Dear Guest
Thank you for visiting! est189 will soon be closing its doors (do forums have doors?) please visit the following thread - (to wail & cry perhaps?)
https://www.est1892.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?p=4002484#post4002484
Thanjk you.
Paul.S
I think that's the key point. Bat England out of the game in a runs/time ratio and you win the series.
That is what is important to the team, not this Test match.
Fair play to Dravid
England won at Headingley in '81 when managing to overhaul a big first innings deficit and setting Australia about 160-ish to win. In fact, twice in that series Australia crumbled under the pressure of chasing a small fourth innings total and it's happened a few times since even when they've unarguably been the best team in the world.
Much better to put the pressure on England, set a massive target and see if they can get anywhere near it (which they won't be able to).
There are plenty of reasons to slag off Test cricket - negativity is just one.
. Suppose you have a physicist and a sociologist standing at the side of a field, observing a set of events unfolding on the field. The physicist does [describes] it using the terminology of mass and velocity and frequency of radiation and the rest. And the sociologist does it by describing it as a rugby match.
. Suppose you have a physicist and a sociologist standing at the side of a field, observing a set of events unfolding on the field. The physicist does [describes] it using the terminology of mass and velocity and frequency of radiation and the rest. And the sociologist does it by describing it as a rugby match.
England are 1 nil down after 2 games in a 3 game series. They need 500 to win which is highly unlikely so they are going to lose the series anyway. Why not have a go? I mean what does it matter if they lose 1-0 or 2-0 and you never know they may well rattle the Indians and pull off a miracle.
England are 1 nil down after 2 games in a 3 game series. They need 500 to win which is highly unlikely so they are going to lose the series anyway. Why not have a go? I mean what does it matter if they lose 1-0 or 2-0 and you never know they may well rattle the Indians and pull off a miracle.
England are 1 nil down after 2 games in a 3 game series. They need 500 to win which is highly unlikely so they are going to lose the series anyway. Why not have a go? I mean what does it matter if they lose 1-0 or 2-0 and you never know they may well rattle the Indians and pull off a miracle.
If they lose 2-0 India will be level with them in the world rankings, if they lose 1-0 they stay 4 points ahead of India.
If they lose 2-0 India will be level with them in the world rankings, if they lose 1-0 they stay 4 points ahead of India.
Fair enough but does anyone really give a **** about the world rankings? I mean just because we are ahead of you doesn't mean we are better. You've just beaten us in our own back yard surely that means at this moment in time your a better test side than us?
Fair enough but does anyone really give a **** about the world rankings? I mean just because we are ahead of you doesn't mean we are better. You've just beaten us in our own back yard surely that means at this moment in time your a better test side than us?
Fair enough but does anyone really give a **** about cricket? I mean just because we are ahead of you doesn't mean we are better. You've just beaten us in our own back yard surely that means at this moment in time your a better test side than us?
exactly
. Suppose you have a physicist and a sociologist standing at the side of a field, observing a set of events unfolding on the field. The physicist does [describes] it using the terminology of mass and velocity and frequency of radiation and the rest. And the sociologist does it by describing it as a rugby match.
But we didnt need to attack, the aim was simply to bat a few overs to ensure england could not get back into the game.
No my little friend the aim was to give yourself enough runs and enough time to bowl us out and win the game. You should of come out like it was a limited over game and tried to hit us all over the park not worrying about how many wickets you lost. We were never going to make 500 even if we had 2 days to bat.
No my little friend the aim was to give yourself enough runs and enough time to bowl us out and win the game. You should of come out like it was a limited over game and tried to hit us all over the park not worrying about how many wickets you lost. We were never going to make 500 even if we had 2 days to bat.
Comment