Just a quick note to say no posts today as I am going to be celebrating a great career of a colleague of mine tonight.

But keep the comments flowing and I’ll look in. Yesterday’s tweet barrage by the media behemoths was something to behold. They are all over the place. Pride goes to that Pringle tweet for sheer haughtiness. I’d give it 11 out of 17 for preposterous bluster.

Meanwhile I am trying to determine “The Anslyst’s” analysis in the KP stuff. Blind hatred as analysis. Hurrah!

Have a good day people.


91 thoughts on “Farewell

  1. @pktroll Mar 27, 2015 / 9:23 am

    On the “Furious” thread I pointed out that my twitter feed had suggested that I follow Selvey, Etheridge and Newman and that I wasn’t feeling well already. I did follow Pringle a few years ago but so sad was he that I gave it up as a bad job. I’d never considered Selvey that seriously as a journalist several years ago and of course he’s done nothing in recent times to suggest I was ever wrong. I also got a referral to Hughes, lol. My day is complete!


    • LordCanisLupus Mar 27, 2015 / 9:25 am

      You need to see how those opposed to your view think. They provide much source material. And they entertain with their attempts at tortured logic to justify the unjustifiable. It’s fun.


      • @pktroll Mar 27, 2015 / 10:57 am

        Over a year ago a recommended tweeter I got was Pam Nash. However on the occasional retweets that I got I thought immediately that it wasn’t worth my while given the quality of output. I’m not even as naturally pro-Pietersen as many others on here (I have always been and always will be a bowlers man), but I have always found the attempts to discredit him since the fall-out of the India tour in 2008 utterly ridiculous. Don’t get me started on “text-gate”. If journalists aren’t prepared to analyse a situation properly from both sides of the equation I find it very hard not to be in contempt of their output. That is why the likes of Hoult and Collomosse deserve a lot of credit for their work, let alone Dobbell and Hopps.

        Just to be clear if Pietersen scores a stack of runs in the CC, of course he should be recalled. I did wonder if he still had it at the end of that Ashes series, especially after his careless dismissal at Perth, but then that would result in me also having a fair amount of amnesia about the way the rest of the team batted in that series and their ongoing performances before and since.

        The idiotic “Great Leap Forward” proposed by Downton and Flower is absolutely the reason why I am “outside cricket” as anyone with half a brain could tell that the ills of the England team couldn’t and never could be solved with the exclusion of one man, particularly when coupled with the ludicrous protection of an utter inadequate of a captain who had stopped scoring meaningful runs. I guess for the likes of us things have unravelled even quicker than it could have been imagined in the last year.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Vian Mar 27, 2015 / 11:03 am

        Not many people on here (there are plenty elsewhere I agree) have some kind of blind faith in Pietersen. It has been said repeatedly that he was a symptom, not a cause.

        I really don’t care whether he plays or not. I don’t care if selectors make a call on cricketing ability that I don’t agree with (that is the job of selectors after all), I just want us to have a policy of selecting the best players, not the best families.


      • @pktroll Mar 27, 2015 / 11:36 am

        Vian, I didn’t mean to suggest that there was any “blind faith” on behalf of others towards him. I guess that the whole debate has often been developed into an almost ludicrous McCarthyite situation where you are either wholly against or wholly for. That is about the only thing that the press has done well, until it all backfired of course!

        Oh and I agree with you naturally regarding picking the best players.


      • Vian Mar 27, 2015 / 2:00 pm

        Agree, that’s what I was trying to get across – the idea that anyone critical of the ECB is therefore a Pietersen acolyte. It’s the laziest dismissal of an objection there is. You see the same technique in politics (not going to specify which side, it’s both) to ignore a valid point by lumping them in the bracket of an extremist.


