West Indies v Sri Lanka, 2nd Test, PoS, 3-7 April

That's Port of Spain, not Piece of Shit.

When did we start refering to Murali as Port of Spain?

Racist.

So this match is only 3 days away, West Indies have home advantage, and yet:

- No squad has been announced
- 2 of our openers will be involved in a match that ends on Tuesday, and will only arrive in T&T on Wednesday.
- We have selected the 2 most sub-continental pitches in the Caribbean in which to face Murali and Vaas. Last time we thrashed them on a fast and bouncy Sabina Park wicket.

What are the WICB playing at? I mean how the hell to we expect to beat Sri Lanka with preparation like that?

So, Windies team? I'd go with-

Chattergoon
Bravo
Sarwan
Samuels
Chanderpaul
Gayle(c)
Ramdin+
Benn
Taylor
Edwards
Jaggernauth

When was the last time the Windies played 2 specialist spinners?

WIFAN wrote:So this match is only 3 days away, West Indies have home advantage, and yet:

- No squad has been announced
- 2 of our openers will be involved in a match that ends on Tuesday, and will only arrive in T&T on Wednesday.
- We have selected the 2 most sub-continental pitches in the Caribbean in which to face Murali and Vaas. Last time we thrashed them on a fast and bouncy Sabina Park wicket.

What are the WICB playing at? I mean how the hell to we expect to beat Sri Lanka with preparation like that?

Exactly man, exactly.

England did the same. In this day and age I find it f*cking criminal to say the least.

Makes no sense at all does it? Weaker attacks need more juice in the decks to compete with superior bowling attacks.

bliksem wrote:When did we start refering to Murali as Port of Spain?

Hehehe.

Well Jaggers has to play. He just took match figures of 10/78 versus Barbados, while Benn racked up 4/158. There will be a massive boycott by Trinis if he doesn't play after outbowling Benn comprehensively again. I would play both spinners anyway, as Ryan Hinds is injured. So my team is very similar to Henry's, but I wouldn't play Edwards as he just endured a nightmare match against T&T where he took only a few wickets and bowled a huge number of no-balls. I wouldnt play Powell either though after his disastrous performance in the 1st test, so hoepfully they have selected a new face.

WIFAN wrote:So this match is only 3 days away, West Indies have home advantage, and yet:

- No squad has been announced
- 2 of our openers will be involved in a match that ends on Tuesday, and will only arrive in T&T on Wednesday.
- We have selected the 2 most sub-continental pitches in the Caribbean in which to face Murali and Vaas. Last time we thrashed them on a fast and bouncy Sabina Park wicket.

What are the WICB playing at? I mean how the hell to we expect to beat Sri Lanka with preparation like that?

On a more seamer friendly wkt, the WI would simply have lost sooner.

The WI victory against SL at sabina is 5 yrs ago, what about the heavy defeats on bowler friendly wk suffered once SA got into their stride 5 wks ago

Don't quote me wrote:
On a more seamer friendly wkt, the WI would simply have lost sooner.

The WI victory against SL at sabina is 5 yrs ago, what about the heavy defeats on bowler friendly wk suffered once SA got into their stride 5 wks ago

And what about the only Test WI have won in the recent past being on a seamer friendly wicket? And what about the only Test SL were actually in the game against Eng in Eng being the only non-seamer friendly wicket?

Don't quote me wrote:
On a more seamer friendly wkt, the WI would simply have lost sooner.

Not really true. Many a time England were able to remain at least 'competitive' when we had dross attacks by producing wickets with a bit of life in them...

"When" we had dross attacks? Fraser and Gough would probably play every game for our current side.

Lara Lara Laughs wrote:"When" we had dross attacks? Fraser and Gough would probably play every game for our current side.

Late 1980's....

JKLever wrote:
Late 1980's....

Before Lara was born. Forgive the little scamp. He's a little clueless.

If I did that, it would be classed as child tampering.

Been watching the new series of South Park? Still churning out classics in their 12th season.

