Cricket 24/7  

Welcome to the Cricket 24/7.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. There are also more forums available to members, such as the Lounge - where members chat about just about anything under the sun except cricket!

Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.


Go Back   Cricket 24/7 > Cricket Discussion Forums > Ex-International Player Forum
Register FAQDonate Members List Calendar Casino Articles Terms of Use Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 14th August 2007, 23:58   #181
Michelle Fivefer
Posting Goddess
 
Michelle Fivefer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: North West England
Team(s): England, Lancashire
Posts: 41,404
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fatslogger View Post
Last word? Against me? When you've got the number of balls Bell faced wrong (it was 62)? Ha.

You know, I actually preferred Bell to have done what he did rather than what I said he should have done too. The game isn't all about ensuring the final result. I like swash and buckle as much as the next man. Bell's batting was a revelation. Still, it wasn't tactically sound.
I just didn't check the exact number and have corrected it now.
Michelle Fivefer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th August 2007, 00:00   #182
CoE
County Pro
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Shrewsbury
Team(s): England!
Posts: 696
Firstly, I'd like to point out my post was in reply to p180.

Secondly, to MF's point of criticism of her favourite players - how do you think I feel about the abuse KP gets on here (in the wider world too, albeit diminishing with time). I do really get a sinking feeling with some posts on here though, and realise how depressing they can be (not really about KP, but often about England's abject performances in general!). Still, cheer up! I thought Bell's innings was absolutely smashing! I loved it :P!
CoE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th August 2007, 00:01   #183
Fatslogger
Self Confessed Mentalist
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hitchin
Team(s): England and Liverpool
Age: 41
Posts: 43,051
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michelle Fivefer View Post
I just didn't check the exact number and have corrected it now.
Sorry but you wouldn't want me to relax my pedantry, would you?
__________________
Work is the curse of the drinking classes - Wilde
Fatslogger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th August 2007, 00:02   #184
Michelle Fivefer
Posting Goddess
 
Michelle Fivefer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: North West England
Team(s): England, Lancashire
Posts: 41,404
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fatslogger View Post
This is, in fact, your normal time on the board isn't it?

Some opinions can be pretty upsetting. Imagine what you'd think if we started talking about Jimmy and Ian being unattractive.
Yes, I'm often on the board around this time. I wish I'd not said that bit about the sabbatical now because it looks like a rather cheap attempt to get people to say "oh please don't leave us Michelle we promise to be nice to you" and such. It was a moment of weakness and I take it back.
Michelle Fivefer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th August 2007, 00:14   #185
Fatslogger
Self Confessed Mentalist
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hitchin
Team(s): England and Liverpool
Age: 41
Posts: 43,051
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michelle Fivefer View Post
Yes, I'm often on the board around this time. I wish I'd not said that bit about the sabbatical now because it looks like a rather cheap attempt to get people to say "oh please don't leave us Michelle we promise to be nice to you" and such. It was a moment of weakness and I take it back.
Oh good, back to the point scoring and abuse then.
__________________
Work is the curse of the drinking classes - Wilde
Fatslogger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th August 2007, 09:48   #186
sanskritsimon
Legendary
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Team(s): Arkholme Bees, Hackney Grasshoppers, Holy Cross Academicals
Posts: 9,604
One thing Bell's innings did was to show everyone how easy it still was to score runs quickly on that pitch. One wonders what might have happened if he had come in at no. 3.

At one point -- I can't remember exactly when it was in relation to Bell's innings -- we needed just over ten an over for the remaining seventeen overs.

