Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The Ashes
#21
No point in having a go at Chris Woakes. The gist of the criticism seems to be that he isn't as good a bowler as Jimmy Anderson nor as good an all-rounder as Ben Stokes. Both true, but he's still one of the eleven best players in England. There isn't a stream of alternatives just awaiting their chance.

Australians grow up on hard, bouncy wickets which encourage fast bowling so that's what they get. Over here, we either play on puddings in Spring and Autumn or are "practising our variations" when the weather is decent. What do you expect?
Reply
#22
That's seems a bit if an excuse for him though GrizzlyBear. Conditions are good now, its swinging. needs to get it right.

Reply
#23
He got that one right

Reply
#24
Chris Woakes has arrived at the Ashes today!
Keep up-to-date with County Cricket at http://deepextracover.com/
Reply
#25
Yes bowled great

Reply
#26
Too little too late. Might be proven wrong... but England couldnt chase down 250.

My real concern is that this is the stealth test match.... for the first time in 30 years, no one is speaking about an Ashes series at work. Flogging this to BT was a very bad idea.
Reply
#27
Its worth it just to see Alison Mitchell on the roof of the stadium

Reply
#28
(04-12-2017, 10:35 PM)Warleybear Wrote: Too little too late. Might be proven wrong... but England couldnt chase down 250.

My real concern is that this is the stealth test match.... for the first time in 30 years, no one is speaking about an Ashes series at work. Flogging this to BT was a very bad idea.

Absolutely agree.  Because I missed the news programmes on the day I didn't know the match had started until I heard the Aussies had declared at over 400 (i.e. end of day 2)
LE - aka John
Reply
[-] The following 1 user Likes Leicester Exile's post:
Warleybear
#29
(04-12-2017, 11:26 PM)Paul Wrote: Its worth it just to see Alison Mitchell on the roof of the stadium
Rather her than me, though the views were quite spectacular.  I was worried that the re-development of the Adelaide Oval would ruin it but though some of the iconic views have gone (from ground level at least), they do seem to have created something special and unique.
Keep up-to-date with County Cricket at http://deepextracover.com/
Reply
[-] The following 1 user Likes Terry's post:
Paul
#30
Another good day from Chris Woakes; and he has the opportunity to play a match-winning innings tomorrow.
The lack of access to TV coverage is a great shame because this has been an excellent Test match.  I was able to watch the last session today and it was Test cricket at its best, fiercely contested and with the game very finely balanced.
Keep up-to-date with County Cricket at http://deepextracover.com/
Reply
[-] The following 1 user Likes Terry's post:
rednalbear
#31
150 partnership between Woakes and Root tomorrow and the victory is ours - simple
LE - aka John
Reply
#32
I agree they need to hang around but theres still two quality batsmen left to come in so theres a chance.

Reply
#33
No guts, no passion, no pride, no chance, no hope - thank goodness for ladies cricket
Reply
[-] The following 1 user Likes narsty simon's post:
Paul
#34
Made the mistake of getting up to watch this morning. Woeful
Paul fondled my onion bags.
Reply
#35
Having watched a bit of the BT coverage, I can now see (or hear) why viewers want to watch with the sound down and/or with the TMS commentary on.
I posted earlier in this thread Richie Benaud's eight rules of television commentary, of which the BT team seem to break seven on a regular basis.
I read in the Cricketer recently the retirement article by Pat Murphy, well-known to Midlands sports lovers.  In it, he sets out what John Arlott told him were the rules of radio commentary so I thought it might be worth repeating them here.  They are:

