What an awesome set of matches today, Surrey winning by a run, Leicester hammering Glamorgan and 2 colosul run totals in the final and it all finished with my county winning, Cricket does not get much better,
Twenty:20 (or is it the other way round)
- Thread starter Mozza
- Start date
Its not cricket as I know it but it is entertaining. But Lancs bottle went.
Aye... Needing 7 to win outright from the last over or 6 to win on less wickets lost it should have been in the bag. Just knock it around for 6 singles, there were enough gaps in the field. Of course after following this plan for the first ball or two Hegg got bored and/or pressured and decided to try and play a little premeditated dink shot instead of playing it like every other ball in the last two overs and nudging it for a single. Of course he messed up, Surrey got a dot ball and now needing more than a run a ball with the way those two were batting and Azhar Mahmood was bowling I could just tell it was all overRed Sea said:
.We've been discussing it on Red Issue and it seems like the consensus was Hegg needs to be relieved of the captaincy. He's not a great captain (e.g back end of last year where against Essex I think when we should have gone for a win in the last day of a CC match he decided to be overly defensive and bat for an extra session to make sure we couldn't lose before puting the opposition in and we ended up drawing a match we should have won.) Also his batting has gone downhill over the last few years. This Lancs team is just such an underachiving lot. It's so frustrating
.gutting really lowest total successfully defended ever? the Fredmeister shoulda got 135 on his own...with one hand tied behind his back!
maybe i shoulda started this thread n all
lowest total successfully defended ever? the Fredmeister shoulda got 135 on his own...with one hand tied behind his back!maybe i shoulda started this thread n all
Quite new to the whole cricket malarkey
Anyone fancy fillin me in on the differences in Cricket and Twenty:20 Cricket?
Anyone fancy fillin me in on the differences in Cricket and Twenty:20 Cricket?
Cricket's the old shite created by the English.Manchesters Finest said:
20:20(or whatever the feck it is)is just newer thats all...
nealn said:Aye... Needing 7 to win outright from the last over or 6 to win on less wickets lost it should have been in the bag. Just knock it around for 6 singles, there were enough gaps in the field. Of course after following this plan for the first ball or two Hegg got bored and/or pressured and decided to try and play a little premeditated dink shot instead of playing it like every other ball in the last two overs and nudging it for a single. Of course he messed up, Surrey got a dot ball and now needing more than a run a ball with the way those two were batting and Azhar Mahmood was bowling I could just tell it was all over
We've been discussing it on Red Issue and it seems like the consensus was Hegg needs to be relieved of the captaincy. He's not a great captain (e.g back end of last year where against Essex I think when we should have gone for a win in the last day of a CC match he decided to be overly defensive and bat for an extra session to make sure we couldn't lose before puting the opposition in and we ended up drawing a match we should have won.) Also his batting has gone downhill over the last few years. This Lancs team is just such an underachiving lot. It's so frustrating
I agree that Hegg isn't the player he was, and it does seem we need a new captain. I am one of those who would play a less than average player if he was a brilliant captain, I think the position is that critical.
However it is difficult to say who would be the best option being an outsider. Is there a player who can motivate other players and lift them when they are out of form and keep them on their toes? And is also tactically aware? I dont know. I quite like Cork but from what I hear he isn't the most popular player and a captain who creates divisions isn't a good option.
Manchesters Finest said:
(ignore DONADO)
Twenty20 is normal (limited overs) cricket reduced to 20 overs-a-side and speeded up to the approx length of a footie match to attract kids and ADD sufferers.
it has removed all of the analyses and tactics in favour of big-hitting and fast running.
on the one hand, it's pretty entertaining...on the other, it kinda defeats the object of cricket.
i'm not sure if i like it yet...giving it time.
Oi, now you're trying to contradict me and in the process, doing it to yourself.GiggsysGirl said:
I have nothing against this wallopy sort of 'cricket'.Just the thing is I wouldn't like to see it being played anywhere outside of that country of yours.No objections otherwise...
And as per the reference to the jab at the great game of cricket, I err...just didnt know how to put it across y'see
DONADO said:Oi, now you're trying to contradict me and in the process, doing it to yourself.
I have nothing against this wallopy sort of 'cricket'.Just the thing is I wouldn't like to see it being played anywhere outside of that country of yours.No objections otherwise...
And as per the reference to the jab at the great game of cricket, I err...just didnt know how to put it across y'see
my sincerest apologies, but you have to admit on the face of your original post it appeared that you were not even a fan of cricket let alone 20/20!
therefore, i was left baffled as to why you were visiting the thread in the first place!
say something nice about it and i'll let the matter drop
Ah..you are quite mistaken.You see its an inbuilt thing for Indians to like cricket.You can't ignore the game in this country.GiggsysGirl said:my sincerest apologies, but you have to admit on the face of your original post it appeared that you were not even a fan of cricket let alone 20/20!
therefore, i was left baffled as to why you were visiting the thread in the first place!
say something nice about it and i'll let the matter drop
I dont agree with concept of one day cricket, let alone 20:20(even though one day cricket is at times watchable)
It is a difficult question but Chilton has always struck me as being quite Vaughanesque in his "cool", almost unflappable, style. Add in that he's young so he can be a captain for years to come and that he's unlikely to be picked by England in the near future and he seems a good choice. Law is also a possibility I suppose as is Chapple but I'd give it to Chilton personally.Red Sea said:
DONADO said:
you dont agree with the concept on one-day cricket?
FLINTOFF'S THE WORLD'S BEST - VAUGHAN
England captain Michael Vaughan believes he has the world's best cricketer in his team for the third npower Test against the West Indies at Old Trafford.
Andrew Flintoff made 167 in the second Test at Edgbaston and, after former England ODI captain Adam Hollioake hailed the Lancastrian as the top cricketer in the world game, current skipper Vaughan agreed.
After making half-centuries in each of his last six Tests and taking his first five-wicket haul in the Caribbean, Vaughan believes the all-rounder's consistency backs up his claim.
"Someone mentioned the other day that he's the best cricketer in the world at the minute and I'm certainly not going to argue with that," the Yorkshire batsman said.
Vaughan believes that Flintoff's recent scores - including three centuries in the past 13 months - prove that power is not his only asset.
"At the minute he's on the crest of a wave, he's playing exceptionally well," enthused Vaughan. "People talk about him being a powerful hitter, but not a lot of people mention what a good technique he has.
"He's certainly looking solid and getting a real good platform and we're delighted to have him in the team and we're very lucky."
And Vaughan is confident about the prospects of another recent England matchwinner, even though Steve Harmison has only taken three wickets in the past two Tests.
The Durham fast bowler was Man of the Series when England won 3-0 in the West Indies and Vaughan believes he will return to the wickets soon.
"I've said all along that he'll get a bagful of wickets in the series," said Vaughan. "I've seen him in practice and the wicket here could suit him a little bit more. I don't think he's bowled that badly, I think West Indies have played him pretty well."
WTF...is he for real??
England captain Michael Vaughan believes he has the world's best cricketer in his team for the third npower Test against the West Indies at Old Trafford.
Andrew Flintoff made 167 in the second Test at Edgbaston and, after former England ODI captain Adam Hollioake hailed the Lancastrian as the top cricketer in the world game, current skipper Vaughan agreed.
After making half-centuries in each of his last six Tests and taking his first five-wicket haul in the Caribbean, Vaughan believes the all-rounder's consistency backs up his claim.
"Someone mentioned the other day that he's the best cricketer in the world at the minute and I'm certainly not going to argue with that," the Yorkshire batsman said.
Vaughan believes that Flintoff's recent scores - including three centuries in the past 13 months - prove that power is not his only asset.
"At the minute he's on the crest of a wave, he's playing exceptionally well," enthused Vaughan. "People talk about him being a powerful hitter, but not a lot of people mention what a good technique he has.
"He's certainly looking solid and getting a real good platform and we're delighted to have him in the team and we're very lucky."
And Vaughan is confident about the prospects of another recent England matchwinner, even though Steve Harmison has only taken three wickets in the past two Tests.
The Durham fast bowler was Man of the Series when England won 3-0 in the West Indies and Vaughan believes he will return to the wickets soon.
"I've said all along that he'll get a bagful of wickets in the series," said Vaughan. "I've seen him in practice and the wicket here could suit him a little bit more. I don't think he's bowled that badly, I think West Indies have played him pretty well."
WTF...is he for real?? jealousy, jealousy...so sad!
Vaughan doesn't say he's the best cricketer in the world. He says he's the best cricketer in the world at the moment. Meaning he's the player in the best form at the moment and I can't think of another cricketer in the form he is at present...
Its also difficult to criticise Flintoff at the moment he is a genuine all rounder in the sense he is a first choice Batsman and Bowler (When fit) and a first class fielder and also by all accounts a great team player - always a big plus.
The only main criticism is he needs to do it against the Aussies, but that is in the future, he can do little more than he is doing and what team wouldn't have him down as one of their first choices?
The only main criticism is he needs to do it against the Aussies, but that is in the future, he can do little more than he is doing and what team wouldn't have him down as one of their first choices?
To be honest the Aussies thing isn't really a criticism as he's never played against them. Its not like he's someone like Trescothick who has tried and failed against the Aussies, he's just never had a go!Red Sea said:
nealn said:
No what I meant was its always difficult to analyse how good a player is unless he is competing against the best. If Flintoff is to be regarded as the best in the world he has to prove it against the best.
Yeah I get that, but I mean it's not a criticism of Flintoff per se in the sense that it is a criticism of someonle like Trescothick. Its more a criticism of the accuracy of any judgements on Flintoff rather then a critique of the player himself. It must be said however he is, on current form, one of the best out there in both suits. If he can keep it up he should give the Aussies a few problems especially as he is a big game player and it doesn't get much bigger than the Ashes...Red Sea said:
nealn said:
No it was never meant that way like Botham never scored a 100 against the Windies who were the greatest side at the time. I've already said he is looking very good and if he does it against the Aussies then there will be no doubt he is the number 1.
So I feel we are in agreement. Flintoff is a very good player but to make him the undoubted top allrounder in world cricket he needs to do it against the Aussies and he needs to carry his good form on for a prolonged period. Flintoff can't be criticised for not proving himself against the Aussies as he has never played them but the accuracy of any judgements on him can be criticised as we can't make an accurate judgemnt until we see how he does agaist the world's best. I'd like to see how well he does on a difficult tour of SA as well... Should be very intresting...Red Sea said:
Absolutely!!
Twenty:20 is a great way to revive interest in domestic championships. Its been a great success in England and IMO should be implemented in India as well, as an add-on to the Ranji and Irani trophies. Theres currently no interest in them at all, we get like one and a half spectators for each game. Having such exciting edge-of-your-seat three hour affairs would be a huge success IMO, rekindle the interest of the masses in the domestic game, and also give the players that extra bit of push that seems to be missing now.
This is bullshit!
Flintoff isnt the best in world.
I have and will always believe that Test matches decide how good player really is.
I don even consider him that great all rounder when it comes to the TEST level.
He isnt as effective as a bowler at test level, his main strength as a bolwer is to cramp batsmean for room , bowl at chest , basically cut out the scoring shots so he committs mistake. this works in one dayers only not in tests.
Also i don care if he hasnt played against Aussie yet, but untill you perform very well against best side in the world you cant be considered the best.
Flintoff isnt the best in world.
I have and will always believe that Test matches decide how good player really is.
I don even consider him that great all rounder when it comes to the TEST level.
He isnt as effective as a bowler at test level, his main strength as a bolwer is to cramp batsmean for room , bowl at chest , basically cut out the scoring shots so he committs mistake. this works in one dayers only not in tests.
Also i don care if he hasnt played against Aussie yet, but untill you perform very well against best side in the world you cant be considered the best.
If you read the article carefully you will see that he is refferred to as the best in the world at the moment meaning he is the player in the best form, which even the likes of Ricky Ponting (currently playing County Cricket for Somerset)has admitted he is at the moment. As for the cramping for room bit not working in tests, it's worked well enough for him to be taking his wickets at 25.33 runs apiece this year. And me and RedSea have both said you can't call him the best until he's done it against the best.crappycraperson said:
feckin hell
every month some player of a team is in great form so he should be reagarded as the best in the world ATM.
Flintoff has along way to go still to be even regarded as one of the best.
every month some player of a team is in great form so he should be reagarded as the best in the world ATM.
Flintoff has along way to go still to be even regarded as one of the best.
That's the point... No one has ever said Flintoff is the best in the world, people like Vaughan and Ponting have said he's the best in the world at the moment because over the past few months he's been playing well. Just like when Graeme Smith was scoring double centuries for fun last summer people were saying he was the best in the world at that moment. Which part of that are you having trouble grasping? Flintoff isn't anywhere near the best player in the world but he is playing the best at this moment. I doubt Smith will ever go down as one of games greats but last summer he was playing as the best batsman in the world and deserved that title.crappycraperson said:
hes not the best in the world..not even in the top 10.. hes an average but dangerous batsman and a good bowler..not great at any... the ATM bit means that hes presently the best in the world.. which he is clearly not..
i havent been following the english cricket of late... but theyv been playing average teams... hes never done much against the top teams -aus,us etc. If he has run into some form it must be very recent... Looong way to go for him to establish himself as one of the top players
i havent been following the english cricket of late... but theyv been playing average teams... hes never done much against the top teams -aus,us etc. If he has run into some form it must be very recent... Looong way to go for him to establish himself as one of the top players
nealn said:
i disagree... a string of hundreds doesnt give anyone the tag of best player in the world... smith did have a run of centuries but noone really thought he was the best in the world...lots of players have gone thru that... azhar mehmood i remember started with a bang..scoring centuries ,taking wickets.. noone thot he was the best... its like im sure if drogba scores 10 or 12 goals in his first 12 premership games this season noone will call him the best in the world...
players better than flintoff..
indian batsman
shoaib
warne
murli
ponting
gilchrist
i could go on.
