Cricket talk

Started Nov 23, 2012 | Discussions thread
bobn2
Forum ProPosts: 29,954
Like?
Re: Cricket talk
In reply to Wyville, Dec 15, 2012

Wyville wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

Wyville wrote:

Sante Patate wrote:

Convincing? Hmmmm ... 3/8 ... good thing for England they were not chasing 250. As they should have been, with seven Indian batters getting past 30 in the two innings but the highest score 91 - from the number 8 (great players score 100 or more about half the time they get to 50 and good players maybe one in three or four, but none of seven is poor).

I'm new to the game, so what looks convincing to me might not be so. Plus, I can only see the scores online.

Enjoy learning though. Test cricket is a lot more fun than T20.

T20 loses too much of the tactics of the game. I always thought it would be better in a two innings format, withe the first innings lasting 10 overs or 5 wickets, whichever came first. If you lose 5 wickets inside 10 overs, you lose those balls. Second innings starts with the same batters who were in when the first finished. It would be a slightly more interesting game than the usual knock up the runs and chase them.

-- hide signature --

Bob

I think you're right there. Setting a score and have the others chase it means a lot of what makes cricket interesting has gone. I'm starting to see that now I have been able to follow a few test matches. Before that I had only seen a few T20 matches, which were nice, but over too fast and not enough of a tactical element.

The fourth test seems to be shaping up to be a cracker - just when it seemed that India might be getting themselves into a position, England get 4 quick wickets.

-- hide signature --

Bob

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
FafNew
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow