What do you think about NSW getting McCullum on board for the 2020 final?
Certainly on other cricket sites/news sites the attitude is that it stinks! Even being compared to the underarm delivery in that while it is legal, it is "not cricket!"
This has caused a knock-on affect where T.Dodemaide has stated he would like to get A.Gilchrist in for the match... or S.K.Jehova (I now will be taking a break to clean up the mess around me due to this proposal)!
Is this a joke? Does this practice lessen the value of the competition?
Comparisons have been made to the 3 Pakistani players here at the moment, but they have been playing all/most of the season and ARE a part of their current teams; not ring-ins for a final.
And then there is the A.Symonds comments, "That's not Australian to me." http://wwos.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=731843
It reads to me as a gift to the media to add an extra -mostly irrelevant - comment into the controversy; what does that really achieve? Is it just another way of letting Symonds slam his foot into his gob? Or is it Symonds trying to uphold his profile while recuperating?
Now don't quote me on the speaker- i think he was introduced as T.Moody (didn't here as i was in traffic!), but a reply to Symonds saying this was, "...that's a bit much of a comment from someone taking millions from the IPL!" If it was Moody (I'm pretty sure it was, but i haven't been able to find the quote on the radio stations website), what was his point? How was Symonds being bought and paid for by the IPL relevant to the McCullum situation?
So many question for you to address. My belief is Cricket NSW is desperate, selfish and frankly pathetic in doing this; i want to see McCullum go first ball, and grass every catch coming his way as well as miss fielding returns (although i have since been informed he is playing only as a batsman) for 4 byes frequently! Or am i just a surly Vic?
I don't blame McCullum, it is his career and he will do what he thinks is best for him (including giving himself 2 chanced at the Champions league now with Kolkata and NSW), it is just weak of Cricket NSW to try to field a team better than they have had throughout the competition from an outside source.
stoph verismo
downthewicket
Friday, 23 January 2009
Wednesday, 21 January 2009
many levels to a playing field
I heard on my drive in to work this morning that Afghanistan have been very competitive in the ICC World cricket league and aiming to get up into the qualifiers of the next world cup!
What a turn out that would be! A country in a state of turmoil, conflict and constant combat, making in roads into such a large world sporting event.
I've had a good read of the involvement and structure of these ICC competitions and i must admit it looks like they (ICC) are doing their best to really develop this second and third tier of the game.
One thought i had was, why doesn't the bottom (2) teams of the top competition spend more time playing the next level down? It is blatantly clear that Zimbabwe and Bangladesh are having their spirits crushed playing at this level, so why is there clear delineation between them and the next level down?
Surely teams such as the Netherlands (top of Div 2 table), Canada, Scotland and Ireland would get a lot out of playing Zimbabwe and Bangladesh more regularly, as well as these two teams getting a much needed moral boasts from a few wins! I'm sure we would see less of a gulf between the top of Div 2 and the bottom of Div 1 than we currently see between the more competitive test nations and Bangladesh and Zimbabwe!
It is good to see that they are playing each other at the moment (instead of boasting Sri Lankas stocks again...and again!) and i hope more of this continues. At least one team will accumulate some points from the encounter.
www.pepsiiccworldcricketleague.com/
stoph verismo
downthewicket
What a turn out that would be! A country in a state of turmoil, conflict and constant combat, making in roads into such a large world sporting event.
I've had a good read of the involvement and structure of these ICC competitions and i must admit it looks like they (ICC) are doing their best to really develop this second and third tier of the game.
One thought i had was, why doesn't the bottom (2) teams of the top competition spend more time playing the next level down? It is blatantly clear that Zimbabwe and Bangladesh are having their spirits crushed playing at this level, so why is there clear delineation between them and the next level down?
Surely teams such as the Netherlands (top of Div 2 table), Canada, Scotland and Ireland would get a lot out of playing Zimbabwe and Bangladesh more regularly, as well as these two teams getting a much needed moral boasts from a few wins! I'm sure we would see less of a gulf between the top of Div 2 and the bottom of Div 1 than we currently see between the more competitive test nations and Bangladesh and Zimbabwe!
It is good to see that they are playing each other at the moment (instead of boasting Sri Lankas stocks again...and again!) and i hope more of this continues. At least one team will accumulate some points from the encounter.
www.pepsiiccworldcricketleague.com/
stoph verismo
downthewicket
Rebuilding...pride.
With only 3 games left of the Australian South Africa international summer left, can we make amends for the test series loss with a win in the ODI series?
I think the best cricket outcome would be 2 all and then a nail biter in the 5th game... but I'm just a hopeless romantic dreamer!
If this was the case, who thinks that Ponting and Co could feel somewhat redeemed?
At one game each so far, is Australia still the best 50 over side in the world?
Do we need to change the line up in any way?
And what of the NZ ODI games?
Are they (the games) of any real value?
NZ have proved to be a far more competitive ODI side, is an upset possible?
As i've said, "...hopeless... dreamer!"
stoph verismo
downthewicket
I think the best cricket outcome would be 2 all and then a nail biter in the 5th game... but I'm just a hopeless romantic dreamer!
If this was the case, who thinks that Ponting and Co could feel somewhat redeemed?
At one game each so far, is Australia still the best 50 over side in the world?
Do we need to change the line up in any way?
And what of the NZ ODI games?
Are they (the games) of any real value?
NZ have proved to be a far more competitive ODI side, is an upset possible?
As i've said, "...hopeless... dreamer!"
stoph verismo
downthewicket
Saturday, 17 January 2009
Damned Duminy!
Ponting must be scratching his head thinking, "what happened?" last night in the 1st ODI against SA. After being tied down for a while at the crease, Australia posted a competitive score and then began supporting it well enough.
Duminy AGAIN looked like he has no real threats within the Australian line-up, and the "weakest link" in the SA side -McKenzie- actually got some runs against his name! At this time the game was in a nice- though somewhat boring- point of balance; then that balance tipped decidedly Australia's way, with quick wickets.
Enter A.Morkel! In one Hilfenhaus over the game was effectively taken away from Ponting.
This post is not a criticism, as i think Ponting worked his bowlers and his field well- ably assisted by Clarke- when it was clear Morkel was there to win the match; evident by the HUMONGOUS and STRAIGHTEST drive imaginable! The big issue was the 'setting-in' of Duminy to steady the innings and allow a powerhouse hitter like Morkel to save the day.
I'm sure the Aussie bowlers have a plan (each) for Duminy, but what ever it may be, it plainly isn't working; he is such a talent!
I don't have one - although Flem on the radio said a series of short ones (not necessarily bouncers)and then jammed in at his feet is what he'd do... old school, but worth a try!
Of concern was the amount of wides bowled by our bowlers too: Tait and Hilf gave away too much down leg side; it is not like they don't know that it will be called if it is even an inch off the pads!
While all is not "doom and gloom" after this game, i think the biggest thing highlighted was that, even when the ball/runs ratio is close, the longer periods of 'tied down' play in ODI mean the death of the format to T20.... my 20c.
stoph verismo
downthewicket
Duminy AGAIN looked like he has no real threats within the Australian line-up, and the "weakest link" in the SA side -McKenzie- actually got some runs against his name! At this time the game was in a nice- though somewhat boring- point of balance; then that balance tipped decidedly Australia's way, with quick wickets.
Enter A.Morkel! In one Hilfenhaus over the game was effectively taken away from Ponting.
This post is not a criticism, as i think Ponting worked his bowlers and his field well- ably assisted by Clarke- when it was clear Morkel was there to win the match; evident by the HUMONGOUS and STRAIGHTEST drive imaginable! The big issue was the 'setting-in' of Duminy to steady the innings and allow a powerhouse hitter like Morkel to save the day.
I'm sure the Aussie bowlers have a plan (each) for Duminy, but what ever it may be, it plainly isn't working; he is such a talent!
I don't have one - although Flem on the radio said a series of short ones (not necessarily bouncers)and then jammed in at his feet is what he'd do... old school, but worth a try!
