*Official* West Indies In Australia

[WindieWeathers]

See? We disagree on the fundamental differences between the formats. But that's OK with me. Stop trying to make it an issue and let's just hug it out.

No i want an argument tonight MR M

Joking aside if he can't be a theat in one dayers then he shouldn't be in the squad imo, because he hardly made the ball turn yesterday which is why they scored runs off of him with no problems.

 

[Streetwise]

Being a WI fan every game counts, why? because unlike the Aussies we ain't used to winning lately, so just like we dominated the second test against Australia but didn't have enough to win the game, yesterday was much of the same but the ODI verson, we started well but messed it up again, plus i think my comments about Gayle are valid whether it's in tests or one dayers.

You must have a different meaning of "dominated" than the dictionary.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Joking aside if he can't be a theat in one dayers then he shouldn't be in the squad imo, because he hardly made the ball turn yesterday which is why they scored runs off of him with no problems.

But I agree that he shouldn't be in the ODI squad, because he's never done anything to deserve it. But neither has Benn. My favoured ODI spinner would be the proven best in the region - Dave Mohammed - but failing him I can't really think of anyone offhand.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

You must have a different meaning of "dominated" than the dictionary.

Don't worry. He's probably the only one on CW who thinks WI dominated that Test.

 

[WindieWeathers]

You must have a different meaning of "dominated" than the dictionary.

Look you won the series, fair enough but most people would agree we were on top in that second test and had a decent chance of winning it.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Look you won the series, fair enough but most people would agree we were on top in that second test and had a decent chance of winning it.

"Had a decent chance of winning" is a lot different from "dominated".

 

[Streetwise]

Look you won the series, fair enough but most people would agree we were on top in that second test and had a decent chance of winning it.

Yes the WI had a chance to win that test but............Australia had a bigger chance of winning.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Yes the WI had a chance to win that test but............Australia had a bigger chance of winning.

Now that's pushing it...

 

[WindieWeathers]

But I agree that he shouldn't be in the ODI squad, because he's never done anything to deserve it. But neither has Benn. My favoured ODI spinner would be the proven best in the region - Dave Mohammed - but failing him I can't really think of anyone offhand.

The man's bowling action doesn't look any better than Benn's imo, he just couldn't make it turn at all, and even the thing i think he's pretty good at which is batting deep in the tail let him down too, bottom line is we'll need much better than him to move our spin department foward in either form of the game.

 

[Streetwise]

Now that's pushing it...

115 odd runs with five wickets in hand, I easily rate Australia chances of doing that above WI chances of taking five wickets.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

The man's bowling action doesn't look any better than Benn's imo, he just couldn't make it turn at all, and even the thing i think he's pretty good at which is batting deep in the tail let him down too, bottom line is we'll need much better than him to move our spin department foward in either form of the game.

They're completely different body shapes and in many ways different bowlers. Comparing their actions reveals nothing about their individual worth.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

130 odd runs with five wickets in hand, I easily rate Australia chances of doing that above WI chances of taking five wickets.

You would.

 

[WindieWeathers]

"Had a decent chance of winning" is a lot different from "dominated".

Australia was never gonna win that test imo while we could have which is why i said "dominated" in the first place.

 

[WindieWeathers]

They're completely different body shapes and in many ways different bowlers. Comparing their actions reveals nothing about their individual worth.

I can only judge on who LOOKS more dangerous, and in that contest Benn is the clear winner IMO.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Australia was never gonna win that test imo while we could have which is why i said "dominated" in the first place.

Australia had a couple of decent chances of winning the Test actually. The biggest of those opportunities was denied by Chris Gayle's brilliance. It certainly wasn't a one-sided affair though, as "dominated" can only mean.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

I can only judge on who LOOKS more dangerous, and in that contest Benn is the clear winner IMO.

And I don't care how dangerous a bowler looks if he's not taking wickets. Because it's not a beauty contest.

 

[WindieWeathers]

And I don't care how dangerous a bowler looks if he's not taking wickets. Because it's not a beauty contest.

And that's why Miller was so shocking because he didn't look dangerous and he didn't take a wicket either.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Ah well, I guess he should retire now.

 

[WindieWeathers]

Australia had a couple of decent chances of winning the Test actually. The biggest of those opportunities was denied by Chris Gayle's brilliance. It certainly wasn't a one-sided affair though, as "dominated" can only mean.

Imo if South Africa, India or England had them in the position we had then in they would have lost, at the end of the day our bowlers just couldn't finish them off.

 

[WindieWeathers]

Ah well, I guess he should retire now.

From international cricket? i agree