Remove this Banner Ad

Surely....

  • Thread starter Thread starter TheMase
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Crawley. Dubious.

He's been obsessed with playing the anchor role all summer. Then he goes and gets out to a rare attacking shot.
It's terrible.
 
Originally posted by TheMase
.. I am reading this wrong ..

Crawley ... 22 runs from 112 balls ...

Thats ridiculas!!
Not wrong at all. Perhaps Crawley is trying to save the test. ;) :o
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Englands batting in this test has taken cricket back almost 10-15years. Boring stuff really.

Geoff Boycott would have been proud of Crawleys knock!
 
I insisit Damien Martyns batting is detrimental to the team, scoring that slowly is so negative and boring, it just brings the team down, as opposed to someone like Hayden or Gilchrist...
 
Originally posted by Navy Master
I insisit Damien Martyns batting is detrimental to the team, scoring that slowly is so negative and boring, it just brings the team down, as opposed to someone like Hayden or Gilchrist...
Nasser Hussain was giving him 8-1 fields and still he had trouble scoring!
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Australia's quickest three bastmen are the first three, and the momentum is usually broken rather than continued when Martyn comes in to bat. Strange for someone commonly regarded by the cricket media as being the most technically correct and attractive stroke player.

As for Crawley, surely its's between he and Zimbabwe's Trevor Gripper as the world's slowest and most boring batsman, and Jason Gillespie must model his batting on their games too!
 
Originally posted by Navy Master
I insisit Damien Martyns batting is detrimental to the team, scoring that slowly is so negative and boring, it just brings the team down, as opposed to someone like Hayden or Gilchrist...

I agree, he really does go too slow
 
England frustrated Australia in the field for the first hour and a half yesterday morning, particularly Stewart. But Crawley didn't make Australia pay, only scoring 2 runs in the first hour. And in the end, being stranded on 35 not out, he could have made plenty more. England's total of 362, for the work they did, could have been plenty more than that, and in the final analysis may not be enough.
On the other hand, we've got used to Test cricket going at 4 an over for the last several years; and it was unusual seeing England chugging along at 2.7. That used to be fairly normal, but not any more. A 300 run day in Test cricket for a while was something out of the ordinary, but the first day stood out for not having 300 runs scored.
 
Originally posted by Bomber Spirit

On the other hand, we've got used to Test cricket going at 4 an over for the last several years; and it was unusual seeing England chugging along at 2.7. That used to be fairly normal, but not any more. A 300 run day in Test cricket for a while was something out of the ordinary, but the first day stood out for not having 300 runs scored.

couldnt agree more, it was only 5 years ago on this ground south africa made 197 in a days play only losing something like 5 wickets.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom