• 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.

The One's That Got Away

Richard Rash

U19 Cricketer
marc71178 said:
So you're now saying that SA are weaker than Pakistan, SL, India and Aus?

Aus for certain, but the other 3...

Mind you we knew this would happen, before the last 3 series, it's been expected to be close as the sides are close, but as soon as England started winning it was because the other side were rubbish...
I would say SA are definetly weeker than India and Sri Lanka..Pakistan well i am not so sure. It depends which pakistan team turns up. I don't really rate SA at all anymore. Ever since they came to NZ i stopped rating them as a top three side. England are winning because they are playing good cricket and if they do manage to win this series against SA then they are quite within their rights to call themselves the second best test side in the world.

However IMO they are still a way off from beating Aus.
 

Craig

World Traveller
Mr Mxyzptlk said:
Echoed. Nasser Hussain was a brilliant captain IMO. Mike Brearley tends to agree.
That maybe so, but he never displayed that brilliant captaincy in opting to bowl first against Australia in Brisbane in 2002, and the decision to leave Hoggard out at Perth when conditions would have suited him.

Trust me, I probably watched a lot more of that series then what you did.
 

Craig

World Traveller
marc71178 said:
So you're now saying that SA are weaker than Pakistan, SL, India and Aus?

Aus for certain, but the other 3...

Mind you we knew this would happen, before the last 3 series, it's been expected to be close as the sides are close, but as soon as England started winning it was because the other side were rubbish...
So would you say India played very well against Australia or only because Australia was weakened by injuries in their bowling line-up?
 

Gangster

U19 12th Man
Richard Rash said:
Utter tripe? New Zealand? We have had a horrific injury run and at full strength i don't really think you can regard us as being utter tripe although i think you have a point in saying that even though England have been playing good cricket they have been playing the 3 weakest teams out of the 7 decent opponents
Well, I just meant your test team. Your one-day outfit is phenomenal.
 

Gangster

U19 12th Man
marc71178 said:
So you're now saying that SA are weaker than Pakistan, SL, India and Aus?

Aus for certain, but the other 3...

Mind you we knew this would happen, before the last 3 series, it's been expected to be close as the sides are close, but as soon as England started winning it was because the other side were rubbish...
If you legitimately think that thrashing the West Indies, New Zealand, and now probably South Africa (although there are still 4 tests to go) makes England the #2 side in the world, then by all means feel that way. But you know deep down in your heart of hearts that it isn't true. You know that Andrew Strauss is in some fairytale form, and that soon enough he'll be found out as a mediocre batsman at best. Soon, Flintoff's pixie dust supply will run out and he'll stop scoring runs and taking wickets by the bagful. Then the pressure falls back on the M&M twins, Trescothick and Vaughan. Yeah, good luck. Ashley Giles as your #1 spinner? Don't come knocking on the subcontinent with him. And Harmison's attitude is ridiculous. "Oh, I'll miss my family, I only want to play cricket for a few more years." "Oh, Bangladesh is so dreadfully hot." "Oh, my panties are in a bunch." "Oh!" He doesn't strike me as the kind of guy who rushes to rehab an injury. Hoggard's a decent trier, but he won't have West Indian batting line-ups to extract hat tricks from every day. Geraint Jones? He'll catch something one of these days, don't worry. Robert Key? Or Inzamam, jr., as he's known in cricketing circles. Minus the talent that is.

The real test isn't the Ashes in 2005. It's making it there.
 

badgerhair

U19 Vice-Captain
Neil Pickup said:
Strauss was born in SA to English parents and was brought up in England. That doesn't make him South African.

Still, I don't think England have named a team in recent memory without at least one non-English-born player in it. Caddick, Strauss, Hussain, Hick, Lamb, Smith, Pringle, White, Hollioake, Jones, Mullally...
Make that "living memory", just about. Think Gower, Greig, D'Oliveira, Cowdrey and Dexter, and you're already back to the mid-Fifties.

Cheers,

Mike
 

Deja moo

International Captain
Neil Pickup said:
If someone's born in an aeroplane passing over a country's airspace, does it make them a citizen of that country? I'm not totally aware of the UK immigration rules, but I don't think that merely being born within these borders secures a right to citizenship/residence.
Being born in an aeroplane flying over US airspace automatically confers US citizenship. I assume other countries might have somewhat similar rules for people born on their soil atleast.
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
Gangster said:
If you legitimately think that thrashing the West Indies, New Zealand, and now probably South Africa (although there are still 4 tests to go) makes England the #2 side in the world, then by all means feel that way. But you know deep down in your heart of hearts that it isn't true.
So, who is then?
 

Marius

International Debutant
If India, Sri Lanka or Pakistan come play in South Africa they will be thrashed. India may put up a bit of a fight but that's it. And how can SA be crap, because they have had an iffish year? Just over a year ago, they almost beat England in England, and Sri Lanka and India at home are both hard series. SA is just going through somewhat of a slump, but I expect them to pull back.
 

Craig

World Traveller
Neil Pickup said:
If someone's born in an aeroplane passing over a country's airspace, does it make them a citizen of that country? I'm not totally aware of the UK immigration rules, but I don't think that merely being born within these borders secures a right to citizenship/residence.
Well my cousin went to the UK last year and was able to claim a British passport on the fact his father was born there (and he got it too) and got in easily without going no where near the UK.
 

Swervy

International Captain
Gangster said:
If you legitimately think that thrashing the West Indies, New Zealand, and now probably South Africa (although there are still 4 tests to go) makes England the #2 side in the world, then by all means feel that way. But you know deep down in your heart of hearts that it isn't true. You know that Andrew Strauss is in some fairytale form, and that soon enough he'll be found out as a mediocre batsman at best. Soon, Flintoff's pixie dust supply will run out and he'll stop scoring runs and taking wickets by the bagful. Then the pressure falls back on the M&M twins, Trescothick and Vaughan. Yeah, good luck. Ashley Giles as your #1 spinner? Don't come knocking on the subcontinent with him. And Harmison's attitude is ridiculous. "Oh, I'll miss my family, I only want to play cricket for a few more years." "Oh, Bangladesh is so dreadfully hot." "Oh, my panties are in a bunch." "Oh!" He doesn't strike me as the kind of guy who rushes to rehab an injury. Hoggard's a decent trier, but he won't have West Indian batting line-ups to extract hat tricks from every day. Geraint Jones? He'll catch something one of these days, don't worry. Robert Key? Or Inzamam, jr., as he's known in cricketing circles. Minus the talent that is.

The real test isn't the Ashes in 2005. It's making it there.
you obviously havent watched this England team much in the last year then.

can I ask you who you think is the number two team in the world???
 

badgerhair

U19 Vice-Captain
Swervy said:
you obviously havent watched this England team much in the last year then.

can I ask you who you think is the number two team in the world???
Pound gets you a penny the answer's "India". There's a phalanx of Indian fans convinced that India are near-challengers to Australia, and that therefore any talk of anyone else being number two, especially England, is downright offensive.

Cheers,

Mike
 

BoyBrumby

Englishman
Craig said:
Well my cousin went to the UK last year and was able to claim a British passport on the fact his father was born there (and he got it too) and got in easily without going no where near the UK.
After the introduction of the British Nationality Act (1981) anyone, regardless of their nationality of birth, can qualify for a UK passport if their father ever qualified for one.

Interestingly (& v controversially) the same doesn't apply to British mothers! As Kevin Pietersen's mum is British & his dad is an Afrikaaner it does make me wonder how he qualifies. Of course his birth may've been registered at British embassy when he was born.
 

Marius

International Debutant
As far as I know that law has now changed. If your mother is British you do now qualify for a passport. I knew a guy at school whose mother was Scottish and father Afrikaans and he had a British passport. As an aside, my fiancee's father came to SA from the UK when he was 9 (so he is hardly British, speaks with a South African accent etc.) but because he was born there my fiancee has a British passport, and is a British citizen, although she has never set foot in England in her life.
 

Craig

World Traveller
Good to see people able to take advantage of some loop hole in legislation.

I have always wondered how footballers from South America are able to play in the EPL (or in the championship etc.) straight away, when they have never played for their country or if they have not the required 75% of competitive internationals. Surely they would have a Portugese or Spanish passport, or go play in a country say Belgium and qualify for a EU passport then go to England?

How does this work?
 

BoyBrumby

Englishman
Craig said:
Good to see people able to take advantage of some loop hole in legislation.

I have always wondered how footballers from South America are able to play in the EPL (or in the championship etc.) straight away, when they have never played for their country or if they have not the required 75% of competitive internationals. Surely they would have a Portugese or Spanish passport, or go play in a country say Belgium and qualify for a EU passport then go to England?

How does this work?
The criteria for citizenship varies across EU-member states. Belgium are particularly lax; if you work & reside there for 2 years you can qualify to be a citizen & the only qualification for foreign-nationals getting a work-permit there is having a job to go to. This is why Man U & Arsenal have their little "feeder" teams where they punt their African & South American youths. Two years later & bingo: Belgium citizens!

I'm not so sure about Spain, but I know Edu (the Arsenal Edu!) qualified for a Portuguese passport by virtue of Portuguese grandfather. His dad had to apply for a Portuguese passport & then when he got it Edu qualified from him.

By extension, a British paternal grandfather effectively qualifies you for a UK passport too; provided you can get your Aussie/Kiwi/Saffie dad to apply for a British passport first! :D
 

Marius

International Debutant
BoyBrumby said:
By extension, a British paternal grandfather effectively qualifies you for a UK passport too; provided you can get your Aussie/Kiwi/Saffie dad to apply for a British passport first! :D
Not true. As far as I know you can only get it if your father was born in the UK. My aunt married the son of a Scot. He is eligible for a British passport, but even if he gets it, his children (my cousins) can only get ancestry visas, not full passports.
 

Top