Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rachael I said nothing about big scores... merely suggesting the top order need to bat through the better part of four sessions. I don't care if that's racking up just 200-250 off the first 100 overs: the important thing is that they play through the first 20 overs with the second new ball... which is when targets should be considered
. |
Not saying that approach is wrong but you could still get skittled for a low score. As a bowler you always feel you can run through a team as long as the opposition are not scoring as you can keep the pressure on with attacking fields etc.
Since the Aussies started this new attacking way of playing, if the batting team scores quicly the attacking fielders vanish and fields become defensive, also making it easy to knock the ball around. If Bell and Colly are batting you can have 3 slips 2 gullies etc... and you know they are only going to score at 2 an over.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rachael Sadly, Hussain was the last captain to be convinced that this was the way to play: he focussed on being tough to beat... realising that batting long had to come before batting hard.
. |
This was a bit negative though and only done really when England were poor. You wont win many games playing like this.