I take the point about Prior's innings being better in terms of saving the game but the thing is there was absolutely no point in saving the game. For relevant data in this regard, see the second innings at Trent Bridge. Monday's play at the Oval reminds me of the one-day match at Lord's when Gavaskar decided to dead-bat everything because he thought there were too many to get.
sanskritsimon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th August 2007, 10:47   #187
Minor Maggie
Buttleresque
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Leeds
Team(s): Lancashire, England
Posts: 26,605
I like Bell but I am wondering when he is going to move on to the next level. He had a torrid time against the Aussies in 2005 and then came back well last summer batting at 6. No-one came out of the winter with much credit and it seemed against the West Indies he did well. However I wonder whether he should at least be batting above Colly who is more of a fighter and might be better suited to batting at 6. However KP and Colly average 70 odd for their wicket which might be why you wouldn't separate them. He should also be working on his bowling and looking to fill in for a few overs as Colly does especially if Flintoff doesn't come back into the test team. Who knows the ODI series might be the making of the man?
Minor Maggie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th August 2007, 10:56   #188
Joe Diddly
Posting God
 
Joe Diddly's Avatar
Mark Nicholas' Lawyer's Pall Bearer
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: SW17
Team(s): Northants
Posts: 13,522
I think the thing with Bell is, the level he is at now, is reasonably good and an acceptable level for a number 6 batsman. However, he is capable of much better and therefore we have greater expectations.

I don't think his bowling is that much of an issue really, and it depends if the captain uses him. He might bowl a few in ODIs, but in tests really it's not that vital.
Joe Diddly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th August 2007, 11:08   #189
Kim
Posting God
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 18,088
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minor Maggie View Post
I like Bell but I am wondering when he is going to move on to the next level. He had a torrid time against the Aussies in 2005 and then came back well last summer batting at 6. No-one came out of the winter with much credit and it seemed against the West Indies he did well. However I wonder whether he should at least be batting above Colly who is more of a fighter and might be better suited to batting at 6. However KP and Colly average 70 odd for their wicket which might be why you wouldn't separate them. He should also be working on his bowling and looking to fill in for a few overs as Colly does especially if Flintoff doesn't come back into the test team. Who knows the ODI series might be the making of the man?
Can you justify that statement?
Kim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th August 2007, 11:09   #190
Joe Diddly
Posting God
 
Joe Diddly's Avatar
Mark Nicholas' Lawyer's Pall Bearer
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: SW17
Team(s): Northants
Posts: 13,522
Because he scores ugly runs. Wheras Bell is just ugly
Joe Diddly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th August 2007, 11:27   #191
Minor Maggie
Buttleresque
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Leeds
Team(s): Lancashire, England
Posts: 26,605
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kim View Post
Can you justify that statement?
Take a look at the strike rates of the two in their innings to date. Colly is consistently in the low 40's whereas Bell is in the 50's. That suggests to me that Colly tends to hang around more for his runs than Bell does.
Minor Maggie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th August 2007, 11:31   #192
Kim
Posting God
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 18,088
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minor Maggie View Post
Take a look at the strike rates of the two in their innings to date. Colly is consistently in the low 40's whereas Bell is in the 50's. That suggests to me that Colly tends to hang around more for his runs than Bell does.

And how does that make him more of a fighter? Doesnt that logically mean KP is less of a fighter than anyone?
Kim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th August 2007, 11:33   #193
Joe Diddly
Posting God
 
Joe Diddly's Avatar
Mark Nicholas' Lawyer's Pall Bearer
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: SW17
Team(s): Northants
Posts: 13,522
It just means he scores slower.
Joe Diddly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th August 2007, 11:41   #194
Aidan11
Harmisonesque
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Somewhere cold and wet
Posts: 39,287
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minor Maggie View Post
Take a look at the strike rates of the two in their innings to date. Colly is consistently in the low 40's whereas Bell is in the 50's. That suggests to me that Colly tends to hang around more for his runs than Bell does.
Does that make Bell a better player than Colly though, or vice versa? To me it just suggests they are different types of player.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northantsfanone View Post
Speaking to Geoff Cook today they may released Mark Wood from Durham. He rates him but the kid has had an operation and maybe one too many bowlers on the books type deal.
Aidan11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th August 2007, 11:43   #195
Joe Diddly
Posting God
 
Joe Diddly's Avatar
Mark Nicholas' Lawyer's Pall Bearer
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: SW17
Team(s): Northants
Posts: 13,522
Colly's stats will have been offset by the 22* he scored of 15,000 balls in Adelaide.
Joe Diddly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th August 2007, 11:48   #196
Midnight
World Class
 
Midnight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Melbourne
Team(s): Australia
Posts: 7,879
I think their comparative strike-rates are a reflection of their relative abilities. Bell is classier and is more naturally disposed to scoring quicker in difficult situations. Collingwood is the more limited strokeplayer, even if he's shown a tendency at times to score quickly in the truncated form of the game. Even so it's usually after he's played himself in. Bell seems more adept at being able to dictate terms earlier. He of course still has that proclivity to implode shortly after reaching a half century.
Midnight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th August 2007, 12:21   #197
CoE
County Pro
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Shrewsbury
Team(s): England!
Posts: 696
Yeah, I'd agree with that Midnight. Collingwood really doesn't have that great an amount of ability, but he certainly makes the most of it and is mentally strong. It's no surprise that he and KP often produce big partnerships when England are well behind in the game - IMO the two mentally strongest players. Bell on the other hand has a huge amount of ability, perhaps more than either of the others, yet for some reason he just can't dig in and makes lots of little mistakes.
CoE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th August 2007, 15:09   #198
Fatslogger
Self Confessed Mentalist
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hitchin
Team(s): England and Liverpool
Age: 41
Posts: 43,051
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanskritsimon View Post
One thing Bell's innings did was to show everyone how easy it still was to score runs quickly on that pitch. One wonders what might have happened if he had come in at no. 3.

At one point -- I can't remember exactly when it was in relation to Bell's innings -- we needed just over ten an over for the remaining seventeen overs.

I take the point about Prior's innings being better in terms of saving the game but the thing is there was absolutely no point in saving the game. For relevant data in this regard, see the second innings at Trent Bridge. Monday's play at the Oval reminds me of the one-day match at Lord's when Gavaskar decided to dead-bat everything because he thought there were too many to get.
ODIs don't result in draws though. Tests do. Honestly, what chance do you think England had of forcing a win at any point in Bell's innings? As good as 1/1 000? I don't think so. Scoring 170 at 10 an over with 4 wickets down is nigh on impossible in an ODI. Doing it in a test is a mirage and not a remotely convincing one either.
__________________
Work is the curse of the drinking classes - Wilde
Fatslogger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th August 2007, 15:31   #199
Kim
Posting God
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 18,088
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fatslogger View Post
ODIs don't result in draws though. Tests do. Honestly, what chance do you think England had of forcing a win at any point in Bell's innings? As good as 1/1 000? I don't think so. Scoring 170 at 10 an over with 4 wickets down is nigh on impossible in an ODI. Doing it in a test is a mirage and not a remotely convincing one either.
Generous odds there FS as 1842 test matches producing a highest winning total of 418 would suggest. Didnt Bell's innings show how easy it was to score quickly on that pitch against attacking fields . 4/5 an over is tough to get in FC cricket with no fielding restrictions and the more (or do I mean less?) liberal interpretation of wides.
Kim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th August 2007, 22:39   #200
Fatslogger
Self Confessed Mentalist
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hitchin
Team(s): England and Liverpool
Age: 41
Posts: 43,051
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kim View Post
Generous odds there FS as 1842 test matches producing a highest winning total of 418 would suggest. Didnt Bell's innings show how easy it was to score quickly on that pitch against attacking fields . 4/5 an over is tough to get in FC cricket with no fielding restrictions and the more (or do I mean less?) liberal interpretation of wides.
I was pointing out that England's chance was less than 1/1 000 and probably vastly less. Actually, more accurately I was trying to get Sans to say something silly. It's rather difficult to decide on exact odds for something obviously extremely unlikely and utterly unprecedented. I would say that the total number of tests number is a bit misleading though. I can't imagine that more than a tiny proportion of those tests gave a side a chance to chase over 450 without utterly prohibitive time pressure.

Anyway, over 10 an over for 17 overs with 4 wickets already down in a test strikes me as significantly more prohibitively unlikely than the initial almost totally prohibitively unlikely chase of 500 in 110 overs.
__________________
Work is the curse of the drinking classes - Wilde
Fatslogger is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:13.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Cricket247.org