-
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 ** Sri Lanka in New Zealand tour
- Thread starter nookie_lk
- Start date
chaminda_00
Hall of Fame Member
Last time i checked Franklin, Mills, Wiseman weren't batsmen so there tailenders or lower order players.marc71178 said:
chaminda_00
Hall of Fame Member
Not as useful as Chandana and Vaas coming in at 9 and 10 in this innings.marc71178 said:
Franklin and Mills are more than respectable batsman, and they have showed this on the international stage. Wiseman is a very handy batsman too, he's built up quite a decent average for someone coming in at 9 or 10, in the past few years.chaminda_00 said:
JASON, Cumming was not out at times 4 times. You make up a lot of stuff.
chaminda_00
Hall of Fame Member
Just they can hold the bat and make some decent runs doesn't make them batsmen.Ming said:
Tim
Cricketer Of The Year
Where did I get this idea from?
Straight out of the selection hand-book.
Styris still averages 40 in test cricket & has only recently gone through a lean patch. He is the still ahead of Vincent in the pecking order. All Vincent can do now is keep racking up the runs and hopefully for him, Styris continues his poor form.
Straight out of the selection hand-book.
Styris still averages 40 in test cricket & has only recently gone through a lean patch. He is the still ahead of Vincent in the pecking order. All Vincent can do now is keep racking up the runs and hopefully for him, Styris continues his poor form.
chaminda_00
Hall of Fame Member
Yeah but isn't current form more important then overall career averages.Tim said:
Tim
Cricketer Of The Year
But how many International teams select like that?
The Brett Lee / Kasprowicz example has been highlighted. Brett Lee was struggling for a number of years, where-as Stryis was struggling in just 1 series or 2 at the most. There is a big difference.
Im almost certain that the selectors will opt for Styris if he returns in time from injury.
Im not arguing from the point of view that I want Styris to return ahead of Vincent, Im arguing from the point of view that the selectors will do it this way.
The Brett Lee / Kasprowicz example has been highlighted. Brett Lee was struggling for a number of years, where-as Stryis was struggling in just 1 series or 2 at the most. There is a big difference.
Im almost certain that the selectors will opt for Styris if he returns in time from injury.
Im not arguing from the point of view that I want Styris to return ahead of Vincent, Im arguing from the point of view that the selectors will do it this way.
Last edited:
chaminda_00
Hall of Fame Member
India and Vinod Kampli, if they selected sides on career averages then he would be one of the first guys picked, granted not a great example, but it shows that sides are picked on current form. Laxman got dropped from the Indian ODI but he still has a decent ODI record.Tim said:
You are right to an extent when it comes to Lee/Kaspra but you have to remember that Vincent form is greater then Kaspra current form, so therefore that has to come into calculations.
If i was the selectors then i would pick Vincent over Stryris unless Vincent losses form, but the Kiwi selectors don't always think logically and pick players depending on who they like not what their form is i.e McMillan
Why does no one want to drop astle, both styris and vincent deserve to be in the middle order.
Unless bucknor cheats again and favours srilanka We should win.
But lets not talk about umpiring.
Your definition of plumb must be different from mine jason, none of the not outs were out.
You are just making up silly excuses, why can't you accept reality like chaminda and admit nz has played better.
Unless bucknor cheats again and favours srilanka We should win.
But lets not talk about umpiring.
Your definition of plumb must be different from mine jason, none of the not outs were out.
You are just making up silly excuses, why can't you accept reality like chaminda and admit nz has played better.
Zinzan
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Your avatar seems to be appropriate jasonJASON said:Have you seen the shoddy innings of Cummings and the number of times he was plumb !!(I think the guy was at least 4 times out plumb)
Go and review Flemings innings on replay . He was out at least a couple of times at least.
The way I see it you need to have a good look and then come and talk and we will talk properly !!Vaas IMO took these guys several times over .
And the silly thing of all this would be tomorrow, Cheaty Hair will do a total back flip along with Bucknor and even ones striking out of line, inside edge or not, any part of body, high low - they will pull their finger out !!
So the reality is these 2 guys have converted a close series into one sided Test in the second and a draw in the first !! Honestly NZ is a good Team , but watching this Test series you have to say they have been given a leg up !!
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Hes going to bat at 9 AND 10??chaminda_00 said:
Im sure they wont allow that!
Plus, I think youll find that hes listed to come in at 8...
Like he did in the first Test to save NZ the test ?psxpro said:
* feels sorry for Bucknor for not even getting thanked for helping Kiwis in first Test*
I am not the only one, as Martin Crowe, Mark Richardson and Ian Smith and co went the same way as me !!psxpro said:
I don't think Chaminda says NZ played well enough to have this lead and be so much in front , considering the Teams were pretty even and the decisions that would otherwise have made it a closer Test .psxpro said:
I have already paid tribute to Lou Vincent's innings and his was a chanceless innings.psxpro said:
BTW, I didn't see your post re- SL performing better than NZ in the First Test and the Test ending up in a draw after considerable Umpiring help.
Zinzan
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Look, there is no doubt in my mind that Sri Lanka have had the worst of the decisions thru-out this series. However they are not in the position they are in now (300 behind and 9wks in hand) due entirely to poor umpiring decisions.JASON said:I am a Brown fella - so it definitely does !! Thanks !!
Martin bowled well and Vincent, Fleming batted well.
Also, as I said at the time after the 1st test, I don't think sri lanka would have won if they did get that edge off Mills on the last day. They still needed the last wicket and then would have needed to score over 6 an over to win, all that in diminishing light. Given they didn't even chase down 5.8 runs per over at home against NZ a couple of years ago...I can't see that they would have got close in Napier.
Sir Redman
State Vice-Captain
For crying out loud people enough about the umpiring. With the recent NZ v Aus series where we thought the umpiring favoured the Aussies, we still admitted that it made very little difference to the results and that the Aussies played better than us.
Reading some of the comments here it sounds as if SL were denied a guaranteed victory in the first test due to umpiring. They were not. There was not enough time left in the match and how do you know they wouldnt have collapsed like in the first innings this test?
Reading some of the comments here it sounds as if SL were denied a guaranteed victory in the first test due to umpiring. They were not. There was not enough time left in the match and how do you know they wouldnt have collapsed like in the first innings this test?