The Darts Forum

The Aussie sides of Taylor, Waugh and Ponting could chase down a lot or scores, however they rarely had to as they would score a decent 1st innings or put the pressure on and restrict the opposition. At times they scores quickly, others they knuckled down. Regardless, they had tempos that they adjusted according to the state of the game. Maybe you had them 4 down but the Gilchrist would come in and take the game away or it could have been Hayden being aggressive at the top or Warne being Warne. However underpinning that an understanding that you played to the situation - England at the moment can't do that. Someone has to be 'bazballing' when maybe 30 overs at 2 would get through a tough spell and allow others to blaze at 5 an over.

England have the makings of something, they just don't have the players with that mentality.

KingBinglin wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2024 12:21 am The Aussie sides of Taylor, Waugh and Ponting could chase down a lot or scores, however they rarely had to as they would score a decent 1st innings or put the pressure on and restrict the opposition. At times they scores quickly, others they knuckled down. Regardless, they had tempos that they adjusted according to the state of the game. Maybe you had them 4 down but the Gilchrist would come in and take the game away or it could have been Hayden being aggressive at the top or Warne being Warne. However underpinning that an understanding that you played to the situation - England at the moment can't do that. Someone has to be 'bazballing' when maybe 30 overs at 2 would get through a tough spell and allow others to blaze at 5 an over.

England have the makings of something, they just don't have the players with that mentality.

-259-0 isn't the time to go dashing down the pitch in the 1st over..
If you can't grasp that you shouldn't be playing league cricket never mind test cricket.
It's not brain surgery

KingBinglin wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2024 12:21 am The Aussie sides of Taylor, Waugh and Ponting could chase down a lot or scores, however they rarely had to as they would score a decent 1st innings or put the pressure on and restrict the opposition. At times they scores quickly, others they knuckled down. Regardless, they had tempos that they adjusted according to the state of the game. Maybe you had them 4 down but the Gilchrist would come in and take the game away or it could have been Hayden being aggressive at the top or Warne being Warne. However underpinning that an understanding that you played to the situation - England at the moment can't do that. Someone has to be 'bazballing' when maybe 30 overs at 2 would get through a tough spell and allow others to blaze at 5 an over.

England have the makings of something, they just don't have the players with that mentality.

England won't amount to a Top level test team. At the moment we have players with flashes of class but longer term of moderate performances.

oche balboa wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2024 10:06 am

KingBinglin wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2024 12:21 am The Aussie sides of Taylor, Waugh and Ponting could chase down a lot or scores, however they rarely had to as they would score a decent 1st innings or put the pressure on and restrict the opposition. At times they scores quickly, others they knuckled down. Regardless, they had tempos that they adjusted according to the state of the game. Maybe you had them 4 down but the Gilchrist would come in and take the game away or it could have been Hayden being aggressive at the top or Warne being Warne. However underpinning that an understanding that you played to the situation - England at the moment can't do that. Someone has to be 'bazballing' when maybe 30 overs at 2 would get through a tough spell and allow others to blaze at 5 an over.

England have the makings of something, they just don't have the players with that mentality.

England won't amount to a Top level test team. At the moment we have players with flashes of class but longer term of moderate performances.

Spot on
Especially when the occasional flash keeps you in the team indefinitely

Randall wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2024 7:37 am

KingBinglin wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2024 12:21 am The Aussie sides of Taylor, Waugh and Ponting could chase down a lot or scores, however they rarely had to as they would score a decent 1st innings or put the pressure on and restrict the opposition. At times they scores quickly, others they knuckled down. Regardless, they had tempos that they adjusted according to the state of the game. Maybe you had them 4 down but the Gilchrist would come in and take the game away or it could have been Hayden being aggressive at the top or Warne being Warne. However underpinning that an understanding that you played to the situation - England at the moment can't do that. Someone has to be 'bazballing' when maybe 30 overs at 2 would get through a tough spell and allow others to blaze at 5 an over.

England have the makings of something, they just don't have the players with that mentality.

-259-0 isn't the time to go dashing down the pitch in the 1st over..
If you can't grasp that you shouldn't be playing league cricket never mind test cricket.
It's not brain surgery

"subjective"

oche balboa wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2024 10:06 am
England have the makings of something, they just don't have the players with that mentality.

England won't amount to a Top level test team. At the moment we have players with flashes of class but longer term of moderate performances.
[/quote]

Current squad, probably not. Then again, what is top level currently? Aussies rely heavily on their bowling attack, batting is very suspect.

India are great at home but always vulnerable away. Probably have the most depth and should be the dominant side.

England probably should be in the mix for top three, at least considering resources.

Then what? NZ - enjoyable, some good players but lack depth.
SA - always going to give sides a game but they are far, far, far from where they maybe should be. Financial issues don't help.
Pakistan - well, it's Pakistan. Will always produce some gems but they can go from the sublime to the ridiculous in the blink of an eye.
WI - just seem to be treading water and lose far too many players to T20 leagues.
Sri Lanka - underdogs, at home can be a handful but outside issues hamper them
Bangladesh - should do better than they do seem to fall into a mix of Sri Lanka and Pak
Zim - hampered by previous and current governments so making do with minimal cash
Afghans - again, instability outside their control hampers development
Ire - enjoy the idea of being a test side, finances dictate otherwise.

KingBinglin wrote: ↑Fri Mar 15, 2024 10:34 pm

oche balboa wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2024 10:06 am
England have the makings of something, they just don't have the players with that mentality.

England won't amount to a Top level test team. At the moment we have players with flashes of class but longer term of moderate performances.

Current squad, probably not. Then again, what is top level currently? Aussies rely heavily on their bowling attack, batting is very suspect.

India are great at home but always vulnerable away. Probably have the most depth and should be the dominant side.

England probably should be in the mix for top three, at least considering resources.

Then what? NZ - enjoyable, some good players but lack depth.
SA - always going to give sides a game but they are far, far, far from where they maybe should be. Financial issues don't help.
Pakistan - well, it's Pakistan. Will always produce some gems but they can go from the sublime to the ridiculous in the blink of an eye.
WI - just seem to be treading water and lose far too many players to T20 leagues.
Sri Lanka - underdogs, at home can be a handful but outside issues hamper them
Bangladesh - should do better than they do seem to fall into a mix of Sri Lanka and Pak
Zim - hampered by previous and current governments so making do with minimal cash
Afghans - again, instability outside their control hampers development
Ire - enjoy the idea of being a test side, finances dictate otherwise.
[/quote]

Randall wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2024 10:59 am
Spot on
Especially when the occasional flash keeps you in the team indefinitely

I agree about the 'odd flash' but there is something for giving players a run. The question is, how long is too long and how much weight should previous form carry. Bairstow should be gone but you know he'll have most of the summer to post low scores.

India, Australia and England are the big 3 in Test cricket, they have been since South Africa started to decline.

In 20 years time they might be the only 3.

Captain Hobo wrote: ↑Fri Mar 15, 2024 10:46 pm India, Australia and England are the big 3 in Test cricket, they have been since South Africa started to decline.

In 20 years time they might be the only 3.

Which is sad to consider.

KingBinglin wrote: ↑Fri Mar 15, 2024 10:47 pm

Captain Hobo wrote: ↑Fri Mar 15, 2024 10:46 pm India, Australia and England are the big 3 in Test cricket, they have been since South Africa started to decline.

In 20 years time they might be the only 3.

Which is sad to consider.

Aussies are hosting India for 5 tests next summer, first time since 1991/92 it's been 5 tests. While in NZ we only played 2.

It's where the money is.

Captain Hobo wrote: ↑Fri Mar 15, 2024 11:09 pm
Aussies are hosting India for 5 tests next summer, first time since 1991/92 it's been 5 tests. While in NZ we only played 2.

It's where the money is.

Sadly, that is the case. Eng / Aus / Ind can afford to host the 5 test series.

I'd love to see some standardisation given to tours, maybe, 3 tests and 3 T20s for every tour (I think 50 overs has had it's day) with a few 'notable' contests being given 5 tests.

I know money is the driver but having 2 or 3 test divisions of 8 teams each with promotion / relegation would be good. Yeah, the fear is England etc could get relegated but lets be honest, that's not going to happen. Regardless of anything else, the ICC, much like World rugby are intent on keeping the status quo at the detriment to growth and new audiences.

There are rumblings that the BBC might not renew the deal to show The Hundred due to poorer viewing figures than expected.

Rogg wrote: ↑Sun Mar 17, 2024 5:56 pm There are rumblings that the BBC might not renew the deal to show The Hundred due to poorer viewing figures than expected.

Amazed anyone watches such shit

Randall wrote: ↑Sun Mar 17, 2024 6:37 pm

Rogg wrote: ↑Sun Mar 17, 2024 5:56 pm There are rumblings that the BBC might not renew the deal to show The Hundred due to poorer viewing figures than expected.

Amazed anyone watches such shit

‘Predictable’

The Ginge Reaper wrote: ↑Fri Jul 28, 2023 2:32 pm A beautiful ball from Anderson there.

This was Ginge’s last post.

TDF need him to return.

HalloweenJack wrote: ↑Sun Mar 17, 2024 11:54 pm

Randall wrote: ↑Sun Mar 17, 2024 6:37 pm

Rogg wrote: ↑Sun Mar 17, 2024 5:56 pm There are rumblings that the BBC might not renew the deal to show The Hundred due to poorer viewing figures than expected.

Amazed anyone watches such shit

‘Predictable’

Doesn't it contradict your beliefs though?

HalloweenJack wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2024 6:40 pm

The Ginge Reaper wrote: ↑Fri Jul 28, 2023 2:32 pm A beautiful ball from Anderson there.

This was Ginge’s last post.

TDF need him to return.

+1

Sadly, it appears he's gone for good.

sennafan24 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2024 6:44 pm

HalloweenJack wrote: ↑Sun Mar 17, 2024 11:54 pm

Randall wrote: ↑Sun Mar 17, 2024 6:37 pm

Rogg wrote: ↑Sun Mar 17, 2024 5:56 pm There are rumblings that the BBC might not renew the deal to show The Hundred due to poorer viewing figures than expected.

Amazed anyone watches such shit

‘Predictable’

Doesn't it contradict your beliefs though?

I’m not sure what you mean tbh. My ‘predictable’ comment was aimed at Randall as I could have guaranteed he would have come out with something like that

HalloweenJack wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2024 7:14 pm I’m not sure what you mean tbh. My ‘predictable’ comment was aimed at Randall as I could have guaranteed he would have come out with something like that

I'm referring to "The Hundred's" supposedly low viewing figures.

As someone who champions those formats and the style of play they influence, surely those figures must come as a surprise to you?

sennafan24 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2024 7:21 pm

HalloweenJack wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2024 7:14 pm I’m not sure what you mean tbh. My ‘predictable’ comment was aimed at Randall as I could have guaranteed he would have come out with something like that

I'm referring to "The Hundred's" supposedly low viewing figures.

As someone who champions those formats and the style of play they influence, surely those figures must come as a surprise to you?

I am a fan of all forms of cricket but whilst not against it, I have barely watched the 100
I would have no idea what would be deemed good viewing figures. I have probably watched it once on terrestrial tv since the 100s inception.
When the 100 was first introduced, I got tickets for a couple of games, one with my eldest son and the other with some mates. Then Covid came along and I got a refund. I have never tried for tickets for the 100 since.