can take so many wickets with their bowling...eng should trust their bowling too

I'm still predicting a draw. The groundsman has been saved by a rather shameful batting performance.

Very impressed with Jordan in his England career so far. Has that little bit extra: belief, arrogance, swagger call it what you will. You simply can't teach that.

The pitch is still very good to bat on, you only have to see how easily Jordan has been playing to see that. That will certainly make England err on the side of caution, though I would like to see some intent in the next half-hour or so. Even if they only get half-an-hour at SL tonight, that would be a move in the right direction for me. So another 8 overs batting, aim for 40+runs?

I suspect England will declare overnight though...

Jordan goes. Herath goes over the wicket, Jordan comes down the pitch but the ball bites in the rough and he gets a leading edge to mid-off. Good little knock though, steered England out of trouble

I would have a little hit out now and try to get the lead over 350 whilst still having 5-6 overs at Sri Lanka this evening.

VTR wrote:Very impressed with Jordan in his England career so far. Has that little bit extra: belief, arrogance, swagger call it what you will. You simply can't teach that.

I too am impressed but also surprised by his progress over the last year and a bit. During the 2012 season at Surrey he was like a lost boy, short of confidence and struggling to make the team. When he did play, he bowled a lot of no balls. His move to Sussex has really worked out and I strongly suspect some credit there is due (as well as to Jordan himself).

Another 10 overs remaining in the day, England lead by 335. No declaration yet from Cook. What is the rule for a new innings in the extra time? If England declare now, there will be a 10 minute recess between innings, that will be 3 overs gone.

with 10 overs to go and 330+..I am disappointed to see Eng still batting.....but not surprised
New era and all that but the same old timidity

At least they are pushing on. Good contribution from the lower order yet again. When Matt Prior fell, England were 121-6, now they are 224-7. 200 runs in the first innings, now this, the lower order is really doing a fine job here for England, and that really has been the difference between the 2 sides. Sri Lanka were 385-4 at one stage, lost 6 for 68 in the first innings.......

England will have to declare but also give Sri Lanka an inviting total to chase so that they may go slightly on the offensive. I would certainly be declaring very soon myself.

Lot easier to do some rearguard action when it isn't hostile 90mph bowling. Still, good recovery, but even on this deck, Lanka should have crucified this English team from 120-5

Swann had spun Sri Lanka out for 82 in 24 overs last time when they where there in England on a last day where nobody expected a result. Cook might be hoping fore something similar here. Certainly no proactiveness from him. Cook seems to be confused, someone tell him Sanath Jayasuriya is Sri Lanka's chief selector and not their test opener any more!!. A lead over 350, Sri Lanka will never go for that, yet Cook isn't feeling safe........ Or are they playing on for Ballance's hundred?

Cook is letting Balance go for his 100. Wrong move I feel, should have declared.

well there's no point in declaring now, just 6 minutes left, so it's only a question of whether Ballance can get his hundred in what should be two more overs.

I'm not able to watch at the moment. Re: the declaration not coming. Is there any issue with the light? Just wonder if play might end for the day if we do declare now.

Hope Sri Lanka end the day tomorrow at 253-8!!.......

So England go to stumps at 267-8. So in all likelihood, Sri Lanka will be chasing 391 to win the game. Won't be surprised if Cook bats another 20 minutes tomorrow to push the score to 400 to feel a bit more safer!!.

Even MS Dhoni with his Ishant Sharma led bowling attack wouldn't have gone this far!.

msp83 wrote:Even MS Dhoni with his Ishant Sharma led bowling attack wouldn't have gone this far!.

yeah...cook might bat tomm also....
he can't take Eng any further.
Flower and the ashes melt-down has destroyed him completely and irreversibly

Not an attacking approach in the evening session. It really did seem as if Cook wanted Balance to get his 100 before declaring and I think that may be costly in regards to a win tomorrow as Sri Lanka aren't going to go after this total.

Big opportunity missed, understandable but missed all the same I feel.