Uhhh, maybe. Is the one with Cartman sucking Butters' dick a series 11 episode? That was immensely funny.

Meant season 12. That Butters one was season 11.

Have you seen "Major Boobage", where they all get high on cats urine? It's a tribute to "Heavy Metal" apparently. I've never heard of it but it's supposed to be some 80s cartoon. Heard of it? Seems like your sort of era.

No, I haven't seen any of the 12th series. Didn't even realise they'd done one. Never heard of Heavy Metal, AFAIK... could've forgotten.

Brass Monkey wrote:

Don't quote me wrote:
On a more seamer friendly wkt, the WI would simply have lost sooner.

The WI victory against SL at sabina is 5 yrs ago, what about the heavy defeats on bowler friendly wk suffered once SA got into their stride 5 wks ago

And what about the only Test WI have won in the recent past being on a seamer friendly wicket? And what about the only Test SL were actually in the game against Eng in Eng being the only non-seamer friendly wicket?

Good point,

but bottomline, the WI are a poor side, in most circumstances in life and sport, making the terrain more difficult, just highlights the deficiencies even more.

The WI victory over AUS on a flat one in antigua, is more more recent, than the one over SL at sabina, neither is a great guage though, as circumstances in 1 victory in a million shouldn't be used as formula for all future exploits, or an excuse for poor performance

JKL wrote:
Not really true. Many a time England were able to remain at least 'competitive' when we had dross attacks by producing wickets with a bit of life in them...

a good strategy

when you have gower, gooch, gatts, lamb, smith et al

when the majority of your top 7 avg less than 33, not so good, as you can end up with 47 all out, ask harmi

Don't quote me wrote:Good point,

but bottomline, the WI are a poor side, in most circumstances in life and sport, making the terrain more difficult, just highlights the deficiencies even more.

The WI victory over AUS on a flat one in antigua, is more more recent, than the one over SL at sabina, neither is a great guage though, as circumstances in 1 victory in a million shouldn't be used as formula for all future exploits

Not at all. That flat deck win versus Aus was a long time ago.

We've got a top 6 that average over 40, we still got rolled for 80 and 110 recently.

Basically, most sides are bad because their bowlers can't 'cash the cheques' the batsmen have made.
To narrow the gap between the teams, a lively deck would be the best chance.

Either that or watch two very good exponents of bowling on a batting track go at it for SL, whilst the modest WI attack toils away for no reward.

Basically, on a lively deck - which Sri Lanka quite simply are no good on - they wouldn't have conceded an inordinate amount of runs and have to bat twice in a row for a loss.

That's why we saw a superior batting line-up lose when WI beat SA, the same thing for NZ beating England.

Brass Monkey wrote:

Don't quote me wrote:Good point,

but bottomline, the WI are a poor side, in most circumstances in life and sport, making the terrain more difficult, just highlights the deficiencies even more.

The WI victory over AUS on a flat one in antigua, is more more recent, than the one over SL at sabina, neither is a great guage though, as circumstances in 1 victory in a million shouldn't be used as formula for all future exploits

Not at all. That flat deck win versus Aus was a long time ago.

We've got a top 6 that average over 40, we still got rolled for 80 and 110 recently.

Basically, most sides are bad because their bowlers can't 'cash the cheques' the batsmen have made.
To narrow the gap between the teams, a lively deck would be the best chance.

Either that or watch two very good exponents of bowling on a batting track go at it for SL, whilst the modest WI attack toils away for no reward.

Basically, on a lively deck - which Sri Lanka quite simply are no good on - they wouldn't have conceded an inordinate amount of runs and have to bat twice in a row for a loss.

That's why we saw a superior batting line-up lose when WI beat SA, the same thing for NZ beating England.

But has this any pertinence to South Park?

taipan wrote:
But has this any pertinence to South Park?

Only that England, WI, NZ and Murali would be unerringly pranged again and again by the boys who write it. Were they to be cricket fans.