FFS... No one is saying he is the best player in the world. Just that he is AT THE MOMENT meaning that he is the best player on current form. Ponting is a far better batsman but when he says Flintoff is the best in the world at the moment he means that Flintoff's current form is better than his and every other players in the world at the moment. Last summer I wouldn't have said Smith is the best batsman in the world as Tendulker, Lara, Dravid, Ponting, Hayden, Inzaman, Kallis and Jayasuriya (to name a few) are better batsman than him but he was the best batsman in the world at that moment because he was in the best form at that moment.amolbhatia100 said:
It's an issue of definitions and semantics but most people would take the meaning of "best at the moment" as meaning the person playing the best at that time. That's why when Richie Benaud persistently reffered to Smith as the best batsman in world cricket at the moment last year he did not mean that Smith is better than Lara or Tendulker etc but he meant he was the batsman who was playing the best at that moment.
For example I think Gilchrist is the best wicketkeeper batsman in the world but I would say Parthiv Patel is a better wicketkeeper batsman at the moment as he is averaging over 64 with the bat since January compared to Gilchrists modest 30 (infact he is on a severe downward spiral with the bat at the moment averaging just over 20 in the last few matches he has played). Last summer I would have said Tendulker is the best batsman in the world but Smith is the best in the world at that moment. Just like Ponting and Vaughan don't mean Flintoff is the best player in the world just that he is playing the best at the moment.
And speaking of Indian batsman... Dinesh Mongia. Why has he never been given a go in tests? OK his ODI record is average but from his First Class and List A averages (http://www.cricinfo.com/link_to_database/PLAYERS/IND/M/MONGIA_D_06007730/) it seems that his longer version game is better than his limited overs game so why has he never been given a go in a test? From what I've seen of him for Lancashire he seems a good batter in the longer game. Very compact and neat. Good strokes and a useful bowler. With the problems India have had in the past with openers I'm surprised someone who seems well equiped for the opener's berth (patient and solid in defence) besides Sehwag has never been given a go. Sehwag, Dravid, Singh, Ganguly, Tendulker, Laxman, Patel (not in any order) = solid batting order IMO but Mongia could have been given a go when Laxman wasn't in great form a few years ago.
amolbhatia100 said:
oh for crying out loud!i'm sensing a pattern here! people who have been WATCHING Fred this summer (hit huge, carefully thought out totals / outsmart Lara yesterday) think he can't be bettered right now...
...whereas you lot seem to have a wholly unnecessary stick up your arse!
no one's saying he can perform like this against the Indians/Aussies but who says he can't?!!
GiggsysGirl... Can I just ask you for a favour. Please start a thread on the NatwestChallenge and the Champion's Trophy before I get excited and do it myself coz we all know what happened last timeGiggsysGirl said:
i'm sensing a pattern here! people who have been WATCHING Fred this summer (hit huge, carefully thought out totals / outsmart Lara yesterday) think he can't be bettered right now...
...whereas you lot seem to have a wholly unnecessary stick up your arse!
no one's saying he can perform like this against the Indians/Aussies but who says he can't?!!
P.S Jimmy's bowling shit...
nealn said:P.S Jimmy's bowling shit...
he is a bit
but to be fair a) he'd have a wicket if Thorpey wasn't such a doddery old man, b) he's been out the team a year...A YEAR and c) he's probably pining for me...probably!
p.s. thread on the way...
Dinesh mongia is nt that great and county cricket is average , anyone can perform there. Dinesh for the openernealn said:
Mongia got a good run in the side , even got ahead on laxman in WC but failed. He was in side for more than 1 year, didnt took his chance .
GiggsysGirl said:
i'm sensing a pattern here! people who have been WATCHING Fred this summer (hit huge, carefully thought out totals / outsmart Lara yesterday) think he can't be bettered right now...
...whereas you lot seem to have a wholly unnecessary stick up your arse!
no one's saying he can perform like this against the Indians/Aussies but who says he can't?!!
becos he hasnt so far maybe?? lots of players have come and gone like this...doing this kind of thing over a few months against rubbish opposition.. the best do it at the world cups,in big test series and more important over a number of years. etc.
So basically what vaughan said has practically no meaning...i dont give a feck abt what hes done in a couple of series...that really has very little meaning.. that way irfan pathan is the top fast bowler in the world(altho i think he actually might become).. but lets see..someday he might actually become one of the best all rounders, but lets wait a year or so
That's my point... He was given a run in the ODI side when it seems his game is far more suited to the longer version of the game. I'm just surprsed he was never given a go in what seems his prefferred format when the likes of Wasim Jaffer were...crappycraperson said:Dinesh mongia is nt that great and county cricket is average , anyone can perform there. Dinesh for the opener
Mongia got a good run in the side , even got ahead on laxman in WC but failed. He was in side for more than 1 year, didnt took his chance .