In assessing today's play (particularly from an England point of view), you need to consider all the bumps and wobbles that came with it. Particularly significant imo is that we took half an hour longer than we wanted to get Sri Lanka all out.

Happy for  Gary Ballance who I rate so highly (my vote for the most exciting youngster). He showed why I rate him so high, he can play in any way and adapts to situations well. He can dig in, or he can smack the ball around. Great hundred from the lad!

As for the declaration I would've told them to get on with it earlier, but I think we missed a trick this morning with our initial plans and that's cost us. Must declare overnight which leads me onto...

"@swildecricket: Ballance tells Ian Ward: We may still have a few overs to bat in the morning"

If that is the case then I shall join the fully fledged Cook negative camp

No way England bat on in the morning. Definitely a bluff from Ballance.

JDizzle wrote:No way England bat on in the morning. Definitely a bluff from Ballance.

Don't feel so confident, JD. Sir Alastair isn't feeling safe, and he needs all the backing to take the side to a new eara and a new direction, and no disruptions can be allowed!. All players should speak in the same voice, and poor old Ballance was just echoing his captain's thoughts!!.

msp83 wrote:Even MS Dhoni with his Ishant Sharma led bowling attack wouldn't have gone this far!.

Great terminology there, msp    

So Ballance has secured his place then, bit annoyed as he is taking up a place that should be James Vince's.

Robson looks a bit overawed by Test Cricket at the moment, Cook needs to drop the captaincy (maybe to Anderson?)

msp83 wrote:

JDizzle wrote:No way England bat on in the morning. Definitely a bluff from Ballance.

Don't feel so confident, JD. Sir Alastair isn't feeling safe, and he needs all the backing to take the side to a new eara and a new direction, and no disruptions can be allowed!. All players should speak in the same voice, and poor old Ballance was just echoing his captain's thoughts!!.

Na, absolutely no chance. If I had any monetary or physical possessions, I would be willing to stake them that England declare tomorrow morning before the start of play! No-one in the world is defensive enough to keep batting.

Very good innings from Ballance in the end. Looked like Boycott-esque at one point, got really stuck in the middle but full credit to him for not throwing it away and accelerating nicely as the innings went on and putting his side into a position of strength. Not really his fault of course that his captain was more interested in personal milestones than a team victory.

The less said about Cook, the better. Unlike msp though, I won't put it past MSD to go one better later in the summer. After all, he is the same captain who let Brendon Mccullum score a double hundred and a triple hundred in successive tests and conceded 700 runs from 90/5....     

Gregers wrote:So Ballance has secured his place then, bit annoyed as he is taking up a place that should be James Vince's.

I can't agree with that, Ballance averages near enough 53 in FC cricket, he more than deserves a good shot and has already shown in his second test he's got the talent to be a stalwart of the side

Can Vince open? If so that's his route into the side

First things first, if England had declared tonight it would have had to have been at least half an hour before the close of play, so 6pm. With the 10 minutes between innings they would have had 5 overs at SL. IMO there would have been no point in declaring after that.

With that in mind I am surprised Ballance and Jordan didn't try to force the pace a bit more right after drinks, which would have given them the chance to declare. Maybe England felt that they weren't quite safe yet at that point, I think they were 300 ahead, and you could make a case that losing their last 4 wickets for say 20 runs having a mad dash would have gifted SL a great opportunity, on what is still a very good pitch for batting on. While that has some merit, I would still say that on balance England could have pushed on earlier.

As it is, England began their push when it was pretty much too late to declare already anyway, which makes the number of runs they have seem slightly bloated. Had they batted at normal pace for the last half hour or so they would have been "only" 360 ahead. If England had declared at the end of the day with a lead of 360, would they have recieved less criticism? Maybe...

Another point re the declaration is that England bowled a lot of overs in the SL innings (more in fact than SL bowled in England's first dig), so their bowlers will have ben understandably a little tired. With that in mind it's possible that England always intended to bat until the close of play to ensure their bowlers all had a decent rest (all four seamers bowled a few overs this morning). You could say a 5-10 over burst wouldn't make much difference to that, but if SL had got off to a flyer against the harder ball and some tired bowling, it could have made a difference.

Final point: this is a two test series. If you go 1-0 down, it's difficult to come back. Of course this works both ways, but could also explain why England weren't as adventurous.

In summary, I would personally have liked to see England push on a bit earlier and have a quick blast at SL this evening, but understand why they didn't. If England win tomorrow, Cook and Moores will have been justified. If SL finish the day 2 or 3 down, it's largely irrelevant. If SL finish the day 8-9 down, then Cook will deserve the criticism. The proof, as they say, is in the pudding.

Now onto Ballance. I don't actually think letting Ballance reach his century was really on England's mind when thinking about declaring (though it would have been had he been 98 overnight). He played very nicely indeed, and I'm delighted for him. I commented after day 1 that he looks a good player but was getting starts without kicking on. Today he laid down a marker, so good on him for that.

Finally, a comment about SL. I thought they did brilliantly to surge back into the game, great spell from Eranga, but I was a little disappointed by them after tea, particularly their tactics to Ballance. They seemed to be basically throwing it wide of off stump in the hope he'd do something silly, and not really trying to get him out. I think having done really well to force a position from which they could potentially get an unlikely win, they let themselves down a bit, by not trying to really force the issue. On these sorts of pitches you don't get many chances, and I feel SL missed an opportunity there.

ShankyCricket wrote:Very good innings from Ballance in the end. Looked like Boycott-esque at one point, got really stuck in the middle but full credit to him for not throwing it away and accelerating nicely as the innings went on and putting his side into a position of strength. Not really his fault of course that his captain was more interested in personal milestones than a team victory.

The less said about Cook, the better. Unlike msp though, I won't put it past MSD to go one better later in the summer. After all, he is the same captain who let Brendon Mccullum score a double hundred and a triple hundred in successive tests and conceded 700 runs from 90/5....      

That says more about the quality of our bowling than about the captain........ And now we have Binny, the reincarnation of Kapil Dve and Ian Botham combined to lead our bowling and batting charge, so everything will be fine and a situation like this won't even come up!.........

Vince should get a go in limited overs cricket soon though. A top 3 of Hales, Bell and Vince followed by either of Ballance/Ali/Root at 4 and England would be a serious side. Cook seriously upsets the team balance in ODIs.

Vince can open (more so in ODI than FC but he has done it)

Compton
Moeen
Bell
Vince
Root
Ballance
Prior
Woakes
Jordan
Broad
Anderson

Thats what I'd go with, Cook has to go

on the other England players.

Cook's form is a real worry right now, I'm not as certain as others that it's the captaincy, looks like a real rough patch which he's had before, but England need him scoring runs.

Robson looked better today, less frenetic, and got a pretty good ball, but won't like to see his bat coming down at an angle like that. Still too early for me to make a definitive judgment, but could do with scoring runs (and looking good in doing so) in the next Test.

Bell was probably a victim of his own form, got a bit over-excited and tried to attack one which wasn't there for the shot, but he'll be fine.

Root looked in good touch (as you should after scoring 200), and got undone by good bowling.

Moeen got a good ball, but again played a loose shot against the spinner. I said before the Test that I was worried about Moeen's batting, particularly against high quality spin, and those worries remain. He's a lovely shotmaker, but I worry that his technique isn't quite compact enough for Test cricket.

Prior got out to a ball which 99 times out of 100 he'd put away. I'm not massively fussed by that, he just didn't play the shot well, but his form looked OK.

Jordan continues to look like a good batsman for a n°8, has a very easy style. Got out trying to get after Herath which was the right thing to do in the circumstances.

Broad looks relieved not to be facing 90mph stuff directed at his head!! I'm backing him to score quite a few runs this summer...

