You're having a Rubber Chef type debate. As Gaffs said, it's to do with the pitch and the ball.
Right, the ask me anything about cricket thread.
- Thread starter Spoony
- Start date
You're having a Rubber Chef type debate. As Gaffs said, it's to do with the pitch and the ball.
I know I am.
I was going to go on to tell you all about why Owen Hargreaves is the best Umpire keeper England have had in a generation.
You've ruined it now though
I was going to go on to tell you all about why Owen Hargreaves is the best Umpire keeper England have had in a generation.
You've ruined it now though
What is the significance of getting a new ball?
The ball being harder and shinier, is likely to swing more through the air as well as offer extra bounce and pace.
By the time the new ball's due, there's not much scope for fast bowlers to trouble the batsmen in any of those ways, unless there's reverse swing but let's not get bogged down in that.
It's true.
Simon Schama's filming a documentary on it at the moment.
Simon Schama's filming a documentary on it at the moment.
Why did most English grounds only until recently, NOT have flood lights?!
Do you people in England really all sleep THAT early that you don't even want the possibility of a day and night ODI to be played?!
Do you people in England really all sleep THAT early that you don't even want the possibility of a day and night ODI to be played?!
Because there is not that much money on county cricket. There was no real financial benefit to invest in floodlights as there were few night games.
hmmm, it's just that when you look at the grounds in countries like India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Australia, South Africa or even in the UAE...they all have grounds with floodlights for years and years...and none of them (even before the IPL) had much money in any county/club cricket, or any county cricket played there at all..
Surely you'd think that for One Day Internationals at least, they'd have floodlights!
Honestly shocking. Thus I almost used to hate it when ODI tournaments are held in England and Windies due to the lack of day/night matches!
Playing under the lights adds a totally different atmosphere to games..
I may also have something to do with TV. Lets face it, not many people watch county cricket live or on TV so there is little financial benefit to moving the game to the evening. If Sky were pulling a few mil viewers for an evening game, then more money would go to the clubs, which would mean more money for improving grounds.
Things may be changing. Some Nat West Pro 40 games and Twenty20 Cup games are played under lights, where available.
I dont know much about domestic cricket abroad, but i dont think there is any country that has 18 teams like there are in England & Wales. Isnt there only 6 in Australia and South Africa.
Maybe English cricket would be better served with less teams? That would improve the quality of competition and thus improve the interest in the game. You could then reduce the amount of foreigners, thus more English players would be playing higher level cricket.
In Europe they have natural light till 9-9:30 in summers.
Lol, fair enough but....well obviously it's not practical relying on natural light in a day and night match!
Good point. But its not all that oftern though - most of the time its overcast anyway.
How did Durham go from not even being in the championship to county champions, and how do the Tykes like being overshadowed by these neighbouring upstarts?
please can you explain to me the Duckworth Lewis Method
We should really ask John Dyson this question!
Come on, some decent questions. How about my opinion on the greats of the game?
What do you think about Tuffers as a commentator?
Spoony's opinion does not matter.
Sachin.
Sachin.
Tendulkar or Lara?
Lara. Simply because I think his best, was better than Tendulkar's. Also, if we're being uber critical - Tendulkar didn't face the best attacks in the 90's. How many games did he play against the Australian, Pakistani and South Africa attacks during that period?(if I'm wrong - I'll stand corrected) that said, he probably the closest thing to Bradman in terms of aesthetics. Uncannily actually. But it's close - my biggest criticism of Lara is that he played for himself, whereas Sachin was a better team player.
Having said all that, both couldn't hold a candle to Viv Richards.
Anymore questions? How about the best West Indian bowler of all time?
Sachin and Lara faced the same attacks. Sachin has more centuries against Australians than anyone else. I'm sure he played more against Younis and Akram then Lara. And which SA bowlers are you talking about? Pollock, De Villiers, Donald? Not sure who faced them more but I can remember a couple of great centuries from Sachin against that attack. The 169 at Durban (I think) was one of his all time best knocks. The only thing where Lara would beat Sachin would be that he could convert big scores into really big scores. Sachin has fewer double hundreds than Dravid I think.
Actually, it'll be interesting to compare their stats against the best bowling nations. As for SA - yeah, Pollock and Donaldo(feck). Not saying it was better than Aus and Pak's attacks of the 90's - mainly because it was a bit two dimensional - but on a fast track at home, it didn't make much difference.
Basically, Sachin in Aus, Pak and SA compared to Lara in Aus, Pak and SA (90s)
I'd say Sachin probably has a better record aginst Aussies, Lara would be better against SA. Not sure about Pakistan. Would be close.
India in Australia Test Series - 46.00(only played once against Aus in Aus during the 90s)
India in Pakistan Test Series - 35.83(only played once in Pakistan during the 90s)
India in South Africa Test Series, 1992/93 - 33.66 and 1996/97 - 40.16
India in Pakistan Test Series - 35.83(only played once in Pakistan during the 90s)
India in South Africa Test Series, 1992/93 - 33.66 and 1996/97 - 40.16
West Indies in Aus - 58.25 and 32.88
West Indies in Pakistan Test Series, 1990/91 - 24.50 and 1997/98 - 21.50
West Indies in South Africa Test Series, 1998/99 - 31.00 (only played once in SA during the 90s)
Both have much better records at home, it has to be said.
West Indies in Pakistan Test Series, 1990/91 - 24.50 and 1997/98 - 21.50
West Indies in South Africa Test Series, 1998/99 - 31.00 (only played once in SA during the 90s)
Both have much better records at home, it has to be said.
Why just the 90s? The Aussie attack was pretty good until McGrath and Warne retired.
Sachin in Australia - 16 tests 6 centuries 58.53 average
Munaf Patel is just coming round to ours.
Do the Caftards have a question for him?
Do the Caftards have a question for him?
Yes. But Pakistan's attack was at its peak in the 90s and SA - ditto, probably.
We'll do their whole careers against Australia.
Lara both home and away against Australia - 51.00
Tendulkar home away against Australia - 56.08.
Both impressive, to be fair.
Can you ask him what happened to Irfan's pace? Seriously.
Think you're confusing him with his brother.
What's the "follow on?" I thought everyone had two innings, and if both teams didn't get that then it was a draw?
The Chinaman is the left-arm spinner's googly, the topspinner spins towards the batsman rather than across him and the flipper is a backspinning ball.
England batted first and scored 425, right?
Australia have to come within 200 runs of England(225 in this case). If they don't, England have the option of enforcing the follow-on, which basically means England can force Australia to bat their 2nd innings immediately.
England will choose to enforce the follow-on because their bowlers have bowled only 48 overs so far and won't be tired.. assuming that they bowl Australia out soon tomorrow. In some cases, teams choose to not enforce the follow-on because their bowlers will be tired after bowling long spells. England in this match also have the advantage of having gone in with 5 bowlers, hence less workload for each bowler.
Um. I'm pretty sure the chinaman is just the name given to a left-arm unorthodox spin. Ball coming into the right-hand batsman.
Why does Pietersen try and make a stunning save at the byline and feck it up, instead of just slapping the ball away and saving the points.
because he's a c-unt?