-
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*** West Indies in New Zealand
- Thread starter James
- Start date
)
irfan
State Captain
Sorry if I'm not uptodate with things but wtf is a bowl-off. I presume you just bowl at a full set of stumps with no batsman present, if so, how come only 3 out of 17 balls hit the stump. Is it like penalty kicks where after 5 shots the team with the most goals win or they go to sudden death if scores are deadlocked ??zinzan12 said:Was that cricket ?? I'm still trying to decide
Smudge
Hall of Fame Member
The Black Caps need to decide how seriously they're going to take Twenty20. Their approach today was fairly laidback and if the ICC is going to push this version of the sport ahead, then I'd like to see them actually show a little application.
Frankly, the win in the bowl-off was like a turd covered in diamonds. The nice shiny win hid the rather pooey performance from the batsmen in particular.
Smith, Gayle and Bravo (for his 1.2 overs) managed to bowl straight, but how many of those bowled dismissals were from batsmen going across the line or trying to go over cover. There needs to be more straight hitting - and straight hitting is what has worked for other teams in Twenty20. Cairns' promotion to 5 reeked of sentimentalism, which is all well and good, but you could see the pressure building in his eyes.
And something to ponder - is Shane Bond rivalling Sir Ed Hillary as the greatest living New Zealander?
Frankly, the win in the bowl-off was like a turd covered in diamonds. The nice shiny win hid the rather pooey performance from the batsmen in particular.
Smith, Gayle and Bravo (for his 1.2 overs) managed to bowl straight, but how many of those bowled dismissals were from batsmen going across the line or trying to go over cover. There needs to be more straight hitting - and straight hitting is what has worked for other teams in Twenty20. Cairns' promotion to 5 reeked of sentimentalism, which is all well and good, but you could see the pressure building in his eyes.
And something to ponder - is Shane Bond rivalling Sir Ed Hillary as the greatest living New Zealander?
Langeveldt
Soutie
No, it was Twenty20.. Better get used to that!zinzan12 said:Was that cricket ?? I'm still trying to decide
Scaly piscine
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Ah, I knew the president of the 'I like ODIs but hypocritically hate Twenty20' association would have to post something...Langeveldt said:
Langeveldt
Soutie
Twenty20's aren't like ODI's though.. In ODI's there are aspects such as building an innings and shot selection..Scaly piscine said:
I get the impression that Twenty20 fans will never become test cricket fans, because they are essentially there just so they can go home more quickly.. Its kind of "we don't really like cricket, we just want something to watch whilst the footie isn't on that doesn't take seven hours..
All this hoohaa about Twenty20 being the savior of cricket will rub off when the masses realize that for the most part cricket is a boring sport that requires a lot of patience to get into..
Last edited:
Jono
Virat Kohli (c)
To be fair, I believe it was the format in which the Twenty20 match was decided that prompted Zinzan's statement in regards to whether he watched cricket. I mean there was a Twenty20 match between Aus vs. NZ last year so its not the first time the country has seen the match.
The bowl-out, whilst I didn't witness it, sounded kind of silly.
The bowl-out, whilst I didn't witness it, sounded kind of silly.
Scaly piscine
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Twenty20s are like most ODIs, they just don't have the pottering about in the middle. The only ODIs that are significantly different are the ones where the pitch actually does something and a score of 220 is good - but these are few and far between.Langeveldt said:
ohtani's jacket
State Vice-Captain
The bowl-off was the stupidest thing I have ever seen in cricket.
ohtani's jacket
State Vice-Captain
When they were warming up, they practiced hitting just one stump (i.e. the middle stump), but when the umpires came out they placed three stumps at the wicketkeeper's end and one stump at the bowler's end.irfan said:
It's like a penalty shoot out, except you have 10 attempts and each bowler has two attempts before turning the strike over to the opposition bowler (i.e. Nathan Astle bowled twice, then Dwayne Smith.) If it had been tied after 20 attempts, the game would've gone into SUDDEN DEATH BOWL OFF~!
ohtani's jacket
State Vice-Captain
They bowl at all three stumps.irfan said:So do they bowl at one stump or all 3 or both
I have no idea why there was one stump at the umpire's end. It might've had something to do with Bowden nicking off with the stumps at the end of regulation.
Everybody was confused... When Bond hit the four to tie it, Fleming thought we'd lost the game, but Cairns immediately did a bowling action to signal BOWL-OFF.