posted Aug 3, 2008

What would be the point in an umpire if walking was compulsory? I don't walk because it means the bad decisions and good decisions even themselves out. It you walk that still means you can be given out when not. Why put yourself at a further disadvantage? There's nothing undignified about not walking, you are simply playing within the rules of the game.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Aug 3, 2008

Basically, because he was in charge of the Ashes of 2005 win, which incidentally came directly as a consequence of Shane Warne dropping a catch, Mc Grath standing on a cricket ball, and some incredible bowling feats of Andrew Flintoff.
It had absolutely nothing to do with Vaughans captaincy, nor his batting.'

Yes you are the expert on why England won the Ashes! I think you may find it had as you say alot to do with Flintoff, but also a lot to do with Pietersen and as for the Aussie mistakes - England made a few mistakes in the series themselves in the field. Had they got them they may have won more comfortably - you cannot give such narrow reasons on why a cricket series ran one way and not the other.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Aug 3, 2008

on the subject of bad umpiring,

the standard of umpiring has deteriorated immeasurably since the introduction of video replays. both sides were on the end of some poor decisions over the last couple of days but there are so many mistakes these days that somebody always has a right to complain.

i think we are seeing the downside of using technology. when do you ever see an umpire making a decision on a run out or a stumping these days? umpires have become lazy and their concentration suffers to the point where they probably aren't watching lbw's as attentively as they had to back in the day, lbw decisions were rarely wrong before technology came in for run outs, with less responsibility comes complacency.

using tennis as an example, the challenge system seemed to be a big success but the most striking thing about it was how good the line judges were as calls were rarely overturned, how long before tennis officials become lax with it because it can be overturned if they are wrong?

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Aug 3, 2008

I think it is time to give Vaughan some respect he has made a brave and a difficult decision for him and i hope he can come back later when he is in form and end his career on a high but otherwise drop Strauss and Ambrose!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Aug 3, 2008

Vaughan has done the honest thing. He has struggled with form, as do most International Captains at some point in their career. He has also been hung out to dry by those who praised his finest hours.
MV has been a very good and inventive leader of English Cricket and deserves more than the 'He just won the ashes' thing. I hope he can regain his form and return to the team on merit. I also wish his successor better treatment and support.
Isn’t it about time we supported our sporting heroes, rather than setting them up for the inevitable fall, and then enjoying the carnage?

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Aug 3, 2008

Bit sorry to hear about Vaughan resigning, but I think it was the correct decision.

My team for the the 4th test at the Brit Oval would be:

(1) Denly (Kent)
(2) Cook (Essex)
(3) Key (Kent)
(4) Pietersen (Hampshire) (c)
(5) Goodwin (Sussex)
(6) Collingwood (Durham)
(7) Foster (Essex) (Wk)
(8) Flintoff (Lancashire)
(9) Anderson (Lancashire)
(10)Sidebottom (Nottinghamshire)
(11)Panesar (Northamptonshire)

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Aug 3, 2008

I wasnt available when Saffers hit the winning runs to win the series for the first time since 1960 odd. Over 40 years of wait - has South Africa cricket gone to a level thats never been before? I sincerely hope so.

Graeme Smith was superb - his batting, discipline, composure, mental toughness, focus, application and determination to strive for his country to win a match that cud win the series for his country was absolutely, immensely, brilliant. It was a majestic innings in the 4th innings of a match. One of the all time best innings i have seen and probably i will ever see.
I admit he also rode his luck at times but he earned his luck.

I wonder what is the latest ICC Test ranking table will look like. I think Aussies will be sweating becos this South African cricket team is getting stronger and are producing results away from home superbly.

Now do you people believe that this South Africa team is a force to be reckon with and cud become No 1 Test team in the World with their unity, experience, creativity, mixture of great players/talents and a very good backroom staff? This Saffers team have been round for a few years whereas the Aussies are still trying to settle into thier new era.

Congratulation to South Africa

I hope they can make the series scoreline look a little more flattering by beating England at the Oval and win the series 3-0. I have never seen such a scoreline in Englands backyard since Aussie beat England in 2001 4-1.

Test cricket is the best and will never be dead - this match had everything and so many twist and turns and you know the old saying - Cricket is a funny old game.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Aug 3, 2008

My Team would be-

1.Key
2.Cook
3.Bell
4.Pietersen
5.Bopara
6.Collingwood
7.Flintoff
8.Foster(wk)
9.Anderson
10.Harmison
11.Panesar

Whoever they announce as captain will be my captain, but I would choose Rob Key if he were already involved in the team.

Sidey needs a rest, Bopara in for Vaughan, and Bopara can help out with Collingwood bowling part time. Strauss needs to go. Never really liked him tbh, and Key to come in.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Aug 3, 2008

Surely now Saffers are on the BRINK of becoming the No 1 Test team in the World. Aussies will definitely be sweating - they'll be wanting Langer, Gilchrist, Warne, McGrath to come out of retirement.

Go on Saffers make the scoreline look a little bit more flattering - 3-0 to Saffers wud be brilliant and will certainly help their cause to become the No 1 Test team in the World.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Aug 4, 2008

After yet another batting failure (only Panesar's average is lower than Vaughan's), I don't think there was any alternative. He wasn't producing the goods and had to go.

I don't think anybody would deny that the better team won the series, although I think that it would have been much lower than 43 years had SA not been banned from test cricket from the early 70s up to the 1990s as they had a very good side back then with Graham and Peter Pollock and Barry Richards.

I'm not sure about making Pietersen captain though but I do hope that it makes him more responsible. He got out at a bad time with a century there for the taking but, having said that, England can't keep relying on KP, Bell and Flintoff to dig them out of trouble because the top three batsmen have failed again. How many times now have England failed to reach 80 without three wickets down? You can't keep doing that against a team of SA's quality.

Glad to see that Broad's back in the squad as England could have done with him to support Collingwood second time round and Flintoff in the first innings. Hopefully England will play him this time but I wouldn't bet on it.

Unfortunately, they only have pride to play for now. I hope that they can go on to make the scoreline more respectable, then they can plan for India.

add comment | complain about this comment