BBC Blog Network

User Profile

BrucieB

Listed below are comments made by BrucieB between Friday, 20th June 2008 and Monday, 6th July 2009.

«Newer
Older»

Springbok legends? 01:17am on 06 Jul 2009 The telling point for me is, as stated in the article, that several players played below their best, and the young prospects did not debut well - but the Boks still won.
In other words, they are a better all-round team than this article seems to credit them with being.
I've said since the start of the Super14 that SA would be the team to beat this year, and that is proving correct. That they lost the 3rd Lions test was no surprise, given the number of changes/experiments SA made for that game - plus the Lions hunger to retrieve something from their tour.
But when it comes to what I regard as the real crunch - the Tri-Nations - frankly I can't see the ABs (let alone the Wallabies) seriously threatening a Bok team firing on all cylinders. And (sob) I'm a kiwi!
Can new-look Lions square the series? 1:58pm on 26 Jun 2009 Sorry all, but if the Lions - all with recent 6 Nations games behind them - couldn't win the first test - the Boks first hit-out of the year - then they won't win any. I said at the start of the Super 14 that SA's players were looking ominously good this year, and I stand by it - witness the results (Bulls, Boks). The Lions might win the third if the Boks come off the boil, but that consolation will be as good as it gets. And frankly - and I'm a Kiwi - I can't see the ABs beating them either. (And they will totally obliterate Australia.)
Stanford parade raises serious concerns 08:49am on 01 Nov 2008 re #5, Dr Grammar: prescient. 2 codes is what will happen: it was already splitting into "specialists"; 20/20 will just accelerate that trend until the forms separate entirely.

re #66, cybermikeyd: and that's the nub of WHY they will separate: because money will be the all-important driver of one, and "purism" the respected foundation of the other.

unfortunately what that means is that there will be less money (hence less interest - from players) in Test cricket, so it will struggle to remain viable - and may well need support back from its brash new offspring to sustain itself.

in a sense, that's what the stanford series is already doing, before its due time.

personally, i wish 20/20 had not been invented; it is in danger of completely corrupting the world's most curious and mystically entertaining game.

but since it has been, ALL the governing bodies had best sort out, and quick, exactly how to accommodate (and encourage) both forms at once.
The end of a cricketing era 09:39am on 23 Oct 2008 Australia's period of dominance was, despite what Aussies might like to believe, always going to come to an end. The real question should be, how long will it take them to recover?
Probably not very long, knowing the way Aussies approach their sport.
But longer, I suggest, than it otherwise might, with Ponting as captain. Because now his star players have been taken from him, his inadequacies as a skipper are more evident. Without clear "next please" star performers to wheel in, he is left groping in the dark. And you can't successfully manage a transitional period when you don't actually know what you're supposed to be doing.
Don't get me wrong, Ponting's a star player himself - as a batsman. But not as a captain.
Phelps on course after greatest relay race in history 3:42pm on 11 Aug 2008 one other thing about this race: i believe the first FIVE teams all went under the old world record.
Olympic ideals survive Chambers challenge 3:40pm on 18 Jul 2008 What ideals?
Well, hypocrisy: clearly the by-law is legally flawed, yet its held up as the best most wonderful invention. no, its just a bad excuse.
On the other side, what about forgiveness? there is none. despite the guy doing his best to turn everything around, he still gets painted a cheat - forever. so much for the benefits of reform.
As for ethics ... if the BOA had any, it would recognise that Chambers has the moral victory, and admit a technicality should not prevent him running, and let him do so.
Then there might be hope for "purity" in sport.
This is a lose/lose situation.
Pattinson selection causes a stir 3:18pm on 18 Jul 2008 get real. half the team are foreign-born - mostly Saffers - and without them England would be third-rate. but so what? its the modern game; if you qualify, you get picked. and you get picked (supposedly) because you're the best. at least this guy was born in the UK. wait and see what happens, and if he's rubbish, then moan. but don't slag him on "racial" grounds if you're not prepared to ethnically cleanse the whole team.
Is it time for more politics in sport? 10:46pm on 14 Jul 2008 It's a sad commentary on the corporatisation of almost everything that (younger) people these days are too concerned with maintaining their precious cog in the corporate box to express any sort of contentious opinion.

We have been stuck in this centre-right rut ruled by fear for 35 years now; it is no surprise at all that no one is brave enough to care by acting, especially when they have the world's focus.

The world's worst polluter and (by the numbers) worst human rights abuser will stage a festive showpiece to legitimise its stance, and only a few symbolic blinks will ineffectively seek to mar it.
Low-scoring games can be fascinating 10:11am on 22 Jun 2008 Halfway through the NZ innings some twit was decrying NZ as an "awful side" basically not fit to turn up at the same ground as England. Hope he has indigestion.

That said, the kiwis are awful at the moment, and frankly i blame the (previous) administration for the woeful lack of tests of late: something like only 3 tests in 18 months before late 07. You can't sculpt a decent batsman, or a decent side, if you don't give them quality matches to play. And then there's the many changes in personnel....

England have no such excuses, so fans should be careful about what they prattle about in case it bites them.
Laws should change for switch-hitters 10:52am on 20 Jun 2008 re 91, sdanicic wrote:

"How about simplifying all the laws by removing all the distinctions between the on and off-side."

Agree! Except IMHO that with LBW's, either make it that they only apply if the ball pitches in line, or get rid of the LB altogether. It is after all the most contentious and most vague of all decisions in any game; and given today's batting penchant for 'getting on with it' you are unlikely to see anyone deliberately padding away (knowing they had immunity).
And/or, an LB should only be possible when the batsman offers no stroke - this would ensure you didn't have negative play, while making it abundantly clear (even if it wasn't a good decision) that the batsman is the only one to blame.

«Newer
Older»

^ Back to top

BBC MMVI

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

BBC.co.uk

BBC Blog Network

Find and talk to the BBC's bloggers.

User Profile

BrucieB