The Cricket Society III
Discuss sports, teams, players, matches and events. Anything and everything sporting.
| Announcements | Posted on | |
|---|---|---|
-
- Reputation:
- Respected Member
- Posts: 211
Re: The Cricket Society IIIHaha South Africa survive? England will need to survive! I can see Steyn and co skittling England out on the first day depending on conditions and fitness. England will finally be facing a decent pace attack for the best part of 3 years since South Africa last toured. I am confident if Steyn, Morkel and Philander fire, South Africa will will the series.(Original post by Straight up G)
The first test is crucial. If South Africa can survive, and not lose, then they have a decent chance to win the series. -
- Reputation:
- TSR Demigod
Re: The Cricket Society IIIThey faced a magnificent Pakistani pace attack in 2010, who, by all accounts, got the better of the England team. South Africa haven't done well in their tour games, they are mentally down after the loss of Boucher, and this applies especially to Kallis, the rock of their team, and he has a dismal record in England anyway.(Original post by robotpenguin)
Haha South Africa survive? England will need to survive! I can see Steyn and co skittling England out on the first day depending on conditions and fitness. England will finally be facing a decent pace attack for the best part of 3 years since South Africa last toured. I am confident if Steyn, Morkel and Philander fire, South Africa will will the series. -
- Reputation:
- Respected Member
- Posts: 211
Re: The Cricket Society IIIThat tour isn't the best to refer to due to the related scandals. Kallis is certainly an important player, but Smith, Amla, De Villiers, Duminy and Rudolph are all very good batsmen. Kallis underperfomed in the 2008 tour, but SA still won the series. Smith has an average of 72 and will certainly be leading the charge
-
- Reputation:
- TSR Idol
- Location: Place
Re: The Cricket Society IIIit saddens me that people think England won that series because they bought out the series just because of a few no balls(Original post by robotpenguin)
That tour isn't the best to refer to due to the related scandals. Kallis is certainly an important player, but Smith, Amla, De Villiers, Duminy and Rudolph are all very good batsmen. Kallis underperfomed in the 2008 tour, but SA still won the series. Smith has an average of 72 and will certainly be leading the charge -
- Reputation:
- TSR Demigod
- Location: Yorkshire
- Posts: 6,255
Re: The Cricket Society IIISo KP has done an Afridi and reversed his limited overs retirement....
Not sure what to think tbh. He's a good player, but we seem to be moving on well enough without him. -
- Reputation:
- TSR Idol
- Location: Place
Re: The Cricket Society IIIValuable for big stage of T20 WC(Original post by Captain Crash)
So KP has done an Afridi and reversed his limited overs retirement....
Not sure what to think tbh. He's a good player, but we seem to be moving on well enough without him.
Useful if his Test form ever dips. -
- Reputation:
- Banned
- Posts: 1,016
Re: The Cricket Society IIIAha, India are now 5th in the ICC Test Rankings, behind England, Aus, SA and Pak.
Actually laughable really.
Just waiting for the day NZ and WI manage to overtake us too
Overall in the world, India are 5th (Test), 4th (ODI) and 7th (T20).
to England 1st in Tests and T20, 3rd in ODIs.
-
- Reputation:
- Exalted Member
- Posts: 332
Re: The Cricket Society IIIBy this time next year India will be 1st in ODI and 2nd in Tests. You heard it here first.(Original post by ♥ ♥ ♥)
Aha, India are now 5th in the ICC Test Rankings, behind England, Aus, SA and Pak. Actually laughable really.
Just waiting for the day NZ and WI manage to overtake us too
Overall in the world, India are 5th (Test), 4th (ODI) and 7th (T20).
to England 1st in Tests and T20, 3rd in ODIs.
-
- Reputation:
- TSR Demigod
- Location: Yorkshire
- Posts: 6,255
Re: The Cricket Society IIISure he can slot into the Twenty20 side, but where does Pietersen fit into the ODI side? Who would you drop out of Bopara, Bell or Trott? The ODI team is on a roll and bringing Pietersen back would harm that. That said, perhaps this is ok with Pietersen as he originally retired for ODI reasons in any case. -
- Reputation:
- TSR Demigod
- Posts: 5,115
Re: The Cricket Society IIITypical KP IMO - all the attention has to be on him. Maybe the ECB should sit down with Queen Kevin and decide what's best for his schedule and forget the team. Honestly, KP should stick to his decision now. If he comes back, no doubt he'll be gone soon enough again.
-
- Reputation:
- Banned
- Posts: 1,016
Re: The Cricket Society IIII highly doubt, even with India's long stretch of home games. Just don't think they've got it.(Original post by like a boss)
By this time next year India will be 1st in ODI and 2nd in Tests. You heard it here first.
Maybe in ODIs. Not in Tests. Not yet.
Really intrigued to see how Ind vs Eng goes this winter. If India are dominant and win comprehensively, then great, think they'll get a huge boost from that. Either way, the point is, that rather than the rankings, India need to focus on prioritising Test cricket, and the BCCI need to take it more seriously. -
- Reputation:
- TSR Demigod
Re: The Cricket Society IIIInteresting, in quite a few ways. I wonder how much money the PCB will be able to extract from the BCCI, and what the BCCI's motives are for giving any money away at all? They're probably under a bit of fire for losing endless away series and making up for it by playing Sri Lanka again and again.India and Pakistan have agreed to a three-match ODI series, to be held in India in December. The series, whose confirmation is subject to the Indian government's approval, is likely to be held over the Christmas period, between the Test and one-day legs of England's tour of India. It will be the first bilateral series between the two sides since Pakistan's tour of India in end-2007.
Bilateral cricketing ties were snapped following the Mumbai terror attacks in November 2008, though the two countries have played each other in the World Cup, Champions Trophy and Asia Cup.
