NationStates Jolt Archive

Lee just got Bell with an absolute screamer of a ball. All you can do to those is hope it goes past the edge.

I've never been convinced about Ding-dong.

To be frank, Parnesar had 1/60 or thereabouts before that great one-day player Symonds decided to take the matter in hand. Australia would be in a far better position for the second innings, and the next two tests, with Martyn instead of him in the team.

Great fielder tho :rolleyes:

Oh and apologies for Aussie fans. I picked Ponting as my first innings batsman in my fantasy cricket game. He was doomed to fail as soon as I clicked 'confirm'.

To be frank, Parnesar had 1/60 or thereabouts before that great one-day player Symonds decided to take the matter in hand. Australia would be in a far better position for the second innings, and the next two tests, with Martyn instead of him in the team.
Hey, he made more than Martyn did last time, if I recall correctly. :p

And besides, the fact that Symonds got into a fight he was bound to lose eventually (not an accident, if you ask me, the plan would've been to demoralise Monty thoroughly) doesn't change that there were four more wickets Panesar took.

He bowled well today, I don't think anyone can dispute that. The whole of the English attack did, showing once more that you can play Australia well, you just have to try. Too many sides don't seem to have enough self-belief to take the fight to them.

Oh and apologies for Aussie fans. I picked Ponting as my first innings batsman in my fantasy cricket game. He was doomed to fail as soon as I clicked 'confirm'.

You're forgiven. He dodged a bullet not enforcing the follow-on in the second test, and I for one think he had it coming for being cocky.
Smirking bastard will probably get a double-century in the second innings and enforce a draw :rolleyes:

Hey, he made more than Martyn did last time, if I recall correctly. :p

And besides, the fact that Symonds got into a fight he was bound to lose eventually (not an accident, if you ask me, the plan would've been to demoralise Monty thoroughly) doesn't change that there were four more wickets Panesar took.

He bowled well today, I don't think anyone can dispute that. The whole of the English attack did, showing once more that you can play Australia well, you just have to try. Too many sides don't seem to have enough self-belief to take the fight to them.
The 17 off one over was proof to me Aussie's plan was to try to destroy Monty's self-confidence. This certainly wasn't a bad plan all things considered - the pressure on him from all sides going into this test must have been enormous.
I think it showed his quality that he was able to bounce back from that and take two wickets in the next two overs.
Plan definitely back-fired on the Aussies. Be interesting to see how they play him in their 2nd innings.

Well there you have it...

Well done Monty...but as the poster above says...lets see how they play it out...

At least its a proper game now!

You have to wonder how England would have fared with Monty in the side for Brisbane, or even just Adelaide. :rolleyes:

The first session today will be crucial.

If England bat well, they can set themselves up for a win & get themselves back in the Ashes.

If they collapse again, it'll pretty much be all over for them.

I want England to win this match, so that its at least a contest on Boxing Day. It really is kinda crap when you go to a game and its already a foregone conclusion.

And for the conspiracy theorists: Do you think some guy in a suit downstairs will tell Australia to throw the game? If they win this, the next two games will be flops, with bad performances and low crowd attendance, and all in all will result in less money for those in charge. Just thought I'd throw the idea out there ;)

*Puts on patriotic hat*

ENGLAND!

In a all seriousness, another real close one, but we do have a good chance. Look out for more first class bowling and comedic fielding from Panesar.

Should....have ....played.... from.... the .....start!!!!

Should....have ....played.... from.... the .....start!!!!

Absolutely! Well maybe not at the Gabba...

In other cricket news, its a beautiful sunny day in Wellington and Kumar Sangakkara is destroying New Zealand. I should have gone down to the ground to watch..

In other cricket news, its a beautiful sunny day in Wellington and Kumar Sangakkara is destroying New Zealand. I should have gone down to the ground to watch..

If I wasn't going down to Christchurch in a few hours I'd be there.

Absolutely! Well maybe not at the Gabba...

He couldn't have done worse than Giles did.

In other cricket news, its a beautiful sunny day in Wellington and Kumar Sangakkara is destroying New Zealand. I should have gone down to the ground to watch..

Sounds like an exciting game. Sri Lanka all out for 268, with Sangakkara making 150 of them. NZ 4/66 in reply!



Edit: England all out for 215, 29 runs behind Aus. Good partnership of 40 from Panesar & Harmison, the highest one of the England innings!

Well, England all out for 215.

Good last-wicket stand by Panesar and Harmison but our lead strikers and mid-order went out WAY too easy (OK so Strauss I think was Not Out but that' how it goes...).

Here's hoping we can hammer their front-batsmen before the close of play.

HOLY SHIT!

Langer out on the first ball!

Things are looking up a little :D

Australia now 1/82, 111 runs ahead of England. The Poms desparately need wickets, the Ashes are quickly slipping away from them this afternoon.

Stumps on day two. Australia are 1/119, 148 runs ahead, both Ponting & Hayden undefeated on 57. Looking very bad for England.

Although England can still win, it looks like Ponting is going to lead the team to another victory. Kind of a shame that the series will be over after three games, but then again I would love to see us win it back 5-0. :D

He couldn't have done worse than Giles did.

Damn! You know I totally forgot that Giles played in the First Test! Doh!

91 for 1...25 overs...

In other cricket news, its a beautiful sunny day in Wellington and Kumar Sangakkara is destroying New Zealand. I should have gone down to the ground to watch..
That is what Sunday is for.


England probably would have lost as badly as the did in the first 2 tests with or without Monty, he would just be a band aid and they wouldn't actually be putting it on the wound.

Giles may be nothing special but England had a team effort of suckyness.
2nd test they fell to shit in the batting.

You idiotic poms, you will probably try and survive the next 3 days and hope for a draw and hopy you can wint he next two matchs *starts laughing uncontrolably*.
Anyways, you guys look to short term, trying to save runs, you bowl defensively, force flintoff to take out the slips and before you know it the best batsman in the world and the best opener in the world (maybe not on current form but he'll bounce back with big century here) have got 50's. Now if they survive the first 20 minutes tomorrow they will bat all day, they will bat you out of the game and warne will bowl you all out on the 4th day (and 5th day if you survive that far which i doubt).
You people need to stop having such a defensive mindset. When warne or lee or mcgrath or clark get hit for a four they don't mind and rarely push a fielder back because of a boundary. They are confident enough to expect a mistake, which the poms are not. That is why you will lose at least 4-0 and a likely 5-0 whitewash.
I regret voting for a narrow australian win on this poll at the start of the series, should of selected the pulp one.





HAIL AUSTRALIA!

That is what Sunday is for.


England probably would have lost as badly as the did in the first 2 tests with or without Monty, he would just be a band aid and they wouldn't actually be putting it on the wound.

I don't know about that. Monty would have been able to take a few wickets in Adelaide, and that could well have been enough in the first innings to keep Australia behind a lot more and to slow them done or bowl them out in the second innings (which is obviously harder to predict assuming day two and three went differently).

Ponting back to what he usually does then. And he plays wrist bowlers pretty well.
Century 34 is it?
Personally I hope Monty bounces back and gets another 5 bag. It shows up the English selectors and I like spinners over seam bowlers

Aside from Murghy of course. The little cheat.

Monty breaks the partnership and then takes Symonds for the second time in the match. Gilchrist in on the pair..

Gilchrist in on the pair..



Well so much for that... 57 ball century for Gilchrist. Viv Richards almost lost another one of his big records - his 56 ball hundred.

Gilchrist makes up for his 1st innings duck by having a go at breaking Viv Richards fastest century record.
Poor thing fails to beat it by 2 balls. Gotta feel sorry for him. Bet the English players do.:p

England one for none in persuit of 557. You can do it!

England one for none in persuit of 557. You can do it!

Amazing. Three centuries within the same day from guys who weren't in at the start of play. And Gilly's smashing the ball around everywhere. And England being 1/0. What a day.

Just when you think England could pull it back they give it up. Again.

:headbang:

That century by Gilchrist was phenomenal, I've never seen anything like it. I was sitting there with my jaw open, gobsmacked, alternating with hoots of laughter as he audaciously smashed 6 after 6. Outstanding! :)

That century by Gilchrist was phenomenal, I've never seen anything like it. I was sitting there with my jaw open, gobsmacked, alternating with hoots of laughter as he audaciously smashed 6 after 6. Outstanding! :)

*cries* Well at least we got stuffed, as opposed to a 2 wicket victory.

That century by Gilchrist was phenomenal, I've never seen anything like it.


I enjoyed Nathan Astles 153 ball double hundred more :p The second hundred in that innings was in 39 balls.

I enjoyed Nathan Astles 153 ball double hundred more :p The second hundred in that innings was in 39 balls.
To be fair to GIlchrist, his 2nd 50 was in 17 balls.

What a century from Gilly, he just belted everyone. I guess he's back in form now.

*cries* Well at least we got stuffed, as opposed to a 2 wicket victory.
We haven't lost it yet!

Ok, yes we have. How embarrassing. 3-0 after three tests.

We haven't lost it yet!

Ok, yes we have. How embarrassing. 3-0 after three tests.
Not just 3 nil either.
3 arse-kicked, too embarassed to be seen in public, total humiliation, defeats.

To be fair to GIlchrist, his 2nd 50 was in 17 balls.

So was Astle's.

# NJ Astle:
# 50 in 74 minutes, from 54 balls, 10x4;
# 100 in 148 minutes, from 114 balls, 16x4, 2x6;
# 150 in 185 minutes, from 136 balls, 25x4, 3x6;
# 200 in 217 minutes, from 153 balls, 27x4, 9x6.



Gilchrists was prettier to watch though to be fair, he was hitting sweat drives and things. Astle was just charging and bludgoning over cover..


India just cleaned up South Africa for 84. Lulz.

Not just 3 nil either.
3 arse-kicked, too embarassed to be seen in public, total humiliation, defeats.

Yes yes, rub it in with a brick, why don't you.

Yes yes, rub it in with a brick, why don't you.
Think of it as tough love

Definitely all over now. If Cook had managed to stay in I'd have had a very faint scrap of hope that we might have been able to pull off a miracle, but with both him and Bell out - well, it ain't looking good.

Pietersen and Flintoff to both hit centuries! :p

:(

Definitely all over now. If Cook had managed to stay in I'd have had a very faint scrap of hope that we might have been able to pull off a miracle, but with both him and Bell out - well, it ain't looking good.

Pietersen and Flintoff to both hit centuries! :p

:(

Plus a significant lower order contribution. Can't see it happening myself.

So that's it then.
England totally humbled.

C'mon Boony, start gloating. You know you want to!:D

I don't need to gloat, the scoreboard speaks for itself. :)

I was at the Club rooms on Saturday, watching Gilchrist open up, bloody fantastic.

Panasar(Sp), he is a womble.*Shakes head*

Something to cheer the Poms up.

Harlesburg-703rd in the world for Happiest Citizens.
5 Billion Citizens as of last week.

Warne was getting some fierce turn.

Hmm, good hustle for England, but the Aussies were always too strong.

There is not a single aspect of the game in which the Australians didn't outperform the Poms. Their batting line-up is second to none, their bowling can celebrate the addition of Clark for many years to come (adding to the McGrath/Warne combo only a very select group of batsmen can stand up to), and their intensity in the field has been excellent.

Add to that the English' lack of preparation, and there is little to salvage for them. KP was their only consistently dangerous batsman but lacked support. Panesar is a revelation but was only brought in when it was really a bit late. Hoggard can be excellent, but if the ball doesn't swing, then there's little he can do. And poor Flintoff just seemed a bit overwhelmed. He bowled well and made excellent decisions as Captain, but his batting suffered (I didn't particularly like the show he put on this morning...that just wasn't the place or the time to swing the bat like a maniac).

Let's see whether they can rally and put up a fight, but I don't see it. I'm sad to predict a 5-0 whitewash from here.

I don't need to gloat, the scoreboard speaks for itself. :)

This is true.
*concedes bragging rights to the Aussies*
Ah well, now I can enjoy the rest of the series, without caring too much.

Its so sasd, how did we go so wrong? This always happen, whenever we win something we go and balls it up the next time round.

I'm really pleased we've won back the Ashes, but I'm disappointed that England didn't put up much of a fight. The sting's gone out of the series & we're only three matches in.

Even though we lost the previous series in England, it was still fantast cricket to watch (except for the post-match celebrations after the final test :p ).

Hey, hey. This is looking almost interesting.

England was comprehensively beaten yesterday with the bat...but this morning Australia is 5/84 all of a sudden, chasing 159 for the first innings.

May we have a match on our hands?

Nevermind. :rolleyes:

Hayden and Symonds get 150s and now Gilchrist is at the crease. 6/363.

Nevermind. :rolleyes:

Hayden and Symonds get 150s and now Gilchrist is at the crease. 6/363.


Heh, it only takes one decent partnership when you're defending 150-odd.

Hi Gilly.






Bye Gilly.

It's interesting to note that the entirety of Australia's top 7 (excluding Martyn, this is) have made at least one century in the series. Langer, Hayden, Ponting, Hussey, Clarke, Symonds and Gilchrist have all reached 100.

For England, Cook, Pietersen and Collingwood have made centuries. The ability to turn good starts into meaningful scores is absolutely crucial, and Australia have so far done this better in this series.

Oh, and Australia have bowled and fielded far better. ;)

It's interesting to note that the entirety of Australia's top 7 (excluding Martyn, this is) have made at least one century in the series. Langer, Hayden, Ponting, Hussey, Clarke, Symonds and Gilchrist have all reached 100.

For England, Cook, Pietersen and Collingwood have made centuries. The ability to turn good starts into meaningful scores is absolutely crucial, and Australia have so far done this better in this series.

Oh, and Australia have bowled and fielded far better. ;)

You might add prepared, and been captained, better as well.

You might add prepared, and been captained, better as well.

Strange to think that England, the Ashes holders, would underprepare for what may be, in all legitimacy, the most hyped Ashes ever. A couple of 2-day tour matches? Boggles the mind.

About the captaining though, Australia has the advantage. Ponting is captain in name only. I would suggest Warne and maybe Gilchrist do the majority of it.

Warne, Gilchrist, and maybe Ponting onto Flintoff doesn't seem fair. :p

awful

still not long until another whitewash at the World Cup...

pathetic cricketing by England. If Fletcher had any cajones he'd have resigned.

awful

still not long until another whitewash at the World Cup...

pathetic cricketing by England. If Fletcher had any cajones he'd have resigned.

What about the one day tri series with aus and nz before the world cup? Can England win a game on this tour?



ICC ODI Rankings:

Team *Matches Points Rating

1
Australia 33 4335 131
2
South Africa 32 4047 126
3
New Zealand 22 2477 113
4
Pakistan 30 3373 112
5
Sri Lanka 37 4011 108
6
India 41 4355 106
7
West Indies 35 3628 104
8
England 26 2573 99
9
Bangladesh 31 1262 41
10
Zimbabwe 30 691 23
11
Kenya 9 0 0

I'd be amazed if we did win a match now!

The pre test games were a farce...and really should have had alarm bells ringing...

awful

still not long until another whitewash at the World Cup...

pathetic cricketing by England. If Fletcher had any cajones he'd have resigned.


Am I the only fan who doesn't really care for one day cricket?

Although in regard to Fletcher, he ought to resign after the VB triangular series, and Flintoff should never be allowed to captain England again.

Thank God Symonds got that 150, should secure his spot for the rest of the series. Almost overshadowed Hayden's 150.

Of course, both these guys are Queenslanders. :cool:

Am I the only fan who doesn't really care for one day cricket?

Although in regard to Fletcher, he ought to resign after the VB triangular series, and Flintoff should never be allowed to captain England again.

Actually I quite like ODI's and the 20Twenty comps....

What I hate is the ineptitude for England to capitalise on success.

I blame committees as well!

England played well once again.

No, wait. Not well. What's that word I'm looking for?... Ah, yes! Poorly. England played poorly once again.

It's all so embarrassing. I wish I didn't care about cricket, but my problem is that whenever England are playing anything I always care.

I think England's opening partnership in the second innings was their highest for the series... and they got done for 161. :p

2009 should be interesting. I expect Langer, Hayden and maybe Gilchrist to have retired, in addition to Warne, Martyn and McGrath. England currently have the benefit of a younger side that will improve as they develop, though I think Duncan Fletcher needs to be replaced.

In 2/3 years, Strauss will still be playing, Cook will be a very, very good player, Bell and Collingwood will still be there. Pietersen will just be even better. The bowlers will still be there, and should be better. Especiall Panesar. The 4th Test convinced me to permanently do away with G. Jones and leave Read in the side.

Interesting to see what England do when three injured starting XI players (Trescothick, Vaughan, and S. Jones) return. Jones in for Mahmood/Andersen, but what about Trescothick and Vaughan? Who gets dropped?

I think England's opening partnership in the second innings was their highest for the series... and they got done for 161. :p

2009 should be interesting. I expect Langer, Hayden and maybe Gilchrist to have retired, in addition to Warne, Martyn and McGrath. England currently have the benefit of a younger side that will improve as they develop, though I think Duncan Fletcher needs to be replaced.

In 2/3 years, Strauss will still be playing, Cook will be a very, very good player, Bell and Collingwood will still be there. Pietersen will just be even better. The bowlers will still be there, and should be better. Especiall Panesar. The 4th Test convinced me to permanently do away with G. Jones and leave Read in the side.

Interesting to see what England do when three injured starting XI players (Trescothick, Vaughan, and S. Jones) return. Jones in for Mahmood/Andersen, but what about Trescothick and Vaughan? Who gets dropped?

Assuming Cook and Bell can maintain some semblance of form and consistency while Vaughan and Trescothick are out, the latter two might not get back in the side at all.

Well, that would be the case if Fletcher leaves and we end up with someone who will pick players based on form and ability, not just those he likes.

Assuming Cook and Bell can maintain some semblance of form and consistency while Vaughan and Trescothick are out, the latter two might not get back in the side at all.


If Cook plays and shows the sort of promise that he currently is, I'd have him in favour of Trescothick. They're not too far apart now anyway, and Cook will still improve. Bell, on the other hand, is different. Its all well and good to make centuries against Pakistan at home, but I've noticed in this series 3 failures to convert well-made half-centuries into match-turning centuries against quality bowling. Vaughan is good at converting 50s to 100s (15 centuries to 14 half-centuries), especially against Australia.

Who should replace Fletcher and who should be England captain?

Who should replace Fletcher and who should be England captain?

No idea (I'm Australian) and Strauss. Vaughan if he ever returns.

No idea (I'm Australian) and Strauss. Vaughan if he ever returns.

Well damn! We'll hire you...what wiv being Aussie n all...might teach some of the lads how to win ;)

Vaughn...yeah...but as you say...if he returns...

One player who should be on the team list always (obviously depending on the wicket) is Monty...

Well damn! We'll hire you...what wiv being Aussie n all...might teach some of the lads how to win ;)

Vaughn...yeah...but as you say...if he returns...

One player who should be on the team list always (obviously depending on the wicket) is Monty...

Well, I'm actually Polish and living in Australia. Even more expertise!

The way Panesar bowled in his first Ashes test, against the world's best batting team, on a pitch not regarded as spinner friendly went to show how pigheaded and above all wrong the selectors were in picking Giles ahead of him.

Though his batting and fielding are not nearly as comical as I had heard they would be. :(

Well, no Warne to worry about now for the Ashes series.
Actually, I wonder if MacGill will still be playing because I can't see another Oz spinner who can take this place.

Well, I'm actually Polish and living in Australia. Even more expertise!

The way Panesar bowled in his first Ashes test, against the world's best batting team, on a pitch not regarded as spinner friendly went to show how pigheaded and above all wrong the selectors were in picking Giles ahead of him.

Though his batting and fielding are not nearly as comical as I had heard they would be. :(

LOL!!!

Yeah Monty should have played ever test. I cannot understand why beyond personality issues with Fletcher...Giles never lived up to expectations...his 1st class record is not bad...but he just seems incapable of moving his game up to Test level....from what I have seen anyway...and that is not much given that I can only watch a half hour highlights show....(Sky have the rights to show the entire series)...

Monty did surprise me with his batting...he has improved...and even more reason to put him in the squad...

Well, no Warne to worry about now for the Ashes series.
Actually, I wonder if MacGill will still be playing because I can't see another Oz spinner who can take this place.

MacGill is still up for it he said, but he is pretty old so they'll need to find someone else too.

*sniff* *sniff* I smell a whitewash.


*sniff* *sniff*


first since nineteen twenty something...


or maybe not? Well with England effectively 12/5... ummm yeah..

*sniff* *sniff*


first since nineteen twenty something...


or maybe not? Well with England effectively 12/5... ummm yeah..

Yeah. How galling.

The BBC highlights anchor (from last nights show) made some comment about England looking good at 240 something for 4....

:headbang:

I really, really hate Warne. He annoys me so much. Ugly bastard.

I was horrified to hear that the next Ashes series will be played in 2009.

Isn't there something unfair about that? England win the Ashes, keep them for a year (less actually.) Australia win them, get to keep them for two?

BTW, that urn with some ashes in it is a museum piece belonging to the MCC, and it belongs in the MCC museum. They can keep the sad, self-pitying thing, regardless of Richard Branson's attempts to foist it on us Aussies.

I really, really hate Warne. He annoys me so much. Ugly bastard.

Greatest cricketer ever?

Greatest cricketer ever?

No. He is no better than Murali. Infact, Murali has a better record on the whole. When Murali is finished he will have many more wickets probably. Having said that, Murali is easily not the greatest either.
To be honest, I don't know who I would class as the greatest cricketer ever. Probably Bradman but maybe Viv Richards. Thinking of all-rounders, it's hard to go past Khan.

BTW, that urn with some ashes in it is a museum piece belonging to the MCC, and it belongs in the MCC museum. They can keep the sad, self-pitying thing, regardless of Richard Branson's attempts to foist it on us Aussies.

I agree completly that the MCC should keep the urn. It is where it belongs but not because it is sad or self-pitying. It's a pretty amazing piece of history and I think they should just take it back to Lords and leave it there.

I really, really hate Warne. He annoys me so much. Ugly bastard.

He was cute as a boy. I guess he hasn't realized that the boyish charm wore out a few years ago.

I don't think he'll be going into politics, or launching a new airline, or even going onto the commentary circuit. With any luck he'll value his privacy like Bradman, and learn the difference between "some chick who called me up" and "an expensive and discrete call-girl."

Nah, he'll be a complete embarassment. He loves the attention and he'll get it any way he can :rolleyes:

No. He is no better than Murali. Infact, Murali has a better record on the whole. When Murali is finished he will have many more wickets probably. Having said that, Murali is easily not the greatest either.
To be honest, I don't know who I would class as the greatest cricketer ever. Probably Bradman but maybe Viv Richards. Thinking of all-rounders, it's hard to go past Khan.


Botham? LOL (yeah yeah joke!)

Viv Richards...yeah...I really miss the Windies team of the 80's...

The problem is that you can look at stats and make a choice...but it does not rate a mans greatness as it does not take into account the behavior of the player...

Botham? LOL (yeah yeah joke!)

Viv Richards...yeah...I really miss the Windies team of the 80's...

The problem is that you can look at stats and make a choice...but it does not rate a mans greatness as it does not take into account the behavior of the player...

That's true. And it's yet another reason why Warne isn't the greatest cricketer of all time. His behaviour is bullshit. The way he was acting in the 4th test towards umpire Rudi was not good. I don't see how there were no ramifactions for that.

That's true. And it's yet another reason why Warne isn't the greatest cricketer of all time. His behaviour is bullshit. The way he was acting in the 4th test towards umpire Rudi was not good. I don't see how there were no ramifactions for that.

Note my complete non disagreement with this ;)

Note my complete non disagreement with this ;)

Excellent, heh.
Anyway, as for England. Flintoff shouldn't have been captain, Jones shouldn't have been keeper and Giles shouldn't have been the spinner. Also, there is no way that Harmison was ready.

He was cute as a boy. I guess he hasn't realized that the boyish charm wore out a few years ago.

I don't think he'll be going into politics, or launching a new airline, or even going onto the commentary circuit. With any luck he'll value his privacy like Bradman, and learn the difference between "some chick who called me up" and "an expensive and discrete call-girl."

Nah, he'll be a complete embarassment. He loves the attention and he'll get it any way he can :rolleyes:

His ex wife is pretty damn hot and they still live together.. That situation makes me chuckle.
Warne? Value privacy? Impossible. He'll probably try get into commentary or something but he won't be any good.

Greatest cricketer ever?

How do you measure it though? Here's some thoughts:

Most valuable player in team, turned most matches: Khan.
Most entertaining or controversial: Botham. (If he'd bothered to be sober on the field, he'd probably qualify for the other catagories, too.) Warne.
Fairest, most sporting, best 'spirit of cricket' ... would we notice? ... Raratunga, Gower or Gilchrist.
Grew the game, promoted the game: WG Grace? In the modern era, Kerry Packer :(

If it's not obvious, I've followed the game since the early seventies and don't know much about the history before that.

Excellent, heh.
Anyway, as for England. Flintoff shouldn't have been captain, Jones shouldn't have been keeper and Giles shouldn't have been the spinner. Also, there is no way that Harmison was ready.

And Fletcher should be in the Tower!

One thing though is that we had a weak side. No Vaughn etc...so it was not easy to make some decisions...but one of the worse was not playing Monty earlier.

Jones...great at 1st class cricket...not Test.

And Fletcher should be in the Tower!

One thing though is that we had a weak side. No Vaughn etc...so it was not easy to make some decisions...but one of the worse was not playing Monty earlier.

Jones...great at 1st class cricket...not Test.

Monty is fantastic. When Anderson got Ponting out today he almost gave Billy a high five. His wicket celebrations are brilliant. As the commentators pointed out, Monty and Hussey are the perfect cricket couple.

How do you measure it though? Here's some thoughts:

Most valuable player in team, turned most matches: Khan.
Most entertaining or controversial: Botham. (If he'd bothered to be sober on the field, he'd probably qualify for the other catagories, too.) Warne.
Fairest, most sporting, best 'spirit of cricket' ... would we notice? ... Raratunga, Gower or Gilchrist.
Grew the game, promoted the game: WG Grace? In the modern era, Kerry Packer :(

If it's not obvious, I've followed the game since the early seventies and don't know much about the history before that.

Quite. But is there a cricketer who is regarded as the best ever ala Tiger Woods?

Football is harder what with Puskas, Pele, Stefano...

One requirement I do think needs to be there is off the field behavior...

How do you measure it though? Here's some thoughts:

Most valuable player in team, turned most matches: Khan.
Most entertaining or controversial: Botham. (If he'd bothered to be sober on the field, he'd probably qualify for the other catagories, too.) Warne.
Fairest, most sporting, best 'spirit of cricket' ... would we notice? ... Raratunga, Gower or Gilchrist.
Grew the game, promoted the game: WG Grace? In the modern era, Kerry Packer :(

If it's not obvious, I've followed the game since the early seventies and don't know much about the history before that.

Indeed. Fair calls.
Also, just in terms of NZ Cricket, I would like to chuck Hadlee in there too. Great all rounder.

His ex wife is pretty damn hot and they still live together.. That situation makes me chuckle.
Warne? Value privacy? Impossible. He'll probably try get into commentary or something but he won't be any good.

He has good sense in only one field I can see, which is cricket. He would make a good selector perhaps, but even if the ACB was willing to risk a scandal somewhere down the track he wouldn't take it. All responsibility, no glory.

Emu farming. If he can sell a cure for balding, he can sell emu ... er, meat? Feathers? Whatever they do with ostriches.

Indeed. Fair calls.
Also, just in terms of NZ Cricket, I would like to chuck Hadlee in there too. Great all rounder.

For "most valuable player" absolutely. All-rounders have a distinct advantage there, you can think of times they won a game with the bat or ball.

Enjoy Warne's fifty today? :jab:

No. He is no better than Murali. Infact, Murali has a better record on the whole. When Murali is finished he will have many more wickets probably.

Get stuffed mate. Murali will only surpass Warne because:

The pitches in SL he plays on are specifically made to cater to his bowling style, while Australian pitches are usually the opposite.

Lots of SL's matches are against shitty teams including Bangladesh. It is a lot easier to take 5 for 50 against them than England.

Plus, they actually changed the definition of a chuck to allow him to bowl his Doosra.

His ex wife is pretty damn hot and they still live together.. That situation makes me chuckle.
Warne? Value privacy? Impossible. He'll probably try get into commentary or something but he won't be any good.

I seem to remember him doing a bit for Nine during the time he was banned and wasn't bad. He is obviously a good speaker with a lot of knowledge and love for the game. Don't see why he wouldn't be any good. I'm pretty sure he'll end up on the Nine commentary team sooner or later.

Awwww, the shame....

...

Plus, they actually changed the definition of a chuck to allow him to bowl his Doosra.

The "15% elbow flex" thing?
A rule change was proposed and accepted at a meeting of ICC chief executives in early 2005, stating that any bowler may straighten their arm up to 15 degrees, and Murali's doosra once again became a legal delivery.
Here's were you call the ICC corrupt. I'm not saying you're wrong, mind ...

I reckon, Don Bradman is the greatest ever cricketer. He was a run scoring freak, head & shoulders above any other batsman. England invented bodyline tactics just to beat him, which lead to the laws of cricket being changed.

I think Warne is the best bowler we've ever seen, and second only to Bradman in overall greatness. His personality is abrasive & he's an idiot, but his skills can't be questioned. When Australia needs a wicket, Warne almost always delivers. He never gives up, his performance in last year's Ashes was outstanding, and almost single handedly won it for Australia. Murali is a big fish in a small pond. Warne is the biggest fish in the biggest ocean. He has got 700+ wickets, whilst playing alongside Glenn McGrath (560+), Jason Gillespie (250+), Merv Hughes (200+) and Craig McDermott (290+), amongst others. Murali's only real competition for wickets within the Sri Lankan team is Chaminda Vaas.

The "15% elbow flex" thing?

Here's were you call the ICC corrupt. I'm not saying you're wrong, mind ...

Corrupt is the wrong word. I'm just pointing out all the advantages he has. And Boonytopia just pointed out another major one I forgot; Warne has had to compete with great bowlers taking a lot of wickets including McGrath, who is the third highest wicket taker ever. Many times half the batting side is even out before Warne has his first spell.

Corrupt is the wrong word. Suggest another one. "Lucky" perhaps?
I'm just pointing out all the advantages he has. And Boonytopia just pointed out another major one I forgot; Warne has had to compete with great bowlers taking a lot of wickets including McGrath, who is the third highest wicket taker ever. Many times half the batting side is even out before Warne has his first spell.
Meaning he gets to bowl at the tail (not so much recently tho:) )
For comparison across generations, the only sensible statistics are "wickets per match" "wickets per ball/over" or "wickets per hundred runs." And the "best figures" statistic assumes the bowler got a decent spell.
In all measures Warne excels, of course. I'm not disputing he's a great bowler, perhaps the best ever, I'm just dubious about the "most wickets ever makes the best bowler ever" line which is so common in the media. With cricket academies training players young, professional careers and sponsorship starting below international level, more Tests per year, more new (weak) teams playing Test cricket, I think it's wrong to make such a fuss about modern players breaking aggregate records. Take away Bangladeshi wickets, and Warne doesn't have 700.

And I'm with Boonytopia on the Bradman thing. You can't argue with that average.

EDIT: It's different for batsmen and bowlers tho, huh? The bowlers have to compete for the ten wickets (also pesky fielders running 'em out) but batsmen benefit from having good partners.

Suggest another one. "Lucky" perhaps?

Meaning he gets to bowl at the tail (not so much recently tho:) )
For comparison across generations, the only sensible statistics are "wickets per match" "wickets per ball/over" or "wickets per hundred runs." And the "best figures" statistic assumes the bowler got a decent spell.
In all measures Warne excels, of course. I'm not disputing he's a great bowler, perhaps the best ever, I'm just dubious about the "most wickets ever makes the best bowler ever" line which is so common in the media. With cricket academies training players young, professional careers and sponsorship starting below international level, more Tests per year, more new (weak) teams playing Test cricket, I think it's wrong to make such a fuss about modern players breaking aggregate records. Take away Bangladeshi wickets, and Warne doesn't have 700.

And I'm with Boonytopia on the Bradman thing. You can't argue with that average.

Mulari gets to bowl at the tail too, but. I agree that the wickets tallies would be misleading taking into account the changes in the game. However I believe that, somehow adjusted, he would come out on top.

We really ought to say something gracious about the England players too.
Pieterson for captain!!!
Despite the 5-0 scoreline (oops) it's been a decent contest. In every test there was a point somewhere in the middle where England could have taken the game in hand.

