ashley bach
Cricketer Of The Year
Now that would be a Nelson special...
-
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 * 2022 Commonwealth Games Women's T20
- Thread starter _Ed_
- Start date
Himannv
Hall of Fame Member
What is Harleen Deol like as a player? She's coming in at 7 and doesn't seem to be a bowling option (judging by this one game). Rana or Vastrakar (sp) could bat there I think.
anil1405
International Captain
Pretty average based on what I've seen of her till date. There are better batters in the side. Meghana will play the next game if she has recovered completely from covid, and will bat at 3. Pooja will join the team a bit later. Ideally I'd like to see this XI:
Smriti
Shafali
Meghana
Kaur
Yastika
Deepti
Rana
Pooja
Renuka/Meghna
(Insert another spinner/pacer/or even jemimah at 5)
Gayakwad
7 bowling options and the team bats deep too.
Pup Clarke
Cricketer Of The Year
She's a jet of a T20 cricketer. Perfect at the back end of an innings with the bat or maneuvering a chase, bowls good economical spin and an excellent fielder.
Still a tad inconsistent at times, but phenomenal to watch at her best
anil1405
International Captain
Unfortunately Smriti, Shafali, Yastika, Jemimah, Meghana have all played in top 3 for most of their careers. One or two of them will always play out of position . Deepti is the only experienced batter to come after Kaur who is used to batting lower down. Yeah agree that Deepti isn't suited for this format with her batting but the team has to stay put with her.
Magrat Garlick
Rather Mad Witch
competitive total by Barbados. it might be enough to have three players
SillyCowCorner1
Moooo
3 down for Pakistan
Gotta make more inroads.
We got this!
Today I’m a Barbadian…part and parcel with being a West Indian.
Gotta make more inroads.
We got this!
Today I’m a Barbadian…part and parcel with being a West Indian.
Magrat Garlick
Rather Mad Witch
Pakistan women just *do not* score quickly do they
they were competent at the 50-over world cup but uuuuh
they were competent at the 50-over world cup but uuuuh
ataraxia
International Coach
Yeah, one thinks "I can do better, just hit the damn ball with any strength ffs" territory (disclaimer: I cannot do better). Knock from Dar though, a real trailblazer in this department.
(also, from a cursory look around some of these players, their administration competence seems to be at an expectably and exceptably low level)
obligatory:
davado
School Boy/Girl Captain
i served my time
And i missedthis forum more than i realised i would.
So i wont go as faras reading all the rules but ill becareful i promise
davado
School Boy/Girl Captain
i heard a great deal of boastful commentary about the draastic improvement in the england womens t20 team during the recent series against the hapless sth africans. And how england would threaten australia for gold.
Not only do i think Australia will thrash england like they are the under 12s. I think new zealand are far superior to england. And englands best medal chance is bronze.
Unfortunately i dont think the same commentators will be involved in the commonwealth games, so i wont hear them eat crow as they decry their desperate bad luck when getting bronze.
Looking forward to watching amelia kerr bat. And of course sophie devine etc. New zealand could be worth a wager at $15 on ladbrokes
Ausralia rightly favourites $1.40
england (who are imo a 2nd rate team with no chance in hell) $4.00
india who already been beaten by australia after their 3 best players had great games and australia had a shocker $8.00
new zealand who are the only team capable of beating aust $15
so as i see it theyre paying 15 to 1 in a 2 horse race.. Which is insane value. Ladbrokes have made a huge error. Bought into the hype probably.
Australia will probably win gold. But not neccessarily and at those odds youd be crazy not to bet on new zealand. imho
Not only do i think Australia will thrash england like they are the under 12s. I think new zealand are far superior to england. And englands best medal chance is bronze.
Unfortunately i dont think the same commentators will be involved in the commonwealth games, so i wont hear them eat crow as they decry their desperate bad luck when getting bronze.
Looking forward to watching amelia kerr bat. And of course sophie devine etc. New zealand could be worth a wager at $15 on ladbrokes
Ausralia rightly favourites $1.40
england (who are imo a 2nd rate team with no chance in hell) $4.00
india who already been beaten by australia after their 3 best players had great games and australia had a shocker $8.00
new zealand who are the only team capable of beating aust $15
so as i see it theyre paying 15 to 1 in a 2 horse race.. Which is insane value. Ladbrokes have made a huge error. Bought into the hype probably.
Australia will probably win gold. But not neccessarily and at those odds youd be crazy not to bet on new zealand. imho
Himannv
Hall of Fame Member
I feel New Zealand lack a bit of balance in their side. They looked a bit better with Down coming in at 6 to finish games, but she's struggled with injuries this year and they're a bit over reliant on Devine and Kerr. Devine is very consistent, but I feel Kerr is like her own worst enemy at times.