  1. Think of the blind person
  2. Look to your right and left as well as straight down the wicket
  3. Never be afraid to slip in a literary or poetic reference
  4. Don't talk down simplistically to the listener
  5. Know your cricket history
  6. Leave your summariser time to talk between the overs
  7. Give the score at least once an over
  8. And hope that the listener feels: "Gosh, I wish I was there."
I think the best of the radio commentators today at least manage to adhere to five or six of these rules, though I will be keeping score during the next Test.
What do others think?
Keep up-to-date with County Cricket at http://deepextracover.com/
Reply
#36
(07-12-2017, 11:55 PM)Terry Wrote: Having watched a bit of the BT coverage, I can now see (or hear) why viewers want to watch with the sound down and/or with the TMS commentary on.
I posted earlier in this thread Richie Benaud's eight rules of television commentary, of which the BT team seem to break seven on a regular basis.
I read in the Cricketer recently the retirement article by Pat Murphy, well-known to Midlands sports lovers.  In it, he sets out what John Arlott told him were the rules of radio commentary so I thought it might be worth repeating them here.  They are:

  1. Think of the blind person
  2. Look to your right and left as well as straight down the wicket
  3. Never be afraid to slip in a literary or poetic reference
  4. Don't talk down simplistically to the listener
  5. Know your cricket history
  6. Leave your summariser time to talk between the overs
  7. Give the score at least once an over
  8. And hope that the listener feels: "Gosh, I wish I was there."
I think the best of the radio commentators today at least manage to adhere to five or six of these rules, though I will be keeping score during the next Test.
What do others think?

BT seem to have gone down the "Top Bantz" route so beloved of today's broadcasters. They are actually now much closer to the TMS style of coverage than Sky. I think TMS gets away with murder - it's been on a downward spiral fro years. Far too self-referential and hubristic for my liking.

The thing I miss with BT's coverage is the lack of any context or decent analysis. Criticize Sky as much as you like but they have taken technical analysis of the game to another level. We are all pretty decent students of the game but I'm always amazed at the things Atherton, Hussein et al spot.

Also what BT lack is any kind of digitised archive of previous cricket so they have no way of illustrating any analysis with historical footage.

Also too many ad breaks.
Reply
#37
I've only just got round to reading this thread and it seems like I'm one of the only people pleased that it's on BT Sport (for purely selfish reasons). We pay £33.50 a month, which includes unlimited fibreoptic broadband (with good speeds) and a TV package that includes BT Sport and quite a lot of entertainment channels (and we get a HD YouView box which we can record on). This compares very favourably with Sky, which would cost in the region of £50 or more per month for a similar package including Sky Cricket.

However, when it comes to the actual coverage, I prefer Sky, if nothing else for the fact that I cannot stand Pietersen. I just don't understand why they have him commentating when he hates half of the England team! And don't get me started on Vaughan... but I do like Boycott and Mitchell. I made the mistake of waking up at 03:30 last week, watched for 45 minutes while in bed then went back to sleep once we'd lost 3 wickets!
Proud to be a Bear
Reply
#38
The problem is that if you have sky, then need Netflix to keep the wife happy, then need Prime to keep your children happy... then need BT .... it all adds up to major dosh. The game has shot itself in the foot... this series was lost to the British public before it was heading to be lost to Australia. What with behaviour issues, results, lack of visability.... Test Cricket is killing itself..... this series will sadly have a major impact on it when it comes to attendances over the next year or two.... yet more empty plastic seats appearing at many grounds.
Reply
[-] The following 1 user Likes Warleybear's post:
Leicester Exile
#39
Sky doesn't need to be £50+. For the full package including Movies and Sport I pay £27.20 pm. Like most this is achieved by telling them I am cancelling. Big problem though is BT have taken Premier RU and now the Aussie Ashes and for a lot of people a big reduction in Premier Football. One plus is they are now covering Championship Football which includes Blues (for this season at any rate) and AV.
LE - aka John
Reply
#40
(11-12-2017, 09:14 PM)Leicester Exile Wrote: Sky doesn't need to be £50+. For the full package including Movies and Sport I pay £27.20 pm. Like most this is achieved by telling them I am cancelling. Big problem though is BT have taken Premier RU and now the Aussie Ashes and for a lot of people a big reduction in Premier Football. One plus is they are now covering Championship Football which includes Blues (for this season at any rate) and AV.

Does that price include internet? Unfortunately I'm not in the position to tell them that I'm cancelling as I'm not a customer!
Proud to be a Bear
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)