England v West Indies Twenty20 Series Thread

[Ernest]

Match 1 scorecard BBC SPORT | Cricket Scorecard .

West Indies innings 208-8.

[Ernest]

England 155-6 - 16 overs.

[Ernest]

A well deserved win by the West Indies, beating England by 15 runs- a brilliant last over by Brave.

Should test players play in this form of cricket?, Pietersen strained for the extra run, he injured himself - and was out in any case::Futile.

[adamberry]

Originally Posted by Ernest

Should test players play in this form of cricket?, Pietersen strained for the extra run, he injured himself - and was out in any case::Futile.

Well Viv Richards has just argued that point of TMS, and has mentioned the likes of Maddy, Doshi et al coming in for people like Cook.

In any case, Pietersen isn't injured after all; the medical team have given him the all clear to play tomorrow. Well played to the Windies, and also Collingwood for getting England as close as they got.

[Ninjaman]

So which non-Test WI players was Viv saying should be played or was he just focusing on English players?

[Andy Mellon]

Possibly Rampaul? He certainly bowled a decent final over (19th Over)... Other than that, the team wasn't vastly different anyway.

[pie_chucker]

Originally Posted by Ernest

Should test players play in this form of cricket

I think we should play the 20/20 specialists. We have batters and bowlers who have played a fair bit of 20/20 now and are quite good at it.

Our bowling once again looked weak - why Anderson and Broad, Oh and in domestic 20/20 slow bowlers are becoming the beat weapon for slowing the rate down - where was ours.

The batting lacked any urgency (as usual) until Colly got going, but by then it was a bit too late.

[Ninjaman]

Originally Posted by Andy Mellon

Possibly Rampaul? He certainly bowled a decent final over (19th Over)... Other than that, the team wasn't vastly different anyway.

Rampaul was in the Test squad.

My point is that a potential injury to Pietersen raises the question should Test players play 20/20 games to avoid injury.

A reasonable debate to have if the discussion point is about ALL teams.

Viv (I'm sure brought in to provide a West Indian emphasis to commentary) should then be suggesting players to replace Chanderpaul, for example, as he might get injured.

So I'm asking was his comment a general one or England-specific?

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by adamberry

In any case, Pietersen isn't injured after all; the medical team have given him the all clear to play tomorrow. Well played to the Windies, and also Collingwood for getting England as close as they got.

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.

Originally Posted by pie_chucker

I think we should play the 20/20 specialists. We have batters and bowlers who have played a fair bit of 20/20 now and are quite good at it.

I agree - but when Paul Collingwood was questioned after the game on this subject - he answered "the players in the one day squad are the best in England", so it looks like there will be no change to 20/20 specialists.

20/20 is cricket with a difference, it even has a different audience - it should be set aside from mainstream cricket IMO, it's hardy related.

How many 20/20 supporters would watch test cricket, or a 50 over ODI?, no more than a handfull I would - wager.

20/20 supporters are there for the excitment (like baseball) IMO, and won't do anything to boost test attendances as was suggested.

[pie_chucker]

Originally Posted by Ernest

I agree - but when Paul Collingwood was questioned after the game on this subject - he answered "the players in the one day squad are the best in England", so it looks like there will be no change to 20/20 specialists.

20/20 is cricket with a difference, it even has a different audience - it should be set aside from mainstream cricket IMO, it's hardy related.

On the first point I have to say that regarding 20/20 cricket Colly is talking rubbish. If that is the strongest squad then where is Maddy for example?? He's proven to be one of the best 20/20 players around.

One the second point I wholeheartedly agree.
20/20 is a differant game and if we are to win interantional games we may as well play a team of specialists and also save our test players from potential injury.