• 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* Third Test at Old Trafford

FaaipDeOiad

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
Realistically it wouldn't have made much difference if Clarke had declared at tea anyway. It was what... six overs after tea before bad light, and 34 runs? Could have had the change of innings during tea but still, six overs probably isn't going to make or break the result of the test. Was always gong to require some luck with the weather tonight/tomorrow, but if it was clear, you could argue that a sub-300 lead wouldn't have been enough to allow for attacking play etc. On the other hand if it rains half tomorrow it was always going to be a draw regardless.
 
harsh.ag

harsh.ag

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Honestly, this is ridiculous. This is a sport. Moderate risks should be allowed. The batsmen should be given the option to carry on in case of bad light. A) They are already padded up from top to bottom, any injury can hardly be threatening. If you are such pussies, they you should go be umpires at a barn dance. Sportsmen everywhere take lots of risks. Why don't we ban the XGames altogether; B) IT'S A SPORT. They want to win. Give them the opportunity. The fielders are not going to get hurt. Who the **** is scared of getting a little hurt when a game is at stake. Umpires, **** you!! And **** Cook. *****. Scared little *****. ​But mummy, I just wanted to keep the Ashes at home.
 
Swingpanzee

Swingpanzee

International Regular
harsh.skm said:
Honestly, this is ridiculous. This is a sport. Moderate risks should be allowed. The batsmen should be given the option to carry on in case of bad light. A) They are already padded up from top to bottom, any injury can hardly be threatening. If you are such pussies, they you should go be umpires at a barn dance. Sportsmen everywhere take lots of risks. Why don't we ban the XGames altogether; B) IT'S A SPORT. They want to win. Give them the opportunity. The fielders are not going to get hurt. Who the **** is scared of getting a little hurt when a game is at stake. Umpires, **** you!! And **** Cook. *****. Scared little *****. ​But mummy, I just wanted to keep the Ashes at home.
Click to expand...
Oooh, harsh.
 
Cooky Monster

Cooky Monster

U19 12th Man
harsh.skm said:
Honestly, this is ridiculous. This is a sport. Moderate risks should be allowed. The batsmen should be given the option to carry on in case of bad light. A) They are already padded up from top to bottom, any injury can hardly be threatening. If you are such pussies, they you should go be umpires at a barn dance. Sportsmen everywhere take lots of risks. Why don't we ban the XGames altogether; B) IT'S A SPORT. They want to win. Give them the opportunity. The fielders are not going to get hurt. Who the **** is scared of getting a little hurt when a game is at stake. Umpires, **** you!! And **** Cook. *****. Scared little *****. ​But mummy, I just wanted to keep the Ashes at home.
Click to expand...

 
harsh.ag

harsh.ag

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Howe_zat said:
So firstly

But then

So it's always important to try and win, unless Cook and England want to win, in which case he's a "scared little *****". Or is it only fair to want to win when you say so? Could we have a chart so as we can keep track?
Click to expand...
There is a right way of winning, and a ***** way. There is a fine difference. If you have a fight on your hands, fight it.
 
Howe_zat

Howe_zat

Audio File
harsh.skm said:
There is a right way of winning, and a ***** way. There is a fine difference. If you have a fight on your hands, fight it.
Click to expand...
I must be new to this concept of "fight" that means to throw away the match as soon as you're behind. When is it "right" to play defensively, oh wise one?

Or do you just feel it's a captain's moral obligation to play perfectly into his opponent's hands as soon as he's behind?
 
Prince EWS

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
harsh.skm said:
Honestly, this is ridiculous. This is a sport. Moderate risks should be allowed. The batsmen should be given the option to carry on in case of bad light. A) They are already padded up from top to bottom, any injury can hardly be threatening. If you are such pussies, they you should go be umpires at a barn dance. Sportsmen everywhere take lots of risks. Why don't we ban the XGames altogether; B) IT'S A SPORT. They want to win. Give them the opportunity. The fielders are not going to get hurt. Who the **** is scared of getting a little hurt when a game is at stake. Umpires, **** you!! And **** Cook. *****. Scared little *****. ​But mummy, I just wanted to keep the Ashes at home.
Click to expand...
:lol:
 
Furball

Furball

Evil Scotsman
Howe_zat said:
I must be new to this concept of "fight" that means to throw away the match as soon as you're behind. When is it "right" to play defensively, oh wise one?

Or do you just feel it's a captain's moral obligation to play perfectly into his opponent's hands as soon as he's behind?
Click to expand...
Don't bother.

Some of the muppets on here would have a go at England/Cook if we knocked off the runs in 40 overs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top