Well funnily enough, I don't think England would have put in such a terrible batting display if they actually had 50 overs to bat in this innings...
Sound like someone who doesn't watch him a lot.
In reference to which game?
If I were sitting next to someone who was about to throw away an international match with an act of stupefying idiocy I think I'd let them know about it. Do you think Johnny D was the only person in the Windies set-up with access to the D/L information? They post it up on the scoreboard for God's sake.Umm... Dyson was the on ewho called them in as well as the manager. How does that equate to everyone being stupid?
Well you may think that, but actually I've watched him a fair bit since his debut in 1994. Great player? Yes. Selfish player? Definitely.
Same holds for KPby that yardstick
Pchah. Finest batsman, by miles, among England's keepers since Alec Stewart.
Everyone has a role to do and Dyson's word is superior since he was the one with the sheet. I'm pretty sure he was told he may have been wrong by some of the players but he said he was right and exercised his authority. Yes, that makes all of them stupid for trusting him I guess.
100% spot-on.
Nothing to do with a history of injuries though of course.
2003 World Cup.
Best flat track bully of England's keepers since Alec Stewart. Also worst (by a big bloody distance) keeper of England's keepers since Alec Stewart.
"His word is superior"? He "exercised his authority" and "they trusted him"?
He's a worse keeper than Stewart, at least for the bulk of Stewart's career anyway.
Yep. However, even they draw the line at dropping a catch, lying on it, picking it up, throwing it back to the bowler and then saying "Yes, I really did catch it". The fact that England have been less than angelic does not make one iota of difference. Perhaps I come from the wrong era, but cheating is cheating - and blatant cheating is inexcusable.
Look, the coach has authority over everyone else in WI cricket in that pavillion. He had the sheet in his hand and he's the one who's supposed to be responsible for it. What's there to joke about?
Stewart was a quality batsmen, average 49 without the gloves on, scored in difficult situations. Prior just hits runs when the top order have already hit runs, so it's fairly pointless. He then invariably drops a catch or 2 to let the opposition back in the game. Stewart was decent keeper too.
Well you may think that, and a Test average of 48 doubtless qualifies him for that tag in your book. I'm sure you've seen lots of his First Class performances as well, including all those partnerships he's been involved in with his County team-mate Chris Tremlett?
Geraint Jones might disagree there. Also Matt Prior is worthy enough to be included in the Test team as a specialist batsman.