Of concern was the amount of wides bowled by our bowlers too: Tait and Hilf gave away too much down leg side; it is not like they don't know that it will be called if it is even an inch off the pads!
While all is not "doom and gloom" after this game, i think the biggest thing highlighted was that, even when the ball/runs ratio is close, the longer periods of 'tied down' play in ODI mean the death of the format to T20.... my 20c.
stoph verismo
downthewicket
Tuesday, 13 January 2009
Instant swamp?
Here we go for instalment number 2 of this seasons T20 fixture.
What an interesting first match; interesting in that the star was un-capped at first class level. Had i had the opportunity to post just prior to that game i would have questioned the value of such a move; Warner's results would have seen mud on my face.
What i do question is whether it is right for players to jump from grade to national cricket.
I'm happy for player to find fast success, but how is it fair to those players that have diligently worked their way through the system, "paying their dues" so to speak... everyone hates a queue jumper!
Now this criticism is not directed at Warner- who wouldn't take such an opportunity (and well done to him for capitalising on his chance). It is more a question of whether we still believe in a "fair go" in this country?
With this precedent, are players going to get the depth of experience considered vital for a longer international career? Are they going to aim only to bash their way into international contention and IPL dollar glory? Will the domestic competition been seen as the backwater of Australian cricket; a place for the "almost good enoughs", as players endeavour to emulate Warner and bypass representing their states? Do people think I'm making something out of nothing?
stoph verismo
downthewicket
What an interesting first match; interesting in that the star was un-capped at first class level. Had i had the opportunity to post just prior to that game i would have questioned the value of such a move; Warner's results would have seen mud on my face.
What i do question is whether it is right for players to jump from grade to national cricket.
I'm happy for player to find fast success, but how is it fair to those players that have diligently worked their way through the system, "paying their dues" so to speak... everyone hates a queue jumper!
Now this criticism is not directed at Warner- who wouldn't take such an opportunity (and well done to him for capitalising on his chance). It is more a question of whether we still believe in a "fair go" in this country?
With this precedent, are players going to get the depth of experience considered vital for a longer international career? Are they going to aim only to bash their way into international contention and IPL dollar glory? Will the domestic competition been seen as the backwater of Australian cricket; a place for the "almost good enoughs", as players endeavour to emulate Warner and bypass representing their states? Do people think I'm making something out of nothing?
stoph verismo
downthewicket
Saturday, 10 January 2009
Henry on Alfie on Unit
Interesting to hear J.Langer on Grandstand today (sat 10/01/09). http://blogs.abc.net.au/grandstand/2009/01/langer-reaffirm.html?site=cricket
It was commendable to hear how much support he has for his "great mate" M.Hayden. Unfortunately his support clearly blurred his common sense!
Langer voiced that Hayden should be able to leave the test arena on his own terms; and that his batting did its job in the SCG test. Also, that dropping Hayden from the T20 and ODI sides was premature and that Langer was disappointed with the selectors choice. Of interest was G.Lawson later in the show contradict these points stated by Langer!
It has been said that I'm 'after' Hayden, and not respecting his contribution to Australian cricket (not in this forum- elsewhere), this is clearly not true given he opens in my greatest Australian side. I certainly don't feel like I'm targeting him for any other reason other than his failures and inability to move on them; i have the utmost respect for this many fine innings and brilliant fielding (and leading) in the past... and that is my point; his best is obviously behind him.
I think after mounting pressure, much of it aimed directly at the selectors, the right choice has been made and Hayden can now try and regain some form in the longer game for QLD. If he fails there, then there is no reason or excuses for taking him to Blighty!
As Lawson said, "you are judged on runs and wickets."
stoph verismo
downthewicket
It was commendable to hear how much support he has for his "great mate" M.Hayden. Unfortunately his support clearly blurred his common sense!
Langer voiced that Hayden should be able to leave the test arena on his own terms; and that his batting did its job in the SCG test. Also, that dropping Hayden from the T20 and ODI sides was premature and that Langer was disappointed with the selectors choice. Of interest was G.Lawson later in the show contradict these points stated by Langer!
