What's new

The Cricket Thread

Shanks

Kinda not anymore....
May 11, 2005
31,210
19,152
I think the fact that he died as a result of something that happened in a game, such a freak accident, has had an affect on this as well. His friends actually saw him collapse on the pitch and pretty much die in front of them, there was no time for any of them to prepare for what happened, and I still think most people thought he would pull through.

He was a country boy, who achieved something that the majority only dream of, and seems like he was a genuinely popular member of the team. I don't think there has been a mass hysteria, I would expect the same sort of thing in this country if an English footballer died on the pitch during a game or as a result of something that happened on it.
Agree, I'd say it would garner similiar reactions if it happened here on a football pitch.

Fella who had a heart attack at white hart lane, hit some serious news levels, and he ended up surviving.
 

montylynch

Fandabeedozee
Jun 23, 2005
5,827
4,000
Also, the fact that it was such a rare occurrence. Cricket is the No.1 sport in Aus, from backyard cricket to state cricket to test cricket, they love the game. When your skipper in Australia, you don't just skipper the side into battle, you skipper the country into battle. It's probably seen as a more important job than the PM.

Be interesting to see how the test team reacts when they play their first test on Tuesday. It'll be hard for some to get back into the swing of things, I'm sure there will still be some raw emotions.
 

panties

has a nine incher
Mar 13, 2014
1,345
1,919
Been up since 4.30 watching England. Superb batting from James Taylor thus far
 

Archibald&Crooks

Aegina Expat
Admin
Feb 1, 2005
55,616
205,279
At 170-3 after 35 overs the commentators were saying 300 + was on the cards and I laughed as they hadn't had the standard collapse yet. Usually from that position 260-270 is where they'll end up and so it came to pass.

170-3 became 173-5 and we limped to a not anywhere near good enough 265. Pretty much as usual.

Now the bowlers 'might' win this for us (unlikely as its currently 185-3) but 8 or 9 times out of ten they wouldn't, they couldn't. Its just the same thing time after time after time with little or no sign of improvement.

IMO the selectors and whoever else responsible, who have made a massive deal out of moving the last ashes series and cancelling/moving other stuff to accomodate this are fucking up royally by changing pretty much nothing, the whole thing will have been wasted and we'll arrive at the World Cup none the wiser as to what our best team is and will go out at the first opportunity. And THEN, the required changes will be made.

Buffoonery at its finest. All them years ago Ian Botham was right and not much has changed.
 

SteveH

BSoDL candidate for SW London
Jul 21, 2003
8,642
9,313
At 170-3 after 35 overs the commentators were saying 300 + was on the cards and I laughed as they hadn't had the standard collapse yet. Usually from that position 260-270 is where they'll end up and so it came to pass.

170-3 became 173-5 and we limped to a not anywhere near good enough 265. Pretty much as usual.

Now the bowlers 'might' win this for us (unlikely as its currently 185-3) but 8 or 9 times out of ten they wouldn't, they couldn't. Its just the same thing time after time after time with little or no sign of improvement.

IMO the selectors and whoever else responsible, who have made a massive deal out of moving the last ashes series and cancelling/moving other stuff to accomodate this are fucking up royally by changing pretty much nothing, the whole thing will have been wasted and we'll arrive at the World Cup none the wiser as to what our best team is and will go out at the first opportunity. And THEN, the required changes will be made.

Buffoonery at its finest. All them years ago Ian Botham was right and not much has changed.

Would help if we picked the best players. I dont get the likes of Stokes playing (a Spurs fan I believe).
 

Arnoldtoo

The thinking ape's ape
May 18, 2006
35,408
55,179
At 170-3 after 35 overs the commentators were saying 300 + was on the cards and I laughed as they hadn't had the standard collapse yet. Usually from that position 260-270 is where they'll end up and so it came to pass.

170-3 became 173-5 and we limped to a not anywhere near good enough 265. Pretty much as usual.

Now the bowlers 'might' win this for us (unlikely as its currently 185-3) but 8 or 9 times out of ten they wouldn't, they couldn't. Its just the same thing time after time after time with little or no sign of improvement.

IMO the selectors and whoever else responsible, who have made a massive deal out of moving the last ashes series and cancelling/moving other stuff to accomodate this are fucking up royally by changing pretty much nothing, the whole thing will have been wasted and we'll arrive at the World Cup none the wiser as to what our best team is and will go out at the first opportunity. And THEN, the required changes will be made.

Buffoonery at its finest. All them years ago Ian Botham was right and not much has changed.

I think we know that our best team hasn't got Cook in it, but we're not going to play that team.

My 12 would be: Hales, Ali, Taylor, Root, Morgan, Buttler, Bopara, Jordan, Woakes, Broad, Tredwell, Anderson

To make up the 15 I'd have Bell, Kieswetter and Stokes
 

Archibald&Crooks

Aegina Expat
Admin
Feb 1, 2005
55,616
205,279
I think we know that our best team hasn't got Cook in it, but we're not going to play that team.
Exactly. We can all see it except from the people currently enagaged in spunking several months preperation up the wall. Sadly it'll only be Cook that goes and not the inept fuckwits running English cricket.
 

Arnoldtoo

The thinking ape's ape
May 18, 2006
35,408
55,179
Exactly. We can all see it except from the people currently enagaged in spunking several months preperation up the wall. Sadly it'll only be Cook that goes and not the inept fuckwits running English cricket.

Well yes, but you and I are too busy to take it on right now!
 

SpursManChris

Well-Known Member
May 15, 2007
5,347
2,458
I cannot believe Sky have the ashes. What a total and utter disgrace. We have it on our anti-siphoning list, Pay TV can't get it. Is it away AND home ashes? I know it's at least away. Do you have ANY test cricket protected?
 

nidge

Sand gets everywhere!!!!!
Staff
Jul 27, 2004
24,868
11,368
I cannot believe Sky have the ashes. What a total and utter disgrace. We have it on our anti-siphoning list, Pay TV can't get it. Is it away AND home ashes? I know it's at least away. Do you have ANY test cricket protected?

All test cricket is on Sky. Highlights are on Channel 5.
 

nidge

Sand gets everywhere!!!!!
Staff
Jul 27, 2004
24,868
11,368
Fucking DISGRACEFUL. What a piss weak, piece of shit government, buckling under Murdoch pressure.

Not really. Test cricket was barely watched before 2005 when the last test match shown in full on free to air TV was when England won the Ashes in 2005. (Sky I believe were already confirmed to take over rights before that Ashes series.) At this point the ECB were desperate for money and Sky were willing to put money into the sport where the BBC, ITV, Channel 4 and 5 weren't willing to.
 

SpursManChris

Well-Known Member
May 15, 2007
5,347
2,458
Not really. Test cricket was barely watched before 2005 when the last test match shown in full on free to air TV was when England won the Ashes in 2005. (Sky I believe were already confirmed to take over rights before that Ashes series.) At this point the ECB were desperate for money and Sky were willing to put money into the sport where the BBC, ITV, Channel 4 and 5 weren't willing to.
Actually, I did temporarily forget that cricket is far from being a big popular sport over there.
 
Top