scottdisco
rip this joint please
Simon Hughes --> Chris Gayle
indeed.
indeed.
CRICKET!! breaking news, gossip, lies, whatever etc..
- Thread starter benjybars
- Start date
crackerjack
Well-known member
that really, really sucks
i went to loads when i lived in Manchester. I was there in the mid-90s the day Cork got a hattrick (the first Englishman in decades to do so) in the first over of the day. We arrived 15 mins late
scottdisco
rip this joint please
under this leaden pall of NW8
that's somewhat unfortunate.
our kid was actually at the first day of this one the other day (him and a pal went to the WIndies earlier this year too; lucky skunks), and i txted to ask - Bopara aside - did anybody inspire him?
his somewhat gnomic reply was not overly, Broad did OK.
get your (rain) dancin' shoes on Hucks.
that really, really sucks
i went to loads when i lived in Manchester. I was there in the mid-90s the day Cork got a hattrick (the first Englishman in decades to do so) in the first over of the day. We arrived 15 mins late
that's somewhat unfortunate.
our kid was actually at the first day of this one the other day (him and a pal went to the WIndies earlier this year too; lucky skunks), and i txted to ask - Bopara aside - did anybody inspire him?
his somewhat gnomic reply was not overly, Broad did OK.
get your (rain) dancin' shoes on Hucks.
crackerjack
Well-known member
benjybars
village elder.
nah you're spot on. fuck rugby and formula one.
although dan cricket was shown every summer on terrestrial tv throughout your entire childhood so you shouldn't be a complete cricket wasteman
yeah, i hope this happens. i always got the impression that under the vaughn/fletcher/fairbrother axis (flintoff, harmison, collingwood, geraint jones, ashley giles...etc...) bell wasn't taken as seriously as he could've been. he's not boring - he's just not good at sniping and drinking and taking the mick and giving dead arms, which made him a bit of an outsider under that particular regime...
also warne won't be around this time... he was pretty-much the only australian bowler who could get bell out, even though mcgrath made a point of targeting him..
also, re lack of cricket on terrestrial tv, such a shame. in south africa it's on terrestrial TV in 3 languages - english, afrikaans and xhosa.
crackerjack
Well-known member
Would like to agree with what's been said re Bell. But he just never seems to progress. he's been stuck in 'potential' for four years and has a record of not-very-much against the Aussies, I believe.
So, the pre-tour talk starts here.
Nice walkover against a 2nd rate team who were pissed off they even had to come here. Does it mean anything? I have a horrible feeling England will struggle to get them out all summer, unless the conditions are on Jimmy Anderson's side, when he looks almost unplayable.
Prediction: 3-0 to the Colony of Disgracefuls, damn them.
So, the pre-tour talk starts here.
Nice walkover against a 2nd rate team who were pissed off they even had to come here. Does it mean anything? I have a horrible feeling England will struggle to get them out all summer, unless the conditions are on Jimmy Anderson's side, when he looks almost unplayable.
Prediction: 3-0 to the Colony of Disgracefuls, damn them.
viktorvaughn
Well-known member
I think most of the Guardian opinions are ok.
Forget Vaughn and Harmison, forget Flintoff - if he is fit and playing well it is a bonus but we can't work on the assumption that he will be in the team. He can come in for Bresnan if he looks up to it.
Stick with these guys performing well and have some faith in them i guess!
Forget Vaughn and Harmison, forget Flintoff - if he is fit and playing well it is a bonus but we can't work on the assumption that he will be in the team. He can come in for Bresnan if he looks up to it.
Stick with these guys performing well and have some faith in them i guess!
S
simon silverdollar
Guest
for the ashes i think england should stick with pretty much the same team, but with flintoff in for Bresnan (and get flintoff batting down at 8) and sidebottom in for Onions.
we need someone capable of bowling long spells of very economical bowling in case Hughes or Clarke go berzerk, and sidebottom is pretty much the only bowler capable of this - flintoff is way too fragile nowadays.
still not convinced that bell isn't a fassy.
the problem he's got is that it's not clear what it would take for him to prove that he's ready for a return to Tests...he can score loads of runs in country cricket, but his problem has never been lack of form, it's been loss of concentration when under pressure, and he just won't face that kind of pressure except in tests. horrible catch-22 for him.
we need someone capable of bowling long spells of very economical bowling in case Hughes or Clarke go berzerk, and sidebottom is pretty much the only bowler capable of this - flintoff is way too fragile nowadays.
still not convinced that bell isn't a fassy.
the problem he's got is that it's not clear what it would take for him to prove that he's ready for a return to Tests...he can score loads of runs in country cricket, but his problem has never been lack of form, it's been loss of concentration when under pressure, and he just won't face that kind of pressure except in tests. horrible catch-22 for him.
crackerjack
Well-known member
What's a fassy?
Can't see Bell getting the nod over Colly - he's not all that good, but he'll be deemed necessary as a great team man and a strong, hopefully unifying presence in a team that's had its personnel problems.
S
simon silverdollar
Guest
definitions of fassy vary...it's really just a word i like. it tends to mean an irritating person, with connotations of wimpishness/weakness.
i think Collingwood could have a great Ashes. he's been in good form recently, and if he grinds out a few 100s or 150s in the middle order i can see it really pissing the australians off.
i think Collingwood could have a great Ashes. he's been in good form recently, and if he grinds out a few 100s or 150s in the middle order i can see it really pissing the australians off.
don_quixote
Trent End
did anyone see that empire of cricket programme? they just rewrote history! apparently kevin pietersen won the ashes in 2005. only one mention of flintoff being 'part of the bowling attack', where they somehow failed to mention of simon jones and absolutely no mention of marcus trescothick. but he only put us in winning positions didn't he?
don_quixote
Trent End
and argh i get so annoyed by programmes that only ever talk about the last day of the edgbaston test. it was about so so much more than that.
and lets be honest that oval test innings was good but a lot more is made of it than really should be. the unsung work was done by flintoff and hoggard to bowl the aussies out far far cheaper than they should have been on the sunday morning and then by the weather in making it very very dark on the sunday afternoon.
and lets be honest that oval test innings was good but a lot more is made of it than really should be. the unsung work was done by flintoff and hoggard to bowl the aussies out far far cheaper than they should have been on the sunday morning and then by the weather in making it very very dark on the sunday afternoon.
crackerjack
Well-known member
Yeah, I enjoyed the show, but it's the problem with boiling one of the best series in history down to 5 mins of screen time. The remarkable aspect of that win was that everyone contributed - didn't all the batsman except Bell get at least one century (memory might be hazy here)*? Average opening partnership something like double the Aussies'. All the bowlers had one great performance, even the King of Spain chipped in with 3 wickets one innings.
edit:*all except Tresco, who high scored 90 and averaged 43
Last edited:
benjybars
village elder.
i just watched my complete Ashes 2005 boxset at the weekend (it was a big weekend) ... fuck!! it was such an amazing series. just incredible.
so sad that the lack of terrestrial coverage will prevent that communal feeling of 2005 that pretty much EVERYONE was watching the ashes. i really liked that feeling.
so sad that the lack of terrestrial coverage will prevent that communal feeling of 2005 that pretty much EVERYONE was watching the ashes. i really liked that feeling.
matt b
Indexing all opinion
In a way, this will be good for English cricket- the powers that be have been chasing £££, trying to turn cricket into football (the love of 20-20, test series' in may, selling out to Sky) and this has had a negative affect.
Just about everyone else (players excluded) in cricket now seems to see this as a bad thing; short termism at its worse.
Maybe this summer will be the final nail in the coffin for this approach and we can return to the single 5 or 6 test match series / 2x 3 match series and a slightly less commercially driven game- slightly lower key, but all the better for it.
Last edited:
crackerjack
Well-known member
I don't know if low-key is the answer, since low-key=low cash and the probable desertion of many leading players to the IPL. But they have to stop letting Sky run the game - there couldn't be a more stupid series than the recent one against WI, who they'd just played and whose captain said it was all a waste of time.