Cricket Betting Site Betway
Page 4 of 10 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 145

Thread: Dire Times Ahead For England

  1. #46
    International Debutant iamdavid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    2,112
    Originally posted by Richard
    though it would be better if it was Butcher one, Trescothick two, Hussain three, Vaughan four.
    There really is no point picking openers to bat in the middle-order
    One is contradicting one's self :P

    But I agree 100% with everything you say in this post.

  2. #47
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Mr Mxyzptlk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Trinidad and Tobago (Trinidad)
    Posts
    36,797
    Originally posted by Richard
    In that 161 he was absolutely plumb lbw to Charitha Buddhika Fernando on 27. Decent Umpiring and heíd have made no more than 27. Simple as. Played well for a 134 after that, no denying that.
    If you want, I can even go through Trescothickís Test-career and his luck:
    66 in 1st Test innings (Old Trafford); dropped at square-leg on 3.
    71 in 4th innings (The Oval); dropped at slip on 7.
    Century and half-century at Galle; dropped 3 times in first-innings, once in second-innings.
    66 v India at Mohali, first-innings; absolutely plumb lbw to Kumble on 24, for some reason Bucknor gave it not-out.
    99 v India at Motera, first-innings; again, absolutely plumb to Kumble on 36, not given by that idiot Robinson.
    76 v SL, Lordís, second-innings; lbw on 44, not given.
    161 v SL, Edgbaston, already mentioned.
    80-odd v SL, Old Trafford, first-innings; dropped twice in 2 balls, 64 and 66.
    23* v SL, second-innings, dropped at deep-backward-square on 22.
    72 v Aus, ĎGabba; dropped in the gully on 1.
    31 vs SA, Edgbaston, first-innings; dropped at first-slip on 0.
    52* v SA, second-innings; dropped at first-slip on 51.
    68* v SA, The Oval, second-innings, dropped at first-slip on 1.
    Single-figures against SA at Lordís; still managed to get dropped.
    See? Heís been lucky on many occasions. In 2001 he had no luck all season and scored 3 fifties and a hundred; he got one chanceless fifty each in the seriesí in Pakistan, New Zealand and Sri Lanka (2003\04, not 2000\01); he got twin fifties chancelessly at The Oval against India; and of course the 217 in the first-innings at The Oval.
    Now Iíve lost count of his first-chance average, but I can tell you for certain itís far lower than the scorebook one, especially if you exclude the Bangladesh games.
    Basically Trescothickís flaws have been exposed and, for the best part of the last year-and-a-bit, decent bowlers have exploited them (Bangladesh havenít, not surprisingly). Trescothickís First-Class average is anything but impressive. We can only now wait until the West Indies tour. While runs are flowing against his name, no case can be made for his exclusion, thatís all Iíll say.
    Richard very few batsman make any significant innings without giving a chance. That's cricket. Live with it! If it weren't part of the game, there would be a rule saying that once the ball makes contact with the fielder's hand off the bat, the batsman is out regardless of whether the ball is held or not. That would support your dropped catches theory. The fact is that that is ridiculous and will not happen.

    All fielders drop catches. Every international cricketer has dropped several catches in his or her career.
    Sreesanth said, "Next ball he was beaten and I said, 'is this the King Charles Lara? Who is this impostor, moving around nervously? I should have kept my mouth shut for the next ball - mind you, it was a length ball - Lara just pulled it over the church beyond the boundary! He is a true legend."

    The...er...Twitter[/SIZE][/CENTER]

  3. #48
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    They say Walter Hammond dropped 13 catches in his entire First-Class career...
    IMO the standard of catching has degenerated badly in the last 2 or 3 years. I can't produce any statistics to prove it, but I have just been reading match-reports and far more large innings seem to result from let-offs.
    If the rules were made like you say, cricket would not be cricket, even if scorebook averages would give a fairer reflection of a batsman's ability.
    Dropped catches are a part of cricket, I have never disputed that, but I really just think they should be remembered rather more than they are. As you can see from my lists, I don't forget them quickly. I really disagree with the notion that most big innings need let-offs, though; it's just something that is said to quicky fob-off any mention of the innings being lesser because of let-offs.
    RD
    Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourth
    (Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.
    chris.hinton: h
    FRAZ: Arshad's are a long gone stories
    RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006

  4. #49
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Originally posted by iamdavid
    One is contradicting one's self :P

    But I agree 100% with everything you say in this post.
    IMO Vaughan is a better middle-order player than he is opener.
    He's easily up-to-standard as a county opener, even at Headingley, but I still think he's better at three or four.


