mozzycricket.bsky.social
I love all things Cricket, even the pain of supporting England. Cricket parent, Player, Coach, had a short run podcasting, armchair commentator. Debate not hate.
56 posts
75 followers
173 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
I don't know about Bashir.
Is his bowling going to be so far superior to his inability to run field and bat that he becomes viable?
Plenty of spinners have had ability good balls but you also need consistency.
I think this is a needless experiment that is dangerous to his overall development.
comment in response to
post
Granted, I just think that if you temper the mind set, you may find the bat path and control within that will be aided. Mostly (it seams) he gets himself out playing agressively at balls that are difficult to control, although those same shots do make him dangerous when they come off.
comment in response to
post
Not sure about blast specifically but his just an alround solid performer with a strong ticker and room to grow.
comment in response to
post
Her strike rate was not the best at the time she was dropped but her ceiling as a batter is so much higher than those who replaced her.
Too good not to play.
comment in response to
post
Not sure where the context went... something about Notts raiding gloucs and Leicestershire for players.
comment in response to
post
Don't forget worcestershire.
comment in response to
post
Woakes was serverly hampered by Andersons longevity...love him but he shouldn't go to Aus...
comment in response to
post
Needs a wicket keeper
comment in response to
post
Before Bashir, which is premature...there were Hartley etc al all premature... all did ok but where are they now.
comment in response to
post
His straight drives remind me of Stokes... which begs a further question...why hasn't Stokes been batting at 3.
comment in response to
post
He has no list a hundred either
comment in response to
post
To be fair the Bethall pick looks a good one... some of the others premature to say the least.
Bethall will be a good case study if he succeeds long term as to why he didn't get early numbers in FC and list A despite obvious ability.
comment in response to
post
Should give him loads!
comment in response to
post
Absolutely... Siraj on the other hand... not so much
comment in response to
post
Yes, and annoyingly likeable from an English perspective.
comment in response to
post
Had they scored first class hundreds before test call ups? My point is not degrade Bethall who is clearly talented... but others in history had to have scored massive numbers before they were selected.
A very different pathway for those that went before.
comment in response to
post
ECB are to blame not players.
Hundred is a waste of space for the men's game....and before anyone says it was good for the womens game...yes but totally unintentional success.
comment in response to
post
It's not about short changing...its about bowling the right amount of overs per hour.
There are allowances made for extremes... in this case 10 minutes for innings change = 3 overs... an allocation per wicket... and unusual stopages ie lost balls, lots of runs
No excuse last week
comment in response to
post
Did he hit the first ball for 4?
comment in response to
post
Crawley to hit the first ball for 4!!
comment in response to
post
They are not trying, the reg may be wrong but you have to try.
11 overs an hour is not trying.
Oppo got 405 against us in 50 overs ball going everywhere and no ball boys. We were 16.96 overs an hour and got a demerit for not being 17.2.
comment in response to
post
Obviously, I am not blind to the general hypocrisy of the ICC.
comment in response to
post
I think that's 51/49 to New Zealand