BS: Anyone for cricket?

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: ard mhacha
Date: 12 Aug 03 - 03:19 PM

Jon, Looking through the Test Records no one comes close to Steve Waughs record number of wins as Australias Captain,

Matches played, 34, Won 24, Lost 5, Drew 5.
Have a look, the Aussies are sreets ahead. Ard Mhacha.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 12 Aug 03 - 05:00 PM

Ard, I think we are going to go round in circles. Steve Waugh's record is fantastic, Australia have been the best team by a considerable margin for a number of years, etc.

Where I have a problem with is the statement that "the dominant force in Cricket for the past 50 years has been the Aussies". The problem I have is that in part of this period, using Ed's statistics, Australia slumped as low as 6th in the world and the West Indies were untouchable.

Even if we were looking at the best team overall, I don't believe it is clear cut that Australia come out #1 and WI #2. As far as I'm concerned, both teams have had periods of brilliance in that period.

What of course would have been great would have been to the the 2 greatest sides in my memory - the 80s WI and current Australia play each other.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: Sooz
Date: 13 Aug 03 - 04:46 PM

What about the test match starting at Trent Bridge tommorow? I have a ticket for Saturday - will I be able to use it or will it be all over?

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 13 Aug 03 - 06:45 PM

Sooz, although I think SA have played well, I think England are capable of much better (to the point I think some of our play has been embarrisingly bad) than thier last 2 showings in this series. I would back SA to win but, whatever, I don't think it will as one sided as the last 2 (OK I know one was a draw) tests.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: Sooz
Date: 14 Aug 03 - 07:39 AM

I blame the selectors!

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: ard mhacha
Date: 14 Aug 03 - 08:51 AM

Jon, I agree the present Aussie side and the Windies of the Sobers era would have been a hell of a game, but then again as in every field of Sport the present day teams are light years ahead.
Still think i`m right about the past 50 years. Ard Mhacha.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: Sooz
Date: 14 Aug 03 - 10:02 AM

Well, we've had the early collapse but now we are into a record breaking partnership for the 3rd wicket. Hope it lasts!

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 14 Aug 03 - 03:02 PM

A much better day :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: GUEST,Ed
Date: 14 Aug 03 - 03:31 PM

Indeed!

Very pleased for Hussain that he got his century. Let's hope that he makes it a double.

If we play well tomorrow, I think that we could win this (I really do). So far (this series) South Africa haven't had to bat with any pressure. It'll be interesting to see how they react if there is some.

Ever the optimist...

Ed

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 14 Aug 03 - 08:21 PM

Yes Ed, I'd agree with that. It will also be interesting to see how the pitch plays. I backed SA a few posts ago but an England win is a real possibility.

I still think that SA has the stronger attack - have always liked Sean Pollock's accurate and disciplined bowling and perhaps as an outside one have been impressed with this Hall (not forgetting the man who took 10 wickets at Lords...)

Batting for SA, Smith must be due a failure, even if only statistically...

As an aside, there have been baseball vs cricket comments. I never knew till today that some Aussie players have played both and to a high standard. Richie Benaud is apparently a fan of baseball and on C4 today recalled a time when the touring cricket team actually beat the SA national baseball team at their own game!

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: Les from Hull
Date: 15 Aug 03 - 09:13 AM

Don't forget that England have about 7 capped England fast bowlers unavailable for injury (and retirement). I'm not sure that we can bowl South Africa out easily unless we get a bit of help from the conditions or the South Africans themselves.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: Beardy
Date: 15 Aug 03 - 09:30 AM

And Les that between them Anderson, Harmison & Kirtley have less than 10 tests between them. Surely the most inexperienced attack for many many years.

