Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Cricket

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Originally posted by Daniel 7 View Post
    How many times do two countries have to play each other before you get bored of it? It just seems to be a constant stream on the news / sky sports of England v Australia

    Is the entire sport really just England v Australia and thats all that happens? Everything else in the game of cricket is just a build up to England v Australia?

    How many ashes actually are there? They must be running out by now surely, or are they constantly burning stuff to give out at the next instalment?

    I thought the SPL was bad, but this is ridiculous. Its like a perpetual, sedated varsity boat race but with red balls, leisurely field activity and faux jingoism.


    Normally the Ashes are contested once every two years, alternating home and away of course. For some reason - and I am still in the dark as to why this has happened - this summer's home series is being followed almost immediately (gap of just 2-3 months) by the series down under.
    Thanks very much for being ‘This Mornings’ Farmer’

    Comment


      They usually play each other 10 times in 4 years. No different to football really.

      Its just that we had double ashes this year to allow for the world cup next.

      Obviously there is ODI cricket. But everyone plays each other all the time there. Australia and India had a 7 match series recently. I guess we will do the same too.
      *Except Michael, who died.

      Comment


        Come on, if England played Germany 10 times in 4 years at football there would be uproar! (Especially because they'd lose every game - imagine the damage to the fragile Ingerlish fan's psyche!)

        I suppose the other countries that play it like The Cayman Islands or Kenya can't afford to send their teams over very often.

        You'd think the Cricket Federation would stump up some cash for the colonies to come over or get the USA to play baseball over there and cricket here and vice versa. At least there would be some competition.

        Comment


          It's no different to Rugby. Team play all the time due to the limited number of international sides.

          I'd rather watch England play Australia 20 times and have it be competitive than England play some small country with zero pedigree. It'd be like Liverpool constantly playing non league sides. It'd soon get boring.
          *Except Michael, who died.

          Comment


            But how are the ****ter countries supposed to get any better if they can't break into the colonial cartel of the cricket elite?

            See, this is where football sets itself apart from cricket (and other gash like Rugby Union, Rugby League and rounders) - its all inclusive, it embraces new nations, it welcomes them into the international brotherhood of competitive nation states. Then they get better and beat Scotland and consign them to never, ever being able to qualify for another tournament ever again.

            Comment


              They get better through ODI and T20 matches and lesser internationals.

              The trouble with Cricket is that its not an international sport is it? Its a bit like asking GB to go up against the US in basketball and then making an international spectacle of it. Its pointless.

              Football is the only real global sport out there. But that's because it only needs 2 people and a thing resembling a ball to be a game. Cricket is basically a British game taught to the colonies/empire in order for our old toffs to have a bit of a knock about. Its snowballed from there.

              The restrictions of Test playing nations is maybe something that could be looked at. Currently there are only 9 or something. But again it comes down to the standard of the other teams.
              *Except Michael, who died.

              Comment


                I think the first thing that needs to be done, if its going to take off, is sort out the bad light. Just get some floodlights.

                Sort out googlies as well. Nobody can embrace a sport that uses googlies as a term.

                And introduce tackling to stop people completing their shuttle runs.

                Comment


                  And ban Scotland

                  Comment


                    Scotland don't play ****ing cricket

                    Comment


                      Originally posted by Alex View Post
                      The restrictions of Test playing nations is maybe something that could be looked at. Currently there are only 9 or something. But again it comes down to the standard of the other teams.
                      Why don't the little nations just have their own tests?

                      Comment


                        What would be the point? Most countries either cant be bothered, or are totally ****. Itd be like 2 sunday league teams meeting for an International.
                        *Except Michael, who died.

                        Comment


                          Originally posted by Daniel 7 View Post
                          Scotland don't play ****ing cricket




                          Cricket - Scotland cruise to victory
                          Scotland continued their preparations for this month's World Twenty20 qualifiers with a nine-wicket victory over Ragama in Sri Lanka on Monday.

                          Comment


                            Originally posted by Daniel 7 View Post
                            Scotland don't play ****ing cricket
                            Nope, but they still field a team

                            Football without Origi is nothing

                            Comment


                              What does that even mean?!

                              I heard about a team called Scotland but I was under the impression they were all english blokes who had no chance of ever playing for England.

                              Bit like football then

                              Nobody plays cricket in Scotland - nobody!

                              Comment


                                Calum MacLeod
                                That is the most Scottish name possible. I think you might be wrong....
                                *Except Michael, who died.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X