It's been a side strain hasn't it? It's not been severe enough to affect him adversely in the shorter format of the World Cup but that's not the same as bowling 20-30 overs over a couple of full days in the field.
English cricket thread
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
Archer's playing a 3 day game at Horsham this week, I think. We still can't be entirely sure with him but that's an awful lot better than what we did with Jimmy.
Yeah that will be the question mark over Archer, of what his bowling will be like with 30 overs in 2 full days.
It's not a guarantee he will play but I'd be fairly sure he does assuming he comes through the 2nd XI. Fact that England were happy enough for him to go out and field for them suggests they are relatively confident.
Sussex fast bowler Jofra Archer took 6-27 in a second XI match as he bids to prove his fitness to earn an Ashes call-up for England. Batting at number six, he then hit 16 boundaries in making 108 from 99 balls.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/49255871
Is it just seeing his leisurely style from an unusual angle or is he bowling nowhere near full pace there?Sussex fast bowler Jofra Archer took 6-27 in a second XI match as he bids to prove his fitness to earn an Ashes call-up for England. Batting at number six, he then hit 16 boundaries in making 108 from 99 balls.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/49255871
Have I missed something and Morgan won't play tests at all? He might have said as much and I missed it but if not how can these others play if they can change his mind?
As far as I'm concerned it's really useful having an ODI captain who isn't mentally shot when the test team have just been thrashed. I really like him being separate.
Doubt he is bowling full pace, but still, poor guys from Sussex 2nd XI!
Best batsmen in the world like Amla etc cant handle his pace, and these poor guys on the semi-pro circuit have to deal with him
How can we base whether or not he's fit on this then?Doubt he is bowling full pace, but still, poor guys from Sussex 2nd XI!
Best batsmen in the world like Amla etc cant handle his pace, and these poor guys on the semi-pro circuit have to deal with him
I think his issue is muscular. He can prove that in the nets during a proper fitness test?
Or maybe he was going close to full speed. Dunno. What do you think?
I'm nervous. I've an awful feeling we've decided he has to play regardless and that he should take it easy in this one.
With Anderson out, I'm certain that is the case.
It will have been 4 weeks since the WC final when next test starts. Should be long enough to recover, given he played a full part in that match.
Last edited:
But he's gonna go off injured after four overs and Ben Stokes will brake down from the strain of having to make up the overs twice in two matches... and Root will develop a panic disorder from the stress of having to decide whether he or Denly are the one who could totally get Smith out and run away to become a travelling hat salesman.
I think the changes will be from the bench - Leach for Moeen, Curran for Denly, Archer for Anderson
Curran at 6/7, not sure who plays 4.
Curran at 6/7, not sure who plays 4.
I hope that Archer does play and the media don’t build him up for a fall. He is an undoubted talent and should be handled with care. Great if he rips through the Aussies, but don’t be disappointed if he doesn’t.
Not as good a second day!Sussex fast bowler Jofra Archer took 6-27 in a second XI match as he bids to prove his fitness to earn an Ashes call-up for England. Batting at number six, he then hit 16 boundaries in making 108 from 99 balls.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/49255871
Moeen is hopefully out of nick and needs some time in county cricket to get his confidence back. Leach in if only is it’s just to tie down one end. I would have Sam Curran in for Denly. Curran got runs against the Aussies in the Lions matches and his batting is underrated. Curran also offers something different in the bowling department in English type conditions. Play Stokes at 3, he’s our best batsman and has developed his game where he should be able to cope with a newer ball. So you could start with:
Burns
Roy
Stokes
Root
Buttler
Bairstow or Foakes
Curran
Woakes
Archer
Broad
Leach
Burns
Roy
Stokes
Root
Buttler
Bairstow or Foakes
Curran
Woakes
Archer
Broad
Leach
Moeen dropped.
Otherwise how you were I think.
Otherwise how you were I think.
I hadn't seen that Stone was injured until now. Not good.