The decision comes after hectic and high-level consultations between officials of the two boards and, latterly, of the two governments. BCCI president N Srinivasan and PCB chief Zaka Ashraf have held several discussions this year regarding resumption of ties, with Pakistan hoping to fit in a series at the end of the year, during the Christmas break in England's tour of India. After the last of those meetings, on the sidelines of the ICC's annual conference in June, Ashraf had said Pakistan were ready for progress on the series but Srinivasan said he would only be able to commit after checking with Indian authorities.
It is Pakistan's turn to host a bilateral series between the two. But there has been no international cricket in the country between Full Members since the March 2009 attack on the Sri Lanka team bus and it is understood that India are not keen to play at a neutral venue, as has been the case with all Pakistan's 'home' series since the attack. Subsequently, Ashraf said India had the prerogative to decide on the dates and host the series, but the PCB would want the BCCI to share revenue because the PCB has apparently not yet recovered from the financial loss suffered when India pulled out of their planned tour in 2009.
The news is another step forward in both boards' efforts to improve cricketing relations after recently, on the BCCI's recommendation, the Champions League T20 governing council had approved the inclusion of the Sialkot Stallions in this year's tournament to be held in October. Sialkot will be the first domestic team from Pakistan to take part in the event. "The CLT20 is owned by the BCCI, Cricket Australia, and Cricket South Africa, so we will recommend to the governing council that the BCCI has no objection and is prepared to invite a Pakistan team," Srinivasan said at the time.
I also wonder where Ashraf has got the cojones to ask the BCCI for money from, he's probably under orders.
Why do India not want to play at a neutral venue? They've probably just said that so that Pakistan have no option but to ask India to host it, and thereby the BCCI gain some more money. Though there might be another reason I guess.
If this three match series goes off without a hitch, I can see India touring Pakistan in the medium term, or at least playing us in the desert in the short term.
Edit: Don't hold your breath though, it's more likely than not, at this point in time, that this series doesn't happen. Time for a bit of PPLast edited by Straight up G; 16-07-2012 at 11:25. -
- Reputation:
- Banned
- Posts: 1,016
Re: The Cricket Society IIII don't think India vs Pak will happen. Fans are getting all excited and there will be loads of hype to no avail.
I doubt that the Indian government will allow it to go through. Judging by the mixed responses from the media and many ex Indian cricketers, just don't see it being finalised.
Why play in India though? Surely they could play in the UAE or something? That way, everyone's happy. Kind of. -
- Reputation:
- TSR Demigod
- Posts: 5,115
Re: The Cricket Society IIIPositive news but knowing Indo-Pak relations, something else will happen and the tour will be called off and I'm surprised at how quickly its happened. I was under the impression that talks were fairly slow so maybe the diplomatic avenues - trade measures etc - have helped build some sort of trust.
In a way, it should be an anticipated series where as you look at the England/Australia rivalry which has just had 5 ODI's and an Ashes next summer, Pak-Ind should be a good build up. -
- Reputation:
- Banned
- Location: the UK
- Posts: 17,796
- Warning points: 1000
Re: The Cricket Society IIISri Lanka were competitive with most teams when they had Murali, but have struggled since he retired. He would win them 1 game a series virtually single handedly.
Pakistan still have the talent to spring a surprise in the sub-continent. I love watching their bowling attack. Batting isn't consistent enough away from home to support the bowling.
South Africa have been consistently there or thereabouts since their reintroduction in the 90s. Consistently top 3 team.
West Indies have now plateau-ed following a slow decline from their peak in the 1980s.
New Zealand occasionally promise to be competitive, but it doesn't normally last long. About the same as the Windies and Sri Lanka now.
Australia have dropped off since the early 2000s when they were one of the best teams ever. They'll be up in the top 2 again.
India were terrible for years, peaked in around 2002 when they managed a draw in England against a reasonably ok England team, and are now not particularly special again. I can't see them competing away from home for several years.
England were terrible for much of the 90s with the occasional bright spot (eg 1998), pretty decent in the 2000s with the occasional disappointment, and are looking like the team to beat in the 2010s.
Funny how things go around. I really think the strength of the domestic setup is the key factor in international performances. India don't have much of a serious domestic league, which is why they have been struggling so badly recently. -
- Reputation:
- Respected Member
- Posts: 211
Re: The Cricket Society IIIYou missed a period of about ten years in which India won several important test series, became the number 1 test team and won the world cup. Many team and individual records were broken, and they still have many match winning players. In Sri Lankan conditions with IPL experience, they will definitely be a force and up there at the end of the tournament(Original post by py0alb)
Sri Lanka were competitive with most teams when they had Murali, but have struggled since he retired. He would win them 1 game a series virtually single handedly.
Pakistan still have the talent to spring a surprise in the sub-continent. I love watching their bowling attack. Batting isn't consistent enough away from home to support the bowling.
South Africa have been consistently there or thereabouts since their reintroduction in the 90s. Consistently top 3 team.
West Indies have now plateau-ed following a slow decline from their peak in the 1980s.
New Zealand occasionally promise to be competitive, but it doesn't normally last long. About the same as the Windies and Sri Lanka now.
Australia have dropped off since the early 2000s when they were one of the best teams ever. They'll be up in the top 2 again.
India were terrible for years, peaked in around 2002 when they managed a draw in England against a reasonably ok England team, and are now not particularly special again. I can't see them competing away from home for several years.
England were terrible for much of the 90s with the occasional bright spot (eg 1998), pretty decent in the 2000s with the occasional disappointment, and are looking like the team to beat in the 2010s.
Funny how things go around. I really think the strength of the domestic setup is the key factor in international performances. India don't have much of a serious domestic league, which is why they have been struggling so badly recently.
