|
15 Mar 04 - 04:23 AM (#1136729) Subject: West Indies 47 all out! From: The Shambles I watched as the West Indies started their second innings a few runs behind England's first innings total, and then I had to go out. When I returned a little later I switched on to see how they were getting on. I was a little confused to see Grahme Thorpe saying how good it was to come over and get a good start in the series by winning the first test! I first thought that rain must have stopped play and this was a re-run of some old footage - but no. One swallow may not make a summer but this result was more than a little incredible........... It's just not cricket. |
|
15 Mar 04 - 04:30 AM (#1136731) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: Lanfranc I didn't believe in miracles - until now! Reminds me of the halcyon days of Jim Laker. Alan |
|
15 Mar 04 - 04:36 AM (#1136735) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: Rasener I watched it, and as each wicket went down, I shouted louder each time, with delight. My wife was saying, "I want to watch something else". I kept on saying that it would be finished soon - tongue in cheek. I was gobsmacked. What a cracking result. What's more it got me in my wife's good books, because she was able to watch what she wanted to. |
|
15 Mar 04 - 06:16 AM (#1136786) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: John MacKenzie This'll be about calypso then? John ;-)....Good result |
|
15 Mar 04 - 07:06 AM (#1136815) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: Strollin' Johnny Wooooooooooooooooooo-Hoo!!! :0) |
|
15 Mar 04 - 07:34 AM (#1136837) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: GUEST,Jon I'll take the victory quite happily but I am a little concerned about that score. I've not seen any coverage of this game but at test level, generaly speaking such scores either indicate appauling playing conditions or a loss of control/discipline by the batting side (even if there is good bowling as well). I enjoy contests more than one sided events and as such, although I do want England to win, I hope WI do better in the next match. |
|
15 Mar 04 - 07:48 AM (#1136848) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: Dave Bryant I think it's just a ply from the WIs - England will take it easy now and we'll get beaten in all the remaining matches. |
|
15 Mar 04 - 07:49 AM (#1136850) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: Flash Company The Spinners used to do a song which went:- Sunshine, sunshine, happy day. Off to the cricket match I'm away, Somebody else can work for me, I'm a happy absentee! Perhaps we could work it up to suit the situation? FC |
|
15 Mar 04 - 07:52 AM (#1136851) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: Rasener The fast bowler's perfect line and length was too good for the West Indies batsmen as they capitulated to their lowest ever Test total of 47. Harmison became the most successful bowler in Sabina Park history when he took 7-12 as he stunned the home crowd. When Bob Willis says that the bowling was excellent and Harmison was brilliant, I sit up and take notice. Don't under rate the English bowling. |
|
15 Mar 04 - 09:19 AM (#1136932) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: The Shambles Incidentally did you know that said Bob Willis included into his name by dead poll, the name Dylan in honour of his great hero (and fellow demon fast-bowler)Bob. That is true - except for the bit about Bob Dylan being a demon fast-bowler. That is BS (as this thread was intended to be). He is of course an outstanding wicket-keeper......... |
|
15 Mar 04 - 09:20 AM (#1136934) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: The Shambles No not DEAD poll. That should be DEED poll. |
|
15 Mar 04 - 09:24 AM (#1136936) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: The Shambles More about Robert George Dylan Willis. http://usa.cricinfo.com/db/PLAYERS/ENG/W/WILLIS_RGD_01001366/ |
|
15 Mar 04 - 09:32 AM (#1136942) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: GUEST,Jon Interesting... a name change based on another name change... Thanks for the info Villain, as I had said above, I'd not seen any coverage when making my comments. It's good to hear that true world class fast bowling was a big factor. Jon |
|
15 Mar 04 - 09:47 AM (#1136958) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: John MacKenzie I called my son Ewan after a certain Mr McColl, who did a bit of metamorphosing himself. John |
|
15 Mar 04 - 12:03 PM (#1137090) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: The Shambles Yes but could he bowl? |
|
15 Mar 04 - 12:07 PM (#1137094) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: Peace At risk of getting the rugby player upset, do you play this game with padding or shirt, shorts and shoes? |
