Comments on: Why Harry Brook’s six fours in an over was better than six sixes in an over https://www.kingcricket.co.uk/why-harry-brooks-six-fours-in-an-over-was-better-than-six-sixes-in-an-over/2022/12/01/ Independent and irreverent cricket writing Mon, 05 Dec 2022 12:05:44 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.1.3 By: Balladeer https://www.kingcricket.co.uk/why-harry-brooks-six-fours-in-an-over-was-better-than-six-sixes-in-an-over/2022/12/01/#comment-270983 Mon, 05 Dec 2022 12:05:44 +0000 https://www.kingcricket.co.uk/?p=27890#comment-270983 In reply to Ged Ladd.

Narrator’s voice: “He was not, in fact, clutching at straws.”

]]>
By: Ged Ladd https://www.kingcricket.co.uk/why-harry-brooks-six-fours-in-an-over-was-better-than-six-sixes-in-an-over/2022/12/01/#comment-270976 Mon, 05 Dec 2022 11:28:23 +0000 https://www.kingcricket.co.uk/?p=27890#comment-270976 In reply to Bert.

Exciting, this.

Daisy is glued to test cricket.

I’m trying to find the right moment to put the kettle on. I won’t get through my 12:00 Zoom without a cuppa in my hand. (It won’t be Tipal Tea and I won’t brush my teeth with Sensodyne. Life’s too short for listening to advertising slogans.)

]]>
By: Bert https://www.kingcricket.co.uk/why-harry-brooks-six-fours-in-an-over-was-better-than-six-sixes-in-an-over/2022/12/01/#comment-270975 Mon, 05 Dec 2022 10:12:53 +0000 https://www.kingcricket.co.uk/?p=27890#comment-270975 86 runs, five wickets, one session. Or more likely half a session, owing to bad light and stuff.

You’d have to say that Pakistan have more chance of victory, but it won’t be easy. I think the phrase is, “beautifully balanced.” Both sides have to choose between attack and defence, with the former bringing both increased chances of winning and increased chances of losing.

Given the awfulness of this pitch, that we have such a brilliant ending is remarkable. So I retract all my previous cynicism about England’s scoring rate, and will happily strangle the first person who says that the declaration was badly timed. Go cricket!

]]>
By: Deep Cower https://www.kingcricket.co.uk/why-harry-brooks-six-fours-in-an-over-was-better-than-six-sixes-in-an-over/2022/12/01/#comment-270972 Mon, 05 Dec 2022 03:10:32 +0000 https://www.kingcricket.co.uk/?p=27890#comment-270972 In reply to Sam.

This one deserves a slow clap.

]]>
By: Bert https://www.kingcricket.co.uk/why-harry-brooks-six-fours-in-an-over-was-better-than-six-sixes-in-an-over/2022/12/01/#comment-270971 Sun, 04 Dec 2022 18:52:06 +0000 https://www.kingcricket.co.uk/?p=27890#comment-270971 In reply to Bert.

Or in other words, if you want to dominate the match batting first the important thing is not the score, it’s batting out the first two days.

]]>
By: Sam https://www.kingcricket.co.uk/why-harry-brooks-six-fours-in-an-over-was-better-than-six-sixes-in-an-over/2022/12/01/#comment-270970 Sun, 04 Dec 2022 18:22:14 +0000 https://www.kingcricket.co.uk/?p=27890#comment-270970 In reply to Bert.

The main effect of throwing a heavy metal thing further than other people is to keep your own hopes of winning a gold medal alive.

Discus.

]]>
By: King Cricket https://www.kingcricket.co.uk/why-harry-brooks-six-fours-in-an-over-was-better-than-six-sixes-in-an-over/2022/12/01/#comment-270969 Sun, 04 Dec 2022 17:05:21 +0000 https://www.kingcricket.co.uk/?p=27890#comment-270969 In reply to Bert.

We suggested to someone that 600 was a good score after two and a bit days but if you were getting bowled out in not much more than a day you probably wanted 700.

]]>
By: Bert https://www.kingcricket.co.uk/why-harry-brooks-six-fours-in-an-over-was-better-than-six-sixes-in-an-over/2022/12/01/#comment-270968 Sun, 04 Dec 2022 16:13:35 +0000 https://www.kingcricket.co.uk/?p=27890#comment-270968 In reply to Ged Ladd.

But one of the things we are told affects batsmen is scoreboard pressure, especially being asked to score plenty with no hope of a victory.

Also, field setting could be a lot different with less time in the match. Depending on the morning session, by lunch we might see all the fielders on the boundary and no hope of an England win.

]]>
By: Ged Ladd https://www.kingcricket.co.uk/why-harry-brooks-six-fours-in-an-over-was-better-than-six-sixes-in-an-over/2022/12/01/#comment-270967 Sun, 04 Dec 2022 15:39:28 +0000 https://www.kingcricket.co.uk/?p=27890#comment-270967 That is how carrot-dangling works in first class cricket, isn’t it? You keep the opposition’s chances of winning alive sufficiently to maximise your own chances of winning and minimise the chances of a draw.

I’m all in favour of it.

It stems from confidence – i.e. it makes no sense to do that unless you believe that you are the better side and that you will most likely prevail if the match ends with a result. As it happens, this approach makes for more entertaining cricket too.

Have I mentioned yet that I’m all in favour of it?

]]>
By: A P Webster https://www.kingcricket.co.uk/why-harry-brooks-six-fours-in-an-over-was-better-than-six-sixes-in-an-over/2022/12/01/#comment-270966 Sun, 04 Dec 2022 15:26:58 +0000 https://www.kingcricket.co.uk/?p=27890#comment-270966 In reply to Bert.

I think I’d have Pakistan as marginal favourites at this point, for sure. England seem to be banking on getting some reverse swing, which might change things a bit, but the Pakistan batters are familiar with these conditions and seem capable of pacing themselves to the required total without having to take huge risks.

England, having made 500 from 75 overs, arguably should be disappointed in their first innings total, but if scoring 650 isn’t enough to get a big first innings lead, then ‘questions have to be asked’ about whether the pitch is the sort of pitch you want to set a relatively low target on.

]]>