British - losers?

[Langeveldt]

With cricket, the facts now say we are the first ever England side to win 8 in a row, yet still people want wholesale changes - we've had the wonderful claims that Graham Thorpe needs to prove himself as a Test batsman and Michael Vaughan is a talentless waste of space and needs dropping.

Also, take the treatment that Radcliffe got in Athens. She went for Gold, pushed herself too hard and missed out. She could quite easily have conserved herself and made a late charge for Bronze/Silver, as one of the Americans did successfully. But no, she went for the top, and her reward was to be castigated from all corners.

As I say, deep-laid social malaise.

Cracking post.. It sickens me, and people who can't praise champions don't deserve them in the first place..

 

[Langeveldt]

It's funny how everyone seems to think that it's specific to their culture, yet this kind of behaviour is found all over the world...except maybe in America.

One of the reasons I support South African cricket is because it doesn't exist in their culture.. yet...

Apart from the odd mumbling from a few country guys in Bloemfontein that AAD didnt give his all for Free State, champions like him are treated as such..

 

[marc71178]

Or rather we've been winning for the last 9 months... we've had teams in the very recent past that have been winning series for longer... and more series, for that matter...
We are too quick to jump to the conclusion that we are doing well at cricket. If we win this series, then we're starting to get a case; until then, no.

So 1 defeat in 18 or so isn't the mark of a good side then?

 

[SpaceMonkey]

So 1 defeat in 18 or so isn't the mark of a good side then?

But dont you know we fluked everyone!

 

[Neil Pickup]

What'll be interesting now will be the volume of criticisms should we lose in Durban.

 

[SpaceMonkey]

theres bound to be loads that have been waiting in the shadows for months hoping England had a bad test so they could come out and tell us all they were right all along but every team (even the Australians) has a bad innings / match occasionally.

 

[Langeveldt]

theres bound to be loads that have been waiting in the shadows for months hoping England had a bad test so they could come out and tell us all they were right all along but every team (even the Australians) has a bad innings / match occasionally.

Im always amazed at the number of forum members (English) who just seem to wait for an oppertunity to stick the knife in. It's like a pleasure is derived from it or something. Madness, I've got every bit of admiration for an England team who are rightfully just one place behind Australia..

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

England is rightly the second ranked test side in the world now, but on the same token I wouldn't get too excited about some wins over the West Indies and New Zealand...

If England beat South Africa (which they should), the hype may be more justified.

 

[SpaceMonkey]

Interesting to note Rudolph was Harmisons 64th wicket of the year which is an English Record. Congrats to that man!

 

[Langeveldt]

Interesting to note Rudolph was Harmisons 64th wicket of the year which is an English Record. Congrats to that man!

Yeah, he has certainly made me eat my words..

 

[Richard]

Whilst Beckham may not be the complete player, that Greece game will always stick in my memory as one of the best individual performances I have ever seen. Any Briton attaining this kinds of heights then suddenly becomes a target for abuse for some reason - people calling for them to be removed from the captaincy/dropped from England squad altogether,

So because of this single game he deserves some of the praise given him? Those talking him down will always have more merit for mine than those talking him up - he could have been good before the outside-football distractions took their toll. Ever since then he's been sporadically brilliant and mostly wholly overestimated.

With cricket, the facts now say we are the first ever England side to win 8 in a row, yet still people want wholesale changes - we've had the wonderful claims that Graham Thorpe needs to prove himself as a Test batsman and Michael Vaughan is a talentless waste of space and needs dropping.

And there have been far greater achievements than simply winning 8 Tests in a row - IMO that says far more about the nature of the game ATM than it does that this side is better than some of the past.
While I don't agree with either of the for-instances above, I do think that there are some overrated players in the current outfit.

Oh, and Man Utd, best club side in the world? Most exploitative with biggest foreign fanbase, yes, best, well - no. Not by a long shot.

Most exploitative?
Sorry, but you're seriously delusional if you think so.
Every club is just as ruthless at exploiting every club below them where the opportunity presents itself.

 

[Richard]

So 1 defeat in 18 or so isn't the mark of a good side then?

Don't quite know where you get the 1 defeat in 18 from - since (inclusive) The Oval against South Africa they've played 12 (removing Bangladesh games for the obvious reasons) with 1 defeat.
In Sri Lanka England could easily have lost 3-0 (yes, they do deserve some credit for not doing so) and only after that largely appalling series - albeit in about the hottest kitchen in cricket - can any run be said to have been put together.
The 10 out of 11 is the mark of a good side, yes - but it won't be that good a side unless they beat South Africa.

 

[Richard]

What'll be interesting now will be the volume of criticisms should we lose in Durban.

You'll not hear too much from me - if they lose in Durban and Cape Town there might start (and only start) to be some case.

 

[Richard]

theres bound to be loads that have been waiting in the shadows for months hoping England had a bad test so they could come out and tell us all they were right all along but every team (even the Australians) has a bad innings / match occasionally.

Which is precisely why, should the match at Kingsmead be lost, one match which bucks a longish trend doesn't really prove much.
Nonetheless, I think I can already claim to be right when suggesting that South Africa would provide a much tougher proposition than the previous 2 teams.

 

[Richard]

Im always amazed at the number of forum members (English) who just seem to wait for an oppertunity to stick the knife in. It's like a pleasure is derived from it or something. Madness, I've got every bit of admiration for an England team who are rightfully just one place behind Australia..

What I think presents some of the misinterpretations is this sort of idea - no-one can possibly criticise a team for winning.
They can criticise the opposition and point-out why the winning may not be quite such an achievement as some might think - that is what I do, for instance.
But pointing-out shortcomings is not neccesarily criticism.

 

[Langeveldt]

What I think presents some of the misinterpretations is this sort of idea - no-one can possibly criticise a team for winning.
They can criticise the opposition and point-out why the winning may not be quite such an achievement as some might think - that is what I do, for instance.
But pointing-out shortcomings is not neccesarily criticism.

Fair enough..

It just seems to be "oh England won because of this".. and not "because they are playing some thoroughly special cricket"

 

[Richard]

You see, it's very simple for me - England won because they played better cricket than the opposition.
Whether the opposition is to continue playing lower standard cricket than them (as the opposition changes, ie) is the question.

 

[marc71178]

Don't quite know where you get the 1 defeat in 18 from - since (inclusive) The Oval against South Africa they've played 12 (removing Bangladesh games for the obvious reasons) with 1 defeat.

Like it or not Bangladesh happened.

Therefore it is:

1 win vs SA
2 wins vs Ban
2 draws and a loss vs SL
3 wins and a draw vs WI
3 wins vs NZ
4 wins vs WI
1 win vs SA

Now I may have not finished my Maths degree, but I'm pretty sure that 1+2+3+4+3+4+1 is 18.

 

[tooextracool]

and he beat him twice? He should give our Leyton a few tips.....although hopefully next month....

possibly more, those are the 2 i remember clearly.
as far as lleyton is concerned, well henmans record against lleyton tbh is very poor indeed.

 

[tooextracool]

The fact of the matter is David Beckham is an incredibly overrated player, has been since 1999 - and the achievements of the England cricket team are overestimated - at present.
Beckham might be a superstar, but with regards football he's been said to have achieved so much that he hasn't.

at least we share the same sentiments in this situation, even if it is in another sport.