• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

I'm dissapointed with the English.

Mr Mxyzptlk

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I agree that the cricket coverage is not particularly good in the papers, and as you say, if it isnt England it barely gets a mention. The Times newspaper, imo, covers cricket in the greatest detail, and offers decent match reports for the domestic season.
Hopefully I'm mistaken then, but I was browsing the front pages of the newspapers at a campus cafe yesterday morning. And while most of them had the tragic Bob Woolmer story featured prominently on the front page, I think (not at all certain) that The Times had the drunkie Flintoff story as the main focus. Was pretty appalled.
 

grecian

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
The Times I've got in front of me from yesterday, has Bob on the front.

Maybe it was an early edition you saw.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
But d'you know what time the papers are printed at?

It might just be a positive step coming across as a negative one.
 

Woodster

International Captain
Yes the one I saw, possibly the later edition, certainly had Bob Woolmer on the front. The boozy night out was covered in the Sunday Times.
 

Langeveldt

Soutie
I'm proudly South African, and living in England at the moment, which has given me the oppertunity to consider the "English Perspective"

The newspapers for a start, feature the cricket well in to the sports section, with other international matches not involving England getting little or no mention at all.

Secondly, it seems to me that English fans and players have an excuse for everything (especially their recent 5-0 whitewash), it was easy to blame Giles and Harmison, and yet none of the blame was afforded to Flintoff and (especially) Andrew Strauss.
However, when they finally win a few (re: the CB Series), no allowances are made for the Australians as they parade around thinking that they are now the Best Team in the World...

I hope the English (and on a lesser degree the other teams) realise that Australia are no longer the be all and end all of international cricket- yes, an amazing team to beat, but you still have to beat other top teams consistantly like South Africa, India and Sri Lanka..

Your thoughts? (I bet the English fans here will find some ****y excuse and resort to personal attacks to discredit this forum)...:happy:
Have you seen the TV coverage yet?? Dire beyond belief..

I remember hearing on SABC, the immortal words "We interrupt CSI to bring you the Zimbabwe v West Indies world cup game" - Awesome.. To think that on terrestrial TV, top notch drama gets stopped so we can see two other countries play cricket on the other side of the world :)
 

Jungle Jumbo

International Vice-Captain
The Times I've got in front of me from yesterday, has Bob on the front.

Maybe it was an early edition you saw.
Yeah, the copy we have at school had Woolmer on the front and a big article on the third page.

I don't think you can attack any paper for not covering enough of the World Cup - they are only providing what their readers want. For every person crying out for an in-depth report on Bermuda v India, there are another five all bypassing the page as soon as they see it. The Times or The Telegraph are the best for cricket though, even if the last one makes you the most unpopular person on the train by dumping half a forest across everyone's laps.
 

Top