• 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 Namibia and Zimbabwe

Barney Rubble

International Coach
That was a bit of a joke - even Strauss bowled an over. Is it just me or does he NEVER bowl? Would have been dead funny if he'd got the last wicket.

Pietersen will be disappointed with getting hit for 22 off his two overs - that's a bit embarrassing against the Zim tailenders.

Bell's a much better bowler than he's given credit for, I think he can definitely do a job if England decide to drop the third seamer to include Pietersen in the future - but then you have to drop someone to include Bell, and if Solanki continues to come up with a 100 every time it looks like he is about to be dropped from the side again, then he's unlikely to ever actually get dropped for a third time.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
marc71178 said:
In the context of the innings they were poor.

Without the last 2 overs they were very very poor.

Yet again he's performed worse than the rest of the attack, yet you continue to say he's been acceptable.

And he's a player you like, funny coincidence there.
Funny coincidence, you keep going on about this "worse than the rest" rubbish.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Barney Rubble said:
That was a bit of a joke - even Strauss bowled an over. Is it just me or does he NEVER bowl? Would have been dead funny if he'd got the last wicket.
His first List-A Limited-Overs over, and no it would NOT have been funny if he'd got a wicket, thank God he didn't.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Nnanden said:
forgot to mention...
im a big fan of rainsford, very glad to see he bowled so well. a bright light for zimbabwe :)
Totally inexplicable that he didn't play until now.
He's so much better than Panyangara, Hondo and Chigumbura it's untrue.
Of course, none of them are a patch on good old Prosper - again. :happy:
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
steds said:
Vaughan scored 90??!?!?!?! In an ODI?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? :-O
It's only Zimbabwe.
He scored 116* against a certain side in a QF not so long ago I might remind you. :p
The former are only slightly stronger than the latter - which is saying something! :lol:
 
Last edited:

Langeveldt

Soutie
I don't understand how you guys can be so certain about these Zimbos having never actually seen them play.. I don't think the logan cup, or a handful of ODI's tell you very much..
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Prince EWS said:
Ahh.. Nkala bowling now.... and getting tonked again...

Why is he even in the squad? What about Mahwire? (dont laugh, hes been in awesome form in the Logan Cup and their OD comp).
Chigumbura got smashed even further than Nkala.
Why has no-one but me said a word about how terrible a bowler he is? Is he immune to criticism on CW.n?
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Langeveldt said:
I don't understand how you guys can be so certain about these Zimbos having never actually seen them play.. I don't think the logan cup, or a handful of ODI's tell you very much..
I've seen Panyangara and Chigumbura once, which is quite enough!
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
Richard said:
His first List-A Limited-Overs over, and no it would NOT have been funny if he'd got a wicket, thank God he didn't.
Why would it not have been funny?

In a way it (along with Collingwood's bizarre figures) would've summed up the whole series.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Prince EWS said:
Has anyone noticed the bowling of Matsikenyeri lately? Its improving leaps and bounds! He completely changed his action (as in, scrapped the old one completely!) not five months ago.
I guessed something must have changed.
Not so long ago his ODI ER was over 10-an-over.
Something of an improvement. :lol:
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
marc71178 said:
Why would it not have been funny?

In a way it (along with Collingwood's bizarre figures) would've summed up the whole series.
Yes, but if Strauss bowls in a ODI again I'll eat my computer.
He does not deserve an ODI average of 3.
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
Richard said:
Of course, none of them are a patch on good old Prosper - again. :happy:
Yes, yet again he came on was played around comfortably, didn't threaten, the batsmen survived and then pummelled the bowling because they had wickets left in the death overs.

What a great player he is (!)
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
marc71178 said:
Yes, yet again he came on was played around comfortably, didn't threaten, the batsmen survived and then pummelled the bowling because they had wickets left in the death overs.

What a great player he is (!)
You really don't understand much about the one-day game, do you?
Can you really not see that his extraordinary ability not to take wickets doesn't matter in the slightest because there aren't many better bowlers around ATM?
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
marc71178 said:
How is it enough?

1 viewing of a player tells us next to nothing about them.
It, along with looking at the outcomes of other games, tells you enough, believe me.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
marc71178 said:
Maybe that's because he keeps on being the worst of the bunch?
And maybe - just maybe - it doesn't matter as long as he's still doing acceptibly.
 

Top