England v West Indies, Super Eights, Barbados

By Will last year, mid-April Leave a comment on this post

It’s a day of last hurrahs. England’s final match; West Indies last game; Duncan Fletcher’s and Brian Lara’s last in international cricket and, apart from those departing, it’s an utterly meaningless encounter. Due to Fletcher’s retirement, England are apparently now up for the match (which is nice). All we want is a Lara hundred though, don’t we?

Leave your wibblings below and keep an eye on the scorecard.

Tags: 2007-world-cup, brian-lara, duncan-fletcher, england, live-coverage, west-indies |

Comments to “England v West Indies, Super Eights, Barbados” Nick wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 11.38 am

A decent batting performance by England would be nice.

pamela wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 12.23 pm

I’m hoping for a 224-0 after 30 overs, a brilliant start by openers Bell and Vaughan with a century apiece (chalk and chalk - take THAT, Mark Nicholas!) . It’ll be 22-4 after 10 overs, rather, and Brian Lara will exit international cricket with the biggest ODI win ever!

Ceci wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 12.54 pm

I would like to watch just one England match from on the sofa rather than from behind it …usually with my fingers in my ears and shouting “La La La”

James wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 1.54 pm

As a neutral Australian, I don’t know what to hope for here. Imagine what it’ll be like if a flogging is the last thing the poor old locals take away from an event that’s given their economies such a coronary. That’ll give them a warm inner glow when they wake up at 4am wondering how to pay for it all. But an English loss will be bad too. There is something pretty sickening about the way the English press get to work on their sides when they are down; not so much knitting at the foot of the guillotine as enthusiastically using the knitting needles to help the execution along. The poor buggers in the English team have had a miserable last few months. The whole Freddy debacle alone feels career-maiming.

On balance, though, I’ve got to go for the Windies, because without Lara England are going to chew them to bits in a few weeks anyway in the Tests. So Lara to get a 150, Gayle to get a fifty (so he has some reason to live), a target in the 300s, and then everyone in the England team except Figjam getting a score of some kind in a dynamic but narrow loss. Oh, and Vaughan to get a hundred, while I’m playing Santa Claus.

marcus wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 3.14 pm

Welcome back, Chris Gayle. It’s just a pity you didn’t play like this in the early stages of the tournament, where it might have done the Windies-and my fantasy team-some good. I can’t think of anyone else who can play those shots and make them seem natural.

vv wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 5.01 pm

somebody shoot Marlon Samuels!!….he just got Lara run-out. Obviously thats not how Lara intended to finish his career, nevertheless, one of the greatest players in the history of cricket (i’d say better than sachin!)…call it a day!!

Matt wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 5.08 pm

James

What on earth is a neutral Australian - unless you mean eunuch ? I’d have thought you’d have been instantly stripped of your citizenship.

We had Stuart Broad’s first World Cup over, so I have grabbed and archived the TMS commentary here in celebration/memoriam:

http://www.mattwardman.com/blog/2007/04/21/stuart-broads-first-world-cup-over/

Matt

Michael wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 5.15 pm

It sucks but its a fitting way to end Lara’s career. His frustrating team mates mess it all up - again.

Stephen Jones wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 5.21 pm

A neutral Australian where England are concerned? I’ve always got the impression that its anybody but England for you Aussies.

Michael wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 5.24 pm

I think we’re witnessing that Liam Plunkett was NOT an answer all along… This is terrible bowling.

Caroline wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 5.51 pm

Far out Vaughany - 1-20 off 7!! Just need that century now, to get Man of the Match . . .

Caroline wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 6.08 pm

Go Vaughany - bowl ‘em out now!

Scott wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 7.22 pm

No, most Australians don’t feel the same level of disdain for England that we used to. We REALLY hate losing to England, but I personally like to see England do well, at least when Australia aren’t involved.

I hate, loathe and detest South Africans. For me, it’s anyone but South Africa.

David wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 7.35 pm

Hello, newbie here. Just curious- why is that Scott? The Saffer distaste seems pretty common amoung Aussies. From my English eyes they approach the game in a similar way to Aus.

Is it just their abrasive attitude, or that they try to play like Oz but don’t have the talent to back it up?

Kathy wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 8.31 pm

Well, this is strange. I get out of bed and switch on the TV and discover, for the first time in a long time, I don’t immediately need to switch it right off again and fall into a slough of despond. Vaughan gets three wickets and a half-century (at least). A few more runs and you could call him an all-rounder! Sorry, tired joke, I know.