Gregers wrote:Vince can open (more so in ODI than FC but he has done it)

Compton
Moeen
Bell
Vince
Root
Ballance
Prior
Woakes
Jordan
Broad
Anderson

Thats what I'd go with, Cook has to go

Dropping Cook from Tests after a bad year would be madness. Has proven his quality far too often and there isn't a better bowling attack to find form against than the "Ishant Sharma led bowling attack" he'd be up against in less than a month's time. He has to go from the ODI side though.

So dropping KP was wrong, but dropping a younger batsman, who's had higher highs, and with likely surpass him when all is done absolutely has to happen? Consider me.

Cook does this with his batting from time to time, he goes through rough patches that go on for long times, but when he's in form he really cashes in, he'll come good again, dropping him for Compton would be absolute madness of the highest order

kingraf wrote:So dropping KP was wrong, but dropping a younger batsman, who's had higher highs, and with likely surpass him when all is done absolutely has to happen? Consider me.

I don't think Gregers would've been too disappointed at the KP axing, kingraf....   

Olly wrote:Cook does this with his batting from time to time, he goes through rough patches that go on for long times, but when he's in form he really cashes in, he'll come good again, dropping him for Compton would be absolute madness of the highest order

Still think his success largely depends on facing poor attacks but when he does face them, there is no better batsman in the world to cash in on them. And he'd be facing one of the worst bowling attacks in Test cricket at the moment next month.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:First things first, if England had declared tonight it would have had to have been at least half an hour before the close of play, so 6pm. With the 10 minutes between innings they would have had 5 overs at SL. IMO there would have been no point in declaring after that.

With that in mind I am surprised Ballance and Jordan didn't try to force the pace a bit more right after drinks, which would have given them the chance to declare. Maybe England felt that they weren't quite safe yet at that point, I think they were 300 ahead, and you could make a case that losing their last 4 wickets for say 20 runs having a mad dash would have gifted SL a great opportunity, on what is still a very good pitch for batting on. While that has some merit, I would still say that on balance England could have pushed on earlier.

As it is, England began their push when it was pretty much too late to declare already anyway, which makes the number of runs they have seem slightly bloated. Had they batted at normal pace for the last half hour or so they would have been "only" 360 ahead. If England had declared at the end of the day with a lead of 360, would they have recieved less criticism? Maybe...

Another point re the declaration is that England bowled a lot of overs in the SL innings (more in fact than SL bowled in England's first dig), so their bowlers will have ben understandably a little tired. With that in mind it's possible that England always intended to bat until the close of play to ensure their bowlers all had a decent rest (all four seamers bowled a few overs this morning). You could say a 5-10 over burst wouldn't make much difference to that, but if SL had got off to a flyer against the harder ball and some tired bowling, it could have made a difference.

Final point: this is a two test series. If you go 1-0 down, it's difficult to come back. Of course this works both ways, but could also explain why England weren't as adventurous.

In summary, I would personally have liked to see England push on a bit earlier and have a quick blast at SL this evening, but understand why they didn't. If England win tomorrow, Cook and Moores will have been justified. If SL finish the day 2 or 3 down, it's largely irrelevant. If SL finish the day 8-9 down, then Cook will deserve the criticism. The proof, as they say, is in the pudding.

Now onto Ballance. I don't actually think letting Ballance reach his century was really on England's mind when thinking about declaring (though it would have been had he been 98 overnight). He played very nicely indeed, and I'm delighted for him. I commented after day 1 that he looks a good player but was getting starts without kicking on. Today he laid down a marker, so good on him for that.

Finally, a comment about SL. I thought they did brilliantly to surge back into the game, great spell from Eranga, but I was a little disappointed by them after tea, particularly their tactics to Ballance. They seemed to be basically throwing it wide of off stump in the hope he'd do something silly, and not really trying to get him out. I think having done really well to force a position from which they could potentially get an unlikely win, they let themselves down a bit, by not trying to really force the issue. On these sorts of pitches you don't get many chances, and I feel SL missed an opportunity there.

