steds said:Nearly. Keep trying...
Sanz said:AA will stay in the team.
He is an annoying little weasel, isn't he? performs once in a blue moon and is brought in as an allrounder over and over and over and over again, his economy rate is constantly around 6.5 and once in a blue moon it dips to 3/4, resulting in an economy rate being 5.5. Just annoys the hell out of me why they repeatedly select him, could've given chance to VRV Singh or even Abid Nabi or another upcoming batsmen.adharcric said:Dude I'm trying to jinx AA, but the man is just too annoying. No amount of jinxing can overpower his ability to turn in an annoyingly adequate performance when you least want it.
Bugger. I jinxed him.Jono said:
Harbhajan to Solanki, out Caught by Yuvraj!! tossed up delivery, the pressure gets to Solanki, he leans forward and flicks it straight to Yuvraj at short midwicket, first wicket for Harbhajan V Solanki c Y Singh b H Singh 10(20) 4s-0 6s-1
25.5 Harbhajan to Solanki, THATS OUT!! Caught!!
*Ahem* Check my last post about Solanki.Barney Rubble said:
EDIT: Bugger, as I type, he's out.
Yeah, I saw.Sanz said:*Ahem* Check my last post about Solanki.
The point is ... Geraint Jones trying to show that he can actually score runs.Tom Halsey said:I don't see what the point of all this poodling around is, we might aswell actually go for it, and make a fight of it rather than just lie down.
Obviously we're probably not going to get it, or anywhere near, but I don't see the point in this.
Cause the 5th bowler AA doesn't count. The funniest part is a part timer like Yuvi has a better economy rate than a frontline bowler like AA.Jono said:Playing for your average.
Anyway why are we bowling Yuvi when we've played 5 bowlers? Probably doesn't matter but its interesting none the less.
Question is whether they're actually going to go for it. It's doable if you've got a bit of self-belief - but it's still nigh-on impossible.Sanz said:I think England can still win this one. Couple of good overs and they are back in the game.
129 in 70 balls. Teams regularly get 200 in Twenty/20 games. It's definitely possible.Barney Rubble said:Question is whether they're actually going to go for it. It's doable if you've got a bit of self-belief - but it's still nigh-on impossible.
Thing is, we can't really afford to lose more than one wicket, or the momentum (and all the batsmen) will be gone.steds said:129 in 70 balls. Teams regularly get 200 in Twenty/20 games. It's definitely possible.