If South Africa beat India and make the World T20 final...

[horny warney]

Burgey, you taking out your frustration that Julie Bishop is voting against a war crimes inquiry into Sri Lanka?

War crimes my friend is a thing only committed by the third world.

 

[Migara]

Its not better format of the game because you are better at it. Test cricket is considered the best form of cricket because you have to both bat well and take 20 wickets. Ask MSD about that. The latter is difficult when you produce wickets like Galle, kandy and SSC where so many test matches did not produce a resuland only batsmen like Mahela could pad their averages. Yes I'm talking about the 900 game.

900 game was played at RPS. Pls update the knowledge!

 

[marc71178]

The simple fact of the matter is, SL have been highly successful in the one format that really matters: the limited overs format.

To most reasonable cricketing people the one format that matters over anything else is Tests.

 

[marc71178]

You are very close to what i actually did but it was not Tugga's style to bat four feet out from the stumps.

Erm, the crease is 4 feet from the stumps. If (as you claim) you spent a long period of time 4 feet from him when batting I can only assume you are either a) a stump or b) have been hit in the head by a cricket ball repeatedly from a very short range...

Actually on reading your posts, b) does seem more likely.

 

[artvandalay]

900 game was played at RPS. Pls update the knowledge!

Yea I didn't specifically mean that game. It was just an example.

 

[Migara]

I am trying to think what Countries like New Zealand and South Africa have achieved after three decades of cricket and how many ATG players they have produced. Additionally, what England had done during 1980-2000 period as a team. England was close to minnows during that time.

 

[DingDong]

most countries have been poor in their first 3 decades in the sport. india only really became relatively competitive after what 90 years in the sport?

plus most countries who play the sport arent known for their athletics skills and there are only 10 countries who even play the sport regularly. being the best cricket nation is like being the tallest midget.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

I am trying to think what Countries like New Zealand and South Africa have achieved after three decades of cricket and how many ATG players they have produced. Additionally, what England had done during 1980-2000 period as a team. England was close to minnows during that time.

Don't bring us into this, take your issues up with Burgey. Don't spread the hate.

 

[the big bambino]

most countries have been poor in their first 3 decades in the sport. india only really became relatively competitive after what 90 years in the sport?

plus most countries who play the sport arent known for their athletics skills and there are only 10 countries who even play the sport regularly. being the best cricket nation is like being the tallest midget.

Nup I see cricket similar to countries that have higher standards of living. Hardly universal but the ideal.

 

[DingDong]

Nup I see cricket similar to countries that have higher standards of living. Hardly universal but the ideal.

yeah fair enough bro.


but as far as the second post in the thread is concerned, there is no need to get on ur high horse so much just because one country has failed to win in another country. didnt australia themselves go like 30+ years without winning in india or something?

 

[the big bambino]

yeah fair enough bro.


but as far as the second post in the thread is concerned, there is no need to get on ur high horse so much just because one country has failed to win in another country. didnt australia themselves go like 30+ years without winning in india or something?

He's just on the wind up. Classic stuff though. To think my ambivalence toward T20 kept me away from this thread until I stumbled into it for a reason I can't remember.

As for Oz doing poorly in India it has to be set against the context of us not playing their all that often until recently. I don't mind the conditions in the subcon. Don't care that they are slow turners. Just another set of conditions to master which adds to the game's variety and character. Just as valid as hard fast conditions here and SA. Though I admit beating Saffy and the Poms is ideal from an Aussie fan's pov.

 

[Furball]

most countries have been poor in their first 3 decades in the sport. india only really became relatively competitive after what 90 years in the sport?

When did that happen?

 

[Shri]

When did that happen?

When Ashwin was born obvz.

 

[Muloghonto]

To most reasonable cricketing people the one format that matters over anything else is Tests.

No. To most reasonable cricket fans, ODI matters more. if tests mattered more, they would be watched more- both on tv and on field. Yet, they arn't. Even in your precious England, ODI/twenty-twenty attracts a greater crowd average than test cricket. Both on field and off field.

Most sportsmen intrinsically follow the fan demand too by and large. If you think that any pro sportsman wouldn't want to highly care about an event or a format that draws far greater number of crowds, i am sorry to say, you are missing out on a big chunk of sporting people.

 

[Muloghonto]

Erm, the crease is 4 feet from the stumps. If (as you claim) you spent a long period of time 4 feet from him when batting I can only assume you are either a) a stump or b) have been hit in the head by a cricket ball repeatedly from a very short range...

Actually on reading your posts, b) does seem more likely.

The crease is 4 feet from the stumps but batsmen don't normally always play right at the crease-line.
Your analysis is limited, there is an obvious c) option that you are not seeing.

 

[BackFootPunch]

No. To most reasonable cricket fans, ODI matters more. if tests mattered more, they would be watched more- both on tv and on field. Yet, they arn't. Even in your precious England, ODI/twenty-twenty attracts a greater crowd average than test cricket. Both on field and off field.

Most sportsmen intrinsically follow the fan demand too by and large. If you think that any pro sportsman wouldn't want to highly care about an event or a format that draws far greater number of crowds, i am sorry to say, you are missing out on a big chunk of sporting people.

Wait, you actually think the players care more about limited overs cricket than Tests? No. God no. I can accept there are fans who see the shorter formats as more important, but the number of players who see Tests as number one is a huge majority.

 

[kykweer.proteas]

Sri Lanka is a joke cricketing nation. Everyone knows it, you're all just too polite to say it.

spinners who are only playing because they missed the pre-season cut for the NY Yankees.

hahaha GENIOUS

 

[Agent Nationaux]

Wait, you actually think the players care more about limited overs cricket than Tests? No. God no. I can accept there are fans who see the shorter formats as more important, but the number of players who see Tests as number one is a huge majority.

They care more about the Tests but they all know where the money is and most will follow it (Gayle, Pieterson, etc).

I think Burgey should do the same but for Pakistan, India, New Zealand, West Indies and England (let's forget Bangladesh) since they are all just as rubbish. The only two good teams are South Africa and Australia.

 

[grecian]

Pretty poor stuff from Burgey in here, not sure why it's being lauded. Aravinda deSilva was one of the best bats I've ever enjoyed watching, Sanga and Mahela are utter quality. Vaas was a beautiful practitioner of swing-bowling on many unresponsive pitches. Sri Lanka have added massively to World cricket since they've come into it in all forms.

I really don't get the hate, is it a joke I'm not getting?

 

[Adders]

. Even in your precious England, ODI/twenty-twenty attracts a greater crowd average than test cricket..

There you go again with your bollocks......that is simply just not true at all.