Once again the Sri Lankans showed us how to play 20/20. I think the rain delay flattered the end result - we should have been beaten a lot easier. I can’t understand why they tried to delay the game…they were always going to beat us. Still, the mid continent teams are known to use any tactic to win. It doesn’t look promising for us in the 20/20 world cup. Would love to be proven wrong but…
Anything can happen in that form of the game shark.
Our best side would do well. :silly:
People forget that this is not real cricket, it is entertainment (apparently). Non stop action ( apparently) So it was absolutely amazing to me tonight that play was held up for 45 minutes because of a slight rain shower. The outfield was playable for a 20/20 (i.e. it wasn’t dangerous), yet the umpires dithered for half an hour after the rain stopped. Then it took over 30 minutes for the Sri Lankans to bowl 5 overs, yet the umpires appeared to make no attempt to hurry them up until the last ball when Maxwell started swearing at them. As for Maxwell and his bogan mates Warner and Wade, how can you shake your oppositions hand and be abusing them at the same time at the end of the game. What a great example of sportsmanship? Not
Overall, none of the participants tonight came out of it looking very good, apart from Bailey whose intervention prevented the after game incident from becoming nastier. IMO this circus was a great advertisement for test cricket ( the real game)
Hold on Mike the Sri Lankans should be charged with bringing the game into disrepute for all their whinging over the very slight drizzle and after the last wicket they carried on like Wankers and it was right that Warner and co should show their displeasure!! They are becoming as bad as the Indians for whinging!
The game was held up so as Channel 9 could keep there audience for another hour or
so and keep there advertisors happy, no doubt about who runs cricket in Australia.
[b]
Over to you 58Shark!
58, the thing which pissed me off the most was in game one, Bailey bowled Finch for an over, even though Maxwell had one over left and was bowling pretty well…and Finch went for a couple of boundaries at a tight point in the game…why bowl a guy who hardly bowls then?..Laughlin got pinged by fat boy Pereria in the last over bowling shite…and guess what?.. gets pinged again in game two bowling short shite again…that 20 runs lifted SL from a 140 to a 160…not too sure why Cutting was dropped instead of Laughlin…
Whilst it’s only 20/20, some of the selections have been strange the least, to me Finch went off the boil in the latter part of the BBL, whilst Pommers was on fire in the lead up to the SL games…yet they picked Finch instead of Pommers?..Marsh was the leading run scorer of the BBL as an opener, yet he comes in at 3?..just think some strange decisions being made at the top level and have been all year throughout all 3 forms of the game.
Stuffed it!!!
Let’s have another go.
Why is it “over to you shark”? Being a pom, you must have one more argument left in you? :lol: (oh dear, that’s probably not a pc comment to make :woohoo: . Mike voiced (as it were) his OPINION, why does that make it “over to you shark”? Over to you unk :huh:
Agree The Sri Lankans certainly didn’t cover themselves in glory. My point about Warner and Wade was that they were not involved in the game at the end so for them to come out and have a go was IMO out of line and not a good look in terms of the “spirit of cricket” to the kids at the ground. Any chest poking should have been done in the privacy of the dressing room. Maxwell you could excuse because he still had the adrenaline pumping. Anyway, the cynical side of me thinks that all this pumped up stuff (remember Warne and Samuels in the Big Bash) is a set up to get the viewers switching on (like WWC!!)
Yes as a previous member pointed out. The general public forget this is not real cricket, it is ‘played’ for entertainment. The cricket makes a lot of money from it, advertisers simply love it, tv stations are making plenty of money too. And the whole thing is just a bloody circus. But hey, everyones making lots of money, so apparently it’s good for us all!
I don’t think anyone disagrees with it being for entertainment and money only waguy. I guess you could argue that all sports are played for entertainment, still that’s another debate I suppose. I like the 20/20 concept, but prefer the other 2 forms of the game. Still, no good going stodgy - pip, pip old chappie and all that. The young set are now influencing the direction of our sports - gotta live with it.
The marketeers, tv stations, and sponsors are influencing the direction of sport = MONEY
Agree - yes, but only because it is accepted and liked. If no one watched the changing games, they would have to move back.