*Official* Bangladesh in West Indies

[Langeveldt]

I guess some good can come out of this game, the chance that Bangladesh could be humiliated by the third string of a crap side.. Kind of like when they got beaten by Zimbabwe.. Such is their hopelessness that I find myself taking great pleasure out of seeing them get hammered..

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Let's not get carried away and call West Indies a crap side. Not when they won the last proper series genuinely.

[shivfan]

Originally Posted by Mr Mxyzptlk

Now that a public admission has been made by Ramnarine that no action will be taken, I can't see WIPA getting away with taking action regardless of what happens. At the end of the day there is no WIPA without the support of the players. And that would definitely kill such support.

Ramnarine's statement still sounded like a thinly-veiled threat to Miller and Pascal....

[shivfan]

Originally Posted by Mr Mxyzptlk

Let's not get carried away and call West Indies a crap side. Not when they won the last proper series genuinely.

Exactly....

When I last checked, the WI beat England 1-0 in a five-Test series in the Caribbean.

If the WI are a crap side, then so are England.

Good knock by Phillips. I think that should put him in reckoning for a place in the WI side when this striking fiasco is finally resolved.

[roseboy64]

I hope not. He's barely played any FC cricket.

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Richards and Barath both deserve opportunities ahead of Phillips. In that order too. I can easily see Morton opening with Gayle if the players return next Test though.

Phillips looked good for the most part, but on the whole was too loose. And unlike Phillip Hughes, he doesn't have enough natural talent to score shedloads despite being loose. He needs to tighten up his game and move his feet more, because yes he scored 94, but it was on a flat track against half of a poor attack.

[Uppercut]

I'm not really a fan of the whole "we got stuffed in England, therefore it doesn't count" attitude of West Indies fans.

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Originally Posted by Uppercut

I'm not really a fan of the whole "we got stuffed in England, therefore it doesn't count" attitude of West Indies fans.

No, it does count because the West Indies entered into it. That's a technicality though, because the fact is that the series should not have happened at all. Quit the presumptuousness, because that was my feeling before a ball was bowled on the tour. It was hastily organized, poorly scheduled, and played for a trophy that should never have been involved.

[Uppercut]

Originally Posted by Mr Mxyzptlk

No, it does count because the West Indies entered into it. That's a technicality though, because the fact is that the series should not have happened at all. Quit the presumptuousness, because that was my feeling before a ball was bowled on the tour. It was hastily organized, poorly scheduled, and played for a trophy that should have never been involved.

You have a point about the trophy, but it's hard to feel much sympathy after the cricket-killing tactics the West Indies used to win it back.

I wasn't referring directly to you, but the feeling I get from the Caribbean is that if the West Indies had gone to England and won 2-0 it'd be hailed as a huge revival and assertion of dominance. But they lost 2-0, and it wasn't even a real series apparently.

[shivfan]

Originally Posted by Uppercut

I'm not really a fan of the whole "we got stuffed in England, therefore it doesn't count" attitude of West Indies fans.

And I'm not really a fan of the "let's get totally down on the side because they performed badly in the last series" attitude of posters....

I understand that Phillips is fairly new, but to me he's the incumbent now. I don't think the strikers should automatically walk back into the side without competition from those who answered the call.

The 200 is up now.

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Originally Posted by Uppercut

You have a point about the trophy, but it's hard to feel much sympathy after the cricket-killing tactics the West Indies used to win it back.

England had their chances in that series, and West Indies have been beaten on similar pitches in the past. The fact that West Indies have barely won at home in an age is proof of that. Newsflash: the pitches have been flat in the Caribbean for a very long time now. The difference is that West Indies outplayed England when the opportunity arose and then actually made the best of pitches that they should not be struggling on. At times they just hung in, but they hung in all the same.

Basically, West Indies finally used home field advantage. India have done it for years, so why criticize West Indies for finally doing so? These are not the spicy, quick wickets of the past. You work with what you have.