Some fielding practice and a bit more batting practice for the bowlers, and it would be more like 3-1 or 3-2. And of course playing Panesar ... but that's hindsight.

We really ought to say something gracious about the England players too.
Pieterson for captain!!!
Despite the 5-0 scoreline (oops) it's been a decent contest. In every test there was a point somewhere in the middle where England could have taken the game in hand.

Some fielding practice and a bit more batting practice for the bowlers, and it would be more like 3-1 or 3-2. And of course playing Panesar ... but that's hindsight.

England have created plenty of opportunities where they could take control/win the tests, but have totally failed to take any of those opportunities. Each time Australia has powered over England & got out of trouble.

Since the second innings in Adelaide, England's batsmen have been pathetic. The fielding has been ok, but not as sharp as the Australian's. The bowling has been inconsistant, definitely underdone.

I think the 5-0 scoreline is a pretty fair reflection. It's almost like the Australians have been taunting England, by letting England think they had a chance in each test, then crushing them effortlessly each time. "Here, do you want to win this test?" *snatch* "Haha, you can't have it."

England have created plenty of opportunities where they could take control/win the tests, but have totally failed to take any of those opportunities. Each time Australia has powered over England & got out of trouble.

Since the second innings in Adelaide, England's batsmen have been pathetic. The fielding has been ok, but not as sharp as the Australian's. The bowling has been inconsistant, definitely underdone.

I think the 5-0 scoreline is a pretty fair reflection. It's almost like the Australians have been taunting England, by letting England think they had a chance in each test, then crushing them effortlessly each time. "Here, do you want to win this test?" *snatch* "Haha, you can't have it."

Yeah...sadly your right....it is a bit like that...

England just refuse to impose...

bloody annoying if you ask me! LOL

Yeah...sadly your right....it is a bit like that...

England just refuse to impose...

bloody annoying if you ask me! LOL

I've been disappointed at how inept England have been this time around (particularly as I had tickets for the 4th of the Boxing Day test at the MCG :( ), because last year's series was such a good contest.

Bloody Mahmood not getting tothe stumps for the runout.
Panasar robbed again.

Get stuffed mate. Murali will only surpass Warne because:

The pitches in SL he plays on are specifically made to cater to his bowling style, while Australian pitches are usually the opposite.

Lots of SL's matches are against shitty teams including Bangladesh. It is a lot easier to take 5 for 50 against them than England.

Plus, they actually changed the definition of a chuck to allow him to bowl his Doosra.
Ok look at it like this.
Can you spin it as far as Murali does and so deceptivly?
I suspect not.
His arm has an unnatural reflex, you can't do what he does, i can't, who the bloody hell can try and bowl the way he does and get that much turn?
No one.

Thats why he should stay.

I've been disappointed at how inept England have been this time around (particularly as I had tickets for the 4th of the Boxing Day test at the MCG :( ), because last year's series was such a good contest.

You may be disappointed. I'm bloody mortified!

Can't even give a decent Series. Shameful.

Bloody Mahmood not getting tothe stumps for the runout.
Panasar robbed again.

Well there's a surprise.

This is embarrassing.

Pietersen's out already, McGrath got him in the first over of the morning.

Pietersen's out already, McGrath got him in the first over of the morning.

Great.

hopeless. bloody hopeless.

Ok look at it like this.
Can you spin it as far as Murali does and so deceptivly?
I suspect not.
His arm has an unnatural reflex, you can't do what he does, i can't, who the bloody hell can try and bowl the way he does and get that much turn?
No one.

Thats why he should stay.

Murali's a fantastic bowler, but not in the same class as Warne.

Murali was a chucker, but the ICC have changed the laws, so he's legitimate now. It's not deliberate, his elbow has more flex in it than most other people. I don't agree with the decision, but I accept it. He's still a top bowler without the doosra anyway.

Great.

hopeless. bloody hopeless.

Monty's just been run out for a duck, direct hit by Symonds.

Oh, boy. They'll be done before lunch.

Which match should I watch at the Gabba? Australia vs England or NZ vs England?

I'm afraid the first one will be over too early. But then, both of them will be.

Monty's just been run out for a duck, direct hit by Symonds.

Yeah...Montys not a batsman really....

whats the score now?

whats the score now?
7/122.

It's a lead of 20 runs.

For "most valuable player" absolutely. All-rounders have a distinct advantage there, you can think of times they won a game with the bat or ball.

Enjoy Warne's fifty today? :jab:

No. He was out damn early. Monty got him with that stunner of a ball. But then Billy gave Gillchrist out instead.

Make that 8/122. :rolleyes:

Great catch. Read gone.

7/122.

It's a lead of 20 runs.

oh dear

Yeah...Montys not a batsman really....

whats the score now?

8/123, Read was just caught in the slips by Ponting of Lee's bowling.

Murali's a fantastic bowler, but not in the same class as Warne.

Murali was a chucker, but the ICC have changed the laws, so he's legitimate now. It's not deliberate, his elbow has more flex in it than most other people. I don't agree with the decision, but I accept it. He's still a top bowler without the doosra anyway.

It's not like it's just Murali that has been affected by the new laws. Many bowlers have been called up for chucking and many bowlers elbows were extending much furthur than Murali's.

Make that 8/122. :rolleyes:

dear oh dear

9/123.
McGrath gets another. Mahmood gone.

Now it's 9/123, McGrath has bowled Mahmood.

Oh, boy. They'll be done before lunch.

Which match should I watch at the Gabba? Australia vs England or NZ vs England?

I'm afraid the first one will be over too early. But then, both of them will be.

Umm, watch neither. Go somewhere else and watch Aus vs NZ.

nothing like a tail end collapse...they don't want to be on the pitch anymore...

I can't believe Ponting hasn't given the ball to Warne for one last fling.

I can't believe Ponting hasn't given the ball to Warne for one last fling.

Hmm. Should be McGrath and Warne and then open up the batting with Langer and McGrath.

Warney's coming on to bowl!

is it over yet?

is it over yet?

McGrath got the last wicket, England all out for 147. Aus are 0/18 chasing 46 to win.

They said it's all over....It is now!

Say this for England: They make NZ look 1/2 way decent.

It's all over, Hayden's hit the winning runs. Australia win the last test by 10 wickets & the series 5-0.

It's all over, Hayden's hit the winning runs. Australia win the last test by 10 wickets & the series 5-0.

Jeeez....really the entire team should just go to Pitcairn and stay there.

Oh, boy. They'll be done before lunch.

Which match should I watch at the Gabba? Australia vs England or NZ vs England?

I'm afraid the first one will be over too early. But then, both of them will be.
I hope you are implying New Zealand will sort out England.
New Zealand B is doing alright against Sri Lanka.
Murali's a fantastic bowler, but not in the same class as Warne.

Murali was a chucker, but the ICC have changed the laws, so he's legitimate now. It's not deliberate, his elbow has more flex in it than most other people. I don't agree with the decision, but I accept it. He's still a top bowler without the doosra anyway.
Murali is in a higher class?
Murali is a massive boast to International Test Cricket more than Warne, because he gives Sri Lanka a boast that an Australian team without Warne doesn't necasarily need, sure they would have been lesser with a Colin 'Funky' Miller or McGill but Murali contributes more.
It took an Australian to tarnish Murali, but Warne managed to tarnish himself through all his on tour actions.

Yes i'd pick Warne in a team before Murali, yes his dismissals are more fantastic but
Well there's a surprise.

That was yesterday.
Benaud made some arse-faced backdoor comment about Giles not being a spinner when he said it took England til the 3rd test to pick a spinner.

Giles is a Spinner, wouldn't make any of the top 5 test nations teams(Or New Zealands) but he is still equalish to Panasar.

Say this for England: They make NZ look 1/2 way decent.
Thats like saying only Australia or India are decent.:rolleyes:
It's all over, Hayden's hit the winning runs. Australia win the last test by 10 wickets & the series 5-0.
My Uncle just won $1000 U.S.:D

That was yesterday.
Benaud made some arse-faced backdoor comment about Giles not being a spinner when he said it took England til the 3rd test to pick a spinner.

Giles is a Spinner, wouldn't make any of the top 5 test nations teams(Or New Zealands) but he is still equalish to Panasar.

Giles equal to Panasar? No. I don't see it...not in pure bowling terms. And he did make it in one of the top 5 teams...

something is wrong with this picture! LOL

Thats like saying only Australia or India are decent.:rolleyes:
Are you trying to say NZ are a decent side? We might have pretty good bowlers (think Vettori will beat Hadlee's wicket record? I think he's got a good chance to - he's got 10 years left, assuming no injuries or burnout) but our batting is appalling. Look at their batting averages. Simply dreadful.
NZ may as well randomly pick one (or two) of their top order and mark their scores down with a duck just to speed up the game a bit and save us the embarassment of seeing them walk all the way out to the middle and trudge all the way back in a few balls later.
Always happens.

Giles equal to Panasar? No. I don't see it...not in pure bowling terms. And he did make it in one of the top 5 teams...

something is wrong with this picture! LOL
England are one of the top 5 test teams? o_O

I hope you are implying New Zealand will sort out England.
New Zealand B is doing alright against Sri Lanka.

Murali is in a higher class?
Murali is a massive boast to International Test Cricket more than Warne, because he gives Sri Lanka a boast that an Australian team without Warne doesn't necasarily need, sure they would have been lesser with a Colin 'Funky' Miller or McGill but Murali contributes more.
It took an Australian to tarnish Murali, but Warne managed to tarnish himself through all his on tour actions.

Yes i'd pick Warne in a team before Murali, yes his dismissals are more fantastic but

That was yesterday.
Benaud made some arse-faced backdoor comment about Giles not being a spinner when he said it took England til the 3rd test to pick a spinner.

Giles is a Spinner, wouldn't make any of the top 5 test nations teams(Or New Zealands) but he is still equalish to Panasar.

Like I said, Warne is a fool, but regardless of his other actions, his bowling ability is superior to Murali's.

Panesar is a much better bowler than Giles, because he actually spins the ball & even gets wickets. Giles does neither.

Are you trying to say NZ are a decent side? We might have pretty good bowlers (think Vettori will beat Hadlee's wicket record? I think he's got a good chance to - he's got 10 years left, assuming no injuries or burnout) but our batting is appalling. Look at their batting averages. Simply dreadful.
NZ may as well randomly pick one (or two) of their top order and mark their scores down with a duck just to speed up the game a bit and save us the embarassment of seeing them walk all the way out to the middle and trudge all the way back in a few balls later.
Always happens.
Ah but we have a fighting tail to our batting order.
Jayasaria(SP) averages around 34.

Our current team that is playing Sri Lanka only has 3 of the 12 that you'd expect to see in the team.
It hasn't helped that many players in the top order have been chopped and changed.

McCullum has gone back up to opening(where he started his International Career)
The Marshalls(James and Hamish) moved up and down the order, oput of sorts.
Peter Fulton young career, maybe not suitable
Simon Doull reckons Ross Taylor will be at the World Cup.

Fleming
Styris
Oram
Haven't played

McMillian might be back for good might not who knows...

Astle has over 7000 ODI runs and can score centuries.

