Neil Pickup
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Are we appealing every time someone plays and misses now?
hes only ever bowled the odd ball at 85+ mph. by and large hes been an 80 mph bowler. and as ive said a billion times in the past, exceptions to a general pattern almost never count towards anything.aussie said:well i realised in PAK he was bowling in this pace but when he debuted in australia & during the 1st india/pak series in 2004 he was bowling 85mph & up..
To be fair to Pieterson, he should be kicked, whacked for playing such a stupid shot.tooextracool said:to be fair to Pietersen
oh i understand the reasoning behind it, just dont particularly enjoy having to watch pathan bowl.social said:Warned twice for running on the wicket - probably change ends.
the ball was poor enough that it deserved to be given a whack at. anything marginally short on that wicket is a poor ball period.Pratyush said:To be fair to Pieterson, he should be kicked, whacked for playing such a stupid shot.
Actually there have been loads of poor balls. Either you whack it if you are completely confident, or you dont stray and play a shot which will prove unnecessary and costly.tooextracool said:the ball was poor enough that it deserved to be given a whack at. anything marginally short on that wicket is a poor ball period.
Yes, the bowler did really well. But, given their lack of cricket, the batsmen should be more selective about going for their shots at this stage, especially when they're still getting used to the pace of the wicket. If KP had 30 or 40 to his name, he'd have probably executed the shot no problem. Thing is, that's how he started his test career at Lord's. Took a long look at it before trying to set about the bowlers. Nowadays he seems intent on attacking from the start, and it just doesn't work very often at this level.tooextracool said:to be fair to Pietersen he applied himself today, batted sensibly for most of it. it was a fine spell of bowling from shree santh that really got to him in the end, and the ball that got him out should really have been put away. it is however important to note the buildup to that delivery, because that is what did him in. putting a fielder out for the pull, and then pitching the ball up and swinging it both ways had pietersen in a knot. when the bad ball came he went after it in a desperate attempt to try and get on top of the bowler and got himself out.
Cook and Pietersen are different players. Pietersen is expected to hit poor balls for fours. Whether Pietersen should have played that shot given what happened on the 4 balls before is questionable, but the fact is that it was a poor delivery.Pratyush said:Actually there have been loads of poor balls. Either you whack it if you are completely confident, or you dont stray and play a shot which will prove unnecessary and costly.
Cook hasn't gone to whack all the poor balls he has faced and he has got more runs than Pieterson if you look at the scorecard.
Do you understand english or not? I am not arguing regarding the delivery.tooextracool said:Cook and Pietersen are different players. Pietersen is expected to hit poor balls for fours. Whether Pietersen should have played that shot given what happened on the 4 balls before is questionable, but the fact is that it was a poor delivery.
Pratyush said:I expect him to take a one or two wickets with this older ball despite 4 off first two balls.
So what actually happened? Cricinfo haven't updated their commentary for ages.Arjun said:Irfan snares Cook and guess what? The picture is frozen for the over right after drinks, so I missed it! But the commercial break seems to run smoothly. Creeps are trying to grab some extra money...
True. He's even scored more than Pietersen, too.Pratyush said:Cook hasn't gone to whack all the poor balls he has faced and he has got more runs than Pieterson if you look at the scorecard.
CricInfo didn't update their scorecards either, but Irfan rattled Cook's stumps and none of us could see the picture, and when Flintoff was facing Kumble, we were watching highlights of the first session!wpdavid said:So what actually happened? Cricinfo haven't updated their commentary for ages.