    • SteveT Mar 27, 2015 / 11:59 am

      Was funny to see Pringle’s pompous condescending outburst yesterday. Especially when an online poll conducted by his former employers at the DT on whether or not KP should play for England again came out 86% in favour. The DT must really regret letting go such a consummate professional who connects so well with his readers. I’m not on Twitter myself, but this might be worth pointing out to him.


  2. Vian Mar 27, 2015 / 10:14 am

    It’s lashing out because they don’t like the way things are moving. Tom Collomosse’s line that there’s a bunch of blazers actively hoping for a player to fail was spot on in highlighting the lunacy of the situation.

    I’m glad Pietersen is playing county cricket this year. Whatever happens this will provide closure to the whole situation, because if by some miracle England dish out to New Zealand and Australia a hammering, then his time is done anyway. If he fails in county cricket, then he’s tried and failed, but he too can move on. I really cannot see a situation where he scores heavily, England lose badly and they still don’t pick him. It’s the fantasy of those who loathe him, but it’s just not sustainable in reality – the mainstream sports press will slaughter them for that.

    The silly justifications the usual suspects are piping up with are doing no harm at all – except to them. Cricket fans really aren’t stupid.


  3. Mark Mar 27, 2015 / 10:21 am

    Cook should be a supporter of KP. Because it keeps the Colonel Blimps like Pringle and Hughes on his side. Such is their hatred of KP it blinds them to all of Pitt the Youngers faults. 2 years of no century’s, pathetic and weak captaincy, and playing second division cricket is all irrelevant to the Blimps.

    Lack of form or second division cricket for anyone else is a major issue for every other player but not Cook. The Blimps demand their piece of flesh. They want a statement from Graves saying KP will never ,ever ,ever ,ever until my face turns blue will he ever play for Englamd again. Then they can declare victory, and English cricket can return to a village garden party with lots of free tickets and champagne to be drunk at the ECBs expense.

    But then when that day comes Pitt the Younger can be safely dispensed with, and sent off to tend his flock, and make guest appearances on One man and his dog.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Vian Mar 27, 2015 / 10:28 am

      If there’s one thing that seems quite clear from his recent outbursts, it’s that Cook realises he’s been used by those above.


      • Zephirine Mar 27, 2015 / 10:55 am

        Yes, I think now Cook realises. Maybe he’s read a few newspapers and blogs while the WC’s been going on. Maybe he’s talked to some people outside cricket. Or maybe he’s just reflected on what exactly happened to him with the ODI captaincy.


      • Vian Mar 27, 2015 / 10:59 am

        It’s fascinating how often people fall for this. It’s the classic “they came for the socialists” routine.


      • OscarDaBosca Mar 27, 2015 / 12:30 pm

        I believe he was part of it, thought that he was secure and only now realises that the mob at the ECB will jettison anyone if it saves their own skin. Can’t wait to hear Downton’s eulogy to KP when he returns in the summer (after a dispiriting 1-0 lost to the WI and NZ, and the dropping of the captain).


      • d'Arthez Mar 27, 2015 / 12:34 pm

        Which, to be frank, does not really say much about his captaincy skills. A captain ought to be not dimwitted. Anyone who lived in the situation should have realized what game the ECB were playing last April.


      • Vian Mar 27, 2015 / 12:39 pm


        Agree with you both.

        The Downton/Whitaker dynamic fascinates me if it all goes wrong. Both will likely prefer to wriggle rather than resign. And for all the talk about “very unlikely” Pietersen will return, I think it distinctly possible because I fear England are going to get battered this summer. So it’s down to him to get runs for Surrey.


      • "IronBalls" McGinty Mar 27, 2015 / 2:05 pm

        I can still see Lee Harvey Oswald screaming “I was the patsy!” as he was led off to court!!


      • Vian Mar 27, 2015 / 2:15 pm

        Shooting Cook seems a bit excessive mind…


  4. thebogfather Mar 27, 2015 / 10:39 am

    Enjoy this evenings fare well! We all need time for cheer and laughter, as much as we need time for getting the ire out of our systems… mine’s a pint of ale an’ hearty, then a Jamesons – let’s party!


