Harmison 12(3)
Flintoff 36(7)
England 48 all out :P
Harmison 12(3)
Flintoff 36(7)
England 48 all out :P
Or something.
RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990 - 15/4/2006
Difference between those two is, Harmison can bat....Originally Posted by one_dayer
Yeah, I bet Afridi can't play the reverse sweep like Harmy. Harmy's gonna break Afridi's 37-ball hundred record in the Ashes ODIs next year, you heard it here first!Originally Posted by Langeveldt
![]()
In Srinath's 5 innings in WC99 he batted as follows: nine, eight, eight, eight, seven.Originally Posted by Barney Rubble
Harmison did indeed hammer a Lee Full-Toss over mid-wicket for four, in fact, but it was perhaps the best moment of The Ashes - no credit for Harmison, just great to see one of Australia's most beloved sons humiliated by an Englishman who can't bat for $hit. The ultimate symbol of how the series had turned.
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.RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006
No, difference is, Afridi's got a shedload of talent that he's totally wasted for the last 2 years; Harmison is massively overrated after a few slog-fests against a totally clueless attack recently.Originally Posted by Langeveldt
I'd like to see him (or, rather, I wouldn't) do that to Nel and Ntini in 5 months' time.
Carter's continued presence at the top of Warwicks' order in one-day-cricket is one of the more infuriating things for me.Originally Posted by Langeveldt
It's reached the phase where Nick Knight, England's greatest ever one-day player and an opener and nothing else, has been forced to bat three of times this season.
Mark Wagh, also a natural opener in the one-day game (not so in the First-Class game IMO), hasn't batted there.
Carter is basically a number-eleven and whenever he makes 5 or less I laugh emphatically.
No, it's not fun, not if good bowlers are involved.Originally Posted by Swervy
There is absolutely nothing worse, for me, than seeing good bowlers slogged by tail-enders.
Fun seeing crap ones slogged, though - like Harmison being hammered all over The Oval by Harbhajan.![]()
So The NatWest Challenge has been renamed "The Ashes ODIs", now, then?Originally Posted by Barney Rubble
![]()
What exactly is so bad about it?No, it's not fun, not if good bowlers are involved.
There is absolutely nothing worse, for me, than seeing good bowlers slogged by tail-enders.
Fun seeing crap ones slogged, though - like Harmison being hammered all over The Oval by Harbhajan
Last edited by Waughney; 04-09-2004 at 07:33 AM.
Member of MSC - Murali Supporters Club
I'm not too dissimilar a batsman to Bradman.
Both of us have batting averages below 100.
Players who shouldn't really be scoring any runs either messing-up figures or compounding agony.
Nothing worse for me than seeing a good player made to look bad by someone who isn't really good enough to be doing so, and under normal circumstances wouldn't have a cat-in-hell's chance of doing so.
All part of the game Richard, all part of the game. The 'normal circumstances' (for tailenders) aren't when the ball is new and when the bowler is at his prime, but when the ball is old and bowlers are tired.Originally Posted by Richard
I'd take seeing a tail-ender against the new-ball every time. Then we'd see a much more proper reflection of their ability.![]()
Still, even in normal circumstances (older ball) the good bowler will oust the useless slogger more often than not.
It's the anomalies that annoy me.
So you get annoyed when England winsIt's the anomalies that annoy me.![]()
Except that, in Test-matches in 2004, them not winning has been very much the anomaly.![]()
![]()
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)