Cricket World Cup 2019 - England World Champions!!!

I feel that's a bit unfair on Ben Stokes, saying it was pretty obviously down to money - unless he's said that of course. He didn't take the game up properly until he arrived in the UK so I assume he had little affiliation to NZ cricket at that point and he was building a nice career when his folks decided to move back down under in 2013 by which time he had already been spotted by the ECB and "in the system" having been picked to play for England. Looks just like circumstances lead him our way, on this occasion.

Maybe. Money is bound to be a factor though, and I wouldn't condemn him for that. Kiwi cricketers are notoriously badly paid by NZ cricket. The top players obviously get to supplement their earnings from NZ cricket with IPL and other 20/20 contracts, English county cricket etc. Personally i find it odd that a kiwi who came to the UK at age 12 with kiwi parents would opt for England. Different if he came much younger or his parents were English.

It's funny, most of my cricket playing compadres, and I have lots as I've played for 3-4 teams in recent years, really don't like him and I'm always saying well give him back then!
 
its the options that we need on tours other than swing bowlers ?? with lack of swing with the kookaburra ball you need fast and bounce, also spin is another key slot and the lack of anything other than moeen ali and rashid what else is there ?? yes this summer is looking good in the ashes and we have now speed and bounce with archer and wood but we all know it will be swing that wins out and anderson and broad if fit plays leave 2 place for spin and bounce

right now i think can name the line up for the ashes and england will go with roy and root opening the bat


roy
root
bairstow
stokes
butler
moeen
woakes
broad
anderson
archer

There's no chance of Root opening while he's captain. He won't bat at three because he says he needs time after captaining the team in the field to re-focus on batting.
 
am not criticizing the team ? its the board ECB in what they do for test cricket in england and its very little, test cricket is not dying and crowds in england are way up from what they used to be for the first 3 or 4 days, better grounds corporate fun for kids and a very good day out but forget coming to see a quick result its test cricket

purists or members will always be on the thin side in test cricket its the norm ?? back to the team setup and opening pair and its down to keeping cook so long as number one and we banked on him far to long and should have blood more players in the role, even if it meant losing then its progress and learning and give somebody time in the middle, its simple the the ECB hate change and when somebody with a bit of talent comes our way its done and dusted and set in stone for years and years even to a point of burning him out

cook was used for so much cricket it got stale and he went down hill so fast because he was on fire at the start of his career and the job was done, but the ECB never do the right thing when your at the top of your game and ask somebody else to challenge them and give them a chance and the other a rest

golden boy jofra archer will be the same he will be asked to play all forms of cricket for the next 10 years and everything is all right with the bowling ?? yes there is going to be a gap in the next year or so when anderson and broad pack up then we have woakes and stokes who swing the ball and wood and archer are who are fast and then maybe the curran brothers but thats its and for spin well just don't look and part time spin is used in moeen ali

Who is out there in the county game worthy of inclusion then? What do the ECB do? It is dying worldwide is my point. I love test cricket more than any other format but we live in a world that loves fast paced sport and money making. Elsewhere there seems to be a struggle to get test worthy players. A lot of recent test matches have been done in 3-4 days due to so much shorter format cricket. Most of England's issues have been players being incapable of leaving good balls and playing decent defensive strokes because they aren't practicing them in shorter formats.

Cook was still the best opening batsman. His average dropped but we have failed to get anyone else to come in and nail that position and again, few in county cricket are excelling. Roy will no doubt be the next call due to Vince still being such a wonderfully frustrating cricketer. Bowling is fine at the moment and talent emerging. Decent spinners around but untested at higher level. You can query decision making when they get thrown in on flat pitches in oz with a series lost.

Away from home the squad should be more varied. Same old struggles seem to repeat. Not having a go at you but what are the solutions? I am puzzled as to why your stance on a world cup win is to immediately feel disappointed about the test team?
 
You obviously have a bee in your bonnet about that. Fair enough. Let me ask you a question, if you don't mind. The All Blacks teams in recent years have featured a number of lads who hail from Polynesia. And have proved worthy of the shirt. Were they wrong to leave their home islands to further their lives (sporting and/or economic) in New Zealand?
Not that it bothers me but their best bowler in the final is from Zimbabwe, also they had Sodhi and munro in their squad who were born in India and South Africa.

Tbf from what I've seen New Zealand have been very graceful, it's the Aussies and Indian fans who are being bitters.
 
We didn't beat New Zealand, it was a tie after the 50 overs and it was a tie after the super over. We were awarded the match based on the number of boundaries hit. Don't get me wrong i am delighted and it was captivating to watch, and i am not in the hollow victory camp, i loved every minute, but we didn't beat New Zealand.

In my opinion, New Zealand were probably the better team on the day. The absolute fluke boundary plus the Boult brain fart gave us 12 runs that meant we had the chance to win / tie in the first 50 overs and we took that chance. For me, those two freakish moments changed the game, without both of them, or even just one of them, New Zealand win. So, in my view, without an enourmous slice of luck, New Zealand win, by being the better team (Just, like by a fag paper). That is my opinion, and given how tight the game was, I think there is an argument to be made for either side being better, and I don't think anyone can argue with 100% conviction that one team were better or not.

Given the above, from Warnes perspective, what he says is 100% true. Just because you don't agree doesn't make him wrong.


I disagree, we were the better team. Warne is just bitter.
 
I disagree, we were the better team. Warne is just bitter.

It was said that we had the better team before a ball had been bowled.

The game was tied. The super over was tied. We won on boundaries hit.

If we had a better team than them going in to the match, yet tied, then it stands to reason that New Zealand were the better performing team on the day, which is what Warne is eluding to.

If it hadn't been a fluke catch by Boult when he was distracted to look the wrong way by his sunglasses falling and a freak deflection off the bat of Stokes diving in to make his ground and getting a bonus 4 runs (subsequently incorrectly adding 4 instead of 3 runs to the total), then I guess They were the better team as they would have won without the major factor that they didn't have on their side; luck.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.