View Full Version : West Indies - short of a run
Why do Australia always get to play 3 or 4 lead up matches before a series and the Windies have one 3 and a bit day game (1 innings with the bat)?
Their A side hasn't played virtually any cricket all year, whereas Australia have played tough 5 day and one day cricket against good opposition almost non-stop. W.I had their 5 test series in Australia cancelled last year because they were deemed 'not competetive enough' and yet they smashed a full strength Bulls by probably 8-10 wickets.
CA haven't given them a fair go, and how can we really expect them to beat us when we don't allow them a few more lead up games and a fair go.
LIONS then DAYLIGHT
31 Oct 2005, 06:03
Why do Australia always get to play 3 or 4 lead up matches before a series and the Windies have one 3 and a bit day game (1 innings with the bat)?
Their A side hasn't played virtually any cricket all year, whereas Australia have played tough 5 day and one day cricket against good opposition almost non-stop. W.I had their 5 test series in Australia cancelled last year because they were deemed 'not competetive enough' and yet they smashed a full strength Bulls by probably 8-10 wickets.
CA haven't given them a fair go, and how can we really expect them to beat us when we don't allow them a few more lead up games and a fair go.
I wouldn't say they smashed the bulls mate, the bulls were more than competitive and the Windies had a good hit out. I think the right call was made on the 5 test series thing as last time in 2000 they were disappointing.
I still think the series will be competitive though.
GO AUSSIE!!!!
Homer Jnr
31 Oct 2005, 06:46
We didn't get many matches before the ashes, and as came to light when we realised that was a big mistake, both cricket boards must agree on the fixturing of matches and the amount of games.
usalion
31 Oct 2005, 08:06
Series last year was cancelled because the West Indies could not get things together with the sponsorship deals....it was a real shambles. "Non competitive" came into it- because they were going to send West Indies C as their Test team- would have been a joke to have played.
silky-smooth
31 Oct 2005, 10:32
I wouldn't say they smashed the bulls mate, the bulls were more than competitive and the Windies had a good hit out.
Even though that's not actually the point of this thread, they annihilated the Bulls. Knocking up 612 (with only 10 men) is a pretty big ownage when your opposition only makes 323 and 9-378.
eddiesmith
31 Oct 2005, 10:38
If it was a 5 day match, the Bulls would have lost by 8 or 9 wickets atleast
Series last year was cancelled because the West Indies could not get things together with the sponsorship deals....it was a real shambles. "Non competitive" came into it- because they were going to send West Indies C as their Test team- would have been a joke to have played.
Cancelling the Series had nothing to do with sponsorship.
I wouldn't say they smashed the bulls mate,
And Qld were smashed mate, W.I were missing a batsman AND Powell who took 4 for in the Bulls first innings didn't bowl in the second innings.
Don't worry Starz, they might be short of a run, but they won't be short of runs when Marlon Samuels latches on to a few Brett Lee pies.
Homer Jnr
31 Oct 2005, 19:21
The Bulls were without Bichel, so immediately they lose 20-30 runs per innings and 3-4 wickets. And we played 2 spinners on a road!
The Bulls were without Bichel, so immediately they lose 20-30 runs per innings and 3-4 wickets. And we played 2 spinners on a road!
Excuses.
Bichel was made 12th man by Le Roux who had a good game, Qld didn't lose much.
eddiesmith
31 Oct 2005, 19:32
Le Roux made runs in the Bulls first innings, you could argue without him the Windies might have won, no guarantee Bichel would have done better
Why do Australia always get to play 3 or 4 lead up matches before a series and the Windies have one 3 and a bit day game (1 innings with the bat)?
When was the last time we played 3-4 FC leadup matches before a series? With all the compressed touring schedules, teams are lucky to get 3 practice matches in a Test tour (assumed 3 Test series for this example).
SorryIHammerChicken
1 Nov 2005, 09:34
The Bulls were without Bichel, so immediately they lose 20-30 runs per innings and 3-4 wickets. And we played 2 spinners on a road!
Mate, you lost. Get over it. Hopefully the Windies keep up their good form this summer and we have a competitive test series.
Looked like a draw to me. QLD vs WI (http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/australia/content/match/223215.html)
The Bulls were without Bichel, so immediately they lose 20-30 runs per innings and 3-4 wickets. And we played 2 spinners on a road!
West Indies didn't have a bowling attack and got one of their main strike bowlers injured. I can assure you that if Powell didn't get himself injured, the match would have been over by Tea on day 4 and resulted in a Windies win. They got 19 of your wickets with a ******** poor bowling attack. So to say that Bichel would have made a difference is moronic.
So your argument can be used in the Windies case as above. Get over it. You didn't win. West Indies didn't win - so get over it. Face facts that you almost lost to a ******** bowling attack.
If Windies went in full strength, The match would have been over by day 3. Due to Powell's injury, your tail only wagged because they had to over-use bowlers and play bowlers who rarely bowl.
I mean in the second innings, Chanderpaul bowled 7 overs. :eek: