India V Kenya

[luckyeddie]

Is your avatar your own budgie, Scaly Piscine? He's a beaut. (great name, btw - let me introduce you to our Norwegian member, Samuel_Vimes. He's obsessed by fish too, as all Norwegians are).

Collingwood's one of those players who is worth at least 10 runs in the field

 

[Scaly piscine]

Yes that's my budgie in it's youthful days, this name is actually a quote from Red Dwarf. I think Collingwood's worth becomes apparent if you imagine him replaced by someone like Robert Key, although I might be slightly biased being a Durham fan. I just hope that there isn't a rush to find someone to make way for Pietersen.

 

[luckyeddie]

Yes that's my budgie in it's youthful days, this name is actually a quote from Red Dwarf. I think Collingwood's worth becomes apparent if you imagine him replaced by someone like Robert Key, although I might be slightly biased being a Durham fan. I just hope that there isn't a rush to find someone to make way for Pietersen.

I picked up the Dwarf quote - from the 'Polymorph' episode, IIRC

If I'm wrong, I'll let myself trout.

 

[Neil Pickup]

You're not wrong. Kryten describing Rimmer's mother, I do believe.

 

[luckyeddie]

You're not wrong. Kryten describing Rimmer's mother, I do believe.

Very prim, very proper, almost austere.....

"He's so energetic! I honestly thought my false teeth were going to fall out."

ALPHABETTI SPAGHETTI?!!!

My all-time favourite episode


Warning.
Contents 2

 

[tooextracool]

46* off 52b v WI (guided England to victory),...

if you had in fact watched that innings you would have seen that it was one of the msot appalling innings ever. both collingwood and read looked totally out of depth against bradshaw and a few other bowlers.

80*, 79*, 46*, 38, 20, 10, 5, 4, 4, 2, 1 - 289 runs @ 36.13 with only 5 definite failures.

oh so scoring 10 and 20 arent failures then?you wouldnt mind it if collingwood averaged 15?
interestingly enough you add his innings against zimbabwe, which doesnt prove anything at all.

You could go back another 10-15 innings and the figures are better.

err yes i know....which is why i said that collingwood hasnt done anything in the last year

Pick any batsman in the world and you'll get plenty of failures, although most of them don't field anywhere near as well as Collingwood...

and i know how well he fields and i have not once said that he should be dropped. the fact is that he isnt scoring consistently, and certain people on here were going on talking about how much more successful he is than yuvraj.

 

[luckyeddie]

Go easy on the newun, TEC, y'all.

He don' mean nuthin' - apart from the fact that, being from Durham, he might see rather a lot of Collingwood and recognise the guy's class.

Or bias might have som.... (voice fades into distance)

 

[marc71178]

if you had in fact watched that innings you would have seen that it was one of the msot appalling innings ever. both collingwood and read looked totally out of depth against bradshaw and a few other bowlers.

Yet he still played through it and got 46* at almost run a ball...

 

[tooextracool]

yep by smashing sarwan all over the park.......and i havent called that innings a failure, it just wasnt a success.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Soooooo scoring 46* and winning the game isn't a success?!?

10, 5, 4, 4, 2 were the 'failures'
he got 1 and was out with 1 ball left and 20 and was out with 7 balls left, even in your 'system' you surely can't expect people to rack up a half-century in those situations. (I recognise arguing using logic goes way over his head but it's worth a try)

 

[tooextracool]

oh he didnt win the game at all, the game was won by trescothick and strauss quite early.
ok then 5 failures and 1 success, still not consistent if you ask me.

 

[Scaly piscine]

oh he didnt win the game at all, the game was won by trescothick and strauss quite early.
ok then 5 failures and 1 success, still not consistent if you ask me.

So if he gets 0 England still win the game do they??? Strauss & Read in with Batty and 3 rabbits to come, 93 runs to get with 21 overs or so left. As far as I'm concerned 5 of those innings were over 30 so are positive contributions and you can add another one to that as he scored 39 against Sri Lanka. Going by your gormless method of judging success I doubt even Bradman at his pomp would of had as much success as failure.

 

[luckyeddie]

I doubt even Bradman at his pomp would of had as much success as failure.

Nope.

80 innings, 29 tons, 13 fifties.
That's 42 successes and 38 failures.

pwn3d by TEC on your own admission - hang your head.

(nice use of 'gormless', BTW)

 

[tooextracool]

So if he gets 0 England still win the game do they??? Strauss & Read in with Batty and 3 rabbits to come, 93 runs to get with 21 overs or so left. As far as I'm concerned 5 of those innings were over 30 so are positive contributions and you can add another one to that as he scored 39 against Sri Lanka. Going by your gormless method of judging success I doubt even Bradman at his pomp would of had as much success as failure.

how can someone 'win the game' when 2 other batsman scored more than him? rubbish the game was already won early when tresco hammered the 82 off 57, unless we saw a collapse of the 90s proportions there was no way we would have lost. all collingwood had to do was survive with strauss and then just put away some of the rubbish that sarwan was bowling. he did the job well enough, but certainly doesnt make his innings a match winning one.

 

[Scaly piscine]

how can someone 'win the game' when 2 other batsman scored more than him? rubbish the game was already won early when tresco hammered the 82 off 57, unless we saw a collapse of the 90s proportions there was no way we would have lost. all collingwood had to do was survive with strauss and then just put away some of the rubbish that sarwan was bowling. he did the job well enough, but certainly doesnt make his innings a match winning one.

I didn't say he'd won the game individually single-handed (no-one ever can, it's a team game after all), just that he (or the team) won and that's a success as he contributed significantly to the victory.

 

[tooextracool]

I didn't say he'd won the game individually single-handed (no-one ever can, it's a team game after all), just that he (or the team) won and that's a success as he contributed significantly to the victory.

then you worded it wrongly when you said that ' he won the game' when in fact that had to do with tresco's innings and even strauss' to an extent. the only thing that you can possibly say about collingwoods innings was that he contributed to the success and survived till the end.

 

[marc71178]

46 not out is more than just surviving.

Had he gone cheaply I have my doubts the win would've happened.

 

[Scaly piscine]

then you worded it wrongly when you said that ' he won the game' when in fact that had to do with tresco's innings and even strauss' to an extent. the only thing that you can possibly say about collingwoods innings was that he contributed to the success and survived till the end.

If you're gonna quote me, get the quote right in the first place. I said:

Soooooo scoring 46* and winning the game isn't a success?!?


If you can't even get that right what hope is there of you getting anything else right?

 

[Magrat Garlick]

(great name, btw - let me introduce you to our Norwegian member, Samuel_Vimes. He's obsessed by fish too, as all Norwegians are).

Yup. And you're obsessed by ducks, just like every Derbyshire player.