Andrew Strauss
Jack Coleman aka Mr Bennet from Heroes
Wednesday 16 May 2007
Thursday 10 May 2007
Bangladesh vs India 1st ODI
So I did wake up at 4.30am - but shortly thereafter fell asleep with the tv left on in low volume - the recipe for a few cricket flavoured dreams. Woke up once more at 6am to discover the Bangladesh position wasn't as disastrous as I had seen in my dreams.
Anyway a score of 250 was a very good effort by the Bangladesh team. They managed to construct a ODI innings as one is meant to. It was quite healthy to see Bangladesh approach the final ten overs with Ashraful and Aftab Ahmad to come. If luck favoured these two a little more, than we may have seen an unpassable target of 260.
Where did Bangladesh lose it?
I don't think in the batting. 250 is a decent score, particularly for Bangladesh - forget the dismissals of Tamim Iqbal and Bashar. Only with Australia (on current form), does team batting go exactly to plan.
They missed Mortaza. Without him, India were able to give their innings the impetus that ultimately provided sufficient a cushion for Dhoni & Kartik to be able to chase down the target later on.
Shahadat Hossain - this is the first time i've seen him. He looks good but needs to learn consistency of line and length to begin with - then how to extract movement off the pitch. He has all the raw materials and more so than say a Mohammad Asif - so I hope he strives to become worldclass rather than Bangladesh test-team class.
Now we come to the three SLAs. Sometimes they look like magicians weaving a web. Today they started off so - but when teams realise they don't spin it sharply, and batsmen get in and stay in - then the runs start to flow. The key is not to lose it when in for a new batsman will then come in and before you know it another few overs will be bowled in no time for minimal runs. That is how I think the 3 SLA approach has worked those couple of times during the world cup, and almost in today's match.
If only BD had a decent 6th bowler who could bowl something different than SLA. That's what is missing for now, in my opinion.
Habibul Bashar's captaincy (not outstanding but not bad) not withstanding, I would love to be able to fit Shahriar Nafees into this side. Hopefully by the next ODI series.
Saquib al Hassan is my Bangladeshi player of the day today. A word must go out to Javed Omar also. He surprised me with some late innings aggression. Sometimes I've thought of him as an individual rather than a team player. Plenty more innings like today and I will change my mind.
Anyway a score of 250 was a very good effort by the Bangladesh team. They managed to construct a ODI innings as one is meant to. It was quite healthy to see Bangladesh approach the final ten overs with Ashraful and Aftab Ahmad to come. If luck favoured these two a little more, than we may have seen an unpassable target of 260.
Where did Bangladesh lose it?
I don't think in the batting. 250 is a decent score, particularly for Bangladesh - forget the dismissals of Tamim Iqbal and Bashar. Only with Australia (on current form), does team batting go exactly to plan.
They missed Mortaza. Without him, India were able to give their innings the impetus that ultimately provided sufficient a cushion for Dhoni & Kartik to be able to chase down the target later on.
Shahadat Hossain - this is the first time i've seen him. He looks good but needs to learn consistency of line and length to begin with - then how to extract movement off the pitch. He has all the raw materials and more so than say a Mohammad Asif - so I hope he strives to become worldclass rather than Bangladesh test-team class.
Now we come to the three SLAs. Sometimes they look like magicians weaving a web. Today they started off so - but when teams realise they don't spin it sharply, and batsmen get in and stay in - then the runs start to flow. The key is not to lose it when in for a new batsman will then come in and before you know it another few overs will be bowled in no time for minimal runs. That is how I think the 3 SLA approach has worked those couple of times during the world cup, and almost in today's match.
If only BD had a decent 6th bowler who could bowl something different than SLA. That's what is missing for now, in my opinion.
Habibul Bashar's captaincy (not outstanding but not bad) not withstanding, I would love to be able to fit Shahriar Nafees into this side. Hopefully by the next ODI series.
Saquib al Hassan is my Bangladeshi player of the day today. A word must go out to Javed Omar also. He surprised me with some late innings aggression. Sometimes I've thought of him as an individual rather than a team player. Plenty more innings like today and I will change my mind.
Wednesday 9 May 2007
Faultline Cricket
It is quite clear now that there is a white-man vs brown-man split emerging in international cricket today. This sounds crass especially as South Africa is a team currently fielding a majority of white players, and England is a team that has played up to 3 players of Asian origin in the past few months. The administrators of international cricket are split along these racial lines, however. (Note: the players get on fine themselves)
We have England, Australia & New Zealand on the one hand.
