• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Search results

  1. Matt79

    Sheep Draft Version 2.0

    btw, my team's name is "Underwater Attack Tigers". Yes, they're really THAT cool! :-O
  2. Matt79

    Sheep Draft Version 2.0

    My final XI: Len Hutton* (6971 @ 56.67, 19 100s) Conrad Hunte (3245 @ 45.06, 8 100s) Ted Dexter (4502 @ 47.89, 9 100s. 66 wks @ 34.93, 1.1 wpm) Greg Chappell (7110 @ 53.86, 24 100s) Seymour Nurse (2523 @ 47.60, 6 100s) Jack Gregory (1146 @ 36.96, 2 100s, 85 wks @ 31.15, 3.5 wpm, 4 5w) Rashid...
  3. Matt79

    Sheep Draft Version 2.0

    I'll post properly tonight when I finish work. The hard choice for me is whether I drop Bopara and go with only five specialist bats, or Hughes and have a sheep in my batting line up and only four specialist bowlers (which would be ok given one of them is Murali). I'm going to back Hughes to...
  4. Matt79

    Sheep Draft Version 2.0

    You're a **** :ph34r:
  5. Matt79

    Sheep Draft Version 2.0

    Was Gilly nominated in 12AA?
  6. Matt79

    Sheep Draft Version 2.0

    Don't **** up my story man... :@ :laugh:
  7. Matt79

    Sheep Draft Version 2.0

    Resent
  8. Matt79

    Sheep Draft Version 2.0

    That's the second time Bradman has been available according to the question's criteria and the second time I've missed out due to ONE other person deciding to nominate him. Not surprised that no-one banned him, disappointed that Michaelf777777777 screwed up an otherwise fine plan. :(
  9. Matt79

    Why were Waqar Younis & Azhar Mahmood punished?

    Oh Jono, really. The intention has to be relevant surely...
  10. Matt79

    Why were Waqar Younis & Azhar Mahmood punished?

    Anderson should have been IMO. Still find the use of the term "racist" in regards to Darryl Hair objectionable, but hey, let's not get into all that again.
  11. Matt79

    Sheep Draft Version 2.0

    12A sent.
  12. Matt79

    Sheep Draft Version 2.0

    Lol Joe. Thought about taking McGrath but figured there was no way he'd still be free. There were probably better options than Hughes but I really didn't want a sheep in this round and Merv is a damn fine, albeit obviously not all time great, bowler. Happy with my XI: Hutton (6971 @ 56.67)...
  13. Matt79

    Sheep Draft Version 2.0

    Sent again. Given the number of passes that have occurred, expecting another fail - there are some horrible sheep for Q11. :(
  14. Matt79

    *Official* Pakistan in Australia

    He's been better than that with the ball this season. Whether that lasts is another question, but he's been comfortably better than Siddle with the ball in the past few matches.
  15. Matt79

    *Official* Pakistan in Australia

    Overflowing with PEWS love at the moment.
  16. Matt79

    Sheep Draft Version 2.0

    Given round 11 is still going, would be a bit hard.
  17. Matt79

    England and ball-tampering?

    With tongue at least partially in cheek however. Although we often get a pretty big bite. Guilty consciences I guess. ;) Can't help but wonder however what the reaction would be if it were a young Pakistani bowler observed doing either of these two actions...
  18. Matt79

    Sheep Draft Version 2.0

    Sent
  19. Matt79

    England and ball-tampering?

    Re Brumby's point on spin, I'd agree that there are Blair-like levels of spin bring generated by himself and Z in here. No wonder Inzi was upset at the Oval!
  20. Matt79

    England and ball-tampering?

    Bit of a theme with Poms. Dirt in a pocket, mints in the mouth, spikes into the ball. Poor form indeed.

Top