Cricket: More Than a Game

Wow. Two big games for the boys and they have really delivered! Morgan and Colly have both impressed me this weekend.

Condolences to SA, MrDeVil. How were you guys to know that England would actually show up?

so apparently england played all their bad games against australia at home.
It would be great if NZ could beat england now so both favourites from the group get knocked out.

Haakon7 wrote:

Wow. Two big games for the boys and they have really delivered! Morgan and Colly have both impressed me this weekend.

Condolences to SA, MrDeVil. How were you guys to know that England would actually show up?

Hehe, yeah. I though England and NZ were going to be the whipping boys of the pool, couldn't have been more wrong. The English players played like they had nothing to lose which was good for them, ours played like they had everything to lose.

Our pace bowling was piss-poor due to rust, and the track had nothing for the spinners.

My heart breaks for Graeme Smith, he's not a popular guy, last night he played the game of his life and it didn't help.

My heart breaks for Graeme Smith, he's not a popular guy, last night he played the game of his life and it didn't help.

really?
I think he is well regarded here in Australia. I think a lot of us were half hoping he could hold on for the draw when he came out injured in Sydney.

superslug wrote:
My heart breaks for Graeme Smith, he's not a popular guy, last night he played the game of his life and it didn't help.

really?
I think he is well regarded here in Australia. I think a lot of us were half hoping he could hold on for the draw when he came out injured in Sydney.

Yeah, it's weird. He's really not well liked here.

I think it's because he took over the captaincy from the very popular (but crap) Sean Pollock, and even more popular (but crooked) Hansie Cronje. Here was this cocky youngster no-one had even heard of suddenly taking charge of our team.

Most people have, at best, a grudging respect for the guy, but little fondness. It's improved with events like Sydney, but until he brings home a trophy or two it's going to be tough to get through to the South African cricket fan.

Over here I think he is seen as a very good player, tough competitor, but perhaps not always the most sporting of individuals, though I don't know off the top of my head of any specific incidents which might bring that about.

I would say that when I saw Strauss refusing his request yesterday for a runner, I did think that if the situations were reversed that the same would have occurred.

I wondering now whether England and NZ will declare an Anschluss for tomorrow to eliminate both SA and SL, as England seek to 'give everyone a run out' and lose to the Black Caps....there'll certainly be accusations of that from SL if NZ win.

Hmmm... Looks like England got a bit cocky.

Cue Andrew Strauss (possibly)

"Oh botheration, we are 77-4. But we're already through and if we get beat, both Sri Lanka and South Africa are out....I really must talk to the chaps about that. I must say that it would also be a pity if I were to bowl 10 overs of medium paced dobbers, we were to be defeated within 20 overs and we could all go down the bar and get bladdered"

Wow!

146 all out, and that's with a free lifeline for Collingwood from Vettori. This makes Sunday's game even more embarrassing. The NZ bowling attack was several orders of magnitude better than ours, and that's a sad thing to say, even Mills was looking dangerous.

That pitch looked well dodgy when England were batting - seems to have been replaced in the interval

Vettori's always seemed like a good sort - quite amusing that it was Collingwood though.

It did look like a 'sporting' wicket when England were batting, but yeah, McCullum didn't seem to have any trouble swatting us around the park. Bopara's LBW looked like the sort of ball you'd get on a wet spring pitch in Hampshire NW Division III.

On the 'was it/wasn't it' runout, it sounded to me like Harper clearly said 'Over', so it was just a storm in a teacup.

And so it's off to the bar, with a stiff digit or two extended in the direction of Chuckeritheran and Slinga.

There's summat you don't see every day in professional sports

from the England v Australia semi final

"FLYING ANTS STOP PLAY"

Punter obviously hasn't got them well drilled enough.

i am sure the press will find some way to make it reflect poorly on his captaincy.

While Australia will always have my respect NZ has me on their side for the final because they are such underdogs.

But, with Vettori on the injury list I think their dream run may be over.

With the start they had if Vettori had been there to bowl out the middle overs Australia might have been in trouble.

So this tournament is supposed to be the savior of 50 over cricket?

Not with a game like yesterday. I think this Champions Trophy has had it's day. Tours are far more entertaining.

I actually thought there was a lot of good cricket played - as a confessed hater of 'moron cricket', or 20-20 as it is known to others, the standard of a lot of the matches was pretty high, despite the poor pitches and flying insect interludes.

I take the point though about finals where the two teams don't exactly bring loads of supporters, and I'm presuming that there isn't that large an expat community of Australians or New Zealanders in SA.

The problem with tours now, of course, is that the timespan of them has shortened as counties don't want their players away for long periods of time, and yet they are trying to squash in 2 MC games as well as ODI's and 4 tests into England's tour of SA, which is only a few weeks away, and then I guess some of them will want to be off playing that Indian slogging nonsense league....cue Petersen's miraculous recovery.

The problem with cricket is that it is a major time commitment, hence the popularity of the 20/20 game. Overall I like the 50 over game, but to regain some impetus they need to encourage risk taking. It's what the peons like.

I'm presuming that there isn't that large an expat community of Australians or New Zealanders in SA.

And yeah, Saffers flood to Aus and NZ, they don't come this way. It's why Perth is practically a home game for South African sports teams.

davet010 wrote:

I actually thought there was a lot of good cricket played - as a confessed hater of 'moron cricket', or 20-20 as it is known to others, the standard of a lot of the matches was pretty high, despite the poor pitches and flying insect interludes.

