Paxter Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 36 minutes ago, Jeor said: I guess he had to be banned, as they have to take a strong anti-corruption stance and if he didn't report an approach then it's only a short skip to something much worse happening. And apparently education about that sort of thing is pretty high in cricket so he should've known. Still, it must be particularly hard for Shakib - he's a world-class player and I'm guessing Bangladesh is particularly vulnerable to approaches given the economics of the game there. Shakib is an IPL player though so I don’t have anywhere as much sympathy for him as for, say, Amir back in 2010. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeor Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 2 hours ago, Paxter said: Shakib is an IPL player though so I don’t have anywhere as much sympathy for him as for, say, Amir back in 2010. Ah, true, true. One thing that does come up is that he doesn't have much excuse. These days apparently all players have anti-corruption education. At least Shakib has completely accepted the ruling and isn't making any excuses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Winged Shadow Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 It's hard to take since it is him and not someone else. He has been the most successful player (and probably the best paid, considering he played a few T20 tournaments) so he really doesn't have a lot of excuse. Some of the fringe players I can understand as they aren't as well paid and these players some times have to support their entire family/extended family with their income. Extremely disappointed right now. He just tarnished his legacy *tinfoilhat* The Bangladeshi part of me is suspicious at the timing of it so close to the strike negotiation where he was the lead from the players side. I wonder if BCB knew all along and this was just a show of powerplay. *tinfoilhat* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Anti-Targ Posted November 11, 2019 Share Posted November 11, 2019 Another tie between England and NZ decided by a golden over. Firstly, in a normal 3 / 5 match series why is there a golden over to break ties. In cricketing tradition a tie / draw is a perfectly acceptable result, both in individual games and in series. And with this 5 match T20 series a 2-2 series draw with the final game being recorded as a tie is a perfectly acceptable conclusion. This incessant demand to always have a winner is an infection that I don't want to see in Cricket, except where a particular competition demands a winner (i.e. competition knock out matches). the honourable draw / tie should be preserved to the extent possible. So I think that 5th match should not have used the golden over. It seems like a less fair reflection of how the teams are matched to decide an entire 5 match series on the basis of a single over of trying to bash the ball. Similar with the last Lions rugby tour to NZ. The 3rd game ended in a draw after regular time, and this meant the series also ended in a draw with 1 win each. To the people who demand there always be a winner this was a great disappointment. To me it was a fair reflection of how evenly matched the two sides were so I was happy with the result. Secondly, I feel like the first tie break in a game should be based on a performance metric within the regular game. I think the team that loses the fewest wickets should take the win in a tie break (or to give credit to the bowlers call it the team that took the most wickets). Only if there is the same number of wickets lost (taken) should a golden over be considered. A totally left field idea could be that the teams have to play a game of tip and run, say with 6 batsmen. If you get bat on ball you have to run no matter what. That way one is likely to run through the batsmen fairly quickly with a lot of run outs. And at least that way you are likely to get more overs in than just a golden bash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paxter Posted November 12, 2019 Share Posted November 12, 2019 17 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said: Another tie between England and NZ decided by a golden over. Firstly, in a normal 3 / 5 match series why is there a golden over to break ties. In cricketing tradition a tie / draw is a perfectly acceptable result, both in individual games and in series. And with this 5 match T20 series a 2-2 series draw with the final game being recorded as a tie is a perfectly acceptable conclusion. This incessant demand to always have a winner is an infection that I don't want to see in Cricket, except where a particular competition demands a winner (i.e. competition knock out matches). the honourable draw / tie should be preserved to the extent possible. So I think that 5th match should not have used the golden over. It seems like a less fair reflection of how the teams are matched to decide an entire 5 match series on the basis of a single over of trying to bash the ball. Similar with the last Lions rugby tour to NZ. The 3rd game ended in a draw after regular time, and this meant the series also ended in a draw with 1 win each. To the people who demand there always be a winner this was a great disappointment. To me it was a fair reflection of how evenly matched the two sides were so I was happy with the result. Secondly, I feel like the first tie break in a game should be based on a performance metric within the regular game. I think the team that loses the fewest wickets should take the win in a tie break (or to give credit to the bowlers call it the team that took the most wickets). Only if there is the same number of wickets lost (taken) should a golden over be considered. A totally left field idea could be that the teams have to play a game of tip and run, say with 6 batsmen. If you get bat on ball you have to run no matter what. That way one is likely to run through the batsmen fairly quickly with a lot of run outs. And at least that way you are likely to get more overs in than just a golden bash. On the subject of tie-breakers, I note that the ICC got rid of the (silly) boundary countback rule for future tournaments. From now on we will just keep playing Super Overs until a winner emerges. I agree that non-tournament matches such as the above do not require a decider. The Australian selectors must be scratching their heads ahead of next week's opening test of the summer. Pretty much every batting hopeful failed in the tour match against Pakistan. I guess it doesn't really matter as 'Gabba test has only one likely winner, but still, it's getting to the point where they will be trying to piece together the shreddings of S Marsh's phone number... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paxter Posted November 14, 2019 Share Posted November 14, 2019 Usman culled from the test squad, with Head reclaiming his place instead of the injured M Marsh. This could be the end of the road for Khawaja if he can’t rediscover his Shield form. Unless of course Marnus’ Ashes brilliance was a fluke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paxter Posted November 18, 2019 Share Posted November 18, 2019 A few other developments ahead of the 'Gabba test: Pucovski, Maddinson and Maxwell have ruled themselves out of consideration for international duties, all citing mental health and a need for time out of the game. It's good to see the Australian cricket media is eating humble pie on this topic after the way they treated Trott in 2013. James Pattinson copped a one-test ban after making homophobic slurs in a domestic match. Glad to see CA taking a hard line on this, hot on the heels of the Gabriel/Root incident. Pakistan actually played pretty well in the tour matches *waits for the inevitable implosion and innings defeat* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ljkeane Posted November 20, 2019 Share Posted November 20, 2019 It looks like England are going to take a more orthodox approach to test cricket under Chris Silverwood, which is good to see. Hopefully it'll lead to some improvement. I like the look of the team they've gone with for the first test tonight. The two new batsmen have earned their places with scoring runs in first class cricket, and Pope as the major young batting prospect in English cricket is eased in this time at six, they've only picked one wicket keeper batsman and Bairstow's been told to go away and earn his place back with the bat. Root back to four probably makes sense and I'm sure Pax will be happy to see Denly still in the team. Having said that the Black Caps team looks pretty solid and I'm not too confident England will be scoring bags of runs against that attack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paxter Posted November 20, 2019 Share Posted November 20, 2019 That's a much better England side. They have rectified most of the obvious selection missteps from the Ashes (Roy as opener/playing an out-of-form Bairstow/playing Woakes when Root doesn't even want to bowl him). And S Curran should be more effective in NZ then he was in the West Indies last winter. Denly...it's a band-aid approach to have him in the side. I'd still rather keep Root at 3 and get Stokes up the order. The Root thing is getting a bit beyond a joke though. What's the odds they push him back to 3 again in the next 12 months. Go Pakistan! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paxter Posted November 20, 2019 Share Posted November 20, 2019 None-for after 18 overs is a good result in early season conditions in NZ. Good early signs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paxter Posted November 20, 2019 Share Posted November 20, 2019 Lol at Pakistan. Dropping Abbas. Are they fucking serious? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Winged Shadow Posted November 21, 2019 Share Posted November 21, 2019 YAY CRICKET!!!! Head/Wade/Paine is pretty weak middle order. If Pakistan can knock over the top order, Aussies are going to be ripe for the picking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paxter Posted November 21, 2019 Share Posted November 21, 2019 Lol Niloy. Are they even going to get Smith out this series? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Winged Shadow Posted November 21, 2019 Share Posted November 21, 2019 They don't have to get Smith out. Just get everyone else out! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paxter Posted November 21, 2019 Share Posted November 21, 2019 I love your optimism my friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paxter Posted November 21, 2019 Share Posted November 21, 2019 Good ol’ Pakistan. That’s the team we know and love, collapsing in a heap after a decent start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paxter Posted November 21, 2019 Share Posted November 21, 2019 A good performance so far from England. This is the benefit of having solid openers - guys like Stokes can actually come in and play naturally rather than resurrecting failures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ljkeane Posted November 21, 2019 Share Posted November 21, 2019 I was only able to watch the first hour or so of the New Zealand England test but Dom Sibley looks quite organised, he certainly seemed to have a pretty clear idea of which balls he wants to leave and which balls he wants to play (of course he didn't last too much longer after I stopped watching). On the downside his technique does look like it'll be fairly easy for bowlers to dry up his run scoring by bowling outside off stump so it's likely to be a question of who'll lose patience first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paxter Posted November 21, 2019 Share Posted November 21, 2019 3 hours ago, ljkeane said: I was only able to watch the first hour or so of the New Zealand England test but Dom Sibley looks quite organised, he certainly seemed to have a pretty clear idea of which balls he wants to leave and which balls he wants to play (of course he didn't last too much longer after I stopped watching). On the downside his technique does look like it'll be fairly easy for bowlers to dry up his run scoring by bowling outside off stump so it's likely to be a question of who'll lose patience first. Yes he's certainly not much of an offside player, but that has worked for many successful test openers over the years (Graeme Smith barely had an offside shot, neither did Matt Hayden). To me, he looks more promising than either Jennings or Roy. Denly was impressive yesterday! As was Stokes, who always seems to bat well against his country of birth. Joe Root's form line is interesting and a bit concerning. 2019 is easily his worst-ever test year, averaging less than 30 and with just the one hundred against the Windies. ETA: A word on poor old Pakistan. They weren't absolutely terrible, but they weren't great either. Yasir really bailed them out by hanging around with Shafiq at the end. Babar's dismissal was horrible. The problem for them is that Australia got most of their wickets from short stuff and yorkers. I'm not sure the Australian batsmen will be as troubled by those types of deliveries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ljkeane Posted November 21, 2019 Share Posted November 21, 2019 England's new era of batting solidity didn't last long. Oh well, at least they'll get 300. Probably. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.