Re: ICC World Twenty20, 2009 - Group B

by JKLever Fri 05 Jun 2009, 21:28

Chivalry Augustus wrote:Oh give over Smerky, Rashid was crap today. He's one of the most over-rated cricketers in England, and that's saying something in a country full of over-rated cricketers. Sidebottom may not have been incisive and brilliant today but he gave his captain some control. Rashid got tonked all over the place and was the worst bowler in a collection of poor bowlers. People are obsessed with the letters 'lb' next to his name, David Lloyd's attitude summed it up. He didn't bowl a consistent line, he wasn't a wicket-taking threat, he didn't turn the ball any farther than Graeme Swann would have done. He might turn into a very good player but he's nowhere near an international player yet.

As for England, their team is rubbish. Where are the hitters? Who's the finisher? Which bowlers can get you 1-25 on a regular basis? Broad and Anderson go at 8s in Twenty20s. How are they going to help you do a job? The fielding was atrocious. The squad for the tournament was atrocious. How can you have Collingwood, Morgan and Foster at 5, 6 and 7? There's no power, no innovation. Just nurdly English cricketers. Holland came out and whacked every ball. Ugly, but simple and effective. If England could have fielded they'd have thrashed 'em, but we played it like it was a friendly and only seemed to wake up after about twelve overs realising we were tied to the train-tracks.

The only positive I can think of is that it wipes that self-congratulatory smile off Team Flower's face. It's harder to beat a team when they're actually trying to win, isn't it...

...c*nt.

Hmmm, don't think Rashid is anything other than what we already knew? Raw as hell... going for 36 off 4 in T20 is hardly a crime though. Swann is obviously a better bowler at this stage but was injured.

Agree totally about the hitters lower down the order - unfortunately they were all sat on the bench!

by Yorkie Jill Fri 05 Jun 2009, 21:29

what a game! not even ashamed to say how pleased I am that the Dutch won. Textbook catching and running.

Ga op Nederland!

by JKLever Fri 05 Jun 2009, 21:29

Basil wrote:
JKLever wrote:Well I won a ton, layed England at 1.02 after the first dutchie over.

I'd rather I hadn't though...

I'm glad someone profited from this fecking shambles

The other half was doing her nut because I didn't want to win it FFS!!!!

by beamer Fri 05 Jun 2009, 21:31

JKLever wrote:Hmmm, don't think Rashid is anything other than what we already knew? Raw as hell... going for 36 off 4 in T20 is hardly a crime though.

Well, if you're playing India or South Africa perhaps it's excusable once in a while...

by Chivalry Augustus Fri 05 Jun 2009, 21:34

JKLever wrote:
Chivalry Augustus wrote:Oh give over Smerky, Rashid was crap today. He's one of the most over-rated cricketers in England, and that's saying something in a country full of over-rated cricketers. Sidebottom may not have been incisive and brilliant today but he gave his captain some control. Rashid got tonked all over the place and was the worst bowler in a collection of poor bowlers. People are obsessed with the letters 'lb' next to his name, David Lloyd's attitude summed it up. He didn't bowl a consistent line, he wasn't a wicket-taking threat, he didn't turn the ball any farther than Graeme Swann would have done. He might turn into a very good player but he's nowhere near an international player yet.

As for England, their team is rubbish. Where are the hitters? Who's the finisher? Which bowlers can get you 1-25 on a regular basis? Broad and Anderson go at 8s in Twenty20s. How are they going to help you do a job? The fielding was atrocious. The squad for the tournament was atrocious. How can you have Collingwood, Morgan and Foster at 5, 6 and 7? There's no power, no innovation. Just nurdly English cricketers. Holland came out and whacked every ball. Ugly, but simple and effective. If England could have fielded they'd have thrashed 'em, but we played it like it was a friendly and only seemed to wake up after about twelve overs realising we were tied to the train-tracks.

The only positive I can think of is that it wipes that self-congratulatory smile off Team Flower's face. It's harder to beat a team when they're actually trying to win, isn't it...

...c*nt.

Hmmm, don't think Rashid is anything other than what we already knew? Raw as hell... going for 36 off 4 in T20 is hardly a crime though. Swann is obviously a better bowler at this stage but was injured.

The thing is, someone like Tredwell would have done a better job than Rashid today because he knows how to bowl in this competition against this quality of opposition. I'm also amazed that Mascarenhas, despite being one of the most effective Twenty20 bowlers in every other team, never gets in the England side. There will be times when he gets tonked but he has bowled brilliantly for Rajasthan against the best players in the world. How is he not good enough to get in our team?

by DJ_Smerk Fri 05 Jun 2009, 21:38

Chivalry Augustus wrote:Oh give over Smerky, Rashid was crap today. He's one of the most over-rated cricketers in England, and that's saying something in a country full of over-rated cricketers. Sidebottom may not have been incisive and brilliant today but he gave his captain some control. Rashid got tonked all over the place and was the worst bowler in a collection of poor bowlers. People are obsessed with the letters 'lb' next to his name, David Lloyd's attitude summed it up. He didn't bowl a consistent line, he wasn't a wicket-taking threat, he didn't turn the ball any farther than Graeme Swann would have done. He might turn into a very good player but he's nowhere near an international player yet.

As for England, their team is rubbish. Where are the hitters? Who's the finisher? Which bowlers can get you 1-25 on a regular basis? Broad and Anderson go at 8s in Twenty20s. How are they going to help you do a job? The fielding was atrocious. The squad for the tournament was atrocious. How can you have Collingwood, Morgan and Foster at 5, 6 and 7? I think I could pick a better team than this one*. There's no power, no innovation. Just nurdly English cricketers. Holland came out and whacked every ball. Ugly, but simple and effective. If England could have fielded they'd have thrashed 'em, but we played it like it was a friendly and only seemed to wake up after about twelve overs realising we were tied to the train-tracks.

The only positive I can think of is that it wipes that self-congratulatory smile off Team Flower's face. It's harder to beat a team when they're actually trying to win, isn't it...

...c*nt.

* - Davies, Denly, Bopara, Shah, Wright, Collingwood, Patel, Swann, Mascarenhas, Sidebottom/Broad, Anderson.

I say persist with him through the group stages. Sidebottom on the other hand, well, what happened to the lethal left arm swing bowler we once knew, that was just last year tearing through the West Indians and New Zealanders? Today illustrated the exact conditions that Sid likes bowling in, (plenty of cloud cover, breeze etc) and he didn't deliver the goods.

Plus, what form has Denly been in this season?

by JKLever Fri 05 Jun 2009, 21:39

Chivalry Augustus wrote:

The thing is, someone like Tredwell would have done a better job than Rashid today because he knows how to bowl in this competition against this quality of opposition.

Fair point, Rashid has hardly had a game for Yorkshire has in T20 has he?

I'm also amazed that Mascarenhas, despite being one of the most effective Twenty20 bowlers in every other team, never gets in the England side. There will be times when he gets tonked but he has bowled brilliantly for Rajasthan against the best players in the world. How is he not good enough to get in our team?

Well i'm no fan but I'd agree again with the above - especially if KP is injured and you're going to make Colchesters finest sit on the bench. The lack of hitters down the order was obvious.

by JKLever Fri 05 Jun 2009, 21:40

beamer wrote:
JKLever wrote:Hmmm, don't think Rashid is anything other than what we already knew? Raw as hell... going for 36 off 4 in T20 is hardly a crime though.
Well, if you're playing India or South Africa perhaps it's excusable once in a while...

I don't really buy that. He's a rookie, hardly played T20 as it is. Anyone can go the distance in this format.

by DJ_Smerk Fri 05 Jun 2009, 21:42

How long has Rashid been able to train after his 'surprise' call-up to the squad?

I assume you differ your line and lengths when training for different forms of the game?

(I understand that last line is stating the obvious to the highest)

by beamer Fri 05 Jun 2009, 21:50

JKLever wrote:
beamer wrote:
JKLever wrote:Hmmm, don't think Rashid is anything other than what we already knew? Raw as hell... going for 36 off 4 in T20 is hardly a crime though.
Well, if you're playing India or South Africa perhaps it's excusable once in a while...

I don't really buy that. He's a rookie, hardly played T20 as it is. Anyone can go the distance in this format.

Yeah, but if he can go for 9 an over against minnows he might have gone for 15 an over against someone half decent. And if that's his standard at present he shouldn't be there, simple as that. We're the host nation, should be trying to win it or at least get as far as possible assuming that's beyond us. Pick the best players for now, not for 5 years' time, we can try out youngsters in a few winter tour JAMITTs.

by LeFromage Fri 05 Jun 2009, 21:52

Or he might have gone for 5 an over like he did against the Windies the other day.

That's the format of the game. Some days you get spanked.

Don't be such a baby about it.

by LeFromage Fri 05 Jun 2009, 21:53

beamer wrote:Bring back Maddy, Snape and Schofield, all is forgiven.

Seriously though, a randomly selected bunch of county journeymen would have done a better job than England's supposed best eleven in this match.

Remember when we went with that approach at the last T20 thing and it was wildly successful... oh.

by DJ_Smerk Fri 05 Jun 2009, 21:54

Dello wrote:Or he might have gone for 5 an over like he did against the Windies the other day.

That's the format of the game. Some days you get spanked.

Don't be such a baby about it.

Agreed, a players talent should not be judged on a few T20's. Especially, younger players who haven't had stints in the ODI or Test arena.

by LeFromage Fri 05 Jun 2009, 21:56

DJ_Smerk wrote:
Dello wrote:Or he might have gone for 5 an over like he did against the Windies the other day.

That's the format of the game. Some days you get spanked.

Don't be such a baby about it.

Agreed, a players talent should not be judged on a few T20's.

Or any T20s.

by beamer Fri 05 Jun 2009, 21:58

by Chivalry Augustus Fri 05 Jun 2009, 22:00

Dello wrote:
beamer wrote:Bring back Maddy, Snape and Schofield, all is forgiven.

Seriously though, a randomly selected bunch of county journeymen would have done a better job than England's supposed best eleven in this match.

Remember when we went with that approach at the last T20 thing and it was wildly successful... oh.

It was a success compared to this shambles. Though we shouldn't be picking county journeymen, rather good cricketers with a good record in Twenty20. i.e. Davies, dropped after one Twenty20 for Foster so that Wright, who has never contributed anything to the England side, can open. And then we pick a token Irishman just 'cause he can reverse sweep.

by JKLever Fri 05 Jun 2009, 22:05

beamer wrote:.

I agree with some of what you said before you edited it though. A lot of people will be spitting chips - just a continuation of 17 years of sh!t ODI cricket by us.

by Basil Fri 05 Jun 2009, 22:10

While the side has to accept collective responsibility for this defeat, Collingwood has to shoulder a lot of blame - some of the field-settings in the last over would have shamed the skipper of an under 13 side. If you're going to have fielders saving the single, it's no good having standing on their heels on the edge of the ring! Mid-wicket and extra cover should have been no more than 15 yards from the bat IMO.

by JKLever Fri 05 Jun 2009, 22:13

Basil wrote:While the side has to accept collective responsibility for this defeat, Collingwood has to shoulder a lot of blame - some of the field-settings in the last over would have shamed the skipper of an under 13 side. If you're going to have fielders saving the single, it's no good having standing on their heels on the edge of the ring! Mid-wicket and extra cover should have been no more than 15 yards from the bat IMO.

He's a seriously bad captain.... 5 T20 losses on the trot.

by DJ_Smerk Fri 05 Jun 2009, 22:25

JKLever wrote:
Basil wrote:While the side has to accept collective responsibility for this defeat, Collingwood has to shoulder a lot of blame - some of the field-settings in the last over would have shamed the skipper of an under 13 side. If you're going to have fielders saving the single, it's no good having standing on their heels on the edge of the ring! Mid-wicket and extra cover should have been no more than 15 yards from the bat IMO.

He's a seriously bad captain.... 5 T20 losses on the trot.

Jonathan Trott is doing okay at the moment.

by JKLever Fri 05 Jun 2009, 22:28

Right, i'm off to get drown my sorrows over a can before those nasty Aussies wake up.

My prediction for Sunday? Remember the 92 WC - we bowled PAK out for 73 and the rain saved them.

My message to the boys... FIGHT LIKE TIGERS !!! Wink

(Ok, we're out. I'm orf)

by Nath Fri 05 Jun 2009, 23:08

Good work England. I knew this would happen!

by Guest Fri 05 Jun 2009, 23:09

Can't believe some people are saying this is the lowest point in England's cricketing history. It's a 20/20 for Christ's sake! Laughing

It's obviously a bit embarassing but some perspective is called for I think!

by Big Dog Fri 05 Jun 2009, 23:22

vilkrang wrote:Can't believe some people are saying this is the lowest point in England's cricketing history. It's a 20/20 for Christ's sake!

It's obviously a bit embarassing but some perspective is called for I think!

Very true. No-one will remember the score tomorrow. Its just another meaningless 20/20.......all the same..i mean...getting beaten by the Dutchies.. Laughing

by Guest Fri 05 Jun 2009, 23:32

Big Dog wrote:
vilkrang wrote:Can't believe some people are saying this is the lowest point in England's cricketing history. It's a 20/20 for Christ's sake!

It's obviously a bit embarassing but some perspective is called for I think!

Very true. No-one will remember the score tomorrow. Its just another meaningless 20/20.......all the same..i mean...getting beaten by the Dutchies..

Like I said, it's certainly embarassing but if we win the ashes this year (probably won't, but still) then no one will be talking about losing a 20/20 to the Dutch.

by Sponsored content