Aus v Zim, T20 WC, Cape Town, 12th September

lardbucket wrote:Oh, so Australia lost? boo-hoo. There's another one in ten minutes.

And starving Zimbabweans aren't inportant in world events either are they?

Well done Zimbabwe! Ray Mali is much smarter than I!

taipan wrote:

lardbucket wrote:Doubt it, they only come around every two years.

Only commenting as I've just logged in and noted the result. That reflects my interest in 20:20, regardless of the result. Well played the Zimbots, though - I guess any win is good for them or at least for their cricket. I must check the scorecard sometime.

Damning with faint praise?

No, though perhaps some will choose to see it that way..

I literally didn't know the game was even being played until I logged in here this am , saw this thread, and deduced the result. I have the same 'interest' in the remainder of the tournament.

In the general scheme of things I doubt this result says anything about where Australian or Zimbabwean cricket are going.

I am pleased for Zimbabwean players and fans that they've won a match. They will see this as important, and it will stimulate interest in cricket in the country, whereas the result means little to Australian fans (or at least to this Australian fan).

Whatever.

eowyn wrote:

lardbucket wrote:Oh, so Australia lost? boo-hoo. There's another one in ten minutes.

And starving Zimbabweans aren't inportant in world events either are they?

That's more than a slight misinterpretation!

Great result today for Zimbabwe. It's always great to see the Aussies lose.

We lost the netball, too, I think.

lardbucket wrote:

eowyn wrote:

lardbucket wrote:Oh, so Australia lost? boo-hoo. There's another one in ten minutes.

And starving Zimbabweans aren't important in world events either are they?

That's more than a slight misinterpretation!

Maybe, who knows anymore in the modern world.

eowyn wrote:

lardbucket wrote:

eowyn wrote:

lardbucket wrote:Oh, so Australia lost? boo-hoo. There's another one in ten minutes.

And starving Zimbabweans aren't important in world events either are they?

That's more than a slight misinterpretation!

Maybe, who knows anymore in the modern world.

It just seemed an extraordinary leap. I haven't read the whole thread, so I've got no idea where your comment came from.

lardy, sweetheart, I'm sorry, I was reading lots of things into lots of posts from all over, I was worried about how the win could be used by Mugabwe and went off on one and you coped the flack. Very poor forumming

cheers, big ears ...

lardy, sweetheart, I'm sorry, I was reading lots of things into lots of posts from all over, I was worried about how the win could be used by Mugabwe and went off on one and you coped the flack. Very poor forumming

If the Australians (supporters and players) don't care about this tournament then the sooner they're sent home the better. The rest of us are enjoying it, and will continue to.

The Zimbabwe problem is an argument for another day as far as i'm concerned (its getting late!), but needless to say the ICC will bury their head in the sand. There's no room for morals and ethical concerns when there's money to be made. Makes you wonder how the modern ICC would have responded to apartheid in the 1970s...?

Gary 111 wrote: The rest of us are enjoying it, and will continue to.

Until tomorrow when its our time to be Mugabe'd!!

Early days, but a very satisfactory start to the post Warne/McGrath era.

LOL, so we lost eh?

I'm sure the rubbish concept will now be embraced by the whole world :roll:

Must admit I feel the same way about losing this match as I would about winning it. WGAF.

lardbucket wrote:

taipan wrote:

lardbucket wrote:Doubt it, they only come around every two years.

Only commenting as I've just logged in and noted the result. That reflects my interest in 20:20, regardless of the result. Well played the Zimbots, though - I guess any win is good for them or at least for their cricket. I must check the scorecard sometime.

Damning with faint praise?

No, though perhaps some will choose to see it that way..

I literally didn't know the game was even being played until I logged in here this am , saw this thread, and deduced the result. I have the same 'interest' in the remainder of the tournament.

In the general scheme of things I doubt this result says anything about where Australian or Zimbabwean cricket are going.

I am pleased for Zimbabwean players and fans that they've won a match. They will see this as important, and it will stimulate interest in cricket in the country, whereas the result means little to Australian fans (or at least to this Australian fan).

Whatever.

Aye. When does the real cricket start?

Invader Zim wrote:LOL, so we lost eh?

I'm sure the rubbish concept will now be embraced by the whole world :roll:

Must admit I feel the same way about losing this match as I would about winning it. WGAF.

Typical Aussie response to a loss

Typical? But we almost never lose

Gay signature BTW...

eowyn wrote:Take the piss but Mugagbe will love this and point score to the detriment of real Zimbabewans

Aye.

Trevor Mudgabe?

Invader Zim wrote:Typical? But we almost never lose :suspect:

...

I think we better get used to it in LATGM.

btw has Drunky had a hair transplant?

Well, that's two thrilling games out of the four played thus far. I'm rather enjoying the format of this tournament! The whole thing, organisation and atmosphere, is so vastly superior to WC07 in the Windies that it's hard to believe that the same organisation is behind both.

If there has to be a quick version of cricket, I'd much rather it be Twenty20 than the 50 over stuff.

lardbucket wrote:Only commenting as I've just logged in and noted the result. That reflects my interest in 20:20, regardless of the result.

Nah, I'm not having that. The only reason you lot don't like 20/20 is because you're s**t.

I'm watching the highlights now. Happy days.

"Ayyyyyyy"

Peregrine Periwinkle wrote:Well, that's two thrilling games out of the four played thus far. I'm rather enjoying the format of this tournament! The whole thing, organisation and atmosphere, is so vastly superior to WC07 in the Windies that it's hard to believe that the same organisation is behind both.

If there has to be a quick version of cricket, I'd much rather it be Twenty20 than the 50 over stuff.

What? All the games have been terribly one sided. Which have been the close ones?