England should have won that series, all things considered on paper. If anything the spirit shown by West Indies in that series was a breath of fresh air, rather than "cricket-killing".

Originally Posted by Uppercut

I wasn't referring directly to you, but the feeling I get from the Caribbean is that if the West Indies had gone to England and won 2-0 it'd be hailed as a huge revival and assertion of dominance. But they lost 2-0, and it wasn't even a real series apparently.

I assure you that anyone who knows or cares about West Indies cricket knew that the team would lose in England this year.

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Originally Posted by shivfan

I understand that Phillips is fairly new, but to me he's the incumbent now. I don't think the strikers should automatically walk back into the side without competition from those who answered the call.

Richards is also incumbent, and Barath very likely would have played this match if not for the strike. You pick your best players. Phillips played a good knock, but he has not done enough to prove that he is one of the best players in the region. Certainly you'd think he would have made much less than 94 if he played the same way against any other Test team. Fluent, the innings was not.

[Uppercut]

Originally Posted by Mr Mxyzptlk

England had their chances in that series, and West Indies have been beaten on similar pitches in the past. The fact that West Indies have barely won at home in an age is proof of that. Newsflash: the pitches have been flat in the Caribbean for a very long time now. The difference is that West Indies outplayed England when the opportunity arose and then actually made the best of pitches that they should not be struggling on. At times they just hung in, but they hung in all the same.

Basically, West Indies finally used home field advantage. India have done it for years, so why criticize West Indies for finally doing so? These are not the spicy, quick wickets of the past. You work with what you have.

England should have won that series, all things considered on paper. If anything the spirit shown by West Indies in that series was a breath of fresh air, rather than "cricket-killing".

I call it cricket-killing when Pakistan or India do it too. When you stop trying to win games once you're 1-0 up in a series, prepare horrendous pitches that bring about 600 plays 700 games and stage the most boring tour in the history of the world, it's killing test cricket. And as such it's hard to feel sorry for them losing the trophy in a hastily-arranged two-game "series" (which England, incidentally, made every effort to win by more than 1-0). And let's get it cleared up- I'm no England fan.

[shivfan]

Originally Posted by Mr Mxyzptlk

Richards is also incumbent, and Barath very likely would have played this match if not for the strike. You pick your best players. Phillips played a good knock, but he has not done enough to prove that he is one of the best players in the region. Certainly you'd think he would have made much less than 94 if he played the same way against any other Test team. Fluent, the innings was not.

True, but Richards was out for 13, and has done nothing so far to say that he deserves to stay on in the role....

In contrast, I think Phillips, Roach and maybe Best have all made a case for themselves.

I thought this thread was about the series against Bangladesh. Isn't there another thread that deals with the England series, which I, among others, felt should never have taken place?

And I know I'm not along in voicing my opposition to that ridiculous, truncated tour BEFORE it took place.....

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Originally Posted by Uppercut

I call it cricket-killing when Pakistan or India do it too. When you stop trying to win games once you're 1-0 up in a series, prepare horrendous pitches that bring about 600 plays 700 games and stage the most boring tour in the history of the world, it's killing test cricket. And as such it's hard to feel sorry for them losing the trophy in a hastily-arranged two-game "series" (which England, incidentally, made every effort to win by more than 1-0). And let's get it cleared up- I'm no England fan.

I don't think West Indies stopped trying to win games until the very last match of the series. And at that point, I think it's forgiven, if you think of how desperate West Indies were for a series win of any kind.

Fidel Edwards bowled his heart out in what was otherwise a pretty tame bowling attack. The fact is that England batted first consistently and made sure that West Indies would have to save the match from the time they started their first innings. Had the catching been better, West Indies could well have had a result in Barbados. As I said before, and it's quite obvious, the pitches have been horrendously flat for years now. It's just that the tourists have usually used them better than the hosts.