Are you staying up for this, Caroline?

Caroline wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 8.40 pm

You betcha, buddy!!! This may never happen again. I have kick-off in less than ten hours, and I’ll be rooted / buggered / insert whichever description is not obscene, but I’m not missing a potential century from the boy!

Caroline wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 8.45 pm

Oh boo hoo . . . Well at least I can go to bed now (3.45am)!

Michael wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 8.46 pm

Vaughn played really well, especially up to the 50, but just got himself out to a brilliant piece of fielding. What I don’t get is he raised his bat to the crowd as he walked off.

WRONG ATTITUDE.

He should be walking off with his head down. The hundred was only 21 runs away this time…

Kathy wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 8.51 pm

Oh, come on Michael, don’t be a miserable git. He played bloody well. Sometimes there can be too much of an obsession with those sort of figures. It’s the first time he’s reached a HALF-century in an international match since 2005. If the England media had had their way he would have been sacked two days ago. I think he’s entitled to feel reasonably pleased.

Wraye wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 8.52 pm

Boo hoo I really wanted Vaughen to do some damage. At least some minimal pride for England. Oh dear. Bites nails …

Some good news though, gals and guys, my VccB team won by 77 runs in Bonn today

Kathy wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 8.57 pm

what does VccB mean, Wraye?

Wraye wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 9.11 pm

Hi Kathy! You’re catching me up on the blogging score, I note VccB means Veterans Cricket Club Bonn. We played against Deutsche Welle - a Radio and TV corporation today. We are a happy groups of Poms, Sri Lankans, Pakistanis, Saffers, Canadians, a Kiwi, an Aussie and of course, the Huns, age range 17 to 66. Brilliant sunshine. Atif top scored for the Wellies with 63 off 68 balls, Ruwan for VccB took 7.2-1-18-5. Great fun.

Now, we have all heard that Fred and KP are “supposed” to be a great batting unit, are they going to pull it off today? … hope I haven’t jinxed things now

Sean wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 9.18 pm

Jinx

Sean wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 9.19 pm

OK Wraye, you’re selecting the side for the first test. Given Fred’s form with the bat, do you bat him at six in the next test match?

Ceci wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 9.19 pm

Freddie! For goodness sake! Managed nearly a whole match watching and now I’m going to have to turn down the sound and just sneak peaks sideways whilst eating industrial amounts of comfort chocolate…

Sean wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 9.20 pm

Michael, I agree with you re the bat raising thing. Half the problem with England is that they think nearly is good enough.

Sean wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 9.23 pm

However - this match is well poised providing England don’t lose any more quick wickets.

Sean wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 9.24 pm

Jinx - oh balls

Wraye wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 9.31 pm

oops … oh sh1t, sorry folks. Yes, Sean, I’d put F lower in the order to take the pressure off and back up the middle to tail. He performed well way back then but the pressure is showing. In my opinion, Fred and Strauss have been treated shabbily by the ECB and here are the results. Their performances have gone right down. Marcus had a full nervous breakdown and now the pressure is off, he is doing great in Somerset.

As I write, we are 6 down. What more can we say?

Sean wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 10.04 pm

Glad you said that, Wraye.

I’d be going for something like

Strauss
Vaughan
Cook
Pietersen
Collingwood
Bell
Flintoff
Read (or maybe the time is right for Davies)
Harmison
Hoggard
Panesar (or maybe Broad)

But d’you know what, I might even rest Fred altogether which would give me a huge dilemma about which keeper.

Michael wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 10.04 pm

Kathy, he played really well. 50 off 33 balls wasn’t it? I reckon Sean nailed it, nearly being good enough? I remember watching Ponting cursing himself off the GABBA out for 196 in the 1st Test. It was a case of not good enough.

I don’t mind being called a miserable git, though the misery I feel is all yours.

So check this out. I am a KP critic, I believe he’s the the most selfish player going around. When Pietersen scores at least 50 England has won 5 and lost 12. He has never scored a hundred in a winning cause.

Now, compare that with Ricky Ponting. When he scores 50 we have won 74 times. Lost 11. Australia an unfair comparison? India is battling with England for 6th and 7th on the ODI table so I’ll pick a couple like batsmen in India.

MS Dhoni, similar set of stats and attacking play; when he scores 50 or more India have won 10 and lost 4.

V Sehwag, scores 50 or more India won 24 and lost 8.

HUGE differences here. Kevin Pietersen is nothing more than a selfish git who does not win games.

Information from the excellent Stats Guru.

Wraye wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 10.30 pm

Hang on, Michael, I have no quarrel with what you wrote except for one little thing …

selfish? - Kallis! He beats KP hands-down every time. Lara too, now I think of it. Boycott, even Bradmann.

Kathy wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 10.33 pm

I beg to differ, Michael. You can spout whatever stats you like â€” it may just be that KP did not get the support from his teammates that he needed or deserved.

And I remember Martin Crowe having a huge tantrum at getting out on 299 and it did not impress me AT ALL. So maybe you and I have different standards of what character is about.

There’s no way you’ll be feeling my misery, or anything else, mate!

I still maintain Vaughan’s put in damn near a man-of-the-match performance with bat and ball under great personal pressure. You can sneer as much as you like.

Wraye wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 10.34 pm

right, so we are 8 down now and it is going to be close. Nixon might, but Broad … err

Best thing is to keep my fat mouth shut here, methinks.

Wraye wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 10.36 pm

way to go, Kathy!

Sean wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 10.40 pm

Actually I think that Pietersen has a huge negative effect on the England one day side. But I don’t actually think it is his selfishness. I think his team mates are too in awe of him, I also think they rely on him too much and, whisper it, I think there is an argument that England are a better team without him. Remember where Pietersen was when England won the CB trophy. Would I leave him out….. absolutely not. But it might be one hell of a challenge for Moores.

I see he made another hundred today, if Englasnd win this game it will be the first time they have when won when he has made a ton.

Sean wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 10.43 pm

Kathy, Vaughan MoM in my book too.

Sean wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 10.45 pm

Wraye - good call. Am keeping schtum in Whitstable also.

Jess wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 10.45 pm

Michael, I am a bona-fide mean girl. I’m a sarcastic, abrasive smart-aleck.

But that was bitchy even by my standards

Michael wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 10.46 pm

These stats don’t lie Kathy.

Though Nixon is going to give KP his first hundred-win. Wishing this guy wasn’t 36… what a revelation he has been. A little punch to show the older blokes can have what it takes.

Wraye, I have to say Bradman hit me from right field. How so?

And oh yeah it was bitchy. KP brings out my full arsenal. No coincidence that arse is in the word.

Wraye wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 10.47 pm

Buggrit. Millenium Hand and Shrimp (for the Terry Pratchett fans out there)

My two darling Leicestershire boys are out there and I am chewing my nails over a game that actually means bugger all. Is this sad or what?

Wraye wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 10.51 pm

Oh f*** .. er golly, Nixon goes

whee - a leg bye! This is close as close can be. Great stuff.

Sean wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 10.53 pm

Oh Lordy Mama!!!

Michael wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 10.54 pm

It’s not sad. This game is important for many reasons.

Wraye wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 10.55 pm

England have won by 1 wicket with 1 ball to spare!

Yo! Well done, Broad, yaaaaaaa!

Jess wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 10.57 pm

Why oh why did England wait until the last, meaningless game to put in a decent performance?

Why?

Michael wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 10.57 pm

Pity for Lara here. So be it. Amazing game for the final game before the semi’s. Full crowd. Lots of emotion. Really good stuff.

Wraye wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 11.05 pm

Phew! well played - a good one to say bye-bye to Fletcher.

Michael, if you check your history, you will find that Bradman had the best stats etc etc but on a personal level, he was not much liked. Like Boycott in England. Honoured and respected by all for ever, but by their own fellow players, not on their Christmas-card lists.

Sean wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 11.13 pm

Jess - was that a rhetorical question?

Kathy wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 11.32 pm

Fantastic game. That’s what one-day cricket is all about. I’ll take my battling struggling flawed England over the world-bashing Australia any day.

Best matches of the tournament:
Eng vs Sri Lanka
Eng vs Windies

Nuff said.

And Sean, I completely agree with your analysis of Pietersen. For reasons beyond his control but related to his brilliance, he distorts the England team. They are in awe of him and rely too much on him. I hate hate the way people keep saying that a match will depend on him and Flintoff doing the biz. Well, Flintoff won’t be doing it anyway these days. But the message that should go out is that EVERYONE has to do their bit. That’s how they win. That’s why big scores from Pietersen alone aren’t going to be matchwinners. They win when everyone contributes. Moores needs to tell them that. And that will take the pressure off Pietersen and he might play even better.

