• 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** Pakistan v New Zealand in the UAE 2014

ohnoitsyou

ohnoitsyou

International Regular
Blocky said:
Yet he averages ten less in domestic with the ball than Sodhi and offers more with the bat. And as well as Sodhi bowled, don't you think it's telling that the moment the pressure lifted from the batsman at the crease that he started going for runs again? It's much easier to bowl at batsmen at 38/2 chasing 400.
Click to expand...
Thats normal. Do you not remember Southee and Boult getting destroyed by Gayle? Happens to everyone barring Dale Steyn.
 
Days of Grace

Days of Grace

International Captain
Blocky said:
Yet he averages ten less in domestic with the ball than Sodhi and offers more with the bat. And as well as Sodhi bowled, don't you think it's telling that the moment the pressure lifted from the batsman at the crease that he started going for runs again? It's much easier to bowl at batsmen at 38/2 chasing 400.
Click to expand...
Ridiculous argument. Pakistan were strolling along with Younis and Azhar and they could have scored quicker? Why didn't they? Because Sodhi bowled well.

And NcCullum having success at ODI cricket? Lol. You know he averages about 45 runs per wicket right?


Now you will argue back with 5 consecutive posts, trying to win the argument by sheer quantity of posts. Sorry, not convinced.
 
Zinzan

Zinzan

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Blocky said:
Yes. And offer more in the field, and not lose anything with the bat.
Click to expand...
What a joke. NcCullum's reasonably economical in short-form cricket due to his ability to fire it into leg-stump, making him difficult to collar. Don't try and make out he would suddenly be a wicket-taker at Test level. I'd put any money on him easily being milked around for 3-4 runs an over & you definitely wouldn't see him clean bowling top order batsmen with close to unplayable deliveries.
 
Blocky

Blocky

Banned
Days of Grace said:
Ridiculous argument. Pakistan were strolling along with Younis and Azhar and they could have scored quicker? Why didn't they? Because Sodhi bowled well.

And NcCullum having success at ODI cricket? Lol. You know he averages about 45 runs per wicket right?


Now you will argue back with 5 consecutive posts, trying to win the argument by sheer quantity of posts. Sorry, not convinced.
Click to expand...
Bollocks. Strolling along when they had less than 100 on the board during most of Sodhi's overs to them. I mean it's OK to try and refute points, but this point is utterly ridiculous, all it shows is you're attempting to argue with me without actually knowing how to.
 
Blocky

Blocky

Banned
"We don't like Sodhi, we know he sucks, but heres a million reasons why we'll argue anyway"

Go go pack mentality.
 
ohnoitsyou

ohnoitsyou

International Regular
Blocky said:
Bollocks. Strolling along when they had less than 100 on the board during most of Sodhi's overs to them. I mean it's OK to try and refute points, but this point is utterly ridiculous, all it shows is you're attempting to argue with me without actually knowing how to.
Click to expand...
What was Sodhi's economy rate at the fall of the 9th wicket. 2.17?

Against an inform world class bat and near ATG, on a docile surface in home condition. If i was a Pakistan supporter i would be disappointed if they weren't strolling along (which they weren't)
 
Last edited:
Days of Grace

Days of Grace

International Captain
Blocky said:
Bollocks. Strolling along when they had less than 100 on the board during most of Sodhi's overs to them. I mean it's OK to try and refute points, but this point is utterly ridiculous, all it shows is you're attempting to argue with me without actually knowing how to.
Click to expand...
Not ridiculous at all. If it happened as you predicted before the match, Sodhi would have released all the pressure and they would have strolled along at 4 or 5 an over, a run-rate which you endlessly state when referring to Sodhi. But Sodhi bowled well and didn't release any of the pressure.
 
Maximas

Maximas

Cricketer Of The Year
Blocky said:
Yet he averages ten less in domestic with the ball than Sodhi and offers more with the bat. And as well as Sodhi bowled, don't you think it's telling that the moment the pressure lifted from the batsman at the crease that he started going for runs again? It's much easier to bowl at batsmen at 38/2 chasing 400.
Click to expand...
The pressure he was very much a part in creating, if he had able spin support that pressure might have been even more significant, you can't win games in these conditions if you are gonna play one spinner who is simply tying up an end,
 
F

Fuller Pilch

Hall of Fame Member
These arguments re spinners won't go anywhere. Tbh the biggest loss (probably bigger than Jeets and even injured Vettori) is KW getting done for chucking
 
Zinzan

Zinzan

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Blocky said:
"We don't like Sodhi, we know he sucks, but heres a million reasons why we'll argue anyway"

Go go pack mentality.
Click to expand...
Everyone seems to be in agreement about Sodhi not being the finished product, but only one person seems to be suggesting Nathan McCullum (of all people) would be a better option at test level.
 
kiwiviktor81

kiwiviktor81

International Debutant
Wonder what McCullum's thinking is here.

If we are to win the series - improbable as that might be - we need enough runs today for a declaration early tomorrow. Which means we need a lot of runs fast, which is McCullum's forte.
 
Zinzan

Zinzan

Request Your Custom Title Now!
kiwiviktor81 said:
Wonder what McCullum's thinking is here.

If we are to win the series - improbable as that might be - we need enough runs today for a declaration early tomorrow. Which means we need a lot of runs fast, which is McCullum's forte.
Click to expand...
Hopefully the fact he's 12 off 5 is an indication of his intentions. I hope he is aggressive, within reason i.e. Not hitting it down deep mid wickets throat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top