  5. SimonH Mar 27, 2015 / 10:59 am

    The press seem all twittered out this morning.

    One of the best comments I’ve seen about Cook (think it was on a Guardian thread) was that he became viewed as a member of the management group rather than being a player in a chain of command. I think that explains a lot over the last year that otherwise makes no sense from the irrelevance of Cook’s form to his outraged astonishment that he could be dropped. I rather suspect Prior was in the same position (hence the lack of proper fitness tests) and the senior bowlers may be as well (although bowlers have usually not been seen as quite fit members of the officers’ club). The elevation of senior players in this way is objectionable in itself but the selective nature of it with England (Pietersen or Bell excluded, for example) particularly rankles.

    I rather suspect it started with Strauss who was clearly earmarked for a management role while still playing and Cook inherited the position as he did the captaincy.


    • Zephirine Mar 27, 2015 / 1:38 pm

      Yes, that’s a very good observation about being part of the management group.
      Strauss probably took to it naturally, and with his degree in Business Studies or Economics or whatever it is, he would have something to offer. Cook doesn’t have skills to offer in that role, but was perhaps encouraged to believe that he does.

      “The elevation of senior players in this way is objectionable in itself ”
      It recalls a prep school with a tyrannical headmaster who rules through favoured prefects.


      • Vian Mar 27, 2015 / 1:55 pm

        As ever, it’s a road to hell paved with good intentions. You can see the logic, that players should be part of it and not treated like schoolboys. The trouble is that the coaching and management team shouldn’t have that much power in the first place.

        No other country has management running the side the way England does. Mike Hesson was a controversial appointment for New Zealand, but it’s clearly McCullum’s team and he is in charge of it.

        What England did was to make the management over mighty, and then co opt the captain into the management team. It’s entirely the wrong way around. It’s also exactly why they don’t like the idea of a strong captain, because Vaughan or Hussain wouldn’t tolerate it. Even Strauss knew where the boundary was.

        When people say they want a strong captain they’re missing the point. It’s the last thing the management want, because he’d supplant them.

        Liked by 1 person

      • hatmallet Mar 27, 2015 / 2:06 pm

        @Vian – and NZ are a great example of how players can get over captaincy disappointment and relationship issues (Taylor didn’t get on with Hesson whilst captain).

        After being replaced, Taylor had a series off and came back just as good as ever. Averages a shade over 50 under McCullum, more than when than under Vettori.


      • Vian Mar 27, 2015 / 2:17 pm

        You know, the argument about players getting in with each drives me nuts. It isn’t an issue. It really isn’t. Strong management bollocks people for petty arguments.

        It’s almost as bad as the “it’s a team game” line which is simply ignorant.


      • paulewart Mar 27, 2015 / 2:57 pm

        Response to Vian: Like so much of the debate on here, your point reflect changes in wider society: in offices across the land troops are infantilised by an ever-growing army of MBA managers.


      • Vian Mar 27, 2015 / 3:00 pm

        That’s why I work for myself. No one to tell me to stop posting on cricket boards and stare at my screen instead 😉


      • Vian Mar 27, 2015 / 3:47 pm

        It’s just pure jealousy about the self employed bit dear Sir!


  6. Rav Roberts Mar 27, 2015 / 11:29 am

    Simon ‘Blind Hatred of KP, passing off as cricket analysis’ Hughes.

    It’s got a ring to it!


    • Annie Weatherly-Barton Mar 27, 2015 / 11:40 pm

      Well there are 3 rings in life yer know: Engagement ring, Wedding Ring, and Suffer Ring. I think Hughes is in the latter category.

      Liked by 1 person

  7. MM Mar 27, 2015 / 12:16 pm

    I love KP. I loved his book, too. There! I feel better now. Hurtled myself straight outside of their cricket with that.

    I imagine KP will be very motivated to let his bat do the business, and not just to threaten an international recall. Every century will be a pointy stake into every anti-journalist’s heart, and the hearts of every ECB shill. Have I just stated the blindingly obvious? There’s always one.

    Are there any pre-season games at the Oval? Bet they would pull in an abnormally large crowd, if he’s back from Oz.


  8. MM Mar 27, 2015 / 12:18 pm

    Hurrah! Saker’s gone. Bad news is Ottis has hardly been working wonders with the West Indies.

    Fingers, toes, and eyes are crossed.


    • Vian Mar 27, 2015 / 12:58 pm

      I made the point on the DT that I find the idea of a temporary bowling coach rather peculiar. Coaching requires lots of time to effect changes. You can’t breeze in, make changes and breeze back out again, it takes months to adjust people’s techniques – even assuming it’s done well.

      So you would hope that he’s doing absolutely nothing whatever in terms of the technical stuff, because you’re just going to get the Finn type disaster of too many people making too many suggestions. If that is the case and it’s purely tactical, you really don’t need a bowling coach at all for that.

      It could be a simple as a different face to refresh things, and ok that might have some merit after the last 18 months, but I’m somewhat surprised (not) no one in the media has raised this Pl question. What is Gibson for? What is his role? Why do they need him? Why do they need anyone on a temporary basis?


      • SimonH Mar 27, 2015 / 1:13 pm

        With Moores as coach and Gibson as bowling coach they only need to make Pietersen captain and it’ll be 2008 all over again!


      • BoerInAustria Mar 27, 2015 / 1:45 pm

        2008 / 2009 …and what happened then?
        ” following England’s Caribbean tour, ….and the departure of Peter Moores, he was appointed full-time team director”
        – Andy Flower


    • Pontiac Mar 27, 2015 / 2:04 pm

      West Indies has so many issues that it’s hard to analyse any part of it in isolation.

      I view Gibson’s hiring as of a piece with hiring Farbrace last time ’round.

      And as a WI supporter I hope it works out just as well.


      • Vian Mar 27, 2015 / 2:23 pm

        Farbrace fascinates me. He used to do coaching when he was a youngish player at Kent, so he obviously was into the idea early on. I’ll say this here with the smaller audience but he used to coach me a bit there. And he was an absolute prize tosser pulling the big I Am.

        Now it’s not remotely relevant to him today, because it was 30 years ago and he’s no more the same person than anyone over that length of time. It’s why it intrigues me that he went down that route – he’s obviously quite good at it.


  9. alan Mar 27, 2015 / 12:25 pm

    If you call yourself a cricket analyst, then the public are entitled to expect that the opinions you put forward under this moniker are based on analysis. Unless of course you admit to personal bias. Hughes opinions on Pietersen are clearly not based on any objective analysis. Didn’t the telegraph drop him about the time they took on Pietersen as a columnist? Could this have affected his ‘analysis’?


    • Vian Mar 27, 2015 / 12:33 pm

      It was a shame they dropped him. Just because his Pietersen analysis doesn’t stand up to scrutiny doesn’t mean he didn’t write some good and interesting stuff.

      But what is interesting is that newspapers ultimately deliver what their readers want. Derek Pringle had enough warnings from those commenting (who he had far too much arrogance to ever engage) that what goes around comes around and that he would have few friends when he got the chop. So it has transpired.

      I don’t think that means endlessly debating those commenting, they have work to do, but occasional remarks shows that they are paying attention. Hoult, Berry and Liew at the Telegraph all do that. So did Steve James when he was on the cricket section. It would have influenced then to know how people were reacting, whether they agreed or not.

      Pringle never learned that lesson. Nor has Simon Hughes. The modern world is not one of journalists dispatching wisdom from the pulpit as places like this demonstrate. It was interesting that the Telegraph got rid of two who were writing articles that repeatedly wound up the majority of the readership. And so you see a change in tone.

      The Guardian is showing signs of going the same way. Ali Martin is very much independent, very sceptical of the ECB and of how things have been done. It doesn’t mean he will write things we always love or agree with but it’s an honest view and an honest approach. Which is all you can ask for.

      Scyld Berry veers from superb articles attacking the ICC stitch up to utter nonsense. That’s still ok.


      • alan Mar 27, 2015 / 2:52 pm

        Yes I confess that I used to respect Hughes work in the past. I used to like Selvey in his tms days
        I was sorry when they dropped him! I think that is why I feel so disappointed not to say angry about their lack of objectivity when it comes to Pietersen or Cook.
        It seems to me they allow personal issues and friendships to completely cloud their judgement.
        They don’t have to agree that Pietersen should return. It’s the vindictiveness towards him and the ‘I know something you don’t but I won’t tell you’ attitude which really grates with me.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Vian Mar 27, 2015 / 2:54 pm

        Alan Tyers tweet about that was extremely pointed wasn’t it?


      • alan Mar 27, 2015 / 4:21 pm

        Haven’t seen the Alan Tyers tweet. I’m an old dinosaur and not on twitter. I had a look without success. Could you give me a link? Old dog and new tricks syndrome has struck again I’m afraid!


      • hatmallet Mar 27, 2015 / 5:59 pm

        Hi Alan – here’s the tweet


      • alan Mar 27, 2015 / 7:24 pm

        Thanks for that. Totally agree.
        Surely these journalists should be able to understand how infuriating that attitude is. Perhaps they really are that contemptuous of the ‘great unwashed’


      • Vian Mar 27, 2015 / 7:27 pm

        Thanks for doing it for me!


  10. hatmallet Mar 27, 2015 / 1:15 pm

    Latest numpty on the Telegraph – called “yozzer” but based on previous posts I don’t believe it’s Hughes. He said my statements that Pietersen had more runs and centuries than any other English player was untrue. Err yes it is true.


    • Vian Mar 27, 2015 / 2:41 pm

      It’s remarkable how silent they go when hit with facts. Never do they turn round and go “Oh I didn’t realise, good point”. They just disappear and then come back later saying the same stuff.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Annie Weatherly-Barton Mar 27, 2015 / 8:21 pm

        Mr Hughes didn’t come back to me with all my points on Twitter. He said that why should England allow KP to play again after he slagged off his captain, half the team and the Coach? Hmm. Well as far as I know he didn’t “slag off” Cook, nor half the players, but had a few words to say about Flower. I didn’t bother to ask the obvious question like: You have proof for that? So instead I said: well isn’t that what Cook has done and of course Gatting and Ravi? Is it just one rule for one player and a completely different rule for all the others? The Silence was deafening.


  11. SimonH Mar 27, 2015 / 1:24 pm

    Oh good, Selvey is predicting Australia will win so add that to the many reasons to hope for a NZ win.

    Perhaps it’s be as accurate as his SA to win the SF “by a distance” prediction.

    This is despite Selvey calling himself a “Kiwi-ophile” and saying he regards the nation as “his second home”!


    • Zephirine Mar 27, 2015 / 2:18 pm

      He does acknowledge the brilliance of McCullum, though. Better late than never.


      • SimonH Mar 27, 2015 / 3:17 pm

        Nobody else though! I get the impression Selvey thinks NZ are a team of journeymen lifted by McCullum. Great captain that McCullum is, he couldn’t attack the way he does without the players to back it up. Williamson and Boult are currently among the very best in the world of their type – not some bluffers who’ve somehow conned everyone into thinking they’re better than they are (which was largely the case in ’91/92).

        Selvey also ties himself in knots trying to hitch NZ to his personal hobby-horses about how the England one-day side should be managed. He praises NZ for continuity of selection but then has to admit that Elliott and Vettori were late call-ups into their squad. He ignores how the heart of the NZ ODI team is also the Test team because it doesn’t fit into his utterly bizarre notion that the two should be separate.

