Critique all you like, yet as a wise man one said.
"Don't be a dick."
My 20/20 squad
I reckon we got a decent bowling attack for Twenty 20 even without Murali, as Chandana likely to replace him. Bandara seems to have gone down the 'Anderson/Dilhara' net bowler route. I don't understand why they don't release these guys to play domestic or A cricket, instead of just doing on one tour after another without bowling in a match.
But back to my point, Vaas has always been a good One Day bowler with his change ups, i reckon that will come in handy in Twenty20. Malinga and his ability to bowl at the death could be awsome in Twenty20. Jayasuriya, Dilshan and Chandana are handy at changing things up in ODIs to keep it tight, especially Jayasuriya at the depth. The real weakness is Dilhara but his slower balls might come in handy when batsmen are looking to increase the speed of run/rate regularly.
Batting is a bit hit and miss due to our high number of stroke payers, over hitters. But if Jayasuriya gets doing it could be game over. Sangakkara and Jayawardene have improved a lot and i think will be suited to this format. The question i guess is the slow starters in Silva and Tharanga. The aggressive but inconsistent Dilshan and Muburak/Kapu. But Dilshan has shown a liking to this format in the some of the matches i've seen. Chandana, Vaas and Maharoof could be handy down the order is they get going as well.
The talk is of resting Vaas and Sangakkara as well, so i think that will reduce our chances dramatically due the crapess of Maharoof (ATM still reckon he has potential) and Prassana Jayawardene. But at full strength I think we have a handy Twenty20 side.
The man, the mountain, the Mathews. The greatest all rounder since Keith Miller. (Y)
Jaffna Jets CC (Battrick & FTP)
RIP WCC and CW Cricket
Member of the MSC, JMAS and CVAAS
Got spanked by Australia
Tied with West Indies (won the bowl out, but that's besides the point - the rules equally could have meant they'd lost on more wickets lost)
Lost to Sri Lanka and then beat them when they gave Murali & Jayasuriya a rest.
That's not particularly impressive.
The West Indies match was fun, Cairns's last outing I believe and IMO should have just stayed as a tie, but the bowl out was an amusing enough affair for all the players. You I see lightly slid past a victory against SA in SA but ah well, can't win em all eh?
Other than the shortened match against SL, we have so far had a great record in 20/20 and your argument against the teams ability at the game I feel is unbased, at least to the extent you are suggesting it exists at.
TBH NZ record is pretty average really, I haven't seen anything to show they have a good record. Being competitive and scoring decent totals equals a good record? Are we talking about Kenya or New Zealand here. In 5 matches they have won 2, lost 2 and tied 1 (official the results stands as a Tie for some reason). Not really results of a side that has dominated Twenty20 like you guys seem to be trying to claim.
50/50 record including a game against a dramatically weakened Sri Lanka. Given it's NZ they'll only be worse when it comes down to the World Cup, where they've shown plenty of times they can't raise their game while others can - you don't win anything for being slightly above average there.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)