saintkiptanui Posted 3 May, 2010 Share Posted 3 May, 2010 Lumb Has made a nice start for England. 30/0 3 overs Lumb has 27 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dark Sotonic Mills Posted 3 May, 2010 Share Posted 3 May, 2010 ********, Lumb out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Um Bongo Posted 3 May, 2010 Share Posted 3 May, 2010 Lol. Pieterson in. Come on then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintkiptanui Posted 3 May, 2010 Author Share Posted 3 May, 2010 Just put the mockers on him, out for 28 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintkiptanui Posted 3 May, 2010 Author Share Posted 3 May, 2010 Oh dear a collapse happening 87-4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisobee Posted 3 May, 2010 Share Posted 3 May, 2010 Oh dear a collapse happening 87-4 England, the team ( along with Hants as well now) who specialise in collapses of all kinds ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintkiptanui Posted 3 May, 2010 Author Share Posted 3 May, 2010 115/4 wright seems to be trying to play a test match innings, dropping the anchor:rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintkiptanui Posted 3 May, 2010 Author Share Posted 3 May, 2010 Everytime I comment the opposite happens, wright now flying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Um Bongo Posted 3 May, 2010 Share Posted 3 May, 2010 He's doing alright now though. 151-4 after 17 overs. That was just Huge! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Um Bongo Posted 3 May, 2010 Share Posted 3 May, 2010 What a shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintkiptanui Posted 3 May, 2010 Author Share Posted 3 May, 2010 Good total this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Um Bongo Posted 3 May, 2010 Share Posted 3 May, 2010 LOL Wright loses his bat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Um Bongo Posted 3 May, 2010 Share Posted 3 May, 2010 191-5 after the 20. Good score. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisobee Posted 3 May, 2010 Share Posted 3 May, 2010 115/4 wright seems to be trying to play a test match innings, dropping the anchor:rolleyes: 191/5 off 20. Wright the slow coach 45* off 27 balls, not good enough ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintkiptanui Posted 3 May, 2010 Author Share Posted 3 May, 2010 191/5 off 20. Wright the slow coach 45* off 27 balls, not good enough !I did say he'd speeded things up c*cklebreath. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisobee Posted 3 May, 2010 Share Posted 3 May, 2010 I did say he'd speeded things up c*cklebreath. Yes but not before saying "115/4 wright seems to be trying to play a test match innings, dropping the anchor !" you dim brain ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintkiptanui Posted 3 May, 2010 Author Share Posted 3 May, 2010 Yes but not before saying "115/4 wright seems to be trying to play a test match innings, dropping the anchor !" you dim brain !Shhh!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisobee Posted 3 May, 2010 Share Posted 3 May, 2010 Shhh!!!! You still here nipper !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keithd Posted 4 May, 2010 Share Posted 4 May, 2010 are people ITK still thinking D/L method is the fairest method for adjusting rain affected games? Am thinking it may be for 50 over games but not so 20/20? Hopefully that wont dent the teams confidence, fantastic batting display. Giving Broad the final over though? To defend 8 runs? Was never going to happen. Why didnt Collingwood or Wright bowl? I saw Wright defend something like 7 or 8 in a limited overs game for England before, he's got it in his locker for sure... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisobee Posted 4 May, 2010 Share Posted 4 May, 2010 are people ITK still thinking D/L method is the fairest method for adjusting rain affected games? Am thinking it may be for 50 over games but not so 20/20? Hopefully that wont dent the teams confidence, fantastic batting display. Giving Broad the final over though? To defend 8 runs? Was never going to happen. Why didnt Collingwood or Wright bowl? I saw Wright defend something like 7 or 8 in a limited overs game for England before, he's got it in his locker for sure... D/L is a farce even for 50 overs, in 20/20 it really does give the team batting 2nd a huge advantage. That said the game was effectively lost in the first over bowled by Sidebottom which went for 15 runs, he didn't bowl again and when the rain arrived WI were 30-0 off 2.2. I had no problem with giving the last over to Broad who along with Swann is easily our best ODI bowler IMO. It was nigh on impossible to defend 8 runs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 4 May, 2010 Share Posted 4 May, 2010 I've not really got an issue using Duckworth/Lewis to set a total, but to allow the chasing team their full quota of wickets is absolute nonsense as it allows them to just go out there and slog from ball one without the worry of how many wickets they've got left. Take yesterday's game as an example, 60 from 6 overs wasn't a particularly unreasonable target, but if the number of wickets allowed were to be reduced proportionally in line with the number of overs to be bowled (i.e. 20 divided by 6 = 3.33, round it up to 4), it would have made it a more realistic game. With only 4 wickets to play with, it would be much riskier to slog from ball one. Sidearse's 15-run over was the key, though, ultimately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatch Posted 4 May, 2010 Share Posted 4 May, 2010 rain forecast for tonight as well, so Maybe England should bat second if win toss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisobee Posted 4 May, 2010 Share Posted 4 May, 2010 I've not really got an issue using Duckworth/Lewis to set a total, but to allow the chasing team their full quota of wickets is absolute nonsense as it allows them to just go out there and slog from ball one without the worry of how many wickets they've got left. Take yesterday's game as an example, 60 from 6 overs wasn't a particularly unreasonable target, but if the number of wickets allowed were to be reduced proportionally in line with the number of overs to be bowled (i.e. 20 divided by 6 = 3.33, round it up to 4), it would have made it a more realistic game. With only 4 wickets to play with, it would be much riskier to slog from ball one. Sidearse's 15-run over was the key, though, ultimately. Indeed and yet had the game continued and reached a point where a result was possible without any more play the number of wickets taken DID affect the total needed. Does that make sense to anyone as it doesn't to me ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Appy Posted 10 May, 2010 Share Posted 10 May, 2010 South Africa Out! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisobee Posted 10 May, 2010 Share Posted 10 May, 2010 England beat NZ to finish clear top, Pakistan go through on net run rate after they, NZ and SA all finished on 2 points. England now play runners up in the other group in the semis and it could ( I believe) still be any one of Australia, Sri Lanka, Windies or India. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedg Posted 10 May, 2010 Share Posted 10 May, 2010 England beat NZ to finish clear top, Pakistan go through on net run rate after they, NZ and SA all finished on 2 points. England now play runners up in the other group in the semis and it could ( I believe) still be any one of Australia, Sri Lanka, Windies or India. Think the sensible money has to be on Oz finishing top and I think with the net run rates India have to bet SL by a fair amount to go threw second (assuming of course Gale does not inspire WI to beat Oz). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now