It has been said that I'm 'after' Hayden, and not respecting his contribution to Australian cricket (not in this forum- elsewhere), this is clearly not true given he opens in my greatest Australian side. I certainly don't feel like I'm targeting him for any other reason other than his failures and inability to move on them; i have the utmost respect for this many fine innings and brilliant fielding (and leading) in the past... and that is my point; his best is obviously behind him.
I think after mounting pressure, much of it aimed directly at the selectors, the right choice has been made and Hayden can now try and regain some form in the longer game for QLD. If he fails there, then there is no reason or excuses for taking him to Blighty!
As Lawson said, "you are judged on runs and wickets."
stoph verismo
downthewicket
Wednesday, 7 January 2009
Twist & turns
As has been the trend for the series the last day of the last test twisted and turned. Amla gave the Springboks a sniff of victory then it was snatched away. Australia dominated for the next hour but could not deliver the death blow. It has developed into a real concernt that our frontline bowlers have been unable to dismiss the tail enders. For the life of me I cannot understand why in the absence of any real threat of a run chase Australia's bowlers didn't target the stumps and only the stumps. How hard is it? They miss.......you hit. And they missed a hell of a lot. The problem was the ball was outside off stump, or too short. I don't care who the team is, the last two batsmen in the line up SHOULD NOT be able to face that many balls. Hayden dropped one, so too did Ronald McDonald. Australia must go away now and practice their catching until their hands bleed or risk a head long slide down the rankings. Without the freakish talents of Warne and McGrath to make chances they must make the most of the ones that come their way. It was the difference in the first two tests. In the third it cost South Africa dearly. How Ponting must lament his drop on day three now having taken the last test. In the end it may have cost us the series.
On a more positive note I thought Bollinger was incredibly unlucky, toiled really hard. Siddle was great in bursts but the standout is Johnson. Any bowler that can bowl as fast in the last hour of day five as his first ball is a hero in my book.
I can't help but think Smith as man of the series was because he batted injured in the last overs. He missed the whole test. Clarke for mine.
On a more positive note I thought Bollinger was incredibly unlucky, toiled really hard. Siddle was great in bursts but the standout is Johnson. Any bowler that can bowl as fast in the last hour of day five as his first ball is a hero in my book.
I can't help but think Smith as man of the series was because he batted injured in the last overs. He missed the whole test. Clarke for mine.
a result is on
I'll take it that the lack of posts this morning is because everyone is glued to their radio/tv.
Australia are providing the goods; McDonald's catch, a blinder- more to come about the sportsmanship from this incident.
Pontings bowling choices and aggressive field placements are supporting his declaration. And what of the declaration? As per my previous post, i thought more runs were needed... but i like the faith Ponting has shown in this new-look line up; and the fact it should have drawn SA into the match.
The radio broadcasters dismissed an SA win and said that a Aus win most likely, a draw next most likely- but that the declaration total was good... hard not to agree now at 4 for!
Apart from the attitude of the Australian players, the other thing that stands out to me is the fielding; the shots at the stumps have been exceptional, adding to the pressure on the SA batsman.
The umpiring has been overall quite good too, and even with the odd wrong call, nothing has been a match changer. De Silva can tour again for mine.
Lets hope it goes to the last session and we win (obviously)... with more Vic wickets, right Leftriteout?
Australia are providing the goods; McDonald's catch, a blinder- more to come about the sportsmanship from this incident.
Pontings bowling choices and aggressive field placements are supporting his declaration. And what of the declaration? As per my previous post, i thought more runs were needed... but i like the faith Ponting has shown in this new-look line up; and the fact it should have drawn SA into the match.
The radio broadcasters dismissed an SA win and said that a Aus win most likely, a draw next most likely- but that the declaration total was good... hard not to agree now at 4 for!
Apart from the attitude of the Australian players, the other thing that stands out to me is the fielding; the shots at the stumps have been exceptional, adding to the pressure on the SA batsman.
The umpiring has been overall quite good too, and even with the odd wrong call, nothing has been a match changer. De Silva can tour again for mine.
Lets hope it goes to the last session and we win (obviously)... with more Vic wickets, right Leftriteout?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)