Stubby Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 The Australian selectors have to stop being so starry-eyed about Shane Watson. Agree 100%. On another note, Hayden is showing no signs of slowing down as he gets older. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delete this account pls Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 I am not a big fan of this Twenty20 form of cricket. Yeah, I'm having a hard time getting interested in it. I tuned in to the Australia/Sri Lanka match but my flatmate wanted to watch Neighbours (yes, scorn is duly heaped on him on a regular basis). So i suffered through neighbours, and by the time it finished, the Sri Lankans were all out. It's a bit hard to take a game of cricket seriously when one innings can be over in 45 minutes. An innings should really last longer than the pre and post-game commentary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Man Who Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 I haven't enjoyed a T20 match as much as India beating SA to knock them out last night. Bunch of chokers alright. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hereward Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 The sad thing is they've gone from being unlucky in desperately tight situations ('99 and '03 WCs) to imploding completely and failing miserably when it counts. My heart is officially bleeding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rimmer Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 I'm jumping on the bandwagon and watching us take on the Pakis tonight, 11pm start. With all our middle-order sloggers this is probably the form of cricket that suits us the most. It still doesn't seem like NZ without Fleming in there, and I'm annoyed that he wasn't picked because he can slog with the best of them, but I guess I'll get used to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IheartTesla Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 A cricket final without Australia Unfortunately its way too early on a Monday morning. I saw todays match with Indian friends from some stream on the internet projected onto a screen. The match was quite exciting, and more importantly, short. The only way Australia can be beat I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rimmer Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 Funny how it's the two teams that did the worst in the World Cup in the finals now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Thursday Posted September 23, 2007 Share Posted September 23, 2007 Here's the updated T20 rankings table (or at least, my version of it) after the semi finals: 1) Pakistan - 85 2) India - 72 3) Sri Lanka - 55 4) South Africa - 54 5) Australia - 44 6) New Zealand - 32 7=) West Indies - 27 7=) Zimbabwe - 27 9) Bangladesh - 26 10) England - 22 11) Kenya - 16 12) Scotland - 0 Pakistan's dominance reflects the fact that their T20 record stands at 10 wins, 1 draw and 1 loss - a formidable record. Sri Lanka and South Africa only lost one game each in the competition, which is why they are still above Australia and New Zealand despite not making the semis. Bangladesh and England both got handed three defeats in the Super 8s, which is why they are below the Windies and Zimbabwe. I'd say these rankings are a pretty fair reflection of the T20 pecking order at the moment - Pakistan have quietly been the best team at the competition in my view, while India, or more specifically Yuvraj, has stolen the headlines. I think they deserve to be in the finals. Sir Thursday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeor Posted September 24, 2007 Share Posted September 24, 2007 We got knocked out, but ah well, I'm not sure we deserved to go through. We had some positively shaky matches up front - got beaten by Zimbabwe and Pakistan, and even if we did demolish Sri Lanka (and beat England before) I think India played the better cricket throughout. Without Ponting things were always going to be a little bit touch and go. Not sure who I'm going for in the final - just want to see a good match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xray the Enforcer Posted September 24, 2007 Share Posted September 24, 2007 Huh. Whodathunk India and Pakistan would get their shit together so quickly? Alas, poor Scotland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeor Posted September 24, 2007 Share Posted September 24, 2007 This is looking to be a good match...India didn't get enough runs on the board. Pakistan are looking in front at the moment, 2/53 with a healthy run rate (Nazir went ballistic one over) and only 100 runs to go. As I write, Nazir is run out with a direct hit. This makes things interesting, because Nazir was almost 100% of the scoring - Younis Khan is doing a marvellous impression of a snail. He played out a maiden over not too long ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IheartTesla Posted September 24, 2007 Share Posted September 24, 2007 65/4 now. I can't look..... although I think the Indians probably scored about 15-20 runs less than they should have. I predict Pakistan will make it through but barely in the last over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IheartTesla Posted September 24, 2007 Share Posted September 24, 2007 What. The. F*ck. That ball was so slow it could have been hit anywhere. Poor Misbah, took them right to the wire but couldn't close it out. I feel for him......great match it was though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeor Posted September 24, 2007 Share Posted September 24, 2007 India win. Misbah Ul-Haq will be kicking himself for that shot. With 6 runs off 4 balls needed and with Misbah on strike, they were virtually home, but having only one wicket to play with meant that he would have really needed a boundary in those last four balls and he went for the scoop shot. At the start of the Pakistan innings when Nazir was flaying them everywhere, I wanted India to win, being the underdogs. Then, when the game drifted out to something like 65 runs off 30 balls, I wanted Pakistan to win. After having next to no boundaries for ages, Misbah suddenly smashed three sixes in an over, and then Sohail Tanvir (who I had no idea could bat) slogged another two before getting out (but with 12 runs off 4 balls he did his job). Five sixes in the space of about ten balls will close that gap up nicely. On the whole India deserved to win, with Pakistan batting atrociously. Nazir's early fireworks and Misbah/Tanvir's 11th hour ball-striking almost stole the match, but there was a big bunch of ugly overs in between. India's batting, while not very spectacular, definitely looked more solid, and their bowling was good. Poor Geoff Lawson was animatedly annoyed with Misbah's last shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Time for Wolves Posted September 24, 2007 Share Posted September 24, 2007 INDIA FUCKING WON!! HELL YES!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DemonKing Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 OK - I'm sold on 20-20 now. That final was about a million times better than any World Cup final I've seen since '87. It was good to see some generally good bowling won the match - and some amazing batting almost won it. Something for everyone. One question though - can someone explain to me what a "bowl-out" is, as happened in the tie between Pak and India earlier in the competition? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stubby Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 One question though - can someone explain to me what a "bowl-out" is, as happened in the tie between Pak and India earlier in the competition? Basically, when the teams are tied at the end of regulation play, they line up their bowlers and take it in turns bowling at the stumps without a batsman there. Much like a soccer penalty shootout, the team that hits the stumps the most out of the five goes wins. If there is still a tie, they go on to sudden death shots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeor Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 I think a bowl-out's a rather silly idea, and it doesn't really test a cricketing skill (as a bowler you don't always aim for the stumps when you're bowling to a batsman). Something more exciting and appropriate could be a sort of 'extra-time' extension. After the 40 overs of the match have proressed and it's a tie, get the teams to swap batting again and have a sudden-death one over per side contest (and the teams could be permitted to change batting orders, so it would be the best bowler against the two best batsmen, etc)...at least make it something that links to the skills used in the game of Twenty20. A bowl-out doesn't really do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Man Who Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 It was a great final, and a great finish. I can't even count the number of times the match swung between the two teams. India looked destined to win it I reckon, from the moment they needed to give England a beating which turned it into every match a must win. Also it was impressive to see that they managed to keep their form going away from Durbs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
williamjm Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 I think a bowl-out's a rather silly idea, and it doesn't really test a cricketing skill (as a bowler you don't always aim for the stumps when you're bowling to a batsman). Something more exciting and appropriate could be a sort of 'extra-time' extension. After the 40 overs of the match have proressed and it's a tie, get the teams to swap batting again and have a sudden-death one over per side contest (and the teams could be permitted to change batting orders, so it would be the best bowler against the two best batsmen, etc)...at least make it something that links to the skills used in the game of Twenty20. A bowl-out doesn't really do that. I'm still amused that one of the teams in the bowl-out (can't remember which one now) failed to hit the stumps on any of their attempts. Another way could avoid it would be to add extra rules to determine a winner in case of a tie - such as the team to have hit the most sixes or something like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.