I agree. I enjoyed the tournament as a whole, A couple big upsets in the group stages really couldn't shake out a different outcome in the end, though. Proud of the Kiwis though, as most people expected them to be whipping boys and they rode that all the way to the final.

I take your point, DeVil, but just because 20-20 is what the peons want, doesn't mean that's what they should get.

It is disappointing to see the stands so barren, but imagine if the same final had been held in Pakistan. Not exactly a flourishing Antipodean ex-pat community there.

Haakon7 wrote:

I take your point, DeVil, but just because 20-20 is what the peons want, doesn't mean that's what they should get. :D

I agree in principle, unfortunately we're a dying breed. Commercial realities rule the roost.

MrDeVil909 wrote:
Haakon7 wrote:

I take your point, DeVil, but just because 20-20 is what the peons want, doesn't mean that's what they should get. :D

I agree in principle, unfortunately we're a dying breed. Commercial realities rule the roost. :(

Yeah, some of the counties over here take as much income in their 4 or 5 home 20-20s as they do from every home 4-dayer, and the various one-day trophies seem to be sliding down the list of priorities.

I'm pretty see that local franchises make more out of one 20/20 than one 4 day game.

A 20/20 game between two top franchises will sell out Wanderers easily, a 4 day probably won't get a total of 30 thousand over the whole game.

It would seem most of the people in this thread dislike 20/20 which must be against the grain given ratings worldwide. I dislike the removal of skill and addition of luck that comes with the format.

superslug wrote:

It would seem most of the people in this thread dislike 20/20 which must be against the grain given ratings worldwide. I dislike the removal of skill and addition of luck that comes with the format.

The people in this thread are purists, for better or worse.

I'm actually softening to the format because it is starting to become a bit more strategic than the slap 'n giggle cricket it was. Just see the rise of spin-bowlers and the convention to bowl first, the opposite to the other formats, as examples.

I'll still take a test first, but 20/20 is getting new people into watching cricket. I hope they graduate to longer forms when the appeal wanes and 20/20 remains an intro to the sport.

superslug wrote:

It would seem most of the people in this thread dislike 20/20 which must be against the grain given ratings worldwide. I dislike the removal of skill and addition of luck that comes with the format.

Based on what happens at Old Trafford, I think that you get a different crowd altogether. 20/20 matches start at 5.30pm, ideal for people to go straight from work (OT is on the Metrolink light rail network), it's not that expensive and there's always a result by 9.45 or so. I think if 20/20 is where people start their cricketing experience from, it would be quite hard to move to 40 or 50 over cricket (which takes a full Sunday) or heaven forbid the 4 day county game, which is all but dead in terms of attendance....there are too many counties, too many overseas players here for 2 months or so, too many games.

I think tests stand on their own, but the county game is all but dead (my dad still blames Geoffrey Boycott) here, and 50 over is dying.

As far as revenue goes, I'm pretty sure that Lancs make more from their 4 20/20's than all of their county games put together, and Lancs are one of the best supported counties in terms of members.

MrDeVil909 wrote:

The people in this thread are purists, for better or worse. ;)

I am sure thre are those who don't consider the one day games part of pure cricket.

So that everyone is clear, I did not grow up playing cricket (wrong country for it) and have come to the game relatively late (age 21, not playing seriously till the age of 25).
Though I've been playing competitively for four seasons, I'm still trying desperately to get lots of my fundamentals right while trying to tune the areas of the game where I've got some (if any) natural ability.

I'm only saying this so that you understand where I'm coming from when I recommend Bob Woolmer's Art & Science of Cricket.

I picked it up for some tips and techniques and clearly didn't look at the 650+(!) page count. The book covers such a broad area of the game that I'm not really sure where to begin, but its like having the accumulated knowledge of decades at your disposal. I find myself just opening it up and reading about whatever topic happens to jump out at me, and I'll be damned if I don't always learn something.

So, if any of you are looking for a reference book on the game covering everything from batting fundamentals to training regime recommendations to the science behind Warne's delivery to Gatting, I'd recommend it.

superslug wrote:
MrDeVil909 wrote:

The people in this thread are purists, for better or worse. ;)

I am sure thre are those who don't consider the one day games part of pure cricket.

Yeah, well. Some people are beyond help.

Haakon7 wrote:

So that everyone is clear, I did not grow up playing cricket (wrong country for it) and have come to the game relatively late (age 21, not playing seriously till the age of 25).
Though I've been playing competitively for four seasons, I'm still trying desperately to get lots of my fundamentals right while trying to tune the areas of the game where I've got some (if any) natural ability.

I'm only saying this so that you understand where I'm coming from when I recommend Bob Woolmer's Art & Science of Cricket.

I picked it up for some tips and techniques and clearly didn't look at the 650+(!) page count. The book covers such a broad area of the game that I'm not really sure where to begin, but its like having the accumulated knowledge of decades at your disposal. I find myself just opening it up and reading about whatever topic happens to jump out at me, and I'll be damned if I don't always learn something.

So, if any of you are looking for a reference book on the game covering everything from batting fundamentals to training regime recommendations to the science behind Warne's delivery to Gatting, I'd recommend it.

Yeah, probably a heavier volume than I will ever need, but I understand that it's considered a must-have text for players.

MrDeVil909 wrote:

Yeah, probably a heavier volume than I will ever need, but I understand that it's considered a must-have text for players.

I completely understand that.
I was just having a moment of man-love for the book and thought I'd share!