At least Alec has made another 50 and is still there (1430 hrs)

See you Sunday at Whitby

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: ard mhacha
Date: 15 Aug 03 - 02:55 PM

Les from Hull, Your prayers have been answered, Smith stepped back on his wicket. It is the battle of the also-rans, like the Ireland v Wales Rugby match to-morrow. Ard Mhacha.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: Les from Hull
Date: 15 Aug 03 - 06:15 PM

And Gibbs played on! I'm now hoping for daft run-outs and retired hurts. We'll take anything with the current state of the England attack. It would be nice to see England at least building for the future, but the best performances were from the old 'uns.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: Sooz
Date: 16 Aug 03 - 03:35 PM

Young Anderson was a bright star today - pink hair and everything!

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: GUEST
Date: 17 Aug 03 - 03:32 PM

Free tickets at Trent Bridge tomorrow (Mon) - what a bargain!! Pity I'm over 200 miles away and can't make it. Just hope England don't snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.....

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 17 Aug 03 - 04:18 PM

We toyed with the idea of going (I reckon on about 3hrs from Cromer) but decided against.

It will be interesting to see how it goes tommorrow. I'd favour England but I think it's too early to write SA off.

It's been a good game for changes of fortune.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 17 Aug 03 - 06:11 PM

Ed, having been at Trent Bridge on Thursday I can assure you that Hussain's ton, welcome though it was, was hugely eclipsed by Butcher's. When Butcher is flowing, it's almost as fine a spectacle as when Stewart on the top of his form (very rare is these days).

Such moments make cricket a joy to behold in a way that,for me, baseball could never match. Neither does baseball have much opportunity for the overt person-to-person menace that can creep into cricket, as it did for instance with the Donald v Atherton hostilities the last time England played SA at Trent Bridge.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 17 Aug 03 - 07:07 PM

Now Donald v Atherton was a classic. Did you see the recent (this series) bit on the C4 coverage where they both were together and talked about it?

For my favourite all time "stylish" batting rather than the (at times) Viv Richard belt every ball out of the park for 6, I think I would go for Mark Waugh at his best.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: Micca
Date: 18 Aug 03 - 10:57 AM

Well, How about that!! England beat them to level the series and SA are without Pollock at Headingly!!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: ard mhacha
Date: 18 Aug 03 - 01:42 PM

Micca, The wicket at Headingly won`t be like the ploughed field at Trent Bridge, the South African Captain wasn`t too pleased, which resulted in the game being a lottery. Ard Mhacha.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Aug 03 - 05:13 PM

I think there is some justification in suggesting that with the pitch as it was, winning the toss was quite an advantage.

That said, England still had to get the runs in the first innings and I thought they batted really well. I also thought they bowled well and overall looked a very different side to the ones we witnessed in the first 2 tests.

It's a shame Sean Pollock will miss Headingly as I would have liked to see SA at full strength up there. There again, England probably have more injury worries with Harmison...

Jon

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: Teribus
Date: 19 Aug 03 - 02:03 AM

Ard Mhacha - Re Test Wickets and some of your comments on them

"on a doctored wicket at Old Trafford"

"The wicket at Headingly won`t be like the ploughed field at Trent Bridge, the South African Captain wasn`t too pleased, which resulted in the game being a lottery."

It is the "home sides" perogative to prepare test wickets to their advantage. Test grounds are selected and the Captain of the home side tells the head groundsman exactly how he wants that test wicket to be prepared for that test. Sometimes it comes off, sometimes not, particularly in England due to the weather. It is not "cheating", it is no part of any diabolical "Brit" plot - It is allowed - It is part of the game - It is done the world over where cricket is played.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: Beardy
Date: 19 Aug 03 - 07:47 AM

Re Trent Bridge's 'ploughed field', considering the pitch played up on Thursday morning and the Test lasted until lunch on the last day with Boucher making 52 I think its rather an uncharitable description. Also the leading wicket taker in the country, James Kirtley, exploited the conditions superbly on his debut for 6-34.

I think conditions more in favour of England at Headingly but the quick flat strip at the Oval could favour SA batsmen.

Stewart

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 19 Aug 03 - 10:05 AM

Interviewed on the pitch before the game, the Trent Bridge groundsman said he'd advise whever won the toss to bowl first as the wicket would play better on the second day. According to a TV report last night, he has now "gone to ground." (Where else would he go?)

Jon, I'd have been interested to see Atherton and Donald on C4. I've never liked Atherton's "means justify the ends" attitude (remember that ball-tampering episode?) but I have a lot of respect for Donald. Their confrontation was my first experience of a test match where everything was replayed to spectators in slow motion on giant screens. Atherton was plainly out, except in the umpire's judgment, so everyone understood exactly what was going on. The following day Stewart came in to bat with England needing about 50 to win and Atherton needing about six for his century. Stewart was in the form of his life, and Donald seemed to have lost his menace from the previous evening. Athers was reduced to a spectator as Stewart knocked off the most of the runs for victory, and was stuck on 98 not out at the end. Rough justice, I thought.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 19 Aug 03 - 01:56 PM

If my mermory serves me correctly, Atherton's comments the other day were along the lines that he never believed in walking and the it was the umpires job to decide. It seemed that Donald was pretty annoyed at the time of the match...

I am one of the ones who likes to think players will walk when they know they are out but I feel sure that is an unrealistic expectation in a tough professional game.

The "dust in the pocket" one caused me some amusement at the time. If I remember right, it didn't seem too long (a year?) after everyone was branding Pakistan as cheats and there we go... our "lilly white" captain gets caught red handed on camera!

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: Hrothgar
Date: 20 Aug 03 - 04:38 AM

That pitch at Old Trafford was doctored more than most ..........

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: ard mhacha
Date: 20 Aug 03 - 08:02 AM

I also seen the Groundsman being interviewed and he was adamant about the wicket holding out, he was wrong of course, and as Fionn said he wasn`t questioned again.
And please Teribus no long winded comments on the prepared wicket, it is obvious to anyone who has the slightest knowledge of Cricket, that the state of the wicket resulted in a much inferior side winning the lottery.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 20 Aug 03 - 02:14 PM

Hmm, I don't think there was any question over the wicket at Trent Bridge being "doctored". It was just a very bad wicket, presumably as a result of the exceptional weather we have had. Preparing a type of wicket that may suit our bowlers is one thing but preparing a wicket that is going to fall apart is another - unless of course you had a means of influencing the toss to ensure you batted first.

As for "much inferior side", I'm not convinced. I do think that SA are a stronger side than England but I don't think the difference is that vast, at least not if England play at thier best.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: ard mhacha
Date: 20 Aug 03 - 02:23 PM

Why did the Groundsman get it so wrong?, he was very incompetent or a liar. Ard Mhacha.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: GUEST,Ed
Date: 20 Aug 03 - 02:33 PM

"Ploughed Field", "Doctored Pitch". Come on! Unless you think that we fiendisly fixed the toss as well, it would have been of no advantage to us.

England are not a much inferior side to South Africa (how quickly the one day series has been forgotten). I really hope South Africa win the toss tomorrow, then there'll be no excuse if we win.

Although I'm sure you'll think of something...

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 20 Aug 03 - 03:38 PM

"Why did the Groundsman get it so wrong?"

That is an interesting question. As I indicated above, I feel that the poor pitch was a side effect of this summer where UK record temperatures have been reached - I can't see any groundsman willfully putting a pich like that out and I would also assume the guy has some experience.

Quite why he felt that it would be an advantage to bat second, particularly when just about everyone else rightly felt the pitch would get worse, is a mystery.

As for the next test, I'll probably be proved wrong but even though I say I feel SA are the stronger side, I quite fancy our chances at Headingly.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: Arnie
Date: 20 Aug 03 - 04:42 PM

I've just got back from Corfu and have seen the pitch mentioned above. Corfu was a British protectorate during much of the 1800's and cricket is a legacy of that era. So is ginger beer! The pitch is pretty small and the residents must fear for their windows and cars when a boundary is hit. However, the ginger beer is brewed locally and tastes like it used to in the UK when I was a kid....I'd love to have seen a match but with the temperature in the 40's that must some feat - for the spectators as well as the players! Anyway, Headingley tomorrow and with a Yorkie in charge we could just be in luck.....

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 20 Aug 03 - 04:43 PM

England are inferior at least to the extent that their hopeless fielding allowed Graeme Smith to go into the Trent Bridge Test with an absurd average of about 202. He's not bad, and may one day be in the league of Lara and Co, but he would have scored only a small fraction of his runs haul if catches had been held. I'm backing England to follow up the Trent Bridge win with another at Headingley, just as in the last home series against SA. After which... I'll be hedging my bets.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: ard mhacha
Date: 20 Aug 03 - 04:46 PM

I am not the only one who believed that the lousy wicket helped England, read your papers and hear what the South African Captain had to say regarding the Wicket.
I listened to his comments on Radio 5 live and he wasn`t at all pleased, and also a few of the letters on Ceefax were of the same opinion. Ard Mhacha.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: Ed.
Date: 20 Aug 03 - 05:03 PM

ard mhacha,

I apologise if I'm misrepresenting you here, but almost everyting that you've said appears to be anti English.

If hating England helps you define yourself as a Scot, I can only feel sorry for you.

If you can't back up your comments with much more than "a few letters on ceefax agreed with me", I stop feeling sorry for you, and begin to pity you.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 20 Aug 03 - 05:26 PM

Yep, dropped catches have proved costly and there have been some bad ones. At that level, I would expect to see every reasonable chance taken as well as the occasional "1/2 chance".

Still, I feel England did seem a lot more focused in the last test.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: GUEST,Elfcall
Date: 21 Aug 03 - 03:59 AM

Arnie

Technically, we have a Lanky in charge who plays for Yorkshire.

Elfcall

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: Mark Cohen
Date: 21 Aug 03 - 05:43 AM

Careful, friends, this discussion is sinking almost to the depths of the ones about George Bush and Iraq...except I can't understand this one at all! Are you folks saying that people deliberately sabotage the playing field to help their chances? How is that possible? Don't both teams play on the same field? I'm obviously missing something here.

Aloha,
Mark

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 21 Aug 03 - 06:07 AM

No Mark, only one person seems to be suggesting that may have been the case at Trent Bridge.

Pictches can be prepared to suit the strengths of the home side. I can't claim to remotely understand the technicalities but, say in India, you might expect a ground to take a lot of spin, in England maybe a nice wicket for seamers (you land the ball on the seam and instead of bouncing off straight, it moves a little to one side or other), etc.

In situations like the Trent Bridge one, it is a huge advantage to bat first. The pitch was dry and developing cracks which get worse as time goes on. The result of such a pitch is that it becomes very unpredictable. One ball may bounce and reach the batsman say at hip height and the next one that is bowled at around the same speed and appears to land at more or less the same spot could bounce and reach the batsman at ankle height. If you consider the ball could be travelling between say 80-90mph, the batsman has little time (fraction of a second) to react to the ball that does something strange.

A good start for England today - SA 10 for 2 as I type.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: ard mhacha
Date: 21 Aug 03 - 06:17 AM

Ed, I lived in England through the 50s and 60s and believe me I met English people that I would have trusted my life on, great friends who I still keep in touch with.
My gripe as it always has been is with the English media and government, they make the most prejudiced seem reasonable, just a liitle sample and I only have to go to last nights BBC News, Wales had an important European Championship game in Belgrade, of course headlined was a nothing friendly between England and Crotia, this is a common theme.
This gripe may seem trivial to anyone but an English sports fan, this a common theme, the Scots and Welsh I have met also voice this criticism.
And who ever heard of an Irishman [yes not Scottish] being interested in Cricket, Ed boy just open the other eye and ear and listen to Lloyd and Atherton[dirty balls] and tell me if they are fair. Ard Mhacha.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 21 Aug 03 - 06:21 AM

Oh and one other comment Mark. When you watch a game of cricket on the tv, one of the first things they do before any play starts is to go out and show you/talk about the wicket (the strip the bowlers bowl on and the batsmen bat on) and try to predict how it will behave.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 21 Aug 03 - 06:55 AM

Ard, what troubles me is that you seem to be letting your feelings influence your judgement on a game of cricket and I really don't see the need for it. I am English and I support my own country in sports but that does not mean I'm proud of or support every action ever made by our country - I'm not/I don't.

Where abouts in Ireland are you? A few years ago I had some very happy times (just a few day trips/and one weekend) in Dublin - sessions in Hughes in particular as well as a wonderful week in Kildare. One day maybe I'll make the West Coast. I also fancy Belfast one day. I've never been North but I've heard good reports...

Jon

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: ard mhacha
Date: 21 Aug 03 - 07:31 AM

Jon, You can take my word on this,when Botham did the impossible in that fantastic game against Austraila some twenty odd years ago, I had a few Quid on England, and well, I had to cheer old fat guts on , he was brilliant.
Was their ever a better all-round feat.

I am away to hide, South Africa won the toss on Headingly`s green grassy slope and they wouldn`t listen to me telling them to put England in, and now they are 59 for 4.
But to-morrow may find things equal, oh for Pollock. Ard Mhacha.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 21 Aug 03 - 07:52 AM

Yes, old "beefy" at his best was brilliant. I'm still uneasy about that test though. The bets placed by Rod Marsh and Denniss Lillee were a disgrace.

Thinking again on the SA cheat that Fionn had mentioned, has anyone else read anything about speculation that he was murdered? One article here

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: ard mhacha
Date: 21 Aug 03 - 01:28 PM

Emerging from the sand I find an impossible turnaround, records shattered by Kirsten and young Zondeki, the best ever 8th wicket partnership of 119 and counting.
Yes it was all of 21 years ago and Botham was one of the pair that made the previous best 8th wicket stand of 109, the game is wide open again, 260 and counting for the Bucs.
Yes that scandal involving a great cricketer Cronge damaged South African cricket, they have certainly emerged again as a force in World cricket, and be fair, I am their only supporter on this Thread.
Ard Mhacha.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: Mark Cohen
Date: 21 Aug 03 - 02:17 PM

Well, that's all well and good, but nothing will top Jim Bunning's perfect game in 1964. So there!

Aloha,
Mark

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 21 Aug 03 - 02:39 PM

An excellent stand and I believe it is a record for Headingly. They would have a long way to go to beat the record for any 8th wicket partnership in 1st class cricket. According to my 2001 copy of Wisden, the highest ever was 433.

The highest I can find for a test match is a partnership of 313 between Wasim Akram and Saqlain Mushtaq - Pakistan v Zimbabwe 1996-97.

The highest I can find involving England is one of 246 between L E G Ames and G O B Allen - England v New Zealand 1931.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: Ed.
Date: 21 Aug 03 - 04:06 PM

L E G Ames and G O B Allen

Les Ames and 'Gubby' Allen. Two names which evoke the romance of cricket for me. Ames, because he was the greatest wicketkeeper in the world from his era, and Allen because my dad once met him.

My dad had no idea who he was (they shared a taxi) but 'Gubby' was apparently most unimpressed at the lack of recognition!

Ard,

Support whoever you wish. I have to say that I find the "anyone but England" attitude somewhat tiresome, but each to their own I guess.

Regarding the current match: it's excellently poised. The best test cricket illustrates the ebb and flow of fortunes between two well matched teams. I think that this could become a wonderful match. Glad that it's a Bank holiday weekend

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone for cricket?
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 21 Aug 03 - 05:28 PM

Ard, I beg to differ. I saw the main BBC TV News last night (BBC1, 10pm, Wednesday) and when it came to the football, the Wales game was top of the bill, followed by Scotland's, with England's third and last.

Though this was as it should have been, I must admit I was a little surprised. During the first two match reports I wondered if the England game was going to follow the news, in which case when the presenter turned to the England game I was expecting her to say "If you don't want to know the score, look away now." But no, the match did not follow - the Beeb must have simply reported on Wales first because it was the most significant match. I don't know what you were watching or hearing but it wasn't the BBCTV national news.