Which Sky Sports commentator delivered the most appropriate ‘England were all out for 77’ face?

1. About time you did a less serious post!

   Bob was genetically predisposed to win this kind of contest. And win it he did.

   I thought he was quite restrained on “The Debate” last night though. Like the fight has gone out of him a bit. Come on Bob – “Do not go gently…” etc!!

   1. Delighted to think that you consider some of our recent work in some way serious.

2. Fantastic stuff by the LMoG – leaving aside any observations about how badly England are going to get stuffed in this game, you must feel pleased by this..? [And excuse me if someone already mentioned this in a comment somewhere: Holder’s 2018 did not go unnoticed by the ICC. But would they have chosen JH in their Test XI if they hadn’t got the idea here first?]

3. 628. Sounds nice and chaseable.

   1. 620 now, and plenty of time left.

      1. Exactly what I’ve been saying

      2. 572 in six sessions? Eminently gettable.

      3. Eminently.

      4. Chase-able indeed

4. January. Brexit. Rain. Cold. England getting walloped.

   When does the County Championship start again?

   1. In theory the CC starts soon after Brexit. In practice, one way or another, either one of those things (or possibly even both) might not progress entirely according to plan.

5. I take some solace from the fact that the overnight deficit, a mere 572 runs, means that this match cannot be the biggest ever margin of defeat. That honour belongs to Australia at the hands of England, at Brisbane:

   http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/17596/scorecard/62562/australia-vs-england-1st-test-england-tour-of-australia-1928-29

   Similarly, although 77 all out does sound (and is) a little embarrassing, it’s nowhere near as embarrassing as a lower number, such as 60 all out.

   Australia were bowled out for something of that order (60) relatively recently, but I cannot remember where it happened. Nor can I remember whether or not any King Cricket readers were there to witness that particular chapter in Australia’s humiliation.

6. So hang on, where are we… two wickets left and a mere 400 runs behind… pah! Up and at ’em, chaps… arf arf

   Don’t get me wrong, 77 is never an acceptable innings total (on any pitch that’s not a Kingston minefield) – but in a way giving up six wickets to this decidedly innocuous-looking “spinner” is actually more embarrassing

7. Definite deja vu here, cos by the time I typed that England had lostthe ninth wicket… in coming back here I’m half-hoping to help finish them off and put an end to this whole sad spectacle…

   Some blinding catches to be fair. And some absolutely piss-awful shot selection to boot… Moeen should punch himself in the face for that “shot” just before tea.

   Ah well, at least Draco will have fresh legs for the second test…

   1. I hate to say this, but Moe should be picked for his spinning abilities alone from now on. His batsmanship is Stuart Broad levels.

      1. It’s bizarre, isn’t it? The jaunt up to number three seems to have stripped him of all competence.

      2. Also worth saying that Ben Stokes’ double hundred currently seems more freakish than Jason Holder’s.

         Stokes bats at five, Holder at eight.

8. We were all discussing the Aussies’ batting averages recently… they don’t compare too unfavourably with many of their English counterparts’ . Stokes being a case in point… although with someone like that (as with Flintoff) you could argue that the bare numbers come nowhere near telling the whole story. Still, he is getting a bit of a nosebleed at five – but who do they bring in instead?

   A guy called Andy Donley pointed out on the BBC website that the match produced this neat stat: England 323-20; Holder & Dowrich 323-2

   As for Moeen – it’s hard to believe this is the same guy who had commentators making purring comparisons with David Gower (though if they meant brainlessly nicking off at the worst possible moment, perhaps they had a point)

Comments are closed.