England drop Moeen Ali with Jack Leach recalled for second Test
England squad for second Ashes Test:
Root (capt), Archer, Bairstow (wk), Broad, Burns, Buttler (wk), Curran, Denly, Leach, Roy, Stokes, Woakes.
England squad for second Ashes Test:
Root (capt), Archer, Bairstow (wk), Broad, Burns, Buttler (wk), Curran, Denly, Leach, Roy, Stokes, Woakes.
Last edited:
So with news today that there's going to be a window for the hundred I'm going to post this:
I genuinely think the Blast is a good product which could have been better had the ECB put half the effort in to promoting it that they have done with the Hundred. I'm certain they could have done a deal with C4 if not the BBC, and I'm certain that they'll struggle to match ticket sales that have been achieved this year.
The damaging thing is we currently have momentum if the Hundred is the disaster everyone thinks it will be then there's a huge chance we'll blow it.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I genuinely think the Blast is a good product which could have been better had the ECB put half the effort in to promoting it that they have done with the Hundred. I'm certain they could have done a deal with C4 if not the BBC, and I'm certain that they'll struggle to match ticket sales that have been achieved this year.
The damaging thing is we currently have momentum if the Hundred is the disaster everyone thinks it will be then there's a huge chance we'll blow it.
Is the "100" 50 balls each or 100 balls each?
100 each
10 overs of 10 balls, 5 of which can be bowled by a different bowler but don't have to be.
You know, to make it easier.
Sure thats only 20 balls less than 2020 an innings?
Thats like 10 mins less and innings, if even?
I dont understand the thought process behind this
Correct.
The thought process was that, apparently, the BBC didn't want to take up a T20 tournament and would only take the cricket if games could be finished in 2hr 30. That was supported by some botched ECB survey which suggested that some T20 matches could last as long as 4 hours (conveniently ignoring the fact that that's the IPL where games are deliberately strung out through Time Outs etc.. to sell ad space) and that the Blast games have a 1.15 cut off to bowl the last over.
Oh, and they asked mumsnet and they thought it was a good idea: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ecb-advised-by-mumsnet-on-new-game-glqd6rjrz
Once again it is not about the stadium going crowd . The money should be made on TV broadcast and the blast with the county format is unsustainable for TV . The whole purpose of the hundred is to get franchise cricket into England
Well if you said that before then you were wrong then, too. It's about trying to encourage young kids to pick up the game and literally every decision they have been made has been to try and achieve that aim. What the Blast attendances is that they're not their target audience. The shorter format is to try and finish games earlier so kids can watch it, they're talking about reducing soft drink prices and increasing alcohol prices to make the atmosphere more family friendly, they've got some games on free to air TV and turned down more Sky money to do that(although I think missed an opportunity here to do more), and they're playing all the games in the summer holidays so kids can watch it. If you don't believe me, then spend two seconds googling what the tournament organisers are saying the point it.
If the ECB just wanted a franchise tournament they'd have just made one and put it on Sky.
The problem with the hundred is not the idea behind it, but the execution. The decision making has been led by a band of people who come across as patronising and out of touch; they've alienated traditional cricket fans who they do need to make a success of the tournament even if they're not primarily the target market; and the decision to make it a franchise tournament fits poorly with the UK's structure; and there's little to suggest that any of the changes they've made will resonate with their new audience.
What's wrong with getting more kids to the game. Cricket is still too long and needs every step that it can take to become a less than 3 hour sport. I am sure that a lot of reaction to T20 was similar to what the hundred has received.
Nothing, I said you were wrong about the reasons behind the tournament.
The difference is that T20 was a substantially different format, the differences between this and a T20 are negligible.
He always seems to be injured which is very unfortunate for him and England
Some good debate in this little back-and-forth you're having.
Personally I'm all in favour of migrating to city-based branding. The UK's population is increasingly urbanised and most cities are now contained within their own metropolitan authorities, rather than the old counties. Ask someone in London or Birmingham which county they are in and they probably couldn't tell you.
But if you want city-based teams, all that requires is a simple change of nomenclature. Just change Lancashire to Manchester and you're done. There's no need to create a whole new tournament.
If the BBC aren't willing to host a match longer than 2 hrs 30 mins then the ECB shouldn't be dealing with them. They've consistently proved themselves a poor broadcaster for cricket and programmes like the One Show just show the sort of people they've got running the organisation. Surely Channel 4 would be willing to put the Blast on TV once a week? Cricket's been great for them in the past.
Also, the Mumsnet anecdote, while amusing, hints at something a little more concerning: the fact that the ECB are putting the future of their sport in the hands of people who have little or no interest in it. Instead of prioritising the people who actually watch the game, they're desperate to recruit people who don't like it - at the expense of their existing supporters. It'll be great if we get this huge new audience but it seems a dangerous way to run a business.
At the end of the day, we're not going to produce a rival to the IPL - India has a billion people and cricket is their number one sport. We should be trying to get our existing product as good as it can be, not rip up the sport for the benefit of people who might not even attend it.
Lot of pundits saying we should drop Denly for Curran and play the following XI:
Burns
Roy
Root
Stokes
Buttler
Bairstow
Curran
Woakes
Archer
Broad
Leach
What say you, forumistas? I'd actually pick Curran at 6 ahead of Bairstow - he's been batting 6 for Surrey in the Championship and Bairstow is totally out of nick. Plus we'll have to pick him in the top 6 sooner or later.
Burns
Roy
Root
Stokes
Buttler
Bairstow
Curran
Woakes
Archer
Broad
Leach
What say you, forumistas? I'd actually pick Curran at 6 ahead of Bairstow - he's been batting 6 for Surrey in the Championship and Bairstow is totally out of nick. Plus we'll have to pick him in the top 6 sooner or later.
It would be a selection purely on talent. Curran hasn't yet scored a century in any form of cricket. You want your number 6 to be averaging 40+ as well.
True, but he's only 21 so hasn't had much time. Also worth mentioning that he's averaging 10 runs more than Denly in tests (and only three behind Bairstow).
Last edited:
I agree with this and with Curran at 6. Only thing is Stokes at 4 - it is asking a lot of a guy who bowls as many overs as he does. You'd want to at least swap Buttler and Stokes but Buttler can't buy a run..
Lords is not a good venue for England. The match will be a draw as the rain will around for most of the five days.
Yeah I think Stokes is our second-best batsman so should go in after Root. He'll bowl fewer overs in a six-man attack too - we can use him for shock value whenever we need a wicket.
Lots of rain forecast for Wednesday, Friday and Saturday so this will be a start stop test. Bowlers keeping warm and batsman retaining concentration in between breaks will be critical. Probably the best way for England to get Smith out, just after a rain break, if a bowler can raise his game in those few moments of readjustment.
Given the rain, there will be plenty of cloud cover plus general conditions at Lords right now means it will be probably be a bowlers game again. Cummins, Starc, Hazlewood, Siddle vs Archer, Broad, Woakes, Stokes looks like an even battle, but Lyon is clearly a better bet over Leach so that may be the deciding factor. Cant wait to see Archer in full flow.
Warner, Bancroft, Khawaga, Roy, Denly, Buttler all need scores to get into the series, and Bairstow is under huge pressure to justify any inclusion whatsoever.
I think Smith and Leach will be the deciding factor, and Australia will take a 2-0 lead.
Given the rain, there will be plenty of cloud cover plus general conditions at Lords right now means it will be probably be a bowlers game again. Cummins, Starc, Hazlewood, Siddle vs Archer, Broad, Woakes, Stokes looks like an even battle, but Lyon is clearly a better bet over Leach so that may be the deciding factor. Cant wait to see Archer in full flow.
Warner, Bancroft, Khawaga, Roy, Denly, Buttler all need scores to get into the series, and Bairstow is under huge pressure to justify any inclusion whatsoever.
I think Smith and Leach will be the deciding factor, and Australia will take a 2-0 lead.