England v West Indies Twenty20 Series Thread

[ll0OoO0ll]

I watched the last few overs of both innings and wondering if any proper and balanced cricket shot, or a genuine stroke pleasing to eye, was delivered by WI or England in this huge pile of runs in 40 overs? I wonder exactly what kinda fans enjoy this crap?
To me, 20/20 is a shame to cricket.
I dunno, perhaps I'll get used to it in the future when we wont have a lot of choices when it comes to format of the game. Like a world cup of 5/5.

[gibbs_fan]

Originally Posted by Ernest

No he is not seriously injured, but that fact is down to luck - Pietersen scrambled an extra single, was out - limped of the field and the TMS commentators thought he could have been injured more seriously.

In 20/20 cricket, every run counts - is one run worth players like Pietersen being injured?, he was lucky this time, he might not be so lucky the next time.

I strongly disagree here. Ern, perhaps you can tell me ho many players DID in fact get injured due to running in the 20/20 game. Pietersen is the best english batsman and if England want to win games, then there best batsman should play. Your reasoning is just a lame excuse IMO. No batsman has got injured because of the extra pressure 20/20 puts on a player. No game is worth getting injured but blaming the 20/20 format for causing injury does not make any sense. Since test cricket requires more concentration and is a mental game, does this mean that players with weak minds (tresco) should not play. I doubt it. It is this kind of thinking that keeps England from being a decent 1 day side.

[Notts Exile]

The make up of the Twenty20 side will be similar to the ODI side which again is similar to the Test side. Some players will be seen as "specialists" and should be included in the form of the game that suits them the best. Why Darren Maddy isn't in the Twenty20 squad and Alastair Cook is is beyond me. Perhaps I'm too stupid to work it out?

The Windies played that game very well. England didn't bowl as well as they could but sure didn;t bowl as badly as I've seen them bowl. Some of the shots Devon Smith and Marlon Samuals played were quite suprb. I wouldn't expect the same again tonight, though.

England missed a trick by not playing Monty. Why, when spin bowlers are proving the most efficient and economical do we play Yardy alone? And a question on his batting - What's that all about? He barely looked capable of hitting the ball off the square.

[Milo]

Can anyone tell me why Darren Powell was able to bowl at 90 mph yesterday in his opening spell, but during the test matches (and especially the period between lunch and tea at the Riverside on day four that I witnessed) he was unable to bowl anything regularly over 80mph. Even Ravi Rampaul was hitting 87 mph yesterday. Taylor bowled most of the test series at 81-83 when he had always previously been peppering 90 suring limited overs internationals.

Do the West Indians actually try at test level?

[Ninjaman]

Maybe he's finally loose after a number of games under his belt?

Or maybe because he knows that at Test macthes he's going to bowl for the better part of 2 days, he has to hold back.

In 20/20, you get 4 overs regardless.

As for, do they try, of course they do.

How on Earth did Collingwood get MOM yesterday anyway?

[Notts Exile]

Originally Posted by Ninjaman

How on Earth did Collingwood get MOM yesterday anyway?

Was it voted on by SKY viewers? Doesn't make sense to me either!

[Collyisamackem]

Originally Posted by Ninjaman

How on Earth did Collingwood get MOM yesterday anyway?

I guess because there wouldn't have been anything resembling a match if it hadn't been for him!

Seriously though, Samuels or Smith should have had it.

[Ninjaman]

Originally Posted by Collyisamackem

I guess because there wouldn't have been anything resembling a match if it hadn't been for him!

In that case it should have been given to the umpire who somehow failed to give him out when he was plumb lbw!!

[Notts Exile]

Originally Posted by Ninjaman

In that case it should have been given to the umpire who somehow failed to give him out when he was plumb lbw!!

Can't disagree with that. Llong made a terrible decision.

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by gibbs_fan

I strongly disagree here. Ern, perhaps you can tell me ho many players DID in fact get injured due to running in the 20/20 game. Pietersen is the best english batsman and if England want to win games, then there best batsman should play.

Not just 20/20 g-f, these type of games are an extra workload on test players, but in 20/20 player are likely to get injured scrabling for an extra run.

Pietersen did feel pain yesterday - lucky for him and England, the injury was slight.

But as I said not just 20/20 - the 50 over game is an extra workload also, why don't team play players who are specialist at this type of cricket?.

NO LESS than Viv Richards agrees BBC SPORT | Cricket | England | England 'need Twenty20 experts'

Originally Posted by VIV RICHARDS

There are specialists for 50-over matches and there are specialists, I believe, in the shorter version of the game,

Originally Posted by gibbs_fan

Your reasoning is just a lame excuse IMO.

LOL what on Earth for/, what have I got to make an excuse over?.