• 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* England in West Indies

Uppercut

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
PY said:
Was it that bad?
Click to expand...
Yeah, there was nothing but utter silence when the ball passed the bat and the angle showed it clearly missed, but you couldn't see it from any angle because every view was obscured in one way or another.
 
G

garage flower

State Vice-Captain
Richard said:
There isn't any lack. :huh:

And I'm aware that every Test should be approached trying to win, but it's not possible to write some such thing in the rules.
Click to expand...
Christ, it's like pulling teeth!

1) You were, as I recall, fairly supportive (or at least not critical) of West Indies' team selection for this test match despite the fact that it showed clear disregard for the broader interests of the game and the wishes of paying spectators and armchair fans.

2) A few pages ago, when espousing your frankly ludicrous theory about top order batsmen deserving the benefit of the doubt, but doubt going in favour of the fielding side where lower order batsmen are concerned, you said something along the lines of cricket being all about "what people want to see". It was badly worded, or p'raps there'd been a typo, but I'm pretty sure that's what you meant.

3) It seems clear to me, that the examples quoted above represent a lack of consistency.

4) The West Indies didn't approach this test match trying to win and - as per 1) - above, I find this pretty deplorable regardless of the result. BUT, I realise there are no rules to prevent this and I'm not suggesting there should be. It's more a "spirit of the game" issue that I'd expect all teams to adhere to.

I'm rushing a bit now because I've got other things to be getting on with, but I hope that the illness doesn't prevent you from following this.
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
garage flower said:
Christ, it's like pulling teeth!

1) You were, as I recall, fairly supportive (or at least not critical) of West Indies' team selection for this test match despite the fact that it showed clear disregard for the broader interests of the game and the wishes of paying spectators and armchair fans.

2) A few pages ago, when espousing your frankly ludicrous theory about top order batsmen deserving the benefit of the doubt, but doubt going in favour of the fielding side where lower order batsmen are concerned, you said something along the lines of cricket being all about "what people want to see". It was badly worded, or p'raps there'd been a typo, but I'm pretty sure that's what you mean.

3) It seems clear to me, that the examples quoted above represent a lack of consistency.

4) The West Indies didn't approach this test match trying to win and - as per 1) - above, I find this pretty deplorable regardless of the result. BUT, I realise there are no rules to prevent this and I'm not suggesting there should be. It's more a "spirit of the game" issue that I'd expect all teams to adhere to.

I'm rushing a bit now because I've got other things to be getting on with, but I hope that the illness doesn't prevent you from following this.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying it's not disappointing that West Indies approached this game in this manner from the POV of interesting cricket.

I'm saying that from the POV of trying to win, rather than crowd-please, West Indies' selection this game was fair enough.

You seem to have read something into something that was not there.
 
Uppercut

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Keep slogging tomorrow til lunch or 200, whichever comes first.

Mildly entertaining last 15 overs there.
 
P

pskov

International 12th Man
Athers: When you were given out on 98 you took a long time to refer the decision, did you not know either way?

Chanders: *laughs* I can't comment on that.

:mellow:
 
S

sammy2

Banned
KP has been humbled. Cleaned up by taylor a few times, and now rattled by edwards. Beautiful.

Imagine what facing four quicker bowlers with no proper protection was like for batsman in the 80s.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top