I think this is a good point - would have been easy to take the easy option and play 2 tests, but instead we're squeezing 3 in. If that means starting this test on a Tuesday, even if it means I don't get to watch much of it, then that's fine.
Did McCullum say whether he would have batted or bowled?
Oi, ****. Any accountant worth their salt also knows that having days 2 & 3 of a Test on the weekend maximises revenue $$$ too. Practicality is one thing, but the $$$ argument works both ways.
I didn't see, but when I saw the wicket, even knowing how flat Dunedin has been recently, I would have bowled. So I sympathise with Sammy there.
Sammy is always a much better proposition as a cricketer when you're not watching him play cricket.
From the commentary I gather Windies bowlers have occasionally hit a good line and length and have challenged the batsmen and sometimes beaten the bat when they've done that. Would surely expect Southee and Boult to hit that spot a lot more frequently at the very least.
yeah. I certainly think had we had won the toss it wouldn't have been a dreadful decision. But when you're Best pace bowler averages 39...
I think Sammy thought that if they bowl first then we can't so he neutralises a relatively strong bowling line up.
Yes but with their top order they really shouldn't be willingly batting first on a pitch with any grass
Yeah, that's also true.
Haha. So although the teams are quite evenly matched, WI were ****ed either way today.
