• 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.

*Official* T20 and ODI matches

Howe_zat

Howe_zat

Audio File
Doesn't Sophia Gardens usually have something there for the spinners? Samit Patel a good call, I daresay the middle order could use reinforcement too.
 
grecian

grecian

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Think they jshould rest Jimmy myself, no point picking up an injury to another key bowler, in a dead rubber, so bring in Samit and Dirtbag for Broad and Jimmy.

Strengthens the batting, weakens the bowling, but if they insist on bowling Bopara, I guess they might give him more then his obligatory couple of overs of his filth.
 
Howe_zat

Howe_zat

Audio File
Broad's out of the return series. Looks like a defeat over there, but we should be able to give them a game.
 
Last edited:
Jacknife

Jacknife

International Captain
Personally thought Finn bowled pretty good and should have had at least a couple more wickets, there was that one that went between keeper and slip and another that Kieswetter should have got to quite comfortably but he had weights round his ankles.
It's been really impressive how much pace he's put on this last year, that first spell, was the fastest by a English bowler in years almost every delivery over 92-94 mph. Nearly all the boundaries he conceded were off edges and miss hits and he proved a very difficult prospect to get away.
If he can continue to learn his game and steadily improve imo he really will be the real deal for England for years to come.
 
Jacknife

Jacknife

International Captain
Hogey said:
In fairness, as a neutral, both rained off games would have gone to India despite their ridiculously bad attack. England got off lucky.
Click to expand...
Don't agree in the slightest, 11 runs from 7 balls you see those kind of numbers knocked off all the time, even with Finn and Anderson in I would have fancied them to do it, especially with India having no death specialist and Finn a capable batsmen.
The first game that got rained off, India posted a par score and got both the openers fairly early but still England had Bell,Trott and Morgan etc to bat, run rate well under 6 runs per over, so it was still very much game on, the same happened yesterday losing the openers early but England still just about chased down the total.
I've been reading this stuff on cricinfo as well, Indian fans saying it really should be 2-2 and England got lucky, I could quite easily say it should be 4-0 if it wasn't for the weather.
 
Last edited:
Furball

Furball

Evil Scotsman
England batted all but 7 balls of their innings and got within 11 runs of India's total. It's not like we were getting owned and the rain washed the game out after 19 overs.
 
Howe_zat

Howe_zat

Audio File
Incidentally, I think this is further evidence that D/L tends to favour the chasing side, in this case because it didn't take into account that tailenders were batting. It can't, obviously, and so it has to take each wicket on average value from Tendulkar to Ed Giddins.

Normally, you wouldn't expect a no.9 and 10 to knock off nine or so runs in the final over, but you might well expect it to happen if it's a no. 10 batting with Mike Hussey or the like. In these cases, I find that D/L usually gives the benefit of the doubt to the chasing team.

Here, though, I think England would have still won. That's because of: a) the pitch playing more and more easily as the game progressed, b) the Indians lacking a proper death bowler, c) Steve Finn is 100% capable of connecting with one to send it into the stands, Australians to confirm, d) I'm sure Broad would have gone for a swing if he had to and e) with ones and twos on offer everywhere, it only needed one boundary.

Not that it matters, obviously. I'm sure you could put together a case as to why India would have won, and the fact that it's a tie seems to reflect that fairly well.
 
Last edited:
Prince EWS

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
Howe_zat said:
Incidentally, I think this is further evidence that D/L tends to favour the chasing side, in this case because it didn't take into account that tailenders were batting. It can't, obviously, and so it has to take each wicket on average value from Tendulkar to Ed Giddins.

Normally, you wouldn't expect a no.9 and 10 to knock off nine or so runs in the final over, but you might well expect it to happen if it's a no. 10 batting with Mike Hussey or the like. In these cases, I find that D/L usually gives the benefit of the doubt to the chasing team.

Here, though, I think England would have still won. That's because of: a) the pitch playing more and more easily as the game progressed, b) the Indians lacking a proper death bowler, c) Steve Finn is 100% capable of connecting with one to send it into the stands, Australians to confirm, d) I'm sure Broad would have gone for a swing if he had to and e) with ones and twos on offer everywhere, it only needed one boundary.

Not that it matters, obviously. I'm sure you could put together a case as to why India would have won, and the fact that it's a tie seems to reflect that fairly well.
Click to expand...
D/L actually does take into consideration the fact that (for example) the tenth wicket is worth less than the first wicket. It can't take into account the specific quality of the batsmen but it does have a function in it for dealing with the sliding scale of a wicket's value.

The problem here was really that it couldn't account for Broad's injury, and that it couldn't take the fact that it was Bopara who got out rather than Finn into consideration. It acted as if a batsman of an entirely unknown quality was batting was a standard #10 with a standard #11 to come. Still seems a bit odd tbh, but it does attempt to do that.
 
Furball

Furball

Evil Scotsman
Prince EWS said:
D/L actually does take into consideration the fact that (for example) the tenth wicket is worth less than the first wicket. It can't take into account the specific quality of the batsmen but it does have a function in it for dealing with the sliding scale of a wicket's value.

The problem here was really that it couldn't account for Broad's injury, and that it couldn't take the fact that it was Bopara who got out rather than Finn into consideration. It acted as if a batsman of an entirely unknown quality was batting was a standard #10 with a standard #11 to come. Still seems a bit odd tbh, but it does attempt to do that.
Click to expand...
How was Duckworth Lewis supposed to take Bopara looking like an international batsman for the first time in his life though?
 
Jono

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
OMM! said:
Not to mention the fact we saw an incredibly worrying sight just before they went off the 1st time. MS Dhoni just stood there almost refusing to let his bowler deliver a ball, pretending to adjust the field, until the Umpires took the players off. It was a Mexican stand-off and the Umpires caved in.

That was unsporting from Dhoni, I'd call it straight up cheating. If you are that sad and desperate to win a sport, then take up darts!
Click to expand...
Turn it up! Both teams were doing it.

Such rubbish.
 
Jacknife

Jacknife

International Captain
Golaxi said:
finn bowls at 95mph?
Click to expand...
Sure does, it was his fastest delivery but he was constantly around 91-94 mph, not a one off as well, did the same while playing for Middlesex on Sky a few weeks ago. All the weights England have had him pumping seems to have paid off.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top