England, on the other hand, look like they've freshened up their squad and have a good system that is producing quality young players. Dunkley has been fantastic and I think Sciver is a very good bat plus they have good backup as well. Ecclestone is the best bowler in the world and they have good bowling options and depth. Only Australia are clearly better than them IMO.
davado
School Boy/Girl Captain
i hadnt factored that weakness into new zealand . I cant really remember the rest of the team (except jess kerr who isnt playing)
but i stand by my opinion of england. i think scriver could play for australia based on talent and however well the rest of the team played against sth africa they wouldnt peel the oranges for australia.
Amelia kerr and sophie devine on the other hand would and at $15 you only need the top 2 batters to fire for an upset.
i personally dont like eccelstone which may colour my judgement but i dont understand why batters dont smash every ball she bowls over her head for 6. Her success mystifies me.
but i stand by my opinion of england. i think scriver could play for australia based on talent and however well the rest of the team played against sth africa they wouldnt peel the oranges for australia.
Amelia kerr and sophie devine on the other hand would and at $15 you only need the top 2 batters to fire for an upset.
i personally dont like eccelstone which may colour my judgement but i dont understand why batters dont smash every ball she bowls over her head for 6. Her success mystifies me.
davado
School Boy/Girl Captain
ye and what was grace harris doing down the order? i thought her inclusion was an error .Wow she can whack it. Imagine how good she'd be if she had to take batting seriously. Their batting order is ludicrous.
(Put a lazy $5 on new zealand anyway)
scriver is a great batter but i dont see her batting australia out of it. same with beaumont
kerr and devine can though and theyve shown the intent to take the chance to do so before.
And done it. I forget what they got but australia not only lost but were shell shocked
Theyd have to both in top form on the day but at 15 to 1 in a 3 horse race ( if you include england which i dont) it seems fantastic value to me
without studying the pools id say new zealand australia play off for gold
theres usually an upset so west indies taking bronze and england 4th ( although i would not put money on that upset- it would just be amusing)
england have a well rounded team of very good players but australia have a much better version
new zealand on th other hand have 2 superstar batters who can and have beaten this australian team
england could play australia 1000 times and not win one game. I dont think its even remotely possible for them to win 1 in 1000.
Either their strategy was wrong from conception or they just didnt have the talent to adopt any other
(Put a lazy $5 on new zealand anyway)
scriver is a great batter but i dont see her batting australia out of it. same with beaumont
kerr and devine can though and theyve shown the intent to take the chance to do so before.
And done it. I forget what they got but australia not only lost but were shell shocked
Theyd have to both in top form on the day but at 15 to 1 in a 3 horse race ( if you include england which i dont) it seems fantastic value to me
without studying the pools id say new zealand australia play off for gold
theres usually an upset so west indies taking bronze and england 4th ( although i would not put money on that upset- it would just be amusing)
england have a well rounded team of very good players but australia have a much better version
new zealand on th other hand have 2 superstar batters who can and have beaten this australian team
england could play australia 1000 times and not win one game. I dont think its even remotely possible for them to win 1 in 1000.
Either their strategy was wrong from conception or they just didnt have the talent to adopt any other
Last edited:
davado
School Boy/Girl Captain
australia can and have thrashed new zealand but vice versa also
heres 2 occasions. Have england ever beaten this australian team?
i dont think theyve even come close
i just read the article- susie bates is their 3rd top class batter.
but its sophie devine who can do it (with kerr and bates help)
how can india be $8 with no hope in hell and nz $15 ? isnt that an obvious error? even if you believe the england hype that difference cant make sense which tells me the bookies arent too savvy with womens cricket
15 to 1 for gods sake ! i cant believe it. Im in gamblers heaven. I know something the bookie has missed
hi 5
ok im getting too excited i may need a lie down after i place my bet
Women's World Twenty20: NZ women thrash holders Australia - BBC Sport
Women's Cricket World Cup: New Zealand chase down 322 to thrash favourites Australia in warm-up | Cricket News | Sky Sports
heres 2 occasions. Have england ever beaten this australian team?
i dont think theyve even come close
i just read the article- susie bates is their 3rd top class batter.
but its sophie devine who can do it (with kerr and bates help)
how can india be $8 with no hope in hell and nz $15 ? isnt that an obvious error? even if you believe the england hype that difference cant make sense which tells me the bookies arent too savvy with womens cricket
15 to 1 for gods sake ! i cant believe it. Im in gamblers heaven. I know something the bookie has missed
hi 5
ok im getting too excited i may need a lie down after i place my bet
Women's World Twenty20: NZ women thrash holders Australia - BBC Sport
Women's Cricket World Cup: New Zealand chase down 322 to thrash favourites Australia in warm-up | Cricket News | Sky Sports
Last edited: