The Latest News
Connect with Us

Notable Releases
From the Store
Game of Thrones House Stark Shot Glass
House Stark Shot Glass
HBO US
Featured Sites
License Holders

Jump to content


Photo

Cricket XVII


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
400 replies to this topic

#1 Paxter

Paxter

    Lord of the Shattered Stumps

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,846 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 06:32 AM

Continuing the Champions Trophy and pre-Ashes sledging... /thumbsup.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':thumbsup:' />

To qualify: Aussies have to win today by over 100 runs (batting first) or with around 20 overs to spare (bowling first)...

Edited by Paxter, 17 June 2013 - 06:36 PM.


#2 Slick Mongoose

Slick Mongoose

    Invisible coat

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,427 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 07:22 AM

Sangakkara's gone quickly, that's got to help.

#3 Paxter

Paxter

    Lord of the Shattered Stumps

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,846 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 07:28 AM

Haha yeah didn't take long for my Sanga prediction to play out.

Aussies not in a bad spot here early on...

#4 Sir Thursday

Sir Thursday

    Ahh! The spray tan won't come off!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,898 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 07:33 AM

Looks like you knocked 10 runs off the thread title /wink.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=';)' />.

ST

#5 Hereward

Hereward

    Fundamentally Indecent

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,545 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 07:34 AM

It's the Duckworth Lewis reassessed thread number.

#6 Jeor

Jeor

    Lord Commander, Night's Watch

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,273 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 08:30 AM

Sri Lanka starting to look dangerous with this partnership.

It looks like a slow wicket so I think Australia are going to have trouble chasing down any target in a hurry, especially against Malinga/Herath. The need to chase the target down quickly means that Sri Lanka can make maximum use of their top two bowlers in an innings where Australia are unlikely to use up their full allotment of batting overs.

#7 Jeor

Jeor

    Lord Commander, Night's Watch

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,273 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 08:46 AM

Commentator's/poster's curse, Dilshan goes!

Doherty of all people looking threatening....what has the world come to.

Sri Lanka bat deep though...I think anything in excess of 200 (which Australia have to chase in 37 overs) is going to be too steep.

#8 Adelstein

Adelstein

    Freerider

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,279 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 10:47 AM

Looks like Sri Lanka might be New Zealand's ODI nemesis once again, even if they actually managed to beat them in the match. Still, this total isn't out of reach for Australia if they give it a go - which kind of works in NZ's favour, since if Australia overhaul the total overall but not quickly enough... well, we'll see. I have to wonder about Australia's motivation, though. You'd have thought they'd be up for a fight at this stage, but this team's been pretty limp in the competition so far.

#9 williamjm

williamjm

    Council Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,437 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 03:24 PM

ETA: I was just browsing through Trott's stats earlier today and noticed he has an ODI average above 50...how did I miss that!? /stunned.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':stunned:' />


One of the commentators mentioned a statistic in one of the recent games that Trott is one of only three current batsmen averaging about 50 in both Tests and ODIs (I think the other two were Amla and De Villiers).

I do think it's a bit odd that Trott seems to get so much criticism about his one-day batting when he's got an excellent record in that form of the game and his strike rate isn't too different to a lot of other top ODI batsmen. Admittedly, he does sometimes struggle to adapt his scoring rate to the situation (it's maybe for the best that he got out early in the 24-over match against NZ) but overall I'd say the weight of runs he scores is enough to make him a valuable member of the team.

You'd have thought they'd be up for a fight at this stage, but this team's been pretty limp in the competition so far.


The last wicket pair showed plenty of fight. It was getting quite tense there for the Sri Lankans but they eventually managed to get the final wicket. I think the Australian hopes of winning the match were sabotaged by the run-rate they needed to achieve to qualify, the Sri Lankan bowling didn't look to be at its most effective (Malinga had a fairly poor day) so if the Australians hadn't needed to score at T20 rates they might have had a chance. Some of the dismissals were a bit incompetent, I thought Bailey had been showing more composure than most of his team so far in the tournament but his run-out was very careless.

#10 The Anti-Targ

The Anti-Targ

    Socially liberal, morally conservative

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,553 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 06:14 PM

It's always tough going when your fate is in the hands of others. Better luck next time NZ and Aussie. Go Sri Lanka!

#11 Paxter

Paxter

    Lord of the Shattered Stumps

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,846 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 06:39 PM

That Bailey run-out...pretty much sums up Australia at the moment. Probably the most discouraging aspect of that Champs Trophy from an Australian perspective is that the only players who made any runs - Bailey and Voges - are not even up for test selection.

Looks like you knocked 10 runs off the thread title /wink.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=';)' />.

ST


Whoops! Fixed that one now /dunce.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':dunce:' />.

#12 arya_underfoot

arya_underfoot

    Noble

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 698 posts

Posted 18 June 2013 - 02:51 AM

It's a pity that Australia's poor showing against England resulted in an impossible required run rate for an otherwise very winnable target against SL. I can't remember Australia going through any tournament or bilateral series of any sort without a win (in my 20 years of cricketing memory) apart from the recently concluded tests in India and the 0-0 drawn test series against NZ in 2001. Sadly, the forthcoming Ashes series looks set to become an addition to this list based on current form.

#13 Paxter

Paxter

    Lord of the Shattered Stumps

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,846 posts

Posted 18 June 2013 - 08:10 PM

I can't remember Australia going through any tournament or bilateral series of any sort without a win (in my 20 years of cricketing memory) apart from the recently concluded tests in India and the 0-0 drawn test series against NZ in 2001.


There's also last summer's test series against SA, and the previous two tours to India (in addition to this year's). Australia haven't won a test in India since Gillie led them to the 2004/05 series win. ODI-wise they were whitewashed by the English last year.

Edited by Paxter, 18 June 2013 - 08:11 PM.


#14 Pinkie Baelish

Pinkie Baelish

    Forever Young

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,041 posts

Posted 18 June 2013 - 08:57 PM

Australia are just going to get steamrollered in this Ashes series. England's test side is notably stronger than Australia's with Cook, Root, Broad and Anderson all being in good form. It also helps that Pietersen will return just in time for the Ashes. With Clarke's fitness being doubtful and the lack of any other top order batsmen in solid form for Australia, their batting order looks likely to crumble against the English bowlers.

#15 Stubby

Stubby

    The night is dark and full of Dropbears

  • Board Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,017 posts

Posted 18 June 2013 - 10:51 PM

Wait, there's a trophy of some sort being played at the moment?

Surely you lot jest.

#16 Adelstein

Adelstein

    Freerider

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,279 posts

Posted 18 June 2013 - 11:05 PM

Australia are just going to get steamrollered in this Ashes series. England's test side is notably stronger than Australia's with Cook, Root, Broad and Anderson all being in good form. It also helps that Pietersen will return just in time for the Ashes. With Clarke's fitness being doubtful and the lack of any other top order batsmen in solid form for Australia, their batting order looks likely to crumble against the English bowlers.

On the other hand, Australia have historically often been at their most dangerous when they've looked really weak. They do have the capacity to trouble England (who haven't been in sparkling Test form recently, for whatever reason), and if fully-loaded, can field a good fast bowling attack, and one Best Batsman In World (pace Amla). The England bowlers have lacked a little incision at times of late (a full day of Kallis at the Oval last year was enough to numb my senses there) so a bit of spine in the Aussie batting could cause problems. Even with that taken into account, though, England should beat them handily - they've beaten better Australian sides than this with less settled teams of their own, after all.

I just can't shake the feeling that there's an ominous vibe of 1989 about all of this, but I tell myself England are far less shambolic than they were then, so hopefully history won't repeat itself.

#17 Paxter

Paxter

    Lord of the Shattered Stumps

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,846 posts

Posted 18 June 2013 - 11:31 PM

On the other hand, Australia have historically often been at their most dangerous when they've looked really weak.


Part of me wants to believe this because I'd like to see a competitive series. The other part of me just wants to see an inept, undisciplined and inexperienced Australian team ground into the English dirt.

#18 Stubby

Stubby

    The night is dark and full of Dropbears

  • Board Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,017 posts

Posted 18 June 2013 - 11:55 PM

Part of me wants to believe this because I'd like to see a competitive series. The other part of me just wants to see an inept, undisciplined and inexperienced Australian team ground into the English dirt.


Part of me also wants the same thing. At the very least to get the selectors to pull their heads out of their collective arses.

#19 Jeor

Jeor

    Lord Commander, Night's Watch

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,273 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 02:36 AM

I too am ambivalent about supporting Australia in this Ashes series. It's not so much about deserting a sinking ship (although that's what they are at the moment) but more the fact that I just don't like many of the players.

If you asked me to name players that I disliked, I would easily put Warner, Watson, Hughes in that lot. I used to dislike Brad Haddin (way back in an ODI when he tried to con an umpire into believing a batsman was bowled, when he'd broken the stumps himself) but I'm probably neutral on him now. Neutral on Clarke too, I don't like him, but I don't hate him. Players I actually like? Er. Siddle, maybe. That's about it.

Should be a good game tonight (South Africa vs England). Can't really pick it. Neither team has been in sparkling form, but if it clicks, either of them could smash any side in the world on their day.

#20 The Winged Shadow

The Winged Shadow

    Tool

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,661 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 06:04 AM

This Australian team is so shit, I can't help but support them!

But by the looks of things, with all you aussies jumping ship, we may have to do a complete team swap for Ashes (Aussies support Poms, Poms support Aussies) for there to be any Aussie supporters left /tongue.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':P' />

In other news, England slicing through the SA top order. Really weird to see SA collapse like that.