BBC Home

Explore the BBC

599 comments

user rating: 4 star

Live text commentary thread

Twenty20 England
by Tom Fordyce (U2883712) 11 June 2009
comment on the article

All well?

Super Eights it is today, and I've got the happy task of doing the text commentary. New Zealand v Ireland first up at 1330 BST, followed by England v South Africa at 1730.

Thoughts, predictions, rants and celebrations all welcome...

Latest 10 comments

Read members' comments or add your own

posted Jun 11, 2009

Another 25-30 runs by England would have put enormous pressure on SA. The pitch and the conditions also suited SA.

I expect England to do much better in the remaining super eight matches.

Collingwood is a tough character. Just as England fought back very well beating Pakistan after losing to Holland, the boys will bounce back.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 11, 2009

dont see why people are saying the bowling was good? they won by 7 wickets. the reason it went so slow was because South Africa chose to bat at a leisurely pace. there was no urgency at all in their batting, and they still won comfortably. Comprehensive win that showed a glimpse in the gulf of class

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 11, 2009

At least South Africa didn t trash you like the women team did to india.

Wow none were ran out lol.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/womens_cricket/8092874.stm

like 113 - 0 lol. No jokes. Thats the gulf between mens and women. The women should be promoted to the mens sport to cover england s blushes.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 11, 2009

@ SC

It may seem that 30 more runs would ahve been a competitive total.However,Saffers designed a professional and clinical win.They made sure Englands confidence is dented with such a loss.Only a target of 160 might have put some more pressure on this South Africna batting even though the pitch was a bit low.

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by AR1978 (U14031162)

posted Jun 11, 2009

Can someone explain how on sky sports they said the net run rate was +/- 0.62? I make it 0.67? ditto for how they got the NRR earlier from NZ/Ireland - +/- 3? should be more than 4?! I think England did well to get such a good NRR out of all that!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 11, 2009

England batted poorly,period.Wishful thinking about scores they ought to have got won't help anybody's gieving.Its possible the Saffers would have been more attacking afterall if they had to go after plenty.The likes of Morkel may have come sooner,for example.infact they took their time and allowed us some entertainment.

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by Peter (U8966523)

posted Jun 11, 2009

+/- 0.67 is the right nrr. Sky Sports wrong - not for the first time.

Strange thing is why SA didn't try and get there in,say, 15 overs to make sure of getting a superior nrr if 3 teams end on 4 points. That's how they lost out in 2007.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 12, 2009

sa dont worry about net rr because they back themselves to be good enough to beat anyone they play. Worrying about net rr is a negative trail of thought

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by Matt H (U10920205)

posted Jun 12, 2009

I dunno... we're saying "the defeat is not so bad, our run-rate isn't abysmal, so we can still go through" which is positive

Well... at least I'm saying that =P

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by Peter (U8966523)

posted Jun 12, 2009

Just be ironic if nrr came back to haunt SA as in 2007. They thought they were good enough to beat anyone then and fell well short against India. Could happen again! (It was SA,Eng,India and NZ in the group last time).

add comment | complain about this comment

Comment on this article

Sorry, you can only contribute to 606 during opening hours. These are 0900-2300 UK time, seven days a week, but may vary to accommodate sporting events and UK public holidays.

RATE THIS ARTICLE

Rate Breakdown

  • 5 57.14%
    4 votes
  • 4
    0 votes
  • 3 14.29%
    1 votes
  • 2
    0 votes
  • 1 28.57%
    2 votes

average rating:
3.57 from 7 votes