• 🇳🇿 🇲🇲 🇯🇵 🇨🇳 🇦🇺 🇦🇶 🇮🇳
    Australian & Asian
    Drug Discussion

    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • AADD Moderators: Tronica

The Official BL Cricket Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think the aussie selectors had a brain fade today, I mean seriously, Brett Dory, James Hopes, Simon Katich. Why?? What's was wrong with Jaques's performance last week, and Brett Dorey, why was he in instead of Stuart Clark or Shaun Tait, fair play on giving McGrath a rest.

Katich just shouldn't be playing top level cricket, he hasn't done anything worthwhile in his last 10 ODI's that I can remember, and I hate to say it, but Martyn is just over the hill and past his use by date...
 
Martyn is definitely not over the hill.

Isn't Tait injured?

Agree about Dorey though - and Hopes - he's shit.
 
Just want to pay tribute here to Chris Cairns, who announced his retirement a day or two ago. He leaves us with nearly 5000 runs in ODIs, over 3000 in tests, and over 200 wickets in each form of the game.

He's in rare company as a test all-rounder, only players like Hadlee, Botham, Imran and Kapil have managed the 3K runs/200 wickets in tests. Only Kallis and Jayasuriya have 5K runs and 200 wickets in ODIs.

My favourite memory of Cairns is his brilliantly disguised slower ball, especially the one which got England's Chris Read in 1999. Read ducked, thinking he was getting a beamer, and the ball slowly looped past him and bowled him.

Then there was the awesome hitting power, the test record number of sixes, the sense that as long as he was still at the wicket there was always hope for the Kiwis.

Thanks Chris.
 
As an Australian who generally supports all the other teams except for Australia, I have to say I'm quite sad to see the end of Chris Cairns. I have a real soft spot for the Kiwis and he was always one of my favourite players. Fair enough that he retires though, it seems like his body has had it. I read on cricinfo I think that thanks to surgery he has 'no ligament support' in his ankle anymore. Ouch.
 
Yeah I'm pretty impressed with Boucher at the moment - he has been doing the business with the bat and now singlehandedly keeps SA in the game with the two dismissals, when it looked like things were getting away from them. The second run out one was particularly awesome, it was almost as if he tricked the batsman or something, and he wasn't even looking at the stumps as he threw it!
Can't believe that Sri Lanka lost the match though, pretty bad loss considering their position in the game.
 
KemicalBurn said:
Honestly, those two stumpings by Boucher were fucking amazing. Two of the best ive seen!
Click to expand...

Technically one was a runout, one was a stumping. The first was incredible - the take and the speed at which he took the bails off. As was the second, ... but slightly odd situation.

And yes, I too cannot believe they lost. The total wasn't big enough I didn't think.
 
A run out is a stumping :) (you can be stumped on a no-ball for instance)

Anyways, the second really was a stumping, the batsmen was caught out of his crease and the ball didnt come into contact with the bat...I was a little confused as to why the bowler (cant remember his name) wasnt given the wicket. The time taken for the keeper to knock the bails off isnt a factor to my knowledge.

Regardless, both were fucking awesome displays of keeping :) He's on par with Rodney Marsh and Jeff Dujon with his keeping abilities as far as im concerned if he keeps up to this level :)
 
The appeal is completely unrelated - that was for LBW? Or caught behind? I can't remember.

The fact is, he was run out as he was attempting a run (or set off for that purpose). A stumping occurs when a batsmen plays a shot and leaves the crease. The bails are removed before he has the opportunity to return to the crease.

If he was out of his crease initially and then the bails were removed then yes, it would be a stumping. But as he was in his crease and left it with the intention of setting off for a run, it is a run out.

Simple.
 
THR is right regarding the rules - if he was going for a run, then it's a run out. If he was out of crease and trying to get back in, then it was a stumping.

That said: I didn't see the dismissal properly, but it looked to me as though it was a stumping. It didn't look like he was going for a run. But I'm willing to accept that I'm wrong ;)

What do you guys think about India basically tearing up the test match tour schedule? They said they want to play Australia, England and Pakistan all the time, and not bother about the other teams as much (they've basically refused to play Bangladesh). This is (seemingly) good for India - it keeps their profits up because they only play the big names. But not so good for the rest of us. And could possibly lead to boredom through too much of a good thing ("another tour by Australia? Again?) - kinda like the tri-nations in rugby.

But the money in cricket comes from India. So maybe they deserve to have the biggest voice?
 
To settle the fact - he intended to set off for a run for some obscure reason. He didn't know where the ball had gone.

As for India, ... they subscribe to an international body. They cannot make unilateral decisions - they play as per the draw. But I can understand not wanting to play weaker teams too often. They're not exactly huge drawcards.

And no, I don't necessarily think the money comes from there. They are sports mad, but at the end of the day, they aren't the be all and end all nation of cricket. And to me, it's not up to one nation, it's a collective decision.

Additionally, if you don't play the smaller teams, they aren't going to improve. And ideally there would be more strong nations playing the game.

PS: New Zealand is going to win the World Cup ;)
 
I'm still at a loss as to why the selectors are pesisting with Katich as an ODI batsman, honetly 50 0ff 83 is just ridiculous, and martyn 46 of 70 odd, they just can't bat like that...
 
well, 20twenty is really just a hit and giggle for those guys with the bonus of some extra pocket money....

and he really needed to hit it yesterday, which, he didn't....
 
I haven't seen much of Katich play to be honest, but I don't think his 52 off 89 from an opener is that bad. Yes the field is up in the first few overs, but your primary role as an opener imo is to see off the new ball and lay a solid foundation for the rest of the innings. Also Katich is partnered with Gilchrist, who is the designated slogger, whilst Katich is more the accumulator type player. If I was a selector I would be more than happy with that run rate from one of my openers, especially with the small target they were chasing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top