No idea why Broad was sent out with 550+ on the board. Diving to prevent a runout he could have pulled a muscle or damaged a finger... very odd.
The Pakistan team captain actually took the field as an opener for their second innings tonight, but the umpires made a late decision that the light was too bad to start the second innings after all. The Pakistani captain usually bats at no 3 or no 4, however as he actually came on to the field of play ready to open for them tonight does he still have open tomorrow morning or can he revert to his normal position if he wants to as play did not actually start?
As 'play' wasn't called at any point to start the 2nd Pakistan innings he doesn't have to open and can revert to his normal position of 3. The MCC cleared this up after the close of play. Law 25.2 states that the innings of the opening batsmen only start at the call of Play, which didn't happen tonight. For other batsmen, it's when they enter the field of play. So, by Law, Azhar Ali doesn't have to open tomorrow as his innings hadn't started.
Back out - probably won't get the wickets but surely Jimmy will get his 600th wicket. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/live/cricket/51416598
My mate Neil once described Jimmy, early in his Test career, as a 'meathead'. I have just reminded him of that evaluation.
Apparently didn't average under 30 until he was over 30. Has got better with age. Heck of an achievement
The real question now is does the test team have to move on from jimmy now? He has been an absolutely brilliant bowler, probably the greatest fast bowler of all time, however he will be 39 by the time of the next ashes series. Been having this debate with one of my work colleagues today. The other real talking point is what do you do about Jos Buttler? Had a phenomenal series with the bat, but the man is a terrible wicket keeper. How we continue to let Foakes waste away in country cricket is beyond me. I would genuinely be considering putting Buttler in as a batsman and fielding in the slips with Foakes keeping wicket.
While Jimmy keeps performing and deserving of a place I think he should continue. Archer hasn't looked great over the summer and Wood has fitness issues. Buttler is an interesting one because as you say, he's a great summer with the bat but poor behind the sticks. Foakes is far better as a keeper but who drops out? If Stokes is going to be a batsmen who occasionally bowls then we can't lose a bowler so it needs to be one of Root, Pope, Crawley. Root is proven and the other two have done pretty well so it's a tough decision. When we go to Australia though we can't afford to drop the amount Buttler has done so it's something that needs looking at
A genuine test class keeper shouldn't drop anything. Knott Taylor Russell etc rarely if ever spilled a catch.
Could we drop sibley or burns and play Crawley as an opener? Neither had a particularly good summer, Burns was especially poor.
Possibly. I have to say I'm not a big fan of the Sibley/Burns partnership. Has Crawley opened for Kent?
#3624, #3627-31. Crawley hasn't played that much at all. Personally I would keep him at 3 but it's arguable.
could he play as an opener though? this summer due to our openers incompetence he has still had to play the new ball. he has pretty much been an opener lol
Apart from Moeen and Banton no one really got going for us and that was the difference tonight. Morgan run out summed up the night.
Well we lost, but, not to get all corny, cricket was the winner. Thank you Pakistan and West Indies for making the best of a bad situation this summer, hopefully the ECB repay the favour!
Did anyone else of a certain vintage go to John Player League matches on a Sunday ? I can remember going to see Northants v Notts and getting Bishen Bedi and Gary Sobers autograph in the clubhouse. Not sure if that kind of thing would be allowed now !.
Oh yes, I was a regular at Lord's in the Edmonds and Emburey era watching Middlesex. When I was at University in Birmingham I also had a ludicrously cheap student membership at Edgbaston.
Used to regularly watch Sunday League at Lord's when I lived in London (albeit not the JPL by then). I recall an afternoon spent laughing at a quite elderly Middlesex supporter who called each opposition player a ****. He got progressively more excited, and foul-mouthed, as the opposition (can't recall who) were reduced to something like 45-7 ("you're run out by a mile, you ****!"). Pissed ouselves when the 8th wicket partnership was unbroken and Middlesex lost. I'd much rather watch that again than T-20.
The Sunday League was always John Player I think. It's strange that we thought of it as very much a shortened game back then, but it was twice the length of T20. I too would prefer the longer format. To me, the element that is lost with T20 is any need to defend your wicket. It's quite difficult to lose all ten in 20 overs so the game is hugely biased in favour of big hitting batsmen.