We have India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, South Africa, Zimbabwe Bangladesh
West Indies is the Switzerland in all this, though hover towards the brown block apparently.
Decisions about ICC base, Daryl Hair, World Cup hosts and the position of ICC chief have all been debated in the recent past, with these two sides broadly sitting on two sides of the fence, and the Asian-Afro bloc winning by majority vote.
For this reason of course it's the White-bloc who are most disenfranchised by this and increasingly amongst the press, particularly the antipodean press, there are articles coming out which base all cricketing problems on the shoulders of this cartel. Whilst sympathising with them on some issues, I feel some of this has been excessive and smacks of a resistance to cricketing traditions evolving / changing. They would rather have the game remaining static at the expense of commercial success. Again they have a point, there are far too many international one day games being played but not everything that is evolutionary or commercial is necessarily a bad thing.
In essence, there are faults on both sides. I see the disagreements widening but can not envisage a permanent split - that would kill the game off. So what do I see? more of the same. The Asian cartel outweighting the Anglo-pedian cartel and the latter continue to lay all blame on the former's shoulders. It is a pity as I think world cricket would benefit if both groups gelled better - a bonding weekend comprising media commentators as well as the administrators is what's needed!
We have England, Australia & New Zealand on the one hand.
We have India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, South Africa, Zimbabwe Bangladesh
West Indies is the Switzerland in all this, though hover towards the brown block apparently.
Decisions about ICC base, Daryl Hair, World Cup hosts and the position of ICC chief have all been debated in the recent past, with these two sides broadly sitting on two sides of the fence, and the Asian-Afro bloc winning by majority vote.
For this reason of course it's the White-bloc who are most disenfranchised by this and increasingly amongst the press, particularly the antipodean press, there are articles coming out which base all cricketing problems on the shoulders of this cartel. Whilst sympathising with them on some issues, I feel some of this has been excessive and smacks of a resistance to cricketing traditions evolving / changing. They would rather have the game remaining static at the expense of commercial success. Again they have a point, there are far too many international one day games being played but not everything that is evolutionary or commercial is necessarily a bad thing.
In essence, there are faults on both sides. I see the disagreements widening but can not envisage a permanent split - that would kill the game off. So what do I see? more of the same. The Asian cartel outweighting the Anglo-pedian cartel and the latter continue to lay all blame on the former's shoulders. It is a pity as I think world cricket would benefit if both groups gelled better - a bonding weekend comprising media commentators as well as the administrators is what's needed!
Monday 7 May 2007
Where to bat Fred
In my opinion that is what the selection of the next England test squad boils down to.
Obvious picks:
1) A. Cook
2) A. Strauss
3) I. Bell
4) K. Pietersen
5) P. Collingwood
6)
7)
8)
9) Harmison
10) Hoggard
11) Panesar
I say obvious but it is consistency of selection which means I include Collingwood over the slighty younger and perhaps more talented and in-form Owais Shah.
I want to pick Matt Prior over Nixon, because Prior is more likely to be the long term option and is more of a batsman by pedigree than Nixon, but I would like to pick Nixon for the 20-20 World cup side (and maybe for the next ODI squad - as he is someone with the nous which is lacking in the present set-up).
Panesar hasn't shown any wicket taking potential of late but is ahead of the rest of the field, so gets a series to reconfirm his international credentials.
I am of course assuming Vaughan won't make it. It's really not fair on Strauss (I assume he is next in line to skipper England), to just step in on Thursday morning if Vaughan can't make it, when he is pushing all stops to even dream of being fit for the 1st match in the series.
Which takes me to the crux of this post:
Andrew Flintoff to bat at 7 (bringing in Shah in the absence of Vaughan) - allowing England to bat down to 8?
or play Flintoff at 6, and stick to the Ashes 2005 winning formula of 5 bowlers (not to mention formula that won England 10 wins in 11 matches. ) When Vaughan plays, this would solve who of Cook, Bell & Collingwood to leave out (I say Collingwood).
I'm going to say bat Flintoff at 6 against the West Indies. Play Andersen in the side. This leaves open the expected slot for Simon Jones (unless of course Anderson excells). Otherwise will England be expected to restructure the batsman-bowler ratio to re-accomodate him? Better to stick to a format where players know what role they play in the side (as batsmen).