Most of our batters average in the low 30's other teams do have 2 or so that average upper 30s and 1 in the 40's but we have a tail that wags.

It's quite reasonable to say we have the best fielding team in the world too and the best Captain.

Top 4.

It's really annoying when us a nation of just over 4 million gets bagged by the media and the public for losing matches, when we are playing nations with considerably more people, sure against South Africa and Australia our record is woeful but to any other nation we can measure up.
We almost always give Oz a fight and South Africa is moe of a bogey team for us, India we can beat but they are better.

We should expect a SemiFinal berth in the World Cup.



---------------
What is up with Harmison averaging about 35 rpw the last 3 years(maybe overseas tours) when he first came onto the scene ripping apart the Windies and the years afte it was a healthy 25ish.

We need a tail that wags cause our top order don't do their job!
I do wonder why Vettori and Franklin bat so low down. Both could do with moving one place up the order.

England are one of the top 5 test teams? o_O


Team Matches Points Rating
Australia 37 4793 130
England 41 4864 119
Pakistan 34 3800 112
India 34 3780 111
Sri Lanka 36 3686 102

http://www.icc-cricket.com/test/

We need a tail that wags cause our top order don't do their job!
I do wonder why Vettori and Franklin bat so low down. Both could do with moving one place up the order.
Whilst Vettori has been Captain he has been batting himself at 5(I think), it hasn't been a success.

Franklin pretty much won the last 2 ODI's with the bat.

Team Matches Points Rating
Australia 37 4793 130
England 41 4864 119
Pakistan 34 3800 112
India 34 3780 111
Sri Lanka 36 3686 102

http://www.icc-cricket.com/test/
Heh New Zealand has played like 6 Tests in the last year...

Out of interest, and being very bored at school, I just worked out a few stats about the Ashes:

Runs scored by batsmen:

Australia:
50's: 12
100s: 9
scored 3114 runs for the loss of 59 wickets(14 no).
This comes to:
42.65 runs/batsman average.(take away lowest and highest, it's 41.1 r/b)

England:
50's: 11
100s: 3
scored 2530 runs for the loss of 96 wickets (11 no).
This comes to:
23.64 runs/batsman average. (take away lowest and highest, it's 21.02 r/b)

Top order (first six batsmen):
Australia:
470, 197, 384, 161, 200, 407, 322, 200, 43
50's: 9
100s: 8
scored 2384 runs for the loss of 35 wickets (7 no).
This comes to:
56.76 runs/batsman average.

England:
94, 258, 503, 99, 151, 319, 130, 95, 277, 109
50's: 11
100s: 3
scored 2035 runs, for the loss of 59 wickets (1 no).
This comes to:
33.92 runs/batsman average.

Tail (last 5 batsmen):
Australia:
50's: 3
100s: 1
scored 617 runs, for the loss of 20 wickets (6 no).
This comes to:
23.73 runs/batsman average. (thus even the Aussie tail had a better batting average than England!)

England:
50's: 0
100s: 0
scored 336 runs, for the loss of 39 wickets (7 no).
This comes to:
7.15 runs/batsman average.

Whilst Vettori has been Captain he has been batting himself at 5(I think), it hasn't been a success.

Franklin pretty much won the last 2 ODI's with the bat.
5's too high for Vettori. I was thinking more 7, possibly 6 at the very highest. Problem is our middle order is weak and Vettori's been forced too far up the order. It feels like they're trying to turn him into another top allrounder a la Cairns but I don't think he's quite good enough with the bat to be that. And really he should concentrate on his bowling, which can win matches for NZ.

Franklin should be 8 with an idea of maybe 7 in the future. Surely he's got the best average in the world for a #9 batsman. Hasn't Vettori got the best #8 average? I recall reading that somewhere recently.

For those of you discussing the greatest allrounder of all time earlier, it has to be Garry Sobers[/url. Has to be. Read that profile. The only way you could argue Bradman is not the greatest cricketer of all time, is to argue that Sobers was a better allround cricketer. You can't touch either of them at the top.


Cricinfo are slowly dishing up profiles of their top 20 all rounders ever: [url]http://content-nz.cricinfo.com/allrounder/content/story/264135.html (http://content-nz.cricinfo.com/ci/content/player/52946.html) Only 7 profiles are up so far, but the list is there.

This really should have been a public poll. :D

My personal prediction however was correct - England beaten to a bloody pulp.

Panesar as a bowler really should've been brought in at the beginning of the series - it might have at least been a little closer than the whitewash it was - Panesar has had some good form.

Interesting statistics, Demented Hamsters.

England have a lot of soulsearching to do... It would be really good to see another Ashes series that's close (2005 was close, there were definitely points at which Australia could have taken matches).

I think the only way to impress upon the team that faced Australia this time how far they've fallen is to boot them all out for a few matches. One of the things that has kept the Australian side so competitive is that each player has to really fight for their spot.

5's too high for Vettori. I was thinking more 7, possibly 6 at the very highest. Problem is our middle order is weak and Vettori's been forced too far up the order. It feels like they're trying to turn him into another top allrounder a la Cairns but I don't think he's quite good enough with the bat to be that. And really he should concentrate on his bowling, which can win matches for NZ.

Franklin should be 8 with an idea of maybe 7 in the future. Surely he's got the best average in the world for a #9 batsman. Hasn't Vettori got the best #8 average? I recall reading that somewhere recently.

Yiip. Vettori has the best average for a test batter at #8. Ever. He is a great batter. As for Franklin, well he has a first class 200 and can definitely hold a bat pretty well. I think he could bat at 7 quite easily.

This really should have been a public poll. :D

My personal prediction however was correct - England beaten to a bloody pulp.

It is a public poll. Click the numbers in the results to see who voted for what. I went for a narrow Australian victory (I was expecting 2-1 or 2-0, maybe 3-1 at worst), but I hadn't counted on England being quite so inept.

For those of you discussing the greatest allrounder of all time earlier, it has to be Garry Sobers[/url. Has to be. Read that profile. The only way you could argue Bradman is not the greatest cricketer of all time, is to argue that Sobers was a better allround cricketer. You can't touch either of them at the top.


Cricinfo are slowly dishing up profiles of their top 20 all rounders ever: [url]http://content-nz.cricinfo.com/allrounder/content/story/264135.html (http://content-nz.cricinfo.com/ci/content/player/52946.html) Only 7 profiles are up so far, but the list is there.

Saw a good comment on that site by someone who had posted in their thoughts. Where the hell is Chris Cairns?!

Out of interest, and being very bored at school, I just worked out a few stats about the Ashes:

Runs scored by batsmen:

Australia:
50's: 12
100s: 9
scored 3114 runs for the loss of 59 wickets(14 no).
This comes to:
42.65 runs/batsman average.(take away lowest and highest, it's 41.1 r/b)

England:
50's: 11
100s: 3
scored 2530 runs for the loss of 96 wickets (11 no).
This comes to:
23.64 runs/batsman average. (take away lowest and highest, it's 21.02 r/b)

Top order (first six batsmen):
Australia:
470, 197, 384, 161, 200, 407, 322, 200, 43
50's: 9
100s: 8
scored 2384 runs for the loss of 35 wickets (7 no).
This comes to:
56.76 runs/batsman average.

England:
94, 258, 503, 99, 151, 319, 130, 95, 277, 109
50's: 11
100s: 3
scored 2035 runs, for the loss of 59 wickets (1 no).
This comes to:
33.92 runs/batsman average.

Tail (last 5 batsmen):
Australia:
50's: 3
100s: 1
scored 617 runs, for the loss of 20 wickets (6 no).
This comes to:
23.73 runs/batsman average. (thus even the Aussie tail had a better batting average than England!)

England:
50's: 0
100s: 0
scored 336 runs, for the loss of 39 wickets (7 no).
This comes to:
7.15 runs/batsman average.
Did you just include Gilchrist in the Australian Tail?:eek:

Saw a good comment on that site by someone who had posted in their thoughts. Where the hell is Chris Cairns?!
He only played in half the games (Both Test and ODI) he could have played in apparently, due to injury.

He only played in half the games (Both Test and ODI) he could have played in apparently, due to injury.

His record speaks for its self though. Still a fantastic player and deserving of a spot in the top 20.

It is a public poll. Click the numbers in the results to see who voted for what. I went for a narrow Australian victory (I was expecting 2-1 or 2-0, maybe 3-1 at worst), but I hadn't counted on England being quite so inept.

Ah, right! I didn't know that one! I just remember it being the names were displayed at the right without clicking. Right-o. My memory has obviously gotten the better of me.

It's unfortunate that England is so inept. I like to see an outright demorailsation as much as anyone, but I would have liked to see a close one this year.

Who would've thought though that we would've seen so many retirements though? Struth!

yeah, i dont think anyone saw that comin... and mate, who says struth these days?

yeah, i dont think anyone saw that comin... and mate, who says struth these days?

You just did, sport!

His record speaks for its self though. Still a fantastic player and deserving of a spot in the top 20.
Yes, ICC Champions Trophy and most 6's in test Cricket
3000 Test Runs and 100(or was it 200/300 Wickets club).

Since the ESPN Greatest Circketers of all time list came out 6 years ago i've always felt Paddles was hard done by for being able to bat, as a bowler he was supreme, but because he could get 100's and 50's he was classed as an All Rounder.
Propping New Zealand up with the ball and expecting him to do it with the bat is a tough ask.
Neither Botham, Dev nor Khan had to do that.

Hadlee was a Destroyer with the ball.
He was ranked too low.
Left-hand bat Right-arm bowlers FTW!

yeah, i dont think anyone saw that comin... and mate, who says struth these days?

I do. I have a strange predilection for the word. I find much of the older Aussie slang to be quite colourful, and it's a shame that it has pretty much disappeared.

I do. I have a strange predilection for the word. I find much of the older Aussie slang to be quite colourful, and it's a shame that it has pretty much disappeared.

Struth is fantastic. Needs to be used more.
Ponting should have used it in his acceptance speech.

Heh New Zealand has played like 6 Tests in the last year...

Yeah...but those are the rankings....

The only thing in England's favour at the moment is that the team is quite young. They need to rebound from this catastrophe and start winning...just like the Aussies do...and not let personalities override reason....

After they spend a goodly time on Pitcairn.

When a thread has passed 20 pages now's the time to raise your post count.

http://smilies.vidahost.com/contrib/tweetz/spam1.gif

When a thread has passed 20 pages now's the time to raise your post count.

http://smilies.vidahost.com/contrib/tweetz/spam1.gif



I have 40 posts per page so this is only page 11.


Those who can edit the jolt settings properly FTW!

I thought Ponting being named MotS was laughable. He passed 50 what, once, in the last 3 tests? Clark took 2/3 wickets every innings!

When a thread has passed 20 pages now's the time to raise your post count.

http://smilies.vidahost.com/contrib/tweetz/spam1.gif
Thats for n00bs
I have 40 posts per page so this is only page 11.


Those who can edit the jolt settings properly FTW!
I've done it but it slows down the page refreshment time, me no likey.

I have noticed that alot of people selected i don't know what you're talking about. No offence, but you are probally american. The ashes is kind of the cricket world cup. England and Australia are the main competitiors and there is always debates about which has the better team. I personally know that England will win because we are always the best.
Americans! Find out more about this typically English sport by going on www.bbc.co.uk and selecting the sports page.

Did you just include Gilchrist in the Australian Tail?:eek:
well, he does bat at #7, so yes technically Mr Adam '56 ball century' Gilchrist is part of the Oz tail (!)

I have noticed that alot of people selected i don't know what you're talking about. No offence, but you are probally american. The ashes is kind of the cricket world cup. England and Australia are the main competitiors and there is always debates about which has the better team. I personally know that England will win because we are always the best.
Americans! Find out more about this typically English sport by going on www.bbc.co.uk and selecting the sports page.

Not Stricktly true as there is a Cricket World Cup (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cricket_World_Cup), which are one day matches opposed to the 5-match test series that are the ashes.

Though The Ashes would probably have to be one of the most famous (if not the most) test match competition. Between old rivals.

I have noticed that alot of people selected i don't know what you're talking about. No offence, but you are probally american. The ashes is kind of the cricket world cup. England and Australia are the main competitiors and there is always debates about which has the better team. I personally know that England will win because we are always the best.
Americans! Find out more about this typically English sport by going on www.bbc.co.uk and selecting the sports page.

England lost to us :p

Though The Ashes would probably have to be one of the most famous (if not the most) test match competition. Between old rivals.

The Indo-Pak test series has more intensity and has more following than Ashes.

Ashes has become very predictable (thumping of England) - barring the last one.

I have noticed that alot of people selected i don't know what you're talking about. No offence, but you are probally american. The ashes is kind of the cricket world cup. England and Australia are the main competitiors and there is always debates about which has the better team. I personally know that England will win because we are always the best.
Americans! Find out more about this typically English sport by going on www.bbc.co.uk and selecting the sports page.

I always enjoy a good joke post..

Like I said, Warne is a fool, but regardless of his other actions, his bowling ability is superior to Murali's.


Not taking anything from Warne, but spin bowlers should be judged about how they perform against good spin-playing teams like India, Pak and SL and not about how many wickets they get from poor spin-playing teams like England, South Africa, Windies etc.

Warne's performances in India have been very disappointing for me while Murali's was better (comparitively).

well, he does bat at #7, so yes technically Mr Adam '56 ball century' Gilchrist is part of the Oz tail (!)
Next time you are bored at school...
Could you break it down into Top, Middle and Lower order?*Angel smilies*

Next time you are bored at school...
Could you break it down into Top, Middle and Lower order?*Angel smilies*
you'll have to wait a couple of days for that. ;)

Not taking anything from Warne, but spin bowlers should be judged about how they perform against good spin-playing teams like India, Pak and SL and not about how many wickets they get from poor spin-playing teams like England, South Africa, Windies etc.

Warne's performances in India have been very disappointing for me while Murali's was better (comparitively).

Good point, but I think it's only against India that Warne hasn't performed. I'm pretty sure that against Pakistan & Sri Lanka his figures are comparable.

On a speculative note, I wonder how his figures would have looked had he played against Australia? His Australian first class results are actually quite poor.

For those of you discussing the greatest allrounder of all time earlier, it has to be Garry Sobers[/url. Has to be. Read that profile. The only way you could argue Bradman is not the greatest cricketer of all time, is to argue that Sobers was a better allround cricketer. You can't touch either of them at the top.


Cricinfo are slowly dishing up profiles of their top 20 all rounders ever: [url]http://content-nz.cricinfo.com/allrounder/content/story/264135.html (http://content-nz.cricinfo.com/ci/content/player/52946.html) Only 7 profiles are up so far, but the list is there.

Speaking of allrounders, this discussion on Cricinfo might interest you.



Sobers is the best
December 5, 2006
Tony Greig, Ian Chappell and Michael Holding discuss the importance of the all-rounder in modern day cricket.

http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/talk/content/multimedia/genre.html?genre=4



Their conclusion is pretty much Sobers first & daylight second.

Good point, but I think it's only against India that Warne hasn't performed. I'm pretty sure that against Pakistan & Sri Lanka his figures are comparable.

On a speculative note, I wonder how his figures would have looked had he played against Australia? His Australian first class results are actually quite poor.

Want to compare them? Stats guru can do it for you (http://stats.cricinfo.com/guru?sdb=compare;playerid=2000;class=testplayer;filter=basic;team=0;opposition=0;notopposition=0;sea son=0;homeaway=0;continent=0;country=0;notcountry=0;groundid=0;startdefault=1992-01-02;start=1992-01-02;enddefault=2007-01-05;end=2007-01-05;tourneyid=0;finals=0;daynight=0;toss=0;scheduledovers=0;scheduleddays=0;innings=0;result=0;follow on=0;seriesresult=0;captain=0;keeper=0;dnp=0;recent=;runslow=;runshigh=;batposition=0;dismissal=0;bo wposition=0;ballslow=;ballshigh=;bpof=0;overslow=;overshigh=;conclow=;conchigh=;wicketslow=;wicketsh igh=;dismissalslow=;dismissalshigh=;caughtlow=;caughthigh=;caughttype=0;stumpedlow=;stumpedhigh=;vie wtype=com_compare;csearch=Muttiah;cplayerid=2041;comparetype=bow_summary;compare=1;.cgifields=cplaye rid;.cgifields=comparetype)

Have a look through those of you who are arguing, and see what you think. It compares the 2 across all test playing opponents and in each country.

The Indo-Pak test series has more intensity and has more following than Ashes.

Ashes has become very predictable (thumping of England) - barring the last one.

I wouldn't say more intensity, because that's very subjective. In my eyes, the Ashes battles are more intense. Definitely a greater following, because the combined population of India & Pakistan is so huge. Unfortunately you are spot on about the predicability of the Ashes series. Since 1989 they have been (barring 2005) increasingly one-sided.

Want to compare them? Stats guru can do it for you (http://stats.cricinfo.com/guru?sdb=compare;playerid=2000;class=testplayer;filter=basic;team=0;opposition=0;notopposition=0;sea son=0;homeaway=0;continent=0;country=0;notcountry=0;groundid=0;startdefault=1992-01-02;start=1992-01-02;enddefault=2007-01-05;end=2007-01-05;tourneyid=0;finals=0;daynight=0;toss=0;scheduledovers=0;scheduleddays=0;innings=0;result=0;follow on=0;seriesresult=0;captain=0;keeper=0;dnp=0;recent=;runslow=;runshigh=;batposition=0;dismissal=0;bo wposition=0;ballslow=;ballshigh=;bpof=0;overslow=;overshigh=;conclow=;conchigh=;wicketslow=;wicketsh igh=;dismissalslow=;dismissalshigh=;caughtlow=;caughthigh=;caughttype=0;stumpedlow=;stumpedhigh=;vie wtype=com_compare;csearch=Muttiah;cplayerid=2041;comparetype=bow_summary;compare=1;.cgifields=cplaye rid;.cgifields=comparetype)

Have a look through those of you who are arguing, and see what you think. It compares the 2 across all test playing opponents and in each country.

Thanks, the only anomaly I could see in Warne's figures was against India. Against all other countries they seem to be fairly similar.

I don't think raw stats are the sole indicator of greatness though. You have to take into account how much he contributes to the team, what his attitude is, how much opponents fear him, etc. You can't really empirically measure those things.

Good point, but I think it's only against India that Warne hasn't performed. I'm pretty sure that against Pakistan & Sri Lanka his figures are comparable.

Not sure about how he fared against Pak and SL but I did watch the famous test match in Chennai (Madras) when Tendulkar made that rare second innings century turning the match around (after being one down in the series) and his bowling was a big let down for me. Warne was very ordinary in both the ODIs and Tests he has played in India.


On a speculative note, I wonder how his figures would have looked had he played against Australia? His Australian first class results are actually quite poor.

Not surprising for me. He tends to be his best on the bigger stage.

How many people saw the sickening hit Staus took from Lee? They reckon it hit him at about 130-40 km/h straight to the helmet. OUCH!!

Thanks, the only anomaly I could see in Warne's figures was against India. Against all other countries they seem to be fairly similar.

I don't think raw stats are the sole indicator of greatness though. You have to take into account how much he contributes to the team, what his attitude is, how much opponents fear him, etc. You can't really empirically measure those things.

At the end of the day though, runs and wickets are the most valuable currency for a player.

At the end of the day though, runs and wickets are the most valuable currency for a player.

Yes, because we can easily measure them.

Not taking anything from Warne, but spin bowlers should be judged about how they perform against good spin-playing teams like India, Pak and SL and not about how many wickets they get from poor spin-playing teams like England, South Africa, Windies etc.

Warne's performances in India have been very disappointing for me while Murali's was better (comparitively).
Thanks for not mentioning New Zealand because he had a habit of ripping our guts out...

Not taking anything from Warne, but spin bowlers should be judged about how they perform against good spin-playing teams like India, Pak and SL and not about how many wickets they get from poor spin-playing teams like England, South Africa, Windies etc.

Warne's performances in India have been very disappointing for me while Murali's was better (comparitively).

CHEAT. CHEAT. CHEAT.

I'm sorry, but Murali is a damn cheat, and, in any case, will never equate to the feat Warne elicits from Batsmen.

CHEAT. CHEAT. CHEAT.

I'm sorry, but Murali is a damn cheat, and, in any case, will never equate to the feat Warne elicits from Batsmen.
He is not cheating because he is legit.
Merr Christmas(CLICK ME) (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12172506&postcount=117)-CLICKABLE

Not sure about how he fared against Pak and SL but I did watch the famous test match in Chennai (Madras) when Tendulkar made that rare second innings century turning the match around (after being one down in the series) and his bowling was a big let down for me. Warne was very ordinary in both the ODIs and Tests he has played in India.

Not surprising for me. He tends to be his best on the bigger stage.

Thats the other mark of a great player. Consistency. Warne, as with other sportsmen, do have patches where things don't gel. But Warne has this very annoying tendency to be in form when he plays in the big matches.

In the case of the match you mention at Chennai he obviously was not hitting his form. Actually that would be an interesting stat...games where he's been the match winner.

Or a stat on his fear factor ;)

He is not cheating because he is legit.
Merr Christmas(CLICK ME) (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12172506&postcount=117)-CLICKABLE

Thats inspired!!!:D

Anyway, I'm sure the law did change solely for him, so the issue is debateable.

Thanks for not mentioning New Zealand because he had a habit of ripping our guts out...

What happened to NZ playing Sri Lanka? All out for 73 chasing 262, NZ's heaviest loss ever? Seems like your batting is in complete disarray at the moment.

What happened to NZ playing Sri Lanka? All out for 73 chasing 262, NZ's heaviest loss ever? Seems like your batting is in complete disarray at the moment.

And at the same time, James Marshall was off make 152* off 137 for his domestic side. NZ batting is such a lottery.

CHEAT. CHEAT. CHEAT.

I'm sorry, but Murali is a damn cheat, and, in any case, will never equate to the feat Warne elicits from Batsmen.

Sour grapes. Sour grapes. Sour grapes.:D

Btw, I am surprised many people here mentioned Imran Khan as a great player. God knows how many times he tampered and lifted the seam. IIRC, He himself admitted to using bottle tops.

What happened to NZ playing Sri Lanka? All out for 73 chasing 262, NZ's heaviest loss ever? Seems like your batting is in complete disarray at the moment.
Would you believe me if i said that was the greatest display of swing bowling that i have ever seen?

Because when Vaas took out our top order, none of them had time to get set.
Malinga was pretty flash too.
Andre Adams shouldn't have been out but he is useless anyways so it didn't matter.
We were 8 down and Murali hadn't even bowled yet.

As early as Match one of the series(might have been a 20/20 or the first ODI's) a commentator said Ross Taylor should stop playing around his legs, because Vaas will expose him soon enough.
Yes he got 100 in game one...

Our batting has been dodgy for a long long time, but our top order has been in trouble since the ICC Champions Trophy.

We hadn't played for about 6 months before then.
-----------------------------

So who heard Lawry's magic commentating when Ponting (?) got run out in the first innings?

Something like...
'Bad field placement, brilliant running.'
Next thing that happened Anderson gets him with a brillaint throw.

Dick of the year?
I say Big nose Bill.

Or perhaps even Brett Lee the singing sensation
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8c3CeAKdDPQ
...

Or perhaps even Brett Lee the singing sensation
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8c3CeAKdDPQ
...



Oh dear..

Oh boy...looks like the Kiwi attack got creamed by Jayasuriya...44 balls 70 runs:eek: and he overtook Afridi for most career sixes...

Oh boy...looks like the Kiwi attack got creamed by Jayasuriya...44 balls 70 runs:eek: and he overtook Afridi for most career sixes...


That was until they gave mark gillespie a bowl and the wellington man knocked off 3 of them pretty quickly.

As a cricket fan, I do rather enjoy a Jayasuriya special though..

So who heard Lawry's magic commentating when Ponting (?) got run out in the first innings?

Something like...
'Bad field placement, brilliant running.'
Next thing that happened Anderson gets him with a brillaint throw.

Dick of the year?
I say Big nose Bill.

Yeah, Bill's often full of shit, but he's a Victorian so I love him. :p

Or perhaps even Brett Lee the singing sensation
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8c3CeAKdDPQ
...

That's a crime. :eek: I had no idea he'd released a song.


What do you reckon the NZ, Aus & Englad tri-series (http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/australia/content/series/249146.html?template=schedule) is going to be like? Your batsmen seem to be really struggling & the Poms have just copped their biggest hiding in 80 odd years.

What do you reckon the NZ, Aus & Englad tri-series (http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/australia/content/series/249146.html?template=schedule) is going to be like? Your batsmen seem to be really struggling & the Poms have just copped their biggest hiding in 80 odd years.

The awesome power of Daniel Vettori will score all our runs and take all our wickets. The problem is, he used to have McCallum to help him at the end, but now he just gets out early with the rest of the top order.

Good God. Can the New Zealanders explain to me what happened to their ODI side against Sri Lanka? I mean, Murali and Vaas are class (ha), but I remember a time when NZ could bat properly down to number 10.

Ever since Cairns retired, I tell ya...

The awesome power of Daniel Vettori will score all our runs and take all our wickets. The problem is, he used to have McCallum to help him at the end, but now he just gets out early with the rest of the top order.
What is with NZ top order? Is there a competition amongst themselves to see how fast they can get out?

Yeah, Bill's often full of shit, but he's a Victorian so I love him. :p
He's a Victorian so i dislike him.:p
That's a crime. :eek: I had no idea he'd released a song.
Neither had i until i saw it on the news, but it had been on Youtube for over a week apparently...
What do you reckon the NZ, Aus & Englad tri-series (http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/australia/content/series/249146.html?template=schedule) is going to be like? Your batsmen seem to be really struggling & the Poms have just copped their biggest hiding in 80 odd years.
New Zealands Bowling squad attack looks pretty hot.
Bond, Gillespie, Mills(?If he is fit), Vettori, Patel.

There are some other players.
Oram.

Forget about Micheal Mason or Andre Adams.

I'd like to see Chris Harris back.

When is the world cup starting?

Who is backing which team? Let's pick semi-finalists.

I am thinking Aussies, Springboks, Indians and the last one maybe a dark horse...haven't followed all the teams closely for coupla years..

Unsurprisingly, I'll predict Australia for the win.

Semi-finalists as Aus, India, Pakistan and, seeing as it's in the Carribean, the West Indies.

I wouldn't rule out Sri Lanka and/or South Africa to make the semis though.

I can't really see England or New Zealand doing much.

I'd love to see one of the smaller nations do well, like Kenya at the previous World Cup.

Sour grapes. Sour grapes. Sour grapes.:D

Btw, I am surprised many people here mentioned Imran Khan as a great player. God knows how many times he tampered and lifted the seam. IIRC, He himself admitted to using bottle tops.

No. Limited though Gilo was, at least he did not require a fundamental change in the laws of the game to be allowed to play.

Frankly, if Sri Lanka rely upon genetic anomolies to have a sporting chance, they are indeed buggered.


In regard to the World Cup, my heart says either Pakistan or India. Australia are to damn Australian to merit support, South Africa too defensive, and nobody else has a chance in the context of ODI's.

Is this still going on?

Is this still going on?
No. We lost the Ashes about six months before it started.

Is this still going on?

It finished about 5 days ago, but it's too good to let go. :p Anyway, the one-dayers will be starting on Friday.

No. We lost the Ashes about six months before it started.

LOL harsh but fair!!! LOL

So on to the One Days...will Monty play? Will Vaughn be up to scratch?

It finished about 5 days ago, but it's too good to let go. :p Anyway, the one-dayers will be starting on Friday.
I propose a new thread!

I propose a new thread!

Lets call it something really original like 'The One Day Internationals/World Cup Thread (Cricket)' !!!! :p

Lets call it something really original like 'The One Day Internationals/World Cup Thread (Cricket)' !!!! :p
Or the"America's not gonna win Ha ha ha Thread"

Personally i think the VB Series sounds better than the Commonwealth Bank Series.

Or the"America's not gonna win Ha ha ha Thread"

Personally i think the VB Series sounds better than the Commonwealth Bank Series.

LOL I like then both :)

The America or VB one...

(my normal handle is vonbek on the forums I visit... when I first regged here in 2003 I was vonners....that got zapped because I was inactive...so created RC)

LOL harsh but fair!!! LOL

So on to the One Days...will Monty play? Will Vaughn be up to scratch?

Vaughan's been out of the game for about a year? He's going to find it tough, particularly as one day cricket is high intensity.

I think they should give Monty a go for at least a few games. England have been too cautious with their selections this summer & it has cost them. If Monty does well it will be great preparation for him for the World Cup. If he gets hammered, then he can go away & work on his game, and the England selectors can try someone else.

LOL I like then both :)

The America or VB one...

(my normal handle is vonbek on the forums I visit... when I first regged here in 2003 I was vonners....that got zapped because I was inactive...so created RC)
We could always make one for the World /VB/Billy Birmingham/Commonwealth Bank Series and one for the World Cup.:)

Damn thats pretty old.
Were you posting during the last world cup?

Or the"America's not gonna win Ha ha ha Thread"

Personally i think the VB Series sounds better than the Commonwealth Bank Series.

The sponsor's product is more interesting to. :)

Vaughan's been out of the game for about a year? He's going to find it tough, particularly as one day cricket is high intensity.

I think they should give Monty a go for at least a few games. England have been too cautious with their selections this summer & it has cost them. If Monty does well it will be great preparation for him for the World Cup. If he gets hammered, then he can go away & work on his game, and the England selectors can try someone else.

Yeah I feel the Vaughn appointment smacks of desperation. But he is a god batsman. Really depends if he can find form quickly...and to be honest I don't think he's going to get the games.

Monty deserves a place on the team if its the right wicket. If its not suitable for spin I don't see him doing well. I would like to see him and Harminson get it on like they did last year...

Still they should get to the quarterfinals....after that...I only see Australia dominating.

We could always make one for the World /VB/Billy Birmingham/Commonwealth Bank Series and one for the World Cup.:)

Damn thats pretty old.
Were you posting during the last world cup?

LOL If you do I will hold you to having this in the title 'World /VB/Billy Birmingham/Commonwealth Bank Series' LOL

Yeah...back on the old forum/servers....sorta miss that time...then came over to Jolt and then I had a major project so I missed posting during the last world cup...the project took up far too much time.

Yeah I feel the Vaughn appointment smacks of desperation. But he is a god batsman. Really depends if he can find form quickly...and to be honest I don't think he's going to get the games.

Monty deserves a place on the team if its the right wicket. If its not suitable for spin I don't see him doing well. I would like to see him and Harminson get it on like they did last year...

Still they should get to the quarterfinals....after that...I only see Australia dominating.

If not Vaughan, who else would you have as captain? I think Vaughan is worth the risk, because he is a very good captain & his on field leadership is excellent. It's probably fair to say that if he fails in terms of form and fitness (particularly his knees again) this summer against Aus & NZ, then probably he'd be too much of a gamble for the World Cup.

I could see Monty developing into the sort of bowler who can do well, regardless of the wicket. The England selectors need to have enough faith in him to give him the chance to do so.

I agree with you about the QFs, I can't see England getting past that stage.

I agree with you about the QFs, I can't see England getting past that stage.
That does seem to be their natural spot for sports of all types.

England should def. make the super 8 section, all they have to do to get there is beat 2 of Canada, Kenya and New Zealand.

Or maybe they wont..




Have you guys all seen the format for this WC? Personally I think it's great. They get all those extra bunny teams in for a few games, but the top 8 teams still all play each other 1992-style.

England should def. make the super 8 section, all they have to do to get there is beat 2 of Canada, Kenya and New Zealand.

Or maybe they wont..




Have you guys all seen the format for this WC? Personally I think it's great. They get all those extra bunny teams in for a few games, but the top 8 teams still all play each other 1992-style.

I don't remember the format for the 1992 WC.

I do remember being at the MCG for the final & cheering for the Pakistanis as they beat the Poms! My English cousin (who was with us) was not amused. :p

I don't remember the format for the 1992 WC.

I do remember being at the MCG for the final & cheering for the Pakistanis as they beat the Poms! My English cousin (who was with us) was not amused. :p

the 1992 format was the current 'big 8' teams with zimbabwe thrown in (who beat england, heh) and the format was simply that everyone played everyone else once, then semis and a final.

This year there are 4 pools of four, the 8 big teams and 8 bunnies. You play the other 3 teams in your pool once, and the top 2 go through to the super 8 round. This, unless there is a first round upset, means that NZ, Aus, West indies, india, sri lanka, england, south africa and pakistan will go through to the next round. Each of those 8 teams then play the 6 teams they haven't played yet, before semis and the final.

If not Vaughan, who else would you have as captain? I think Vaughan is worth the risk, because he is a very good captain & his on field leadership is excellent. It's probably fair to say that if he fails in terms of form and fitness (particularly his knees again) this summer against Aus & NZ, then probably he'd be too much of a gamble for the World Cup.

I could see Monty developing into the sort of bowler who can do well, regardless of the wicket. The England selectors need to have enough faith in him to give him the chance to do so.

I agree with you about the QFs, I can't see England getting past that stage.

As Captain...thats hard to answer...If Vaughn did not have the captaincy I would have him in as a batsman to at least get matches in for the World Cup...I cannot see him doing that and being Captain. Who would I have in his stead? Good question...I don't know.

Monty won't be a Shane Warne...but I think (after thinking about this) that he seems to have the ability to get into a game quickly so he could well be an offensive bowler in the ODI's...

Also wanted to say how refreshing it is to have a great thread about cricket and it not getting derailed.

I do remember being at the MCG for the final & cheering for the Pakistanis as they beat the Poms! My English cousin (who was with us) was not amused. :p

Wasim Akram was unplayable that day....that delivery that got Allan Lamb is still vivid in my memory.

Frankly, if Sri Lanka rely upon genetic anomolies to have a sporting chance, they are indeed buggered.

Why do I have the feeling that you won't be saying this if he was an Englishman playing for England ?


In regard to the World Cup, my heart says either Pakistan or India. Australia are to damn Australian to merit support, South Africa too defensive, and nobody else has a chance in the context of ODI's.

lol. India was just white washed by the South Africans in the ODIs there. Indians are flat track bullies and if the pitches are the same like when we toured Windies earlier (when we won the test series there)...they do have a chance...but the problem with the Indian team is that they look so good on paper but seldom translate that into actual performance as a team. Pakistan is worse than Indian in that aspect. Their infighting is the worst you can see in any international team.

the 1992 format was the current 'big 8' teams with zimbabwe thrown in (who beat england, heh) and the format was simply that everyone played everyone else once, then semis and a final.

This year there are 4 pools of four, the 8 big teams and 8 bunnies. You play the other 3 teams in your pool once, and the top 2 go through to the super 8 round. This, unless there is a first round upset, means that NZ, Aus, West indies, india, sri lanka, england, south africa and pakistan will go through to the next round. Each of those 8 teams then play the 6 teams they haven't played yet, before semis and the final.

That sounds like a really good format. I like the way the best 8 teams will have to play eachother, so there shouldn't be any easy rides through. Whoever makes it through will really have to earn their places in the semis.

LOL I love this!!!!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/england/6240153.stm


Last Updated: Monday, 8 January 2007, 07:53 GMT

Warne open to England coach offer

Warne has two years left on his county contract with Hampshire
Legendary Aussie spinner Shane Warne says he would consider any offer of a coaching job from England in future.

Head coach Duncan Fletcher admitted he would be interested in using Test cricket's leading wicket-taker.

"Australian cricket is my priority. I want the team to stay number one in the world and to help the sport to remain number one in the country," said Warne.

"[But] I would not have any problem with helping in England, New Zealand, South Africa or anywhere else."

Warne, who took 708 Test wickets, retired from the international game after the Ashes but has two years left on his county contract with Hampshire.

606 DEBATE: Could England benefit from Warne?

"I haven't heard anything from the ECB, so I can't say yes or no," he told the Times newspaper.

"I have an affection for England and a house in Southampton and I've helped out England bowlers in the past.

"I am a big believer in players learning from each other. That is what happens - or should happen - at the end of every match or series."


I am sure the Australians will want to keep hold of him, but the idea of working with him is so exciting

Monty Panesar

After Australia wrapped up an Ashes whitewash with victory in Sydney on Friday, Warne spent half an hour chatting with young England spinner Monty Panesar.

And Panesar admitted it would be "beyond my wildest dreams" to work with Warne on a more formal basis.

"Perhaps I am getting too far ahead of myself even thinking about it," he told the Daily Mail.

"He is pure gold so I am sure the Australians will want to keep hold of him, but the idea of working with him is so exciting.

"He could be an incredible inspiration to me because he has so much knowledge and experience."

It would be…..odd, to say the least, to see England’s chief tormentor become their coach. :p

I reckon Monty would get a lot of benefit from Warne as a mentor.

In time, I think Warne would probably make quite a good coach, but I’d let him settle down & get a bit of experience under his belt, before taking him on in any major capacity.

Yay! lets have the best leg spinner to ever play the game be bowling coach for a team that hasn't had a good leg spinner since ever.

It would be…..odd, to say the least, to see England’s chief tormentor become their coach. :p

I reckon Monty would get a lot of benefit from Warne as a mentor.

In time, I think Warne would probably make quite a good coach, but I’d let him settle down & get a bit of experience under his belt, before taking him on in any major capacity.

well I can look at it this way...if we loose we can blame a Aussie ;)

I like Warne...he might be a bit nuts but then thats what genius is all about...and yeah it would be amazing for Panesaar to get tips from Warne...but also for the rest of the team to get to understand what winning is all about.

World cup pick: Australia to beat out semi-finalists South Africa, India and Pakistan, assuming the draw allows for that...

well I can look at it this way...if we loose we can blame a Aussie ;)

I like Warne...he might be a bit nuts but then thats what genius is all about...and yeah it would be amazing for Panesaar to get tips from Warne...but also for the rest of the team to get to understand what winning is all about.

Yes, if even some of Warne's self-belief & desire to win could rub off on England, it would be a boost. Maybe we'll see something like that in the lead-up to the 2009 Ashes? Actually, I think that would be very good forward planning by England (not something that usually occurs I have to say) if they did it. Give Warne a break for 18 months or so, then bring him on in a mentor/coaching role in the latter half of 2008 or early 2009. Might be just the fillip England need.

Yes, if even some of Warne's self-belief & desire to win could rub off on England, it would be a boost. Maybe we'll see something like that in the lead-up to the 2009 Ashes? Actually, I think that would be very good forward planning by England (not something that usually occurs I have to say) if they did it. Give Warne a break for 18 months or so, then bring him on in a mentor/coaching role in the latter half of 2008 or early 2009. Might be just the fillip England need.

The only thing keeping me from total despair is that the team is young.

Will they find strength after the Ashes or will they crumble? Its a litmus test for English crigget...

If we do badly the tabloid press will all over the team like a sore rash on a 87 year old prossie...

The only thing keeping me from total despair is that the team is young.

Will they find strength after the Ashes or will they crumble? Its a litmus test for English crigget...

If we do badly the tabloid press will all over the team like a sore rash on a 87 year old prossie...

Potentially, England have the core of a very good team for the next 5 years or so. It will be interesting to see over the next year or so, whether this tour will be the making or the breaking of them.

Potentially, England have the core of a very good team for the next 5 years or so. It will be interesting to see over the next year or so, whether this tour will be the making or the breaking of them.

well thats the thing...how will the whitewash effect them? The last whitewash was what 1928??

Not good. If they over come that....and actually start acting like a team we might well have the base to equal the achievements of the Aussies...

However knowing England...I doubt it :(

England should def. make the super 8 section, all they have to do to get there is beat 2 of Canada, Kenya and New Zealand.

Or maybe they wont..




Have you guys all seen the format for this WC? Personally I think it's great. They get all those extra bunny teams in for a few games, but the top 8 teams still all play each other 1992-style.
Super 8 instead of Spuer 6...
That last world cup was a mess.

How many teams were there?
16?
And they had 2 pools of 8?
Instead of 4 of 4.
I could never figure out why they wanted teams like Canada, America and Kenya(not so much) to get hammered in 7 games, they could have had the top 2 from each pool going through to the Quarterfinals(or a Super 8 round) and the lesser teams going into a second tier final system.

I can't remember the '92 World Cup very well, i do however have the Young Guns Calender from that year, great names like Chris Pringle, Willie Watson, Martin Crowe, Dipak Patel, Mark Greatbach, Andrew Jones, Might even have Chris Harris with hair...

EDIT:
Just saw this.
the 1992 format was the current 'big 8' teams with zimbabwe thrown in (who beat england, heh) and the format was simply that everyone played everyone else once, then semis and a final.

This year there are 4 pools of four, the 8 big teams and 8 bunnies. You play the other 3 teams in your pool once, and the top 2 go through to the super 8 round. This, unless there is a first round upset, means that NZ, Aus, West indies, india, sri lanka, england, south africa and pakistan will go through to the next round. Each of those 8 teams then play the 6 teams they haven't played yet, before semis and the final.
Seems like the ICC finally listened to me...

Super 8 instead of Spuer 6...
That last world cup was a mess.

How many teams were there?
16?
And they had 2 pools of 8?
Instead of 4 of 4.
I could never figure out why they wanted teams like Canada, America and Kenya(not so much) to get hammered in 7 games, they could have had the top 2 from each pool going through to the Quarterfinals(or a Super 8 round) and the lesser teams going into a second tier final system.

I can't remember the '92 World Cup very well, i do however have the Young Guns Calender from that year, great names like Chris Pringle, Willie Watson, Martin Crowe, Dipak Patel, Mark Greatbach, Andrew Jones, Might even have Chris Harris with hair...

EDIT:
Just saw this.

Seems like the ICC finally listened to me...

Heh, I didn't know that Chris Harris had ever possessed hair. :p It seemed like he was always about 40 years old.

Martin Crowe was an outstanding batsman, probably NZ's best.

oooh twenty/20, I had forgotten about this game.


England are getting belted as we probably all predicted, 139/3 after 12.

oooh twenty/20, I had forgotten about this game.


England are getting belted as we probably all predicted, 139/3 after 12.

Did you catch the three (maybe four?) sixers in one over? Priceless. :p

Did you catch the three (maybe four?) sixers in one over? Priceless. :p

Nah I turned on when Gilchrist was in the late 30s.

I dunno at 165 for 5 after 15 I think this might actually be a close one. Thats assuming England remember how to bat

For now they need to remember how to catch...


Speaking of which, this crowd has been awful with their hands tonight, dropping all those sixes.

oooh twenty/20, I had forgotten about this game.


England are getting belted as we probably all predicted, 139/3 after 12.
You forgot because it is hardly interesting?
Oz 221/5

Heh, I didn't know that Chris Harris had ever possessed hair. :p It seemed like he was always about 40 years old.

Martin Crowe was an outstanding batsman, probably NZ's best.
Harris should be back in the Black Caps.

Perhaps, but greats like Dempster, Donnelly, Sutcliffe and Reid.

You probably wouldn't have heard of them because they were from early to mid last century...

You forgot because it is hardly interesting?
Oz 221/5

thats apparently a record score in twenty 20

and England 10 for 2 .

looks like they didn't remember

I dunno at 165 for 5 after 15 I think this might actually be a close one. Thats assuming England remember how to bat

This is why you should never assume...

This is why you should never assume...

I know I was being very optimistic :D

thats apparently a record score in twenty 20

and England 10 for 2 .

looks like they didn't remember
Well 5/2 is better than 2/5.
Silly Australians.

EDIT:
Run Out
Silly Ockers and their silly nicknames...

lol @ Gilly throwing to the break.