|
16 Mar 04 - 05:32 AM (#1137824) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: Hrothgar Only 47 - and only against the Poms? I hate to think what Viv Richards would say. |
|
16 Mar 04 - 05:35 AM (#1137826) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: Hrothgar I shouldn't laugh too loudly - Australia have just been knocked over by Sri Lanka for 120. |
|
16 Mar 04 - 06:01 AM (#1137844) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: Teribus Appropriate Dylan Quote? "The times they are a changing" |
|
16 Mar 04 - 10:22 AM (#1138113) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: The Shambles I think that maybe 'A Hard Rains Gonna Fall' |
|
17 Mar 04 - 04:33 PM (#1139411) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: GUEST,WI_respects dat dun mek it, wha di rass a happen? |
|
18 Mar 04 - 10:24 AM (#1140002) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: Dave Bryant Giok - If you named him after Mr Miller, then surely you should have called him - James. |
|
18 Mar 04 - 01:13 PM (#1140145) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: Strollin' Johnny A shortage of Jocks and Paddies crowing on this thread? :0) |
|
18 Mar 04 - 01:58 PM (#1140188) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: The Shambles Robert George Zimmerman Willis? I hope that the England batsmen have gone out to buy some nice strong crash hats? I suspect that they will need them in the next match and the remaining games in the series. |
|
19 Mar 04 - 10:12 AM (#1140922) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: Rasener 53 for 0 for the windies. Looks a good batting wicket. A draw me thinks. Lots of runs on this wicket. |
|
19 Mar 04 - 10:54 AM (#1140963) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: Rasener 100 - 0 Oh dear |
|
19 Mar 04 - 10:55 AM (#1140964) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: Rasener Whoops 100 - 1 |
|
19 Mar 04 - 11:13 AM (#1140977) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: Rasener Whoops whoops Harmison at Lunch 7.5 overs 29 runs off him for 3 wickets Windies 110 - 3 |
|
19 Mar 04 - 07:55 PM (#1141350) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: The Shambles There were lots of stoppages for rain - so I am not sure of the final position. Last time they went off for bad light - it was less than 200 for 8! |
|
20 Mar 04 - 03:35 AM (#1141500) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: Hrothgar Australia have beaten Sri Lanka. |
|
20 Mar 04 - 02:14 PM (#1141817) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: The Shambles WOOOPS! England were 8 for 2! |
|
21 Mar 04 - 04:42 AM (#1142153) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: Strollin' Johnny 'Ere we go again! Mind you, at least we dare play sport against other nations, unlike some countries (no names, no pack-drill) who involve only themselves in a 'sport' and call it The World Series. |
|
22 Mar 04 - 04:38 AM (#1142701) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: GUEST,Ooh -Aah Not to worry chaps - Thorpy has done his stuff and we're 6-300, almost 100 ahead on a deteriorating pitch. |
|
22 Mar 04 - 05:50 AM (#1142744) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: The Shambles I wonder how much Graham Thorpe has paid Billy Bowden? He was lbw at least twice in one over! Perhaps Thorpe is paying to keep umpire Bowden in fancy hats? |
|
22 Mar 04 - 07:09 PM (#1143363) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: The Shambles It looks as if the England team are in great danger of winning this one too......... |
|
23 Mar 04 - 04:07 AM (#1143591) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: Rasener I have a very strong opinion about LBW. When I was an umpire, the batsman always got the benefit of the doubt. Its too easy to lift that finger. I can remember one very good slow bowler, appealing for LBW 3 times in one over. I gave not out each time. At the end of the over, he came up to me and quitly asked why I hadn't given the batsman out. I replied, that when he bowled he stood right in front of me, so that I was unable to see what happend once the ball pitched. He thanked me and from that time on he made sure that I had clear vision of the ball pitching. |
|
23 Mar 04 - 05:43 AM (#1143628) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: The Shambles A short explanation - before someone asks. lbw = Leg Before Wicket. In very simple terms it is when the unpire considers that the ball would have hit the wicket and been out - but for hitting the batsman's leg, first. |
|