        Then there is the issue of the MCG. At least Selvey doesn’t run with the ‘poor little NZ can’t cope with the big boundaries’ angle (I’ve had a rant about that on TFT). He does argue Australia have a good record there – but then has to point out NZ won last time they played at the MCG (which was – outrageously – in 2009).

        I’ll forgive Selvey all that and a lot more if he’ll criticise the ECB for their scheduling of NZ this decade. I’m still waiting on that one.


    • Rooto Mar 27, 2015 / 4:50 pm

      I found Selvey’s article fine, and pretty honest about its inconsistencies (Aus have a great MCG record, but NZ won there; the squad visited months ago, but Elliott wasn’t with them, etc).
      My only real gripe is the fact that (close your eyes, Arron) comments weren’t enabled. What exactly is the guy worried about, with such a simply, honestly written, uncontroversial article?


      • d'Arthez Mar 27, 2015 / 6:45 pm

        Maybe he fears that there will be an outpouring over all the idiotic articles he has written in which comments were not enabled.


      • Vian Mar 27, 2015 / 7:29 pm

        I doubt it’s his decision.


      • Arron Wright Mar 27, 2015 / 8:11 pm

        I agree with you, actually. The only bit that wound me up was the awfully trite “no greater rivalry in sport”, when they haven’t even bothered to play each other at ODI cricket for years.

        Liked by 1 person

      • SimonH Mar 27, 2015 / 8:33 pm

        Rooto, the lack of comments will have more to do with it being a Friday evening of international football and a lack of enough moderators.


  12. d'Arthez Mar 27, 2015 / 3:09 pm

    Well, depending how many idiotic insults are hurled at Kevin Pietersen, McCullum might actually make his “10 cricketing highlights of 2015” piece.


    • d'Arthez Mar 27, 2015 / 3:09 pm

      That was meant as a reply to SimonH.


  13. SimonH Mar 27, 2015 / 3:30 pm

    Good to see Richard Kettleborough getting one of the umpiring posts at the WCF – he’s been the outstanding umpire in the elite panel this year.

    Some wibble about Pietersen (or Pietersen-as-proxy-for-Warne) from John Buchanan –



    • paulewart Mar 27, 2015 / 4:48 pm

      They won’t let a day go by without a new attack….
      JB’s auditioning for Downton’s job. Should be a shoo-in at this rate.


    • Silk Mar 27, 2015 / 9:40 pm

      It’s almost like Buchanan is an Aussie. “England have made a series of increasingly irrational and pig headed decisions. They should stick to these. “


      • Vian Mar 28, 2015 / 11:20 am

        I always had the feeling Buchanan was deeply resentful of how Ponting kept him at arms length and insisted on running the team as captain.

        Ponting was right.


  14. Andy Mar 27, 2015 / 8:16 pm

    I’m surprised no one has made the obvious point…

    Please don’t title a post as ‘farewell’!!

    I blinking thought you were off again!


    Liked by 2 people

  15. SimonH Mar 27, 2015 / 8:48 pm

    Nick Knight on NZ:

    “The environment and culture in the dressing room must be extremely special. Without wishing any disrespect, I would describe Martin Guptill and Grant Elliott as capable international cricketers, but their individual performances in the quarter-final and semi-final respectively, under immense pressure, were more what you would expect from some of the world’s more iconic players. It speaks of a dressing room getting the very best from its players”.

    Oh, it’s “culture in the dressing room” time! Is Knight aware of the captaincy row not too long ago? They aren’t all best buds.

    As for Guptill, he is one of only six batsmen to have centuries in all three international formats. His ODI record is exceptional. He had a downturn in form following an ankle injury but it isn’t that difficult to stick with someone who made 189* in an ODI. His Test record is fairly mediocre (will they give him another shot instead of Rutherford?) but does that make him that different to, say, Aaron Finch or Rohit Sharma?

