*Official* England in Sri Lanka

[Tim]

Well if NZ can still win a good number of matches with such a ridiculous team then they can definately do alot better yet.

England have a full-strength team in Sri Lanka, so if they can't win the series then that makes NZ's effort earlier in the year look pretty good considering the make-shift side they took there.

Mind you, we've been playing with a make-shift side for about 3 or 4 years now, waiting for batsmen to crop up.

 

[Gaijin-san]

And another fine performance by your mighty mouth. Australia have been held to 235 by India, your not safe yet.

Mate, my mighty mouth knows the difference between 88 and 235.

 

[Tim]

I hate to say it Rik, but 235 was a very good score in that game.

 

[Token]

Bless your heart Billy Bowden, come back home and get Max Cricket started again...you outsiders havn't seen umpiring till you've watched Billy umpire a Max game (Twenty20 cricket...psh). Tear to the eye stuff.

 

[luckyeddie]

Mate, my mighty mouth knows the difference between 88 and 235.

Rik adopts foetal position

 

[badgerhair]

I realise I'm new here, but shouldn't this thread now be topped, given that the series is actually underway?

Alternatively, perhaps the England squad should be after their ghastly performance yesterday.

Cheers,

Mike

 

[luckyeddie]

I realise I'm new here, but shouldn't this thread now be topped, given that the series is actually underway?

Alternatively, perhaps the England squad should be after their ghastly performance yesterday.

Cheers,

Mike

1. Nope. We are hoping that it just goes away quietly

2. That's the reason for (1) above.

 

[Neil Pickup]

I thought I had topped it last week :rolleyes:

Obviously hadnt

 

[luckyeddie]

Harmison out of the tour.

Rik comes out of foetal position.

 

[LankanPrince]

OK, I will not judge England on their performance in the first ODI. Let us forget England's 'blip' and look foward to the rest of the series.

 

[PY]

If I didn't know better, I'd have said that was a very mature comment :P but the part of means you expect it to get worse.

I hope not

 

[Langeveldt]

England are always making a resurgance as a one-day outfit if you believe the Press. Most of the time they're just regressing further and further, but I really don't think it's possible to get any worse than the present side.

Well thats pretty pessimistic even by my standards, but I find myself agreeing with you, they really do look horribly weak... There are a lot of good players playing, but no outstanding ones to be seen, and to beat these Asian sides (cept Ban) you need a couple of matchwinners... Vaughan should be a matchwinner, but he isnt in One day cricket...

And the fact that we play half the amount of one day cricket that the rest play, and insist on picking an inexperienced bunch doesnt help matters at all...

 

[iamdavid]

You may laugh now but world domination is within our reach :baddevil: :frog:

Sure , Just like Rod says , 2008 you'll be the best in the world :P

 

[Legglancer]

England had a bad day ... Ok a very bad day .... but lets get a proper perspective on their current ODI standard. I believe thay are certainly better than NZ in their batting and bowling.

I know die hard NZ fans may laugh at this statement and submit that NZ did defeat Sri Lanka in SL not too long ago ..... But I feel that NZ certainly did not beat SL in that series as much as Sri Lanka beat themselves. I know I am repeating myself but Sri Lanka still I believe have quite a few problems to sort out.

namely,

1) Fragile Middile order.

2) Unproven new Bowlers

3) Too long abscence from Cricket.

4) No competant replacement for Aravinda.

That having been said Sri Lanka are fortunate too have a few players that are phenominally talanted in Sanath, Murali, Marvan, Vass ..... Mahela, Sangakkara have not by any means lived up to their reputations or thier predicsers.

Most of all Sri Lanka lack the killer instinct and they need to work on theis mentall toughness instead of counting sheer talent to win matchers. If England exploit these weaknesas they can be succsessfull in this tour.

 

[marc71178]

And his recent feats were against the rubbish bowling line-up of Bangladesh and the pretty substandard batting line-up too.

An average of 40 with the bat and 16 with the ball over the whole of 2003 suggests he's played against more than just Bangladesh...

 

[Craig]

You never seem to amaze me Marc. Please go back and read my post again and look for the part were I said his "recent performances..".

 

[Tim]

Yeah I agree that England's ODI side is better on paper, but its not NZ's fault that they win the matches.

It just shows that if we actually find some decent batsmen we'll be alot better.

 

[marc71178]

You never seem to amaze me Marc. Please go back and read my post again and look for the part were I said his "recent performances..".

I know what you said, but he hasn't just suddenly hit form for 3 games against Bangladesh, he's been doing it all year, meaning any comment about recent performances is irrelevant.

 

[Rik]

Mate, my mighty mouth knows the difference between 88 and 235.

Maybe it does. But what it doesn't know is what not to say. There is a saying "if there is no good reason for saying something, then don't say it." And what you said comes into that category, since all it would gain would be another arguement.

 

[Rik]

I hate to say it Rik, but 235 was a very good score in that game.

Maybe it was, but India had started quick out of the blocks and anyway, that post was only there to inflame an arguement.