23 Mar 04 - 06:29 AM (#1143651) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: Rasener Yes but it is a lot more complex than that. The umpire has to firstly determine the following. Did the ball hit the pads first outside the line of stumps on the offside, if so did the batsman offer a stroke. If he did not and in the opinion of the umpire the ball would have hit the wicket. Did the ball hit the pads first outside the line of stumps on the legside, then the batsman is not out. If the batsman is right back on his stumps, it makes the job a lot easier, becuase you can clearly judge if the ball would have hit the stumps. The way that the wicket has been behaving the way it has, then the batsman would need to be on the backfoot, for me to be able to give them out. If the batsman is on the front foot, that is a lot more difficult to judge. If somebody is bowling at 90mph, it is extremely diffcult to make positive decisions. As so often happens, a batsman is given out LBW, when in actual fact it was a no ball, because the bowlers foot has gone over the pop in crease and the umpire hasn't picked it up. To pick that up and then have time to judge where the ball pitched and where the ball would end up, is so difficult. Slow Mo makes it so easy to make a decision, when you are sitting snugly in your armchair. It is my firm belief that all LBW appeals should be referred to the 3rd umpire, with feedback to the umpire at the wicket, who then makes the decision. Any doubt, not out. |
|
23 Mar 04 - 07:25 AM (#1143681) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: Teribus Strollin' Johnny, The "World" referred to in "The World Series" is part of a name of a newspaper that originally sponsored the event. |
|
23 Mar 04 - 07:56 AM (#1143696) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: GUEST,Ed Not true, Teribus. |
|
23 Mar 04 - 08:26 AM (#1143724) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: GUEST I'm not sure on that Villain. Some cases seem so clear that even the bowler knows when he appeals and bowlers at times can be a bit over-zealous in their appealing. I fear time wasting more than anything if 3rd umpire made every decision. On the other hand I don't know how an umpire does his job. You could add someone maybe snicking a ball with the bat to your equation... And that could bring us on to catches... Tell me one thing: Why do we have the different rules for in line, leg side, and off side for LBW. Jon |
|
23 Mar 04 - 09:07 AM (#1143763) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: Teribus Thanks Guest Ed, If what it says in Snopes is indeed fact, then considering that Baseball is played in a number of countries, Canada, Cuba, Japan, etc. The different "leagues" in the United States of America have got a damn nerve calling themselves the world's champions, without allowing the participation of teams from other countries. |
|
23 Mar 04 - 01:08 PM (#1143993) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: Rasener Jon Do you know that is a crcking question. Do you know? I can only assume the following two reasons. Negative bowling down the leg side The other is that a bowler tends to run along the leg side area of the right handed batsmans batting area, and therefore is always going to be rough, which is unfair for right handed batsman. I will investigate and come up with an answer. But you will have to come to the Market Rasen Folk Club on Friday to find out the answer. :-) Les |
|
23 Mar 04 - 04:29 PM (#1144194) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: Ed. Why do we have the different rules for in line, leg side, and off side for LBW. Interesting question, Jon. My guess (and it's only a guess) is that: The batsman's legs are normally positioned outside of the leg stump. If LBW was allowed 'as long as it would hit the stumps' you'd get bowlers, bowling 'round the wicket' yorkers, that would have teams out for 15 |
|
24 Mar 04 - 05:40 AM (#1144641) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: The Shambles Oh by the way - The England team did win the second test too! Am I the only one to remember tours where the West indies team would win the series 5 - 0? And without breaking sweat. What is happening? |
|
24 Mar 04 - 09:07 AM (#1144774) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: GUEST Shambles, I think successes come and go anyway, but part of the WI decline has been said to be down to increased attractions of other sports. I think it also fair to suggest that in more recent years, England have been improving... I'd guess that several of us in this thread would remember say an opening line up of Desmond Haynes and Gordon Greenidge, then horror of horrors for the opposition Viv Richards to follow... or bolwers like Michael Holding or Malcolm Marshall... and maybe throw in Clive Lloyd for good measure. Jon |