    Liked by 1 person

    • Silk Mar 27, 2015 / 9:42 pm

      But nick knight is a complete and total price,right? So this is hardly news.

      In a great dressing room Ravi would still be desperately mediocre.


      • Annie Weatherly-Barton Mar 28, 2015 / 11:11 am

        What is it with these former players? Are they really so stupid, blind or thick? Forget what happened to NZ team where everything went pear-shaped due to management cock up – where have we all heard that before? I suppose the old adage fits here: There is none so blind as those who will not see.


    • Vian Mar 28, 2015 / 11:17 am

      Does he say “would you believe it?” six times in the article too?

      Liked by 1 person

      • Rav Roberts Mar 28, 2015 / 2:43 pm

        We’ve got a great culture in the dressing room now, so I am very surprised and shocked that we didn’t win the world cup (or at least get to the final). Of course when we did win a world cup a few years ago, our dressing room culture must have been crap as KP was in the team. So that was very odd too. It’s also strange how we managed to get to number 1 in the world in Tests with KP in the side. Must be some mistake somewhere?


  16. paulewart Mar 27, 2015 / 10:12 pm

    I posted this elsewhere but it’s a better fit here:

    The difference between Australia, New Zealand and England? Australia and NZ made the tough calls, they then got in with it. At no stage did they drop their best player. If Clarke can play with Watto and Ross Taylor (who suffered a far greater humiliation than Cook) can play with BMac, surely Cook can play with KP. If he can’t, drop him.


  17. MM Mar 27, 2015 / 10:39 pm

    I wonder what Big Cheese is up to? (when he’s not riding his pushbike).


  18. MM Mar 27, 2015 / 10:55 pm

    That interview with Buchanan? He’s an anti-KP plant, I’d wager. If that sounds a bit too conspiracy-fied, let’s move onto this strange little nugget…

    “Moores should stay on for the Ashes regardless of what happens in the upcoming tour of West Indies or home series against New Zealand in May”. Regardless of what happens? Until when?

    The only bit missing is “thanks for my cheque, Peter”.

    Honestly, that bloke is just farting words out of his mouth.

    Liked by 1 person

    • MM Mar 27, 2015 / 11:14 pm

      Yes, it’s a poignant piece, alright.

      I expect Aus to win in Aus, but I so want NZ to do it. Perhaps 400 to win, and they do it off the last ball. Greatest. Final Ever. (of any sport).


      • SimonH Mar 28, 2015 / 9:36 am

        NZ defending 230 with Dan Vettori bowling James Faulkner with 2 needed and with the slowest, loopiest delivery ever wouldn’t be bad either!

        Liked by 1 person

      • d'Arthez Mar 28, 2015 / 11:19 am

        400? The highest successful chase in Australia this World Cup was by Ireland against UAE, and that was a few runs below 280. There have been 7 higher chases in New Zealand.

        There have been 2 chases of more than 305 in Australia (India chasing 321 against Sri Lanka from a tri-series a few years ago in Hobart, and Australia chasing 334 against England in 2011 in Sydney).

        The highest target successfully chased at this ground was 295. By Australia, against England in 2011.


      • MM Mar 28, 2015 / 5:54 pm

        I suggested 400 because that would be a suitably outlandish and traumatic defeat for the Aussies to have to cope with, not because I thought it would be likely. It wouldn’t half be a great final though, wouldn’t it?

        Have a good evening, folks.


  19. Boz Mar 28, 2015 / 10:42 am

    It’s a times like this when one can try to establish the exact nature of the beast who’s absent from our midst due to pressing engagements elsewhere.

