• 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* England in India 2023/24 #CryMoreTour

sledger

sledger

Spanish_Vicente
I just see "Duckett - c Jurel - b Deep" and read "Jurel in the Deep" to the tune of Rolling in the Deep by Adele.
 
Gnske

Gnske

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
sledger said:
Hey I worked hard to make it so stop pissing on my strawberries.
Click to expand...
Then as someone who admires and respects hard work how about some more respect for the England backup wicketkeeper yeah?

You know baiting is a reportable offence
 
Owzat

Owzat

U19 Captain
sledger said:
I don't hate him. I just hate abilities (or his lack thereof).
Click to expand...
EDIT : for clarity I didn't mean debating Jones vs Read, for those didn't realise/pick up on that, I meant that debate - batsman-keeper vs supposed infallible keeper

back to the old "Jones vs Read" debate, Bairstow may not be the solution but the theory of "catch everything" is flawed given not all catches go to the keeper, Foakes is not flawless himself, AND if you don't have runs on the board then how good the keeper is/isn't is rendered moot...

I hate overhyped so any animosity to Foakes is a reaction to idiotic fawning over him for something unproven to make a difference one way or the other. England won ONE Test and that was because Pope made a big hundred after being dropped on was it 104 (?) Foakes may or may not have helped take the wickets to win BUT without Pope and those crucial runs his relevance in the "who keeps?" debate would be 0-3
 
Last edited:
sledger

sledger

Spanish_Vicente
Owzat said:
back to the old "Jones vs Read" debate, Bairstow may not be the solution but the theory of "catch everything" is flawed given not all catches go to the keeper, Foakes is not flawless himself, AND if you don't have runs on the board then how good the keeper is/isn't is rendered moot...

I hate overhyped so any animosity to Foakes is a reaction to idiotic fawning over him for something unproven to make a difference one way or the other. England won ONE Test and that was because Pope made a big hundred after being dropped on was it 104 (?) Foakes may or may not have helped take the wickets to win BUT without Pope and those crucial runs his relevance in the "who keeps?" debate would be 0-3
Click to expand...
Yeah I'm not making my comments in the context of any wider debate tbh. I just think he's rubbish.
 
S

Socerer 01

International Captain
Owzat said:
back to the old "Jones vs Read" debate, Bairstow may not be the solution but the theory of "catch everything" is flawed given not all catches go to the keeper, Foakes is not flawless himself, AND if you don't have runs on the board then how good the keeper is/isn't is rendered moot...

I hate overhyped so any animosity to Foakes is a reaction to idiotic fawning over him for something unproven to make a difference one way or the other. England won ONE Test and that was because Pope made a big hundred after being dropped on was it 104 (?) Foakes may or may not have helped take the wickets to win BUT without Pope and those crucial runs his relevance in the "who keeps?" debate would be 0-3
Click to expand...
a lot of verbal diarrhoea to support a **** Bairstow that has only 3 years of good batting output and will likely be the worst cricketer in the 100 test club when he gets there
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top