Can you sub a sub?
English cricket thread
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
Archer is absolutely incredible. This is showing us how hard it must have been to play the West Indies seamers without helmets
Just imagine what Archer will be like on a genuine fast track with humid or overcast conditions, with some more experience and understanding of what he is capable of!
He’s basically unplayable and completely terrifying in this form and mood.
He’s basically unplayable and completely terrifying in this form and mood.
I’m amazed no one was killed in that era.
There are drug addicts less twitchy then Smith at the crease
I've been following Archer since his debut and I always thought he was a big talent but he's even better than I thought he was.
He's got the best bouncer I've seen in a long time.
I cannot recall any or many occasions when the batsman was hit on the head. There is an argument that says a batsman will be quicker to duck or evade the ball.
The only occasion I can remember of a batsman being hit was the great Brian Close by (I believe) Michael Holding of West Indies.
But they were all body and chest hits. Worth a look at.
I agree, it just follows the batsman and is on him before he can take evasive action. Incredible for such an inexperienced bowler.
If he is bowling at 90 mph, that is equivalent to 130 feet/ second. On that basis the batsman has less than 0.5 seconds from the time the ball leaves the hand. So less than half of that to react to a bouncer.
Accepting that the ball slows through the air and hitting the ground.
Nevertheless, reaction times are very small indeed.
What's impressive is you get no visual clue in the load up. Lots of bowlers, even very fast bowlers with very good bouncers, telegraph a bit. Archer gives you nothing, it's just a snap of the wrist to change the length.
By that logic, 81 mph is 0.55 seconds which isn't a whole lot of time. It's not reaction times in absolutes.. just the minimal percentage change and his wrist position I think.
It's not just the speed, plenty have bowled at that pace throughout the years, it's the never changing action that's impressive. A definate result of his 20/20 background where bowlers work on disguising deliveries all the time.
The decision to not pick Archer at Edgbaston gets worse with each spell he bowls here.
Yes. Exactly. A very good skill.
Yep. You can see the England management ordering fast pitches from here on in, even if it brings Starc into play.
Aussies have played really well there.
Good point.
Beeb live text just shared this. Can't say I know anything about CricViz, so may be nonsense...
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Old Trafford can be curated as a face tracker as well.
What is Oval like these days? Was a brute in Waqar’s time.
Saw on twitter: bad time to be named Head.
This is very impressive from Labuschagne.
Is Joe Root aware of Chris Woakes' record at Lords?
He is settling them down
The weather has been absolutely appalling here all day, I'd say there's a good chance of more rain yet.
They provide all of the slightly advanced stats that all broadcasters use.
Yeah, overbowled Archer here too.
They didn't play him in the first test because they didn't think he was fit and now they have decided to make him bowl the most out of all of the quicks with another test in 3 days. Root and England could learn a great deal from how Australia manage their quicks.
I don't really mind the long spells as a rule, because despite the fact he bowls 10mph quicker than most he just looks like the sort of bowler that should bowl in long spells and just examine a batsman's technique around off stump. He looks a quicker Glenn McGrath to me.
But in this match situation I think an opening burst followed by a big, nasty hostile, second spell was the way to go. When Archer's speeds ended up down in the high 80s there seemed no logical reason to bowl him over, say, Stokes.
fecking hell what is Roy doing in this side.
Serious credit to Labuschagne.
Showed serious mental strength and courage to construct his defensive innings after being hit on the head in only his 2nd ball faced by a terrifying Archer bouncer.
Should defo play on third test, replacing Smith or if he plays, another in the top order.
Showed serious mental strength and courage to construct his defensive innings after being hit on the head in only his 2nd ball faced by a terrifying Archer bouncer.
Should defo play on third test, replacing Smith or if he plays, another in the top order.
In this attack he should be the point of difference. Woakes, Broad, Anderson etc. should be focusing on the bread and butter stuff, Archer should be bowled in short bursts where he can really ramp it up and be a bit more aggressive with his lengths. He can cruise along at 88 or really kick it up another gear and go at 93. The only problem is I would not trust Root to have the nous as a captain to use him effectively in short bursts.
He has become utterly confused in how to play. His technique is no way good enough to play a classical opener role, but his ODI style is also quickly exposed by top test bowlers.
Same problem of past few years, England desperately need reliable and in form no 2 and 3, so Root can bat at 4. Burns seems to have at least solved part of the equation.
Middle order is well stacked so also hard to fit Roy in there.
I'm just not convinced that's actually what Archer is best at. He bowls a lot of overs for his county and I think he is a more skillful bowler than simply smashing a team out bowling shock and awe stuff.
There will be situations where he can blast sides out, but if you primarily bowl him like that you lose the fact that he's accurate and moves the ball both in the air and off the pitch.
I'm not saying he has to blast sides out, a good length is always the best length. I would just prefer him having 6 overs with a little bit extra juice rather than 10 overs with him losing a bit of nip at the end. Let him bowl longer spells when he's in a good rhythm too. For England to already default to him bowling long spells is a little bit worrying (especially when you look at Wood and Stone) but I imagine the dynamic will change when Anderson is back.
He's completely unlike any other bowler England have and they need to be a bit proactive in looking after him. They have lurched from one extreme to another in 2 tests and all in all it makes me feel like they do not actually have a plan for him yet.
Not sure how much this innings will be remembered, but I think that was the difference between 1-0 and 1-1.
It's been a good batting pitch today. Archer apart not much threat from England.
I guess I'm just not convinced that longer spells are that much of an ask for him. He'll probably get a stress fracture now I've said it, but if Archer did what he does with his action at 85 mph no one would have an issue with him bowling 10 over spells - in fact they would expect it.
Obviously you want to manage his workload a bit, but there's benefits in allowing him the time to work over a batsman.