Cricket

[gumboots]

No you are quite correct. 29 apiece. Woakes carrying on where he left off at Lords now. Hope this time he is on the winning side. Did well with the bat too.

[matt83]

Probably taken him 90+ more matches but still good effort. Get past ponting and that would be awesome. Great crack today so far just wish I could get to more test matches. Roll on retirement in few decades

[oldjamfan1]

Probably taken him 90+ more matches but still good effort. Get past ponting and that would be awesome. Great crack today so far just wish I could get to more test matches. Roll on retirement in few decades

I know you're probably not being serious but don't wish your life away mate 😉

[Steve Kean's Hypnotoad]

Probably taken him 90+ more matches but still good effort. Get past ponting and that would be awesome. Great crack today so far just wish I could get to more test matches. Roll on retirement in few decades

Did you contribute to the stand-spanning snake?

[K-Hod]

I saw a few folk on Facebook had gone, looked a great game, shame I was away! Thinking of going in a few weeks myself, this has definitely made me think I will!

Great innings from Root!

[matt83]

Seems bizarre not to enforce follow on. Not been in the field that long and hardly like had front line bowlers bowling for last few hours. Overcast conditions. Could be rain affected. Demoralised opposition.

[chaddyrovers]

I wouldnt enforce the follow on tbh.

Bat for today and get the lead over 500

[oldjamfan1]

I wouldnt enforce the follow on tbh.

Bat for today and get the lead over 500

Now why would England need to do that Chaddy? We are already 400 ahead before we even bat again! Not enforcing the follow on is an unbelievable decision and carries much more risk of not winning the game than enforcing it does.

Seems bizarre not to enforce follow on. Not been in the field that long and hardly like had front line bowlers bowling for last few hours. Overcast conditions. Could be rain affected. Demoralised opposition.

Absolutely spot on.

[oldjamfan1]

So far, I've heard Michael Vaughan, Michael Atherton, Sir Ian Botham, David Gower, Michael Holding, Shane Warne and - to a lesser extent - Nasser Hussain all say how bonkers it is to not enforce the follow on. That's good enough for me.

I fear this might be a decision that backfires on Alastair Cook.

[matt83]

I think it was reasonably foreseeable the Manchester weather may have a say in this game and a lead of 391 seemed plenty. Still think we'll win but it's an unnecessary risk bringing the draw back into play by wasting overs adding to a total Pakistan are unlikely to reach anyway. But what's done is done.

Decent stat heard England haven't lost at old Trafford in 15 years. Winning 7 drawing 2. Last defeat vs Pakistan in 2001. Not that many games to be fair but seems like we lose at Lords every year.

Edited July 24, 2016 by matt83

[Steve Kean's Hypnotoad]

Bizarre decision, not sure what Cook and the coach are thinking.

[gumboots]

They said it wouldn't have been the coach's decision. It's cooks. They said it might be easing Anderson and Stokes back in after their injuries. Don't know. I'd have gone for the follow on too but there must be a reason cook opted to bat.

[chaddyrovers]

I wonder if either Broad or Anderson have a slight injury tbh.

Maybe that why Cook didnt enforce om

[AllRoverAsia]

Maybe Sky influence cricket same as football. Unlikely but so was Cook's decision.

[Baz]

I think it was reasonably foreseeable the Manchester weather may have a say in this game and a lead of 391 seemed plenty. Still think we'll win but it's an unnecessary risk bringing the draw back into play by wasting overs adding to a total Pakistan are unlikely to reach anyway. But what's done is done.

Decent stat heard England haven't lost at old Trafford in 15 years. Winning 7 drawing 2. Last defeat vs Pakistan in 2001. Not that many games to be fair but seems like we lose at Lords every year.

Whilst I do think we should have enforced the follow-on, we are in such a commanding position in the game that with 2 days left to play, there's plenty of time left to bowl them out again.

On the Old Trafford situation, would the Aussies with such a commanding record at the stadium, only look to give them at best 1 test match per year? Time for the ECB to stop the nonsense of counties having to 'bid' for test matches, which is pushing prices up for supporters, and start awarding them earlier, and investing in increasing the quality and size of those stadia

[oldjamfan1]

Whilst I do think we should have enforced the follow-on, we are in such a commanding position in the game that with 2 days left to play, there's plenty of time left to bowl them out again.

On the Old Trafford situation, would the Aussies with such a commanding record at the stadium, only look to give them at best 1 test match per year? Time for the ECB to stop the nonsense of counties having to 'bid' for test matches, which is pushing prices up for supporters, and start awarding them earlier, and investing in increasing the quality and size of those stadia

Totally agree with your second paragraph Baz - spot on. Can't agree with your first one though, we've introduced an unnecessary risk into the proceedings buy giving the weather a chance to intervene. We don't actually know how long we've got to bowl at them.

[Baz]

Totally agree with your second paragraph Baz - spot on. Can't agree with your first one though, we've introduced an unnecessary risk into the proceedings buy giving the weather a chance to intervene. We don't actually know how long we've got to bowl at them.

2 days and no rain forecast.

Like i said, it's not the decision I would have made, to not enforce the follow on, but it's unlikely to be proven right or wrong in this case. If it was only 1 day left, then its a risk that they could bat through, 2 days- well I just can't see that happening.

[oldjamfan1]

2 days and no rain forecast.

Like i said, it's not the decision I would have made, to not enforce the follow on, but it's unlikely to be proven right or wrong in this case. If it was only 1 day left, then its a risk that they could bat through, 2 days- well I just can't see that happening.

When do we declare though? I just don't get the logic at all (there is none).

[gumboots]

There was speculation that they wanted another look at some of the batsmen like ballance and vince who have not been exactly prolific so far but if Root and Cook stay in for a while that won't work either. Personally I wonder if it's to take it to a 5th day maximising revenue. Too many tests have ended early recently and that must be costing cricket and Sky

Edited July 25, 2016 by gumboots

[den]

Can't see that being the reason Gumboots. Think it's just that England are rubbing the Pakistanis in it by making sure it's them that bat last on a wearing wicket. There's loads of time left and that's why they've done it.

[gumboots]

Think venkys are making me cynical! Lol

[den]

Not saying I agree with that decision Gumboots.

BTW, latest forecast is giving a lot of rain in Manchester tomorrow.

[gumboots]

Yes but not generally till later. If we are sensible we should get it over the line

[AllRoverAsia]

There was speculation that they wanted another look at some of the batsmen like ballance and vince who have not been exactly prolific so far but if Root and Cook stay in for a while that won't work either. Personally I wonder if it's to take it to a 5th day maximising revenue. Too many tests have ended early recently and that must be costing cricket and Sky

Exactly what I think - cricket is Sky controlled too.

[Baz]

When do we declare though? I just don't get the logic at all (there is none).

Like I said, it was irrelevant in the end.

1-1 and England so far on top, you wouldn't bet against a 3-1 series win.