  5. #50
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Originally posted by Mr Mxyzptlk
    You're not one of the Clarke detractors are you?
    Presuming you mean Rikki, no, I'm not. I think he's a pretty good batsman.
    But what has that to do with that part you quoted.

  6. #51
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Mr Mxyzptlk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Trinidad and Tobago (Trinidad)
    Posts
    36,797
    Originally posted by Richard
    Presuming you mean Rikki, no, I'm not. I think he's a pretty good batsman.
    But what has that to do with that part you quoted.
    I was referring to Michael Clarke.

    The intention was to show that that's the same attitude of many Aussie supporters which is getting frowned upon by many non-Aussies (English).

    Clarke is accepted by many as a good enough batsman to play in Tests and seems to be considered a Test success already. He's yet to play one...

  7. #52
    PY
    PY is offline
    International Coach PY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Midlands, UK
    Posts
    10,740
    Originally posted by Richard
    None of them contained any good bowling anyway, but they are odd-outs in the general pattern of being played competently and being exposed as palpably substandard.
    That statement about Steve Harmison makes me think you didn't see that spell of bowling. He took those wickets BUT he also had several ripping deliveries (ie rising cutting off the seam on off-stump) that didn't take wickets.

    Those balls deserved wickets but didn't get them. Surely you can't begrudge him the one's he did get? Think the key is that it all evens itself out when it comes to bowling, not so sure i does with batting but hell, they've scored the runs.

    Why don't you invent a new game if you want one that involves people being finished if they offer a chance? It sure as hell wouldn't be cricket.
    A True Champion - Bob. Rest in peace. 15/04/06
    "People today have too big a devil and too small a God"

    - Stephen Currie

    "The Lord is my light and my salvation; whom shall I fear? The Lord is the strength of my life; of whom shall I be afraid?" Psalm 27:1

  8. #53
    Cricket Web Moderator Neil Pickup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Oxford, England
    Posts
    27,193
    Am I the only one who doesn't think that Geraint Jones is all he's cracked up to be with the bat?

    Granted, haven't seen any of him but he was averaging ~60 for the first half of the season and then fell away quite badly in the second. This is is first year in the CC and finished with an average of 44 and a fairly poor 2/9 conversion rate.

    I want a bit more yet before I'm convinced.
    MSN Messenger: minardineil2000 at hotmail dot com | AAAS Chairman
    CricketWeb Black | CricketWeb XI Captain
    ClarkeWatch: We're Watching Rikki - Are You?

    Up The Grecians - Exeter City FC

    Completing the Square: My Cricket Web Blog

  9. #54
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Mr Mxyzptlk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Trinidad and Tobago (Trinidad)
    Posts
    36,797
    Originally posted by Neil Pickup
    Am I the only one who doesn't think that Geraint Jones is all he's cracked up to be with the bat?

    Granted, haven't seen any of him but he was averaging ~60 for the first half of the season and then fell away quite badly in the second. This is is first year in the CC and finished with an average of 44 and a fairly poor 2/9 conversion rate.

    I want a bit more yet before I'm convinced.
    This is what I've been saying. Hence my mention of Michael Clarke syndrome. Admittedly, Clarke does seem to be a very good batsman, but it's essentially the same thing - people are convinced that he will be a success as a top-class batsman, when he's yet to play a Test.

    I think they should call up Jonathan Batty because he's a Surrey player and Surrey players never get a genuine opportunity. :P Life's a bitch.

  10. #55
    Eyes not spreadsheets marc71178's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    England
    Posts
    63,002
    Originally posted by iamdavid
    His off spin is handy to fill in a few overs as you point out , in fact I recall him taking a seven-for this year , he's probably in the same class as Vaughan as far as bowling is concerned.
    I wouldn't rate him that highly - quite an expensive bowler.
    marc71178 - President and founding member of AAAS - we don't only appreciate when he does well, but also when he's not quite so good!