So my suggestion:
6) Flintoff
7) Prior
8) Anderson (of course not batting at 8)
Squad members: Dalrymple & Plunkett
Obvious picks:
1) A. Cook
2) A. Strauss
3) I. Bell
4) K. Pietersen
5) P. Collingwood
6)
7)
8)
9) Harmison
10) Hoggard
11) Panesar
I say obvious but it is consistency of selection which means I include Collingwood over the slighty younger and perhaps more talented and in-form Owais Shah.
I want to pick Matt Prior over Nixon, because Prior is more likely to be the long term option and is more of a batsman by pedigree than Nixon, but I would like to pick Nixon for the 20-20 World cup side (and maybe for the next ODI squad - as he is someone with the nous which is lacking in the present set-up).
Panesar hasn't shown any wicket taking potential of late but is ahead of the rest of the field, so gets a series to reconfirm his international credentials.
I am of course assuming Vaughan won't make it. It's really not fair on Strauss (I assume he is next in line to skipper England), to just step in on Thursday morning if Vaughan can't make it, when he is pushing all stops to even dream of being fit for the 1st match in the series.
Which takes me to the crux of this post:
Andrew Flintoff to bat at 7 (bringing in Shah in the absence of Vaughan) - allowing England to bat down to 8?
or play Flintoff at 6, and stick to the Ashes 2005 winning formula of 5 bowlers (not to mention formula that won England 10 wins in 11 matches. ) When Vaughan plays, this would solve who of Cook, Bell & Collingwood to leave out (I say Collingwood).
I'm going to say bat Flintoff at 6 against the West Indies. Play Andersen in the side. This leaves open the expected slot for Simon Jones (unless of course Anderson excells). Otherwise will England be expected to restructure the batsman-bowler ratio to re-accomodate him? Better to stick to a format where players know what role they play in the side (as batsmen).
So my suggestion:
6) Flintoff
7) Prior
8) Anderson (of course not batting at 8)
Squad members: Dalrymple & Plunkett
Bangladesh vs India
The Bangladesh vs India ODI and test match series gets underway on Thursday.
I guess it's a reflection of the relative success Bangladesh experienced in the world cup that this series is being televised on Sky sports tv in the UK. That, together with the fact, India are almost the Brazil of international cricket by having Tendulkar, Shewag, Ganguly, Yuvraj, Dhoni and even Dravid in the side. All quite easy on the eye or high on entertainment value. Though this Thursday Tendulkar and Ganguly won't be on offer. (What happened to Ganguly after the world cup, was ridiculous in my opinion. I have an image of Greg Chappell gripping Ganguly tight by the knees and dragging him into the ocean with him).
I remember watching a South Africa vs Bangladesh series on Sky years ago and it was cringeworthy tv - such was the gulf of difference in quality and the lack of atmosphere (typical of South Africa test series).
I fear this series may turrn out to be the same also. Bangladesh play 5 bad matches for every half decent fist of a game. Yet nonetheless I shall be tuning in on Thursday with a little eager anticipation - such is my personality type.
The other sign of improved recognition for Bangladesh cricket was New Zealand hosting a series against them - apparently on the back of the world cup campaign. yes, New Zealand where Martin Crowe, that renowned fan of Bangladeshi cricket , rules supreme over the airwaves apparently. The seaming wickets may give rise to some easy wins, and a few easy notches for Shane Bond (and even Mortaza - injurys not withstanding - and I say this with regards to both of these guys) - but may improve the technique of the Bangladeshi boys, providing they stay in long enough.
So Thursday 4.30am it is.
I guess it's a reflection of the relative success Bangladesh experienced in the world cup that this series is being televised on Sky sports tv in the UK. That, together with the fact, India are almost the Brazil of international cricket by having Tendulkar, Shewag, Ganguly, Yuvraj, Dhoni and even Dravid in the side. All quite easy on the eye or high on entertainment value. Though this Thursday Tendulkar and Ganguly won't be on offer. (What happened to Ganguly after the world cup, was ridiculous in my opinion. I have an image of Greg Chappell gripping Ganguly tight by the knees and dragging him into the ocean with him).
I remember watching a South Africa vs Bangladesh series on Sky years ago and it was cringeworthy tv - such was the gulf of difference in quality and the lack of atmosphere (typical of South Africa test series).
I fear this series may turrn out to be the same also. Bangladesh play 5 bad matches for every half decent fist of a game. Yet nonetheless I shall be tuning in on Thursday with a little eager anticipation - such is my personality type.
The other sign of improved recognition for Bangladesh cricket was New Zealand hosting a series against them - apparently on the back of the world cup campaign. yes, New Zealand where Martin Crowe, that renowned fan of Bangladeshi cricket , rules supreme over the airwaves apparently. The seaming wickets may give rise to some easy wins, and a few easy notches for Shane Bond (and even Mortaza - injurys not withstanding - and I say this with regards to both of these guys) - but may improve the technique of the Bangladeshi boys, providing they stay in long enough.
So Thursday 4.30am it is.
Wednesday 2 May 2007
Neutral Umpires
The fiasco on Saturday evening has renewed calls for the best umpires to stand in test matches rather than neutral umpires. The risk I see in this is that it may end up that the same two umpires are chosen for every match or that one nation ends up supplying all the umpires. It isn't that easy to decide who is the best umpire - even Simon Taufel made mistakes during the World Cup - but his fans overlook this. In fact, I think unless one analyses an umpire's performance scientifically (like the ICC actually do), the naked eye won't necessarily reveal the best umpire.
That's one argument. The more pertinent argument here is that on Saturday we had Steve Bucknor (veteran of 5 world cups), and Aleem Dar (widely seen as the 2nd best umpire on the circuit). Simon Taufel is seen as the best (remember even he has made errors of judgement on umpiring decisions in this WC). Thus do we deem that he is chosen to umpire every match? or is it just every important match? in which case, take a scenario where India are playing Pakistan in a test series - it's 1-1 - do you fly taufel in to umpire the deciding rubber?
Umpiring isn't a god given talent like batting, bowling or fielding. Mere mortals can dream of becoming good umpires. I say stick to neutral, but just give them all it takes to be the best - not just 1 super-umpire, but a team of super-umpires.
That's one argument. The more pertinent argument here is that on Saturday we had Steve Bucknor (veteran of 5 world cups), and Aleem Dar (widely seen as the 2nd best umpire on the circuit). Simon Taufel is seen as the best (remember even he has made errors of judgement on umpiring decisions in this WC). Thus do we deem that he is chosen to umpire every match? or is it just every important match? in which case, take a scenario where India are playing Pakistan in a test series - it's 1-1 - do you fly taufel in to umpire the deciding rubber?
Umpiring isn't a god given talent like batting, bowling or fielding. Mere mortals can dream of becoming good umpires. I say stick to neutral, but just give them all it takes to be the best - not just 1 super-umpire, but a team of super-umpires.
Tuesday 1 May 2007
Under-rated
Benno
In the last entry I explained why I think Saj Mahmood is over-rated. This time by way of contrast I make a timely case for James Benning's introduction to the England cause. On Sunday he scored 150 odd in a Surrey total approaching a scoring rate of 10 runs per over. He has, in Ali Brown, the best England qualified one-day pinch hitter, to learn from. Sunday wasn't a fluke for him or Surrey. They and he has precedence. Last year he hit 189 out of a Surey total of 337, chasing a target of 339. The next highest score made by a Surrey batter was 22. Pick him and pick him for the next ODI against the Windies. It would be incredulous if he has not been pencilled in for the 20-20 World Cup. The Analyst will back me on this.
In the last entry I explained why I think Saj Mahmood is over-rated. This time by way of contrast I make a timely case for James Benning's introduction to the England cause. On Sunday he scored 150 odd in a Surrey total approaching a scoring rate of 10 runs per over. He has, in Ali Brown, the best England qualified one-day pinch hitter, to learn from. Sunday wasn't a fluke for him or Surrey. They and he has precedence. Last year he hit 189 out of a Surey total of 337, chasing a target of 339. The next highest score made by a Surrey batter was 22. Pick him and pick him for the next ODI against the Windies. It would be incredulous if he has not been pencilled in for the 20-20 World Cup. The Analyst will back me on this.
Friday 27 April 2007
Over-rated
Saj Mahmood
He has pace - a good looking approach to the wicket and bowling action - height - to date he has not upset the authorities or his teammates - YES I agree with the plethora of pundits who like him, rate him on that front - but NO, I am genuinely sad to say, as things stand he does not have an international career ahead of him.
He has looked good in spells - looked really good that spell against Sri Lanka and in the Lords one day final - but you can count those displays on the fingers of one hand.
If he improves, yes, pencil him in again - but what evidence is there that he will improve? He is 25.5yrs old - it's wrong of Both to keep describing him as young / inexperienced. He was first touted for an international career as far back as the 2003 England academy squad. He has had 4 years of top coaching in which to develop consistency of line and length - and he still can not deliver this save for the odd over or two. I suspect Troy Cooley could have helped him come on and it's a pity he didn't break into the England set up prior to 2005/06.
I am sad to say this as I have warmed to the guy - he has the right attitude - but I think it's better to draw a pencil line across his name and let him return to county cricket and perhaps transform into the test-class paceman we would have loved him to be.
He has pace - a good looking approach to the wicket and bowling action - height - to date he has not upset the authorities or his teammates - YES I agree with the plethora of pundits who like him, rate him on that front - but NO, I am genuinely sad to say, as things stand he does not have an international career ahead of him.
He has looked good in spells - looked really good that spell against Sri Lanka and in the Lords one day final - but you can count those displays on the fingers of one hand.
If he improves, yes, pencil him in again - but what evidence is there that he will improve? He is 25.5yrs old - it's wrong of Both to keep describing him as young / inexperienced. He was first touted for an international career as far back as the 2003 England academy squad. He has had 4 years of top coaching in which to develop consistency of line and length - and he still can not deliver this save for the odd over or two. I suspect Troy Cooley could have helped him come on and it's a pity he didn't break into the England set up prior to 2005/06.
I am sad to say this as I have warmed to the guy - he has the right attitude - but I think it's better to draw a pencil line across his name and let him return to county cricket and perhaps transform into the test-class paceman we would have loved him to be.
Wednesday 25 April 2007
Whinging Kiwi
Crowe says Bracewell should resign
Woke up to find another Crowe critique on cricinfo. I don't like him for his controversial and more significantly, unjustified comments. He is another rent-a-rant. The louder you shout, the more the media will pick up on it kind.
His speech last year at the Spirit of Cricket gig annoyed me the most. Particularly how he underhandedly picked out Muralitharan for criticism, (given that notable commentators / bowlers of the ilk of Holding and Angus Fraser have been satisfied that Murali's action is legitimate - how can Crowe imply it is not without being exposed to the same evidence shown to them). At least have the guts to name him. Then he went on to suggest teams like Bangladesh will never improve. It's fair to say they were granted test status ahead of schedule, but to play fortune-teller and say they will never be a force to be reckoned with flies in the face of dedication to set up a cricketing structure and oodles more support for cricket in Bangladesh than New Zealand (has anyone seen the sporadic attendance at a test match in NZ?).
Anyway moving to the present day, he rants at Shane Bond for having a fish curry before a key ODI? what if New Zealand had beaten Australia? that would have meant they could've beaten Sri Lanka yesterday? Let's not forget this is a New Zealand team which had performed creditably in beating every other team bar Australia and Sri Lanka (pre tournament favourites in many people's books). Let's not forget this is a New Zealand side which had already been comfortably beaten by Sri Lanka once already in the competition. Anyway, Martin, you have your headline. Enjoy the limelight.
Anyway I end this piece on a light hearted note: Cricket Max - LOL
Woke up to find another Crowe critique on cricinfo. I don't like him for his controversial and more significantly, unjustified comments. He is another rent-a-rant. The louder you shout, the more the media will pick up on it kind.
His speech last year at the Spirit of Cricket gig annoyed me the most. Particularly how he underhandedly picked out Muralitharan for criticism, (given that notable commentators / bowlers of the ilk of Holding and Angus Fraser have been satisfied that Murali's action is legitimate - how can Crowe imply it is not without being exposed to the same evidence shown to them). At least have the guts to name him. Then he went on to suggest teams like Bangladesh will never improve. It's fair to say they were granted test status ahead of schedule, but to play fortune-teller and say they will never be a force to be reckoned with flies in the face of dedication to set up a cricketing structure and oodles more support for cricket in Bangladesh than New Zealand (has anyone seen the sporadic attendance at a test match in NZ?).
Anyway moving to the present day, he rants at Shane Bond for having a fish curry before a key ODI? what if New Zealand had beaten Australia? that would have meant they could've beaten Sri Lanka yesterday? Let's not forget this is a New Zealand team which had performed creditably in beating every other team bar Australia and Sri Lanka (pre tournament favourites in many people's books). Let's not forget this is a New Zealand side which had already been comfortably beaten by Sri Lanka once already in the competition. Anyway, Martin, you have your headline. Enjoy the limelight.
Anyway I end this piece on a light hearted note: Cricket Max - LOL
Tuesday 24 April 2007
A Tale of Two Captains
Todays semi-final between Sri Lanka and New Zealand, saw the former win and reach the World Cup Final for the 2nd time, whilst unfortunate New Zealand fail at the penultimate hurdle yet again.
