@cricketjim1 I think it's about rotation for a long term in India. They need cover amongst batters for form and amongst the quick bowlers for fatigue/load and niggles. So the squad has more fast bowlers on the bench. The travelling reserves cover injuries.
@SAAdvantage I expect that if the data is broken into tests it'll show this developed over the series. It felt like ENG became increasingly happen to take low-risk 1s&2s to boundary fields in response to AUS trying to cut out their default preference for 4s&6s as the series progressed.
@Numb3z@sambillings@jonathanliew I don't think it's meant as a criticism. Just an acknowledgement that a supportive environment where you can take risks without being anxious can be more successful?
@Numb3z@sambillings@jonathanliew I didn't read the article as it saying that only those from privileged backgrounds can play attacking cricket. The point is that Eng and ZC are showing that when the fear of failure is reduced, performance and results can increase. And that this is analogous to privilege.
@cricket_badger The difference is one batter is batting outside the crease and is returning. In the other the batter has indicated they consider the ball dead by placing their bat behind the crease. This doesn't matter in the laws.
@cricket_badger It's significant because it increases the predictability of him leaving the crease without confirming the ball is dead, despite indicating he considers it dead. But it's still out.