MFC, you make 4 key points in defense of Cook's approach re the declaration. Don't think any of them really make a compelling case.
When Jordan got out, England were leading by no less than 322. It is a last day of a test match that we are talking about. Sri Lanka does not have a Sanath Jayasuriya/Virender Sehwag/Chris Gayle like player to really take on such a chase on the final day, I am by no way discrediting a legend like Sangakkara or a class act like Mahela here, but to put together a chase like that , you need a Sehwag like player really. So 322 was a very healthy score to have declared the innings. If they had done so, they could have bowled at least 7 overs at the Lankans today. An early wicket would have put them under a lot of pressure, and a flyer from the Lankans if that had happened through say Karunaratne (Silva is not that kind of a player), wouldn't have created major damage as there could have been only 7 overs, and England could have slowed the pace down a bit and get away with 5 or 6 overs.......
I had written above, when the Jordan Ballance partnership was 40 odd, that they should push on from there on. They were in fact maintaining a good tempo up to that point, some how slowed down just a touch after that. But at least after the lead pushed passed 300, they should have pushed on as you rightly said, with Broad and Plunkett at 9 and 10, and a stubborn James Anderson at 11, England could have easily gone into damage control mode for a few overs to push the total pass a safe 325. Remember the pitch is still a good one despite England's poor top/middle order. Even if England had scored only 360, I think the questions would have been there. Sri Lanka are the touring side, they are the underdogs here. A chase of 330 is a high risk one on a 5th day even on a pitch like this. England bowling has experience and quality in Anderson and Broad, and Plunkett and Jordan are challenging propositions, particularly with their speed for Lankan batsmen who are not used to it. And by setting fields that are more defensive, Cook could always have controlled the pace of the game if the unlikely threat of a successful chase was anywhere close to getting materialized.
And as you said, it is the first test of this series. For a touring side like Sri Lanka, a draw is not a bad outcome. There is another game to go, and sensible batting can give them a draw here. There is no need for them to risk it all at this stage of the series. Had the target been something like 330, perhaps they would have gone for it in the final session if they managed the first 2 without too many losses. But now they don't have a chance to win it, so no need to take any risk whatsoever.
Of course such a mindset can be the undoing of batting sides and Sri Lanka can very well lose the game by tea tomorrow. That 82 all out will be somewhere in their minds for sure. But none of that really can defend Cook's approach here.
This has been a poor pitch for test cricket, and this is not the right aggressive approach needed for a winning side.

ShankyCricket wrote:

kingraf wrote:So dropping KP was wrong, but dropping a younger batsman, who's had higher highs, and with likely surpass him when all is done absolutely has to happen? Consider me.

I don't think Gregers would've been too disappointed at the KP axing, kingraf....   

Lol

About 2 years too late but definitely the right decision

Cook needs to be dropped to regain some form

msp83 wrote:

ShankyCricket wrote:Very good innings from Ballance in the end. Looked like Boycott-esque at one point, got really stuck in the middle but full credit to him for not throwing it away and accelerating nicely as the innings went on and putting his side into a position of strength. Not really his fault of course that his captain was more interested in personal milestones than a team victory.

The less said about Cook, the better. Unlike msp though, I won't put it past MSD to go one better later in the summer. After all, he is the same captain who let Brendon Mccullum score a double hundred and a triple hundred in successive tests and conceded 700 runs from 90/5....      

That says more about the quality of our bowling than about the captain........ And now we have Binny, the reincarnation of Kapil Dve and Ian Botham combined to lead our bowling and batting charge, so everything will be fine and a situation like this won't even come up!.........

I'm not gonna sit here defending the indefensible i.e. the "Ishant Sharma led bowling attack" but I remember McSlogga edging at least 10 times through the slips and there wasn't anyone to take the chances. When the captain takes slips off at the slightest hint of a decent partnership, blaming only the bowlers is rather simplistic. Dhoni's captaincy was diabolical and has been for some time in Test cricket when the conditions don't assist his "heavily pitch reliant" spin "attack". Of course the bowlers were awful too but not sure how that absolves Dhoni.