*Official* Group B Discussion - South Africa, Sri Lanka, New Zealand, England

[99*]

Originally Posted by thierry henry

That's completely beside the point. You just don't do crap like that. When was the last time you saw a player dismissed in that fashion? Only McCullum does things like that, in the whole of international cricket. Same with the infamous Mpofu and Muralitharan "congratulating a partner on a century/half-century" run-outs. Same with the "massive completely random appeal for a non-existent edge" I complained about in the CH series last year.

Bull****, how is what McCullum does any different to every bowler that throws the ball back at the stumps? How is it any different to a keeper who waits for the batsman to overbalance before stumping him?

What would you rather him do? Not try and get these people out, what is that going to achieve in the long run, an award for sportsman of the year and **** all else. I'm sorry but that's not good enough, if I want to see good sportsmanship I'll go to a high school game, not an ODI or Test.

[Days of Grace]

Agree.

Sounds like these idiots back in NZ that devised the ****ed idea that there be no competition in elementary school because no child wants to feel like a loser.

[Days of Grace]

Originally Posted by Flem274*

170/2 after 30 tactic is good for a top order of How, Astle, Fleming or something.

170/2 after 30 overs is a very hard thing to achieve even with the best ODI top 4 of all time.

[Athlai]

Originally Posted by zinzan12

What a load a tripe, where to you get your facts from, the telephone book?....Mole's ain't an in your face type of coach for a start & we all know McCullum is a strong personality & is his own man. There's no way Mole's determines the way McCullum generally plays. Some helpful advise at times ...maybe, but McCullum still makes his own decisions.

If anyone is likely to have a bigger influence than Moles, it's Vettori.

At times you really do say things that just ain't so, yet state it with such apparent authority, particularly when you've been called out on argument & presumably do it to over-compensate, I'm not sure. Classic example here, T Henry correctly points out that he when McCullum scores more slowly he doesn't actually score more runs, so to counter that you claim "Mole is making him do it"...

T-Henry agreed that Moles is making him do it? Or at least has suggested for him to do it? Moles was pretty open about how he thought a one day innings should be constructed.

[Athlai]

Originally Posted by thierry henry

There cannot possibly be merit to it UNLESS MCCULLUM IS LIKELY TO SCORE MORE RUNS THAN HE WOULD IF HE ATTACKED.

Otherwise there cannot possibly be any merit to it.

Partnerships do not build without runs.

I know its blunting McCullum's run scoring slightly (though it isn't as though he never scores runs anymore). The young guns at the other end are the attackers while McCullum rotates the strike.

I totally agree that this makes McCullum less useful at the top of the order. Just seems to be useful for letting Ryder and Guptill establish themselves in an attacking role at the other end.

As I've said a dozen times. I DONT AGREE WITH THIS. I WANT MCCULLUM TO ATTACK TOO,

All the abuse is getting pretty frustrating.

[Howsie]

Originally Posted by Flem274*

170/2 after 30 tactic is good for a top order of How, Astle, Fleming or something. When you have McCullum and Ryder opening though it seems a bit pointless.

Tactics should lend themselves to the players you have. We have to wrong opening partnership to play defensively.

McCullum also imo doesn't have the defensive technique yet to play that role. Would be great if he developed one but it hasn't happened yet.

Agree.

[thierry henry]

As I've said a dozen times. I DONT AGREE WITH THIS. I WANT MCCULLUM TO ATTACK TOO

ok

Just don't see why you're offering an "explanation" of the method when it is inexplicable.

We all know what Moles is trying to do, and we all know that it makes no sense.

[thierry henry]

Originally Posted by 99*

Bull****, how is what McCullum does any different to every bowler that throws the ball back at the stumps? How is it any different to a keeper who waits for the batsman to overbalance before stumping him?

What would you rather him do? Not try and get these people out, what is that going to achieve in the long run, an award for sportsman of the year and **** all else. I'm sorry but that's not good enough, if I want to see good sportsmanship I'll go to a high school game, not an ODI or Test.

McCullum is the only guy in international cricket who does this kind of stuff as often as he does. He is the worst offender. I absolutely believe that. It's nothing to do with winning a sportsmanship award, it's simply about not being the biggest cheating prick in the world (of international cricket).

[99*]

Originally Posted by thierry henry

McCullum is the only guy in international cricket who does this kind of stuff as often as he does. He is the worst offender. I absolutely believe that. It's nothing to do with winning a sportsmanship award, it's simply about not being the biggest cheating prick in the world(of international cricket).

Give one example of McCullum cheating, show me an example of where McCullum has broken one of rules of cricket. It is not cheating when you take advantage of your opponents ignorance of the rules. Murali should know better then to walk out of his crease before the ump calls dead ball, Collingwood should know better than to stand outside of his crease before over is called. McCullum did not break the rules in those examples, all he did was take advantge of his oponents stupidity. You can complain about appealing for a 'non-catch' all you want but then your accusing nearly every player in the game of it as well, because it happens everywhere.

Is it against the spirit of the game and unsportsman-like, yes, without a doubt. But in no way is it cheating.

[Athlai]

Originally Posted by thierry henry

ok

Just don't see why you're offering an "explanation" of the method when it is inexplicable.

We all know what Moles is trying to do, and we all know that it makes no sense.

Well if McCullum didn't get out in the 40s so much it would probably work better. The problem is he simply isn't a good enough batsman for this to ever really work.
Though an interesting thing to note is how long Baz has lasted in the innings:
08: (15 innings)
Less than 10 overs: 8 times
10-20 overs: 3 times
20+: 4 times (two in big chases vs. England, 1 against Ireland)

09: (17 innings)
Less than 10 overs: 7 times
10-20: 4 times
20+: 6 times

Would really be interested in knowing what the strategy would be if everything went according to plan. Is Baz supposed to launch or play to the end while the other end does? So far in this CT I have been mildly pleased with his innings only to throw something at the TV when he gets out on 40.
In those innings he has left us at:
23.1 92/3
21.5 128/2
12.3 84/1

[Athlai]

McCullum doesn't break the rules but he certainly bends them.

[thierry henry]

Three times now he has "run out" a batsman after they have completed a run and gone to celebrate a milestone, or gone for a mid-pitch conversation at the end of an over, having touched their bat down in the crease.

Three times. Tell me one other 'keeper in world cricket who does that?

I can't understand the mentality of anyone who thinks that isn't a pissweak way to try to earn a wicket.

[Howsie]

Originally Posted by Athlai

Well if McCullum didn't get out in the 40s so much it would probably work better. The problem is he simply isn't a good enough batsman for this to ever really work.
Though an interesting thing to note is how long Baz has lasted in the innings:
08: (15 innings)
Less than 10 overs: 8 times
10-20 overs: 3 times
20+: 4 times (two in big chases vs. England, 1 against Ireland)

09: (17 innings)
Less than 10 overs: 7 times
10-20: 4 times
20+: 6 times

Would really be interested in knowing what the strategy would be if everything went according to plan. Is Baz supposed to launch or play to the end while the other end does? So far in this CT I have been mildly pleased with his innings only to throw something at the TV when he gets out on 40.
In those innings he has left us at:
23.1 92/3
21.5 128/2
12.3 84/1

I vote option three, 84/1 of 12 overs

[99*]

Originally Posted by thierry henry

Three times now he has "run out" a batsman after they have completed a run and gone to celebrate a milestone, or gone for a mid-pitch conversation at the end of an over, having touched their bat down in the crease.

Three times. Tell me one other 'keeper in world cricket who does that?

I can't understand the mentality of anyone who thinks that isn't a pissweak way to try to earn a wicket.

Of course it pissweak, so what? You'd rather he not take those chances just so that if that person does get out, its in a way that doesn't create an issue.

[Athlai]

Originally Posted by Howsie

I vote option three, 84/1 of 12 overs

Option 2 is good too.