Click here for Arsenal FC personalised gift shop

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 46

Thread: Have we actually had a proper, old skool English collapse so far this tournament?

  1. #1

    Have we actually had a proper, old skool English collapse so far this tournament?

    Just sayin' that when we play like this, we always have one game where our batsmen all go to pieces.

    I'd suggest a cheeky punt on the Kiwis.

  2. #2
    Seems natural that a massive dose of hubris is in the post after thwacking the convicts like that.

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult View Post
    Just sayin' that when we play like this, we always have one game where our batsmen all go to pieces.

    I'd suggest a cheeky punt on the Kiwis.
    Sri Lanka was pretty inept stuff

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by PSRB View Post
    Sri Lanka was pretty inept stuff
    Australia the first time was quite bad as well 53-4

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Luis Anaconda View Post
    Australia the first time was quite bad as well 53-4
    3 single figure scores, three in the 20s and an 89 wasn't really what I meant. I'd almost be happier is we'd been skittled out in that game for a hundred or so, knowing we'd got it out of our system.

    Against SL we need c.110 off 20 overs with 7 wickets left, so we've had an end collapse as well as a beginning collapse, but we haven't had a proper, old skool, English collapsofück yet.

    Stokes scored 80s in both games. {And that bodes well for the Ashes, I accept.}

    If you had a choice, would you bat first or chase? I just wonder if we're more likely to collapse while chasing or if this would be offset by the fact that our bowlers could restrict the Kiwis and reduce scoreboard pressure.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult View Post
    3 single figure scores, three in the 20s and an 89 wasn't really what I meant. I'd almost be happier is we'd been skittled out in that game for a hundred or so, knowing we'd got it out of our system.

    Against SL we need c.110 off 20 overs with 7 wickets left, so we've had an end collapse as well as a beginning collapse, but we haven't had a proper, old skool, English collapsofück yet.

    Stokes scored 80s in both games. {And that bodes well for the Ashes, I accept.}

    If you had a choice, would you bat first or chase? I just wonder if we're more likely to collapse while chasing or if this would be offset by the fact that our bowlers could restrict the Kiwis and reduce scoreboard pressure.
    Without wishing to put the mockers on us, we do have one hell of a batting line up at our disposal.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by PSRB View Post
    Without wishing to put the mockers on us, we do have one hell of a batting line up at our disposal.
    You jinxing cünt.

    With the exception of Stokes, all of them collapsed against either SL or Aus. And we couldn't chase down 350 against Pak.

    Anyway, if we win the toss, do we bat or not?

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult View Post
    You jinxing cünt.

    With the exception of Stokes, all of them collapsed against either SL or Aus. And we couldn't chase down 350 against Pak.

    Anyway, if we win the toss, do we bat or not?
    Yes - bat first please

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Luis Anaconda View Post
    Yes - bat first please
    Any idea why Woakes would still have had an over left if the Aussies had gone the distance? Seems silly to me.

    He's really proving himself as an ODI bowler.

    There was an article in the Times or Graun saying Joffra must play in the Ashes. But if both JA and SB are fit and firing, and Stokes is going to play, are they really suggesting we should drop Woakes?

    Or could be go into a test match with 5 quicks and just Root's twirlers, a bit like the WIndies used to but with Stokes as well.

    It's a pity YJB isn't good enough as a test no.3 as I'd like to see Foakes keep. But we have too many all rounders and no test top order.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult View Post
    Any idea why Woakes would still have had an over left if the Aussies had gone the distance? Seems silly to me.

    He's really proving himself as an ODI bowler.

    There was an article in the Times or Graun saying Joffra must play in the Ashes. But if both JA and SB are fit and firing, and Stokes is going to play, are they really suggesting we should drop Woakes?

    Or could be go into a test match with 5 quicks and just Root's twirlers, a bit like the WIndies used to but with Stokes as well.

    It's a pity YJB isn't good enough as a test no.3 as I'd like to see Foakes keep. But we have too many all rounders and no test top order.
    Don't think Broad is an automatic pick so maybe an opportunity there (wrong in my view). Woakes isn't guaranteed a start - there is Wood as well. I fancy there may be a bit of rotation but I would start at Edgbaston with:
    Burns
    Roy
    ??? (won't score any runs anyway)
    Root
    Bairstow
    Stokes
    Buttler (these three in any order)
    Ali
    Archer
    Broad
    Anderson


    Re Woakes in the ODI - don't think Morgan likes to bowl him in the middle overs. Really seen as just a new ball bowler. Could almost bowl him out from the start. Fair enough to bring him back for the tail though

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •