• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

***Official** West Indies in England***

Prince EWS

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
PathanPower said:
And you can gauge that how exactly? Of course they are going to look good with nothing infront of them to beat.

The facts are that they had the advantage of highly favourable conditions not to mention umpiring against a side who are effectively, on par with the worst in the world and amongst the worst EVER.

Again, anything less than what transpired would have been England playing poorly.
Click to expand...
I know who I'm replying to but I'm still inclined to agree. Remove your umpiring rant and I think you have a fair point. It'd be silly to say England played poorly, but although they batted well, I was still highly unconvinced by the bowling display. I still got the feeling that Harmison and Plunkett would have been getting absolutely belted by better teams - especially Harmison. Sidebottom got wickets just by bowling a high percentage of balls that we're complete rubbish - I don't think he would have had the figured he ended up with had he played against a better side either (don't get me wrong, he bowled well, maintained pressure and got movement, but I don't think we would have seen a better side crumble so badly against him).

England batted very well against a dire attack, and bowled fairly average to a dire batting lineup and got them out anyway.
 
P

PathanPower

Banned
Prince EWS said:
Remove your umpiring rant and I think you have a fair point. .
Click to expand...
Why? Of course I'm not suggesting it had any baring on the result, but yet again we are subjected to shockers playing a role in a match. It's annoying.

We all know England are superior and can create their own wickets, giving them extra help just takes the piss a bit and mars it.
 
Scaly piscine

Scaly piscine

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I think Plunkett would still have taken his wickets against one, Plunkett's better deliveries will get anyone out just like anyone can put some of his rubbish away (if they can reach it). Sidebottom however is the kind of bowler whose figures could have suffered a lot from playing an Australia or what have you because they wouldn't let him bowl, they'd walk up the pitch, stand out of their crease etc.
 
Manee

Manee

Cricketer Of The Year
A note for all those fans of irony.
Ramnaresh Sarwan, the West Indies captain, has said that his team will look to play positively against England left-arm spinner Monty Panesar, who took 6 for 129 in the first innings of the first Test as West Indies were bowled out for 437.
Click to expand...
http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/england/content/story/295746.html

A bet that they didn't consider that they wouldn't survive to face Monty for longer than 6 overs:). There only ray of hope was Dwayne Bravo who ironically got out trying to 'attack' Monty.

Interesting...
 
pasag

pasag

RTDAS
Tbf though, they're perhaps the worst Test side maybe even including Bangladesh and they've just lost one of their best ever players and they're going up the second best side at home, it's not like anyone expected anything different. It's not that they lack heart, it's that they are totally lacking in class, talent and skill at the moment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top