    As we are probably aware there are many subspecies of ‘canis lupus’. The canis lupus horizontalis is probably the one in existence, barely perhaps, at present. In total difference to the usual canis lupus analyticalus, which tends to hover for hours at a time. Rumour has it that during the normal working day the canus lupus uprighticus can be seen earning a crust. When it comes to considering certain writer types the canus lupus ejecticus can be seen and heard for miles around. The shapeshifting ability of the canus lupus is renowned, especially in the movies but the one who takes the biscuit, the one above all others, mainly because he has a high stool, is lord canus lupus, noble in stature and king of the loops …..

    Liked by 1 person

    • Vian Mar 28, 2015 / 10:53 am

      This particular subspecies has a peculiar affinity with Czech lager.


    • thebogfather Mar 28, 2015 / 11:20 am

      Methinks that this morning he may be on his throne, presiding over some very ‘high’ stools… 😉


  20. Marge Mar 28, 2015 / 12:02 pm

    Apologies that this is a bit off topic but it’s a thought that I have which I would be interested to hear views on – and actually SimonH has mentioned it above when he talked about Selvey’s idea of a separate ODI team as bizarre.

    I’ve thought for a long time that it might be quite a good idea. many reasons including a lot of cricket being played by England players, and knackering our bowlers as a result, but since we spend a lot of time moaning that England is way behind the other nations in our ODI thinking, maybe having a separate squad and allowing them to work purely on SF skills is a way to go to get us ahead of the other countries for a change.

    Frankly we seem to have difficulty finding players who can do both in the way that other countries do. Commenters say Aus/NZ/SA et al can do it so we should too. Why? Why don’t we do something different? A bit of ‘thinking outside the box’ to coin a favourite management-speak phrase would be a refreshing change!


    • Vian Mar 28, 2015 / 12:05 pm

      Because in essence good players are good players. Some are more geared to one format or another, but many are simply very very good cricketers and thus can play all formats. The issue you highlight is one of playing too much rather than anything else. England grind their cricketers into the dirt, not just in terms of volume but in terms of managing them. Broad could and should have had his knee operation before they eventually allowed him to, he ended up trying to find fitness and form during the world Cup itself and that was crazy.


    • Rooto Mar 28, 2015 / 12:17 pm

      Well Marge, I’ve proposed similar on the Guardian boards before, though for different reasons (more opportunities to give long runs in the team to young up-and-comers if the test team cream aren’t knackering themselves place-blocking at the same time). Holdingahighline and SimonH – two posters whose opinions I rate highly – have criticized the idea, but I’m clinging onto it for the time being.


      • Arron Wright Mar 28, 2015 / 2:30 pm

        I think that’s only one poster, tbf 🙂
        Bit like me and NOC.


      • Marge Mar 28, 2015 / 2:38 pm

        I agree up to a point Vian, they do play too much but if we do have good young cricketers as Rooto is pointing out who aren’t getting into the test team, why not give them some free rein in the ODI squad? I don’t doubt there are some who can play both but as I said, it’s difficult to pick out that many in England at the moment who can and do clear the boundary with ease a la Warner, BMac, but also make test 100s. It’s just that to me it could be a good option at the moment, rather than flogging the old dead horses that we do.


      • Rooto Mar 28, 2015 / 4:20 pm

        @Arron Then he’s doubly intelligent! Unlike myself. Thanks for the tip-off.


      • northernlight71 Mar 28, 2015 / 5:44 pm

        Why people don’t just take the same identity with them everywhere amazes me


      • Rav Roberts Mar 28, 2015 / 2:47 pm

        Surely a good dressing room culture and a laptop beats class and thinking on your feet?

        Liked by 1 person

      • BoerInAustria Mar 28, 2015 / 5:05 pm

        I will need to check the data on that one Rav…
        If it does not fit I will moderate your question…

        Liked by 1 person

    • BoerInAustria Mar 28, 2015 / 12:51 pm

      Apologies – it is of Sangakkara …


  21. Boz Mar 28, 2015 / 6:15 pm

    enjoy, it’s funny ……….


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s