• 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** New Zealand in Australia Thread

marc71178

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
Slow Love™ said:
I would only incorporate the technology to sort out bat-pad decisions and edges, at this point. LBW's I'd leave alone, because the only aspect of the technology that I'm not convinced about is hawkeye (because it predicts, rather than reports).
Click to expand...

Snicko is by no means perfect yet - on the really close calls it is often inconclusive.

I think the earpieces might help make a difference, and they would have the added bonus of not further slowing the game.
 
marc71178

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
Bookies had Aus as strong favourites - how often do you see a poor bookie?

Australia is still a far stronger side than any other, so they will be more likely to win every game.
 
I

Isolator

State 12th Man
I'm pretty sure Oz would've won. Maybe they can cut the trophy in half... Oz can keep the Chappell half and NZ can keep the Hadlee half.
 
Deja moo

Deja moo

International Captain
The team that held the trophy before this series retains it.

For eg; India took the Border-Gavaskar trophy home with them (or atleast would have if the Aussies had let them take it) after the drawn series in Aus (tests) because they had won the last series 2-1 in India.
 
MoxPearl

MoxPearl

State Vice-Captain
why was everyone so confident aussie would win ?

Aint u been watching the last 2 games ?

Look @ what happened in the last game.. and we only played that game with 10 people.

Im not saying nz would DEF win.. and im not saying aussie would DEF win.. imho it would have been very very close again.. and whoever won would have won by less than 20 runs

Dont worry though.. as a nz supporter .. we used 2 being written off and called not a good team etc :P
 
T

telsor

U19 12th Man
Slow Love™ said:
I would only incorporate the technology to sort out bat-pad decisions and edges, at this point. LBW's I'd leave alone, because the only aspect of the technology that I'm not convinced about is hawkeye (because it predicts, rather than reports).

I don't think we can eliminate poor decisions - but I certainly think we can minimize them. I can't see anything wrong with that.

Recognizing that the umpires make errors and dealing with it has become harder and harder and makes little sense when technology allows the commentators and spectators a better base for judging many decisions than the umpires have. It's a needless frustration that detracts from the fairness of the game.
Click to expand...
Every little step forward technology takes, the proponants say, "I just want this step", and then it becomes just another small step for the next bit...

I follow a different logic...
If 2 rules conflict, the umpire decides which applies.

Rules 27.9 states that the umpires decision is final.

Therefore *whatever* the umpires decides is what the rules say happens in that instance.


It's not 'right', and an umpire who makes too many errors shouldn't get many more games, but it is MORE in accordance with the rules of the game than those who complain "that LBW wasn't out because he got an inside edge first".
 
T

telsor

U19 12th Man
MoxPearl said:
why was everyone so confident aussie would win ?

Aint u been watching the last 2 games ?

Look @ what happened in the last game.. and we only played that game with 10 people.

Im not saying nz would DEF win.. and im not saying aussie would DEF win.. imho it would have been very very close again.. and whoever won would have won by less than 20 runs

Dont worry though.. as a nz supporter .. we used 2 being written off and called not a good team etc :P
Click to expand...
I don't think anyone is saying Aus would definately win.. I know I don't believe that. I think, and feel most would agree that Aus was *more likely* to win.

NZ played very well in the first 2 games, and got close through a couple of exceptional individual performances, Aus, for the most part, played badly. It seems more likely that aus would improve than NZ, particularly in a relative sense, meaning Aus was more likely to win.

Nothing is certain however.
 
SJS

SJS

Hall of Fame Member
howardj said:
Hardly a myth!

FC Batting Average: 48

FC Bowling Average: 27

ODI Economy Rate: 4.69 (equals a score of 234 over 50 overs)

ODI Batting Average: 35

ODI Strike Rate: 67

On the strength of the above figures - and given the fact that he's young and inexperienced - he's definitely worth persisting with. If anything, he's batting too low in the order to showcase his class. At No 8, it's pretty much hit and miss.
Click to expand...
I am afraid my friend these ODI bowling figures are not worth writing home about.

67 is a TERRIBLE strike rate in ODI's. And 4.69 is not great but when added to a wicket every 11 overs PLUS , it is not worth talking about !! Multiply 11.1 with 4.7 and you will see what I mean.

Look up the Australian bowling figures in ODI's and you will se what I mean. Even Mark Waugh has better figures,
 
Deja moo

Deja moo

International Captain
Mr Casson said:
Kasper cost us the trophy!!!!!
Click to expand...
TBH, you had it coming..There were surely going to be some big shots played...its just that Kasprowicz gave them all those hits in his one over. IMO, even if he hadnt, Lee and Watson/Kasper in his next would have.
 
Jono

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
Mr Casson said:
Kasper cost us the trophy!!!!!
Click to expand...
Nah, arrogance and stupidity did.

If you played your best players for the first game, maybe you would have won, would have definitely had a better chance. Now look, there was no game in the decider, and Gillespie and McGrath get another rest. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top