Jayawardene had a blinder - he built the text book one day century and not for the first time in this world cup, made some decisive decisions on the field, to turn around his side's fortunes.
Alas for Stephen Fleming, generally touted as the best captain out there in the international game (English supporters would claim Vaughan is the best - and Australians could justifably say that their team's success hides the captaincy influence of Ponting) - today he could not kill off the Sri Lankan innings after fall of the 3rd wicket, and his team conceded 100 odd off the final 10 overs. When it came to bat, he fell for single figures.
Previously in this competition, Jayawardene led the field (no pun intended) in opting to play around with the timing of the 3rd power play (beyond the previous pattern of waiting for the fall of a wicket) - subsequently I noticed Ricky Ponting and others also did the same (re Tait in Aus vs England).
Thus the team which played better on the day, the team with more matchwinners, with more flair, the team captained better on the day won. New Zealand are a very decent one day outfit and creditably lost to another one.
Jayawardene had a blinder - he built the text book one day century and not for the first time in this world cup, made some decisive decisions on the field, to turn around his side's fortunes.
Alas for Stephen Fleming, generally touted as the best captain out there in the international game (English supporters would claim Vaughan is the best - and Australians could justifably say that their team's success hides the captaincy influence of Ponting) - today he could not kill off the Sri Lankan innings after fall of the 3rd wicket, and his team conceded 100 odd off the final 10 overs. When it came to bat, he fell for single figures.
Previously in this competition, Jayawardene led the field (no pun intended) in opting to play around with the timing of the 3rd power play (beyond the previous pattern of waiting for the fall of a wicket) - subsequently I noticed Ricky Ponting and others also did the same (re Tait in Aus vs England).
Thus the team which played better on the day, the team with more matchwinners, with more flair, the team captained better on the day won. New Zealand are a very decent one day outfit and creditably lost to another one.
Monday 23 April 2007
All is not well in the Windies Camp
Yesterday at a press conference he gave a less than ringing endorsement of Ramnaresh Sarwan - saying that he seemed to be the most obvious candidate to take up the West Indies captaincy as he was the vice-captain, but it doesn't necessarily have to be the case that vice-captain becomes captain. I think Sarwan's reported drinking and partying activities have put a scar on his leadership credentials. Yet he remains the only obvious candidate. Darren Ganga is yet to cement his place in the test side and a split captaincy is far from ideal in a scenario where Sarwan is the more experienced (internationally speaking) player of the two.
Putting this aside I don't think Bennett King has done much to improve the West Indies over his period in charge. Sure they are a decent one-day side (pre-world cup), but that seems to be more due to the talent on board rather than a team gelling to be greater than the sum of the parts a la New Zealand / Sri Lanka.
I'm not sure where I stand on this. I grew to love Lara the batsmen - outside of the two ginormous innings he played against England (whom I was supporting at the time). I don't think as an on field captain he was that bad - better than chanderpaul. It was his off-field disputes with the Board which seemed to filter onto the pitch ie. some really strange selections in the World Cup just gone (gone as far as the Windies team are concerned). They say Sarwan is a good on-field captain - assuming he gets the nod, we can see if ths is true. However, statement of the obvious - they have noone to replace him - not even a Hooper/Sarwan/Chanderpaul category player.
Sunday 22 April 2007
Cricinfo
I am a huge fan of cricinfo. I love the score updates - as near to the tv/radio experience as one can get. Ideal for when one is at work. The feature writers on the whole know a lot more about cricket than Newspaper columnists.
What it is missing - well I've always thought :D - is my own comments and views. I'm joking - it's near as well the complete cricket site. However, I would love to be one of the contributors/writers on there. Not having that option, I hope this blog is the next best thing - and I really hope one or two people read it. As it stands I'm not telling any of my friends about this blog / this idea - as they will laugh.
Anyway if anyone strays upon this site by accident - please leave some motivational comment.
Cheers
Post 1 finished - wasn't too hard.
What it is missing - well I've always thought :D - is my own comments and views. I'm joking - it's near as well the complete cricket site. However, I would love to be one of the contributors/writers on there. Not having that option, I hope this blog is the next best thing - and I really hope one or two people read it. As it stands I'm not telling any of my friends about this blog / this idea - as they will laugh.
Anyway if anyone strays upon this site by accident - please leave some motivational comment.
Cheers
Post 1 finished - wasn't too hard.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
