God help me - the Test Cricket thread

[Professer E]

Stop throwing pies Mitchell and start bowling.

Too many minds not on the job this test.

[capcom]

We clearly don't need much to knock over the Poms.  Have a nice flight back home

[DJC]

In a surprise move, Novax Djokovic has been appointed as England’s batting coach.

A spokesperson explained, “It took two weeks for the Australians to get him out!”

[Professer E]

I think it shows how far test cricket has departed from some nations' main menu.  We're reaping the benefit of more emphasis on long form cricket,  I'm seeing a real push at junior level towards developing correct technique.  I guess the idea is that if you've got good long form technique you can be flexible enough to "work down" the formats, but it doesn't work the other way.

[capcom]

Any form of intnl cricket is and will always be inferior to the Test standard.

[LP]

Not sure why the girls do not get to play 5 day tests, it doesn't make sense to play 4 days and still require a team to take 20 wickets to get a win.
-----------------
As an aside, there is a suggestion floating around that for all test cricket (men and women) test innings should be limited in length, like capped at 120 overs or some other arbitrary value.

I do not agree. I can understand how the cap works at the start of a test, it helps sets up the test for a result, but I can't see it being a valid result in the last hours of day 5 if they get to some arbitrary over limit, perhaps one teams needs a wicket or a handful of runs, and they walk off for a draw!

What if only a the 1st innings was subject to an over cap, no test is decided on 1st innings anyway?

The for argument is that in some respects this has already partially happened, when we changed from 8 to 6 ball overs there was already a reduction in the number of balls bowled in a day with more changeovers consuming time, and time is balls bowled.

There are quite a few other suggestions floating around in the cricket sphere, I'd like to see some trialled in a 3-test series somewhere before they are globally applied to something like The Ashes.

[crashlander]

[quote author=tonyo link=msg=357900 date=1641949637]
Lyon has usually been somewhat solid, but now there have been several occasion where he has failed to have any significant impact on a 5th day wicket.  I just don't rate him as a bowler who can rip through a batting side.

We need a wrist-spinner badly.  Swepson would do for a start, but they should get Warnie in the mentor chair for young guy who plays for Sydney Thunder (Tanveer Sangha).

We need a wrist-spinner badly.  Swepson would do for a start, but they should get Warnie in the mentor chair for young guy who plays for Sydney Thunder (Tanveer Sangha).
[/quote] Lyon's best is past him, alas. He has been the best finger spinner we've had, but he has struggled for the last few years in the last innings of matches. I do like the look of Tanveer Sangha. I think he has potential.

[crashlander]

It's the extra bounce that leg spinners get that's really dangerous on decent pitches.  On the rolled mud featherbeds they'll get in Pakistan it's hard work. Any error in line or length to batsmen that use their feet and it's innocuous, unless there's holes etc and it starts gripping.

With the number of quicks that Pakistan has these days, I'm surprised they still provide crappy wickets. Guys like Haris Rauf are genuine test bowlers. They're country shouldn't disadvantage them so much.

[Baggers]

Haven't been able to watch much cricket since witnessing the Maxwell / Stoinis demolition. Every other game just seemed such an anti-climax. Although those two lads were aided by the Taswegians fielding an ordinary bowling attack, it was still something to behold witnessing such a batting masterclass.

[LP]

I notice a storm has erupted about Mankad in district cricket, with a couple of player suspended for Mankads.

By removing Mankad as an option, batsmen are taking advantage and storming off down the pitch unregulated. Some non-strikers are a meter or more out of the crease at the time of release. It's ridiculous that this is allowed to persist but the current rules prevent opposition bowlers doing anything about it. Umpires are supposed to police the batsmen, but this doesn't work at lower levels as the umpire is already focussed on the bowlers feet followed by the line of the ball.

I think this can be resolved by a very simple rule change for all cricket, basically the problem is the non-striker being able to charge down the pitch without penalty and with very low risk, so increase the risk. Remove the requirement for a fielding player to make contact with the ball before the stumps are broken by a shot off the bat. So that the risk of leaving the crease remains firmly with the non-striker, if they are out of the crease and the stumps are broken, with or without any fielder having laid a hand on the ball, they are out run out!