    Anyone want to join the Society?

    Beware the evils of Kit-Kats - they're immoral apparently.

  11. #56
    Eyes not spreadsheets marc71178's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    England
    Posts
    63,002
    Originally posted by Richard
    Harmison has got wickets only when the batting has been poor: 9 in 1 Test against Bangladesh and 9(?) in 2 Tests against Zimbabwe, neither of whom have very many batsmen you would expect to play well at Test level. His only impressive spells against batsmen who tend to do particularly well are 3 for 55 against India, 4 for 33 against South Africa (both in 1 innings) and 6 for 156 in 3 innings at the end of The Ashes 2002\03.
    So of his 12 matches so far, he's had impressive spells or innings in 7 of them - terrible.



    Originally posted by Richard
    As far as Flintoff goes: has there ever been a worse bowler whose ability continues to be believed in?
    So it's my imagination that he was far ahead of the rest of our seamers in SL then?

  12. #57
    Eyes not spreadsheets marc71178's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    England
    Posts
    63,002
    Originally posted by Richard
    If you really think Flintoff is a better batsman than Geirant Jones, youíre seriously deluding yourself.
    Right - for their counties, Flintoff bats in the top 4 or 5, Jones at 7.

    Flintoff's non-Test average (over about 5 times as many games) is 38.73, whereas Jones has played 1 season for about 41-42.

    Flintoff's recent Test record is more than passable (averaging 40.42 in 2003 and beginning to regularly pass 50 - note that in this time he did not play against Zimbabwe or Bangladesh - where he would almost certainly have made good scores)

    So yes, I do think Flintoff is a better batsman than Jones.

  13. #58
    Eyes not spreadsheets marc71178's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    England
    Posts
    63,002
    Originally posted by Richard
    Just because Kent have enough good batsmen (Fulton, Key, Smith, Symonds, Walker) to bat him at seven when he could perfectly easily be batting three or four for a weaker batting side doesnít take anything away from the runs heís scored.
    Key, Walker - come off it!!!!!!!

    And you think he would make the England team purely as a batsman when he came in after them AND Ealham last season?

    Originally posted by Richard
    Anyway, I canít believe heíll bat below Ealham next season, if he hasnít broken into the England side.
    Of course he won't, but if Ealham had stayed at Kent, I expect he would've done.

  14. #59
    Eyes not spreadsheets marc71178's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    England
    Posts
    63,002
    Originally posted by Richard
    though it would be better if it was Butcher one, Trescothick two, Hussain three, Vaughan four.
    There really is no point picking openers to bat in the middle-order.
    Talk about contradicting yourself!!!!!!

  15. #60
    International Captain
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Kent, UK
    Posts
    7,190
    Originally posted by marc71178
    Key, Walker - come off it!!!!!!!

    And you think he would make the England team purely as a batsman when he came in after them AND Ealham last season?

    Of course he won't, but if Ealham had stayed at Kent, I expect he would've done.

    Firstly you guys need to remember that this was Jonesy first season and nobody really had any clue how he would go, so obviously Fults and the Coach went with experiance and known players ahead of him, and it was basically a like-for-like swap with Nixon, who batted at 6-7 the seasons he was here... Who was a fine batsman to, but was relied for getting a few runs down the order and being able to smash a few if required.

    I also think your under estimating Ealy's the guy was scoring 800-1000 runs every season from 6, so would be a bit harsh on him to drop him down the order for a unkown player


    As for the Walker and Key comment iam shocked, those have been two of our best players in recent season, with Key I think you read to much into his England failures and forget the guy has scored 1,000+ runs for about the last 3/4 seasons, admittly last season was very bad form him but he still managed to come out of it with like 700 runs, and considering how bad he was playing was a fair effort.

    As for Walker iam in pain, the guy has been Mr Consistan with us, he has been in the 1,000+ runs mark every season, not to mention that he has been one of the best One Day players we have ever had, he is our answer to M.Bevan and N.Fairbrother he keeps the scores going and can hit if if wants to, and just to top of the point he ended 2003 with one of his best seasons ever - Considering how poor we were all season to come out of it with a Personal Best was pretty impressive, considering also how many many of our runs Ed Smith scored alone

Page 4 of 10 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •