Cricket Thread

crooky said:
But the Hundred is still on then!

(I think I'm the only person who unironically likes that competition. Naff as fuck but fun to watch the two games in a day with some good quality players)
Click to expand...
I don’t mind it. I love any cricket. So long as I’ve got something to watch during the summer hols it’s all good for me. If you don’t like it, just don’t watch it. It’s not doing any harm to anyone or to cricket as a whole
 
wattle said:
I don’t mind it. I love any cricket. So long as I’ve got something to watch during the summer hols it’s all good for me. If you don’t like it, just don’t watch it. It’s not doing any harm to anyone or to cricket as a whole
Click to expand...
There’s also the One day cup starting on Tuesday. I quite like watching that as it’s a glimpse to see if we have any up and coming youngsters.

It’s a bit like an EDS cup.
 
jimharri said:
Let's see if we can keep the personal insults of other posters out of the thread, please. It's cricket, not football.


;-)
Click to expand...
I’ve done the right thing Jim. I’ve put both of the bounders on ignore. I am entitled to my opinion, and I am happy to debate opinions I disagree with, even yours! However if someone describes me as a JCL to cricket for having an opinion (my first trip to Lancashire Cricket Ground was 1967 and I’ve been a regular or semi regular since) I’ll take angry exception to that. Likewise if someone calls me a racist that’s a serious accusation and I’ll react even more angrily. Let me repeat, I hate the current Indian cricket team passionately but I don’t hate Indian people. Long before you posted yesterday about the Pakistani cricket team I posted very similar a while ago - how they were prepared to stay cooped up in a hotel for 3 months and play a test series was absolutely admirable, as was the spirit they played in and dignity they lost with. Likewise when England toured Pakistan most recently they were fantastic opponents - competitive but fair. No screaming in opponents faces, no screaming at umpires or surrounding them, no throwing the ball at me. I would string all racists and sexists up until they repented and for some turd to call me one is always going to cause an angry response. Tbf I amended **** to **** to be nice. And as you’re one of the few people on here I haven’t got on ignore I’ll be particularly polite to you, you **** **** (edit nice gent)
 
Last edited:
Personally find it hard to get worked up about how India have been on a sportsmanship level because England have given it all back equally.

Stokes getting angry they didn’t declare when Washington was after his first century was the most unsporting moment of the series, the Indians getting a bit mouthy when they’re on top is not exactly criminal and it just raises the stakes and makes the game more fun.
 
Dr Jacoby said:
I agree that Crawley and Pope are problems for England.

Crawley looks like a good player but ultimately flatters to deceive. But I think England like the Crawley/Duckett partnership and both have enjoyed relative success against Australia.

Pope is a poor man’s Ian Bell. He generally scores runs in the first innings but he’s shown weaknesses against high pace and quality spin. Out of our top three, I wouldn’t be surprised if he struggles the most in the Ashes.

How Stat is a good website for cricket stats.
Click to expand...

I think Pope is a problem. Crawley is not the best opener in the world but he consistently gets decent scores and his partnership with Duckett is great. They score so quickly, set the tone of the innings and put pressure on the opposition.

Pope at 3 becomes a problem because he so often gets out within half an hour of coming in. So we can go from 80-120/0 to the same for 2 and all of a sudden the quick start is pointless.

If I were England’s management I’d just ask him to focus 100% on not getting out for the first 10 overs. Scoring doesn’t matter because one of the openers will be around and in, Pope can’t be Root where he scores everywhere and keeps things ticking as he gets his eye in.

And if we had a world class opener to partner Duckett then Pope averaging 30 wouldn’t be a problem, but it’s a lot easier to find a #3 than a new opener IMO.
 
domalino said:
I think Pope is a problem. Crawley is not the best opener in the world but he consistently gets decent scores and his partnership with Duckett is great. They score so quickly, set the tone of the innings and put pressure on the opposition.

Pope at 3 becomes a problem because he so often gets out within half an hour of coming in. So we can go from 80-120/0 to the same for 2 and all of a sudden the quick start is pointless.

If I were England’s management I’d just ask him to focus 100% on not getting out for the first 10 overs. Scoring doesn’t matter because one of the openers will be around and in, Pope can’t be Root where he scores everywhere and keeps things ticking as he gets his eye in.

And if we had a world class opener to partner Duckett then Pope averaging 30 wouldn’t be a problem, but it’s a lot easier to find a #3 than a new opener IMO.
Click to expand...
Yeh agree with all of that. Crawley is vital v Aus. He’s one of those that you should probably ignore the batting average. It masks his importance to the set up. Pope will get found out easily I fear. Not sure what the answer is to the number 3 spot is so I’m pretty sure he’ll get the series. Just my opinion btw. Not trying to be a patronising c**t or an arrogant ‘know it all’ like I was accused of somewhat aggressively earlier haha
 
wattle said:
Yeh agree with all of that. Crawley is vital v Aus. He’s one of those that you should probably ignore the batting average. It masks his importance to the set up. Pope will get found out easily I fear. Not sure what the answer is to the number 3 spot is so I’m pretty sure he’ll get the series. Just my opinion btw. Not trying to be a patronising c**t or an arrogant ‘know it all’ like I was accused of somewhat aggressively earlier haha
Click to expand...
Wildcard would be Rehan Ahmed at 3.
 
domalino said:
I think Pope is a problem. Crawley is not the best opener in the world but he consistently gets decent scores and his partnership with Duckett is great. They score so quickly, set the tone of the innings and put pressure on the opposition.

Pope at 3 becomes a problem because he so often gets out within half an hour of coming in. So we can go from 80-120/0 to the same for 2 and all of a sudden the quick start is pointless.

If I were England’s management I’d just ask him to focus 100% on not getting out for the first 10 overs. Scoring doesn’t matter because one of the openers will be around and in, Pope can’t be Root where he scores everywhere and keeps things ticking as he gets his eye in.

And if we had a world class opener to partner Duckett then Pope averaging 30 wouldn’t be a problem, but it’s a lot easier to find a #3 than a new opener IMO.
Click to expand...
Agree with this. Perhaps it’s my Kent bias but I do believe Crawley has a lot to offer England in test cricket. If he could just show a bit more discipline outside off stump, we’d see his average climb closer to 40.

I think Bethell will eventually replace Pope as England’s number 3.
 
BringBackSwales said:
I’ve done the right thing Jim. I’ve put both of the bounders on ignore. I am entitled to my opinion, and I am happy to debate opinions I disagree with, even yours! However if someone describes me as a JCL to cricket for having an opinion (my first trip to Lancashire Cricket Ground was 1967 and I’ve been a regular or semi regular since) I’ll take angry exception to that. Likewise if someone calls me a racist that’s a serious accusation and I’ll react even more angrily. Let me repeat, I hate the current Indian cricket team passionately but I don’t hate Indian people. Long before you posted yesterday about the Pakistani cricket team I posted very similar a while ago - how they were prepared to stay cooped up in a hotel for 3 months and play a test series was absolutely admirable, as was the spirit they played in and dignity they lost with. Likewise when England toured Pakistan most recently they were fantastic opponents - competitive but fair. No screaming in opponents faces, no screaming at umpires or surrounding them, no throwing the ball at me. I would string all racists and sexists up until they repented and for some turd to call me one is always going to cause an angry response. Tbf I amended **** to **** to be nice. And as you’re one of the few people on here I haven’t got on ignore I’ll be particularly polite to you, you **** **** (edit nice gent)
Click to expand...
I/we have no problems with opinions on here (as long as they're the same ones Ric holds, obviously!), but we try to discourage abuse and name calling, if possible. While it can make the "guilty" party feel better, it generally doesn't add anything to the debate where it's used. Plus (boring fact alert), it's against the rules of the forum and is punishable with a warning. Personally, I prefer to give the posters involved a chance to self flagellate before I start handing out warnings.
 
I feel these two will have to get us to at least 60/80 behind if we going to win! I thought it be all over by now but pitch not doing much if anything
 
jimharri said:
I/we have no problems with opinions on here (as long as they're the same ones Ric holds, obviously!), but we try to discourage abuse and name calling, if possible. While it can make the "guilty" party feel better, it generally doesn't add anything to the debate where it's used. Plus (boring fact alert), it's against the rules of the forum and is punishable with a warning. Personally, I prefer to give the posters involved a chance to self flagellate before I start handing out warnings.
Click to expand...
Noted, you’ll find I defended myself rather than abused. However I will self flaggelatingly check them and clean them up now.
 
jimharri said:
I/we have no problems with opinions on here (as long as they're the same ones Ric holds, obviously!), but we try to discourage abuse and name calling, if possible. While it can make the "guilty" party feel better, it generally doesn't add anything to the debate where it's used. Plus (boring fact alert), it's against the rules of the forum and is punishable with a warning. Personally, I prefer to give the posters involved a chance to self flagellate before I start handing out warnings.
Click to expand...
Totally agree. It is though very hard to not respond when someone unnecessarily calls you a ‘c’ and abuses you totally unprovoked! Anyway - cricket are doing well ;) (so far!!!)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top