|
24 Mar 04 - 09:20 AM (#1144794) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: Rasener My knees are knocking at the thought :-) |
|
24 Mar 04 - 12:53 PM (#1144958) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: The Shambles I suppose that even now a good knock or two from Brian Lara, will make all the difference. But the England bowlers do seem to have gotten the measure of him (so far and touching all the wood I can find). Would they only have been more convinced of this by Lara putting himself down in the batting order for the second innings? |
|
25 Mar 04 - 04:42 AM (#1145568) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: Hrothgar Why do we have the different rules for in line, leg side, and off side for LBW? Some evil-minded people might suggest that it goes back to the days when Pommie batsmen couldn't deal with Bill O'Reilly's leg spin. Can't do very well with Shane Warne, either. Now, how well do Aussie batsmen play off-spin? They can't, much. |
|
12 Apr 04 - 02:18 AM (#1159655) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: The Shambles I suppose that even now a good knock or two from Brian Lara, will make all the difference. But the England bowlers do seem to have gotten the measure of him (so far and touching all the wood I can find). What wise soul wrote that? As the Windies in their first innings in the final test match, are 500 and rising and Brian Lara already has made a triple century! |
|
12 Apr 04 - 03:07 AM (#1159662) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: Rasener The wicket is a good batsmans wicket, and the boudaries are short, making runs build up quickly. A draw already on the cards. If the English bowlers are finding it tough, just wait until the Windies bowlers get hammered. I think the only difference between this match and the previous tests is the wicket. |
|
12 Apr 04 - 10:47 AM (#1159840) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: Les from Hull The wicket will make the most difference, but the English batsmen will still have to deal with the fact that they are the only ones who can lose the match. Bowlers, even fielders, can make multiple mistakes but a batsman sometimes only gets one chance. I think a draw is the most likely result, but at least it proves that the three wins we have had haven't been over third-class opposition. |
|
12 Apr 04 - 12:27 PM (#1159936) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: The Shambles The wicket and the size of the ground are factors but let us not take anything away from where the credit is due. 10 years ago Brian Lara broke the record and he has just taken it back again. The only batsman whoose name appears in the test match top scoring list twice - first and third. Thank goodness for the sake of the England team, that there IS only one Brian Lara. |
|
12 Apr 04 - 03:30 PM (#1160069) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: Rasener What are the English batsmaen doing. I forgot the other factors apathy and tiredness. Cant blame the wicket for being 60 -3 |
|
14 Apr 04 - 04:55 PM (#1161746) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: Ed. To the tune of: "Go West", by Jacques Morali/Henri Belolo/John Willis: Three nil, to the Engerland, three nil to the Engerland (ad infinitum) We did pretty well, I think. |
|
15 Apr 04 - 03:59 AM (#1162149) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: Nigel Parsons Ed: despite the common appreciation, and the media's insistance of still calling this "England", can we please remember that it is the England & Wales cricket board which sent the team out there. |
|
15 Apr 04 - 05:00 AM (#1162185) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: Rasener Well done England 3 - 0. I think Windies made a big mistake batting for so long. It stopped them winning. It was still a very good track at the end. Nigel Does the team go out to these countries called England and Wales?. Which emblem do they wear? |
|
15 Apr 04 - 02:02 PM (#1162556) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: GUEST,van They wear a rose but have been known to use the odd Scot. If you're good enough you play for England as we can't really put a decent side together (at cricket, football & now rugby - before anyone reminds me). |
|
16 Apr 04 - 01:09 AM (#1162865) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: Rasener So is it back to the old argument. Merge them all together and call it UK Cricket team UK Rugby team UK Football team |
|
16 Apr 04 - 06:53 AM (#1163023) Subject: RE: West Indies 47 all out! From: GUEST,Ooh- Aah Sod that, England is England. If the others want a game with us they're welcome. WE aren't all bitter and twisted about the past! |