Wraye wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 11.35 pm

I’m sad for Lara too. I watched his 400 over the Internet. Did a lot of ironing during his innings! In fact, I even have his wagon-wheel in a gold frame on my wall, bought from Dr. Frindall. But it was a selfish innings and only went to draw the game.

Still, Lara was a brilliant player. I have my tickets for the WIndies in the UK and I will miss him. God bless.

Sean wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 11.42 pm

Kathy, excellent point about Pietersen. They sort of echoed this point on the radio also. Because Vaughan and Bopara had batted well, the pressure was off him.

Jess wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 11.45 pm

*snort*

Oh, most definitely rhetorical.

Kathy wrote:
April 21st, 2007 at 11.49 pm

The interesting thing now is: what on earth is England going to do with Nixon? Would they use him in tests or is he strictly a one-day specialist? One nice thing about the year so far is that Nixon has silenced the wicketkeeper wars, for the very short term anyway.

But does he play the longer game well?

Kathy wrote:
April 22nd, 2007 at 12.03 am

Pardon me for spamming this post (and no, I’m not trying to overtake you, Wraye â€” a lot of the time I have nothing to say! Or nothing printable anyway) but I’m all abuzz after a terrible week for England.

New fresh coach, Hoggy and Harmy firing it in on the domestic scene, Tres smacking it around… things could be looking up for England.

simply wondered wrote:
April 22nd, 2007 at 12.04 am

a fantastic game between two supremely average sides.

my twopennorth on the figjam debate: when michael vaughan was at his peak, the saffers gave him a nickname which was afrikaans for guess which part of the female anatomy - translation: ‘you play as hard and unpleasant as us and we fucking hate it because you’ve got the talent to back it up’; the aussies have recently dignified kp with a nickname that translates: ‘you’re as arrogant as us and we fucking hate it, because you’ve got the talent to back it up’. fantastic! give me more. (and for cricket nicknames figjam is rather a bright one!)

Sean wrote:
April 22nd, 2007 at 12.04 am

Kathy - honest answer? I dunno.

I’ve had an eye on Davies of Worcester for a long time and I think that he is the long term answer. I’m not convinced he is ready for test cricket yet though.

But I also think that Read has been most shabbily treated - more than once. However, if Fred drops down to 7 and plays as one of four bowlers (something possible given his form with the bat and Fletcher’s departure) then Read can be sustained as a test keeper; in which case I’d be happy to see Nixon carry on in the shorter form of the game.

Steve wrote:
April 22nd, 2007 at 12.32 am

simplewondered,

about arrogant Saffers and Aussies, it takes one to know one! Psychologist s say that you deride and hate most in others that which you can’t recognise as your own biggest flaw!

you should join Kathy’s kick-Aussie-heads club and have therapy together.

Michael wrote:
April 22nd, 2007 at 12.55 am

My head hurts, but 2005 aside, my foot is bigger than hers.

Kathy wrote:
April 22nd, 2007 at 1.23 am

I have no desire to kick your head, Michael, Aussie or no. I just take issue with some of your interpretations of the game and its players.

And Steve, I’ve been in therapy for ages, but the shrink still can’t convince me to give up on England! So, I’m incurable.

13th Man wrote:
April 22nd, 2007 at 2.08 am

You’ve a loser mentality Kathy. You should never be happy getting out - and against the Windies, Vaughan should be ashamed of himself, getting out as he did. That’s why the Poms are so good at losing - it’s too acceptable.

Emma wrote:
April 22nd, 2007 at 2.36 am

Nice to see a win for a change. Still bemused that Bell was dropped - haven’t quite worked out the logic other than ‘play more bowlers’. Don’t get me wrong, I think Bopara is a good player for the future, but his strike rate was hardly one to write home about.

Kathy wrote:
April 22nd, 2007 at 3.03 am

I’m not sure you can read, 13th man. I never said I or anyone else was “happy getting out”.

13th Man wrote:
April 22nd, 2007 at 6.26 am

Well Kathy, as you claim to be a journo I’m not entirely sure that you can write. You may not be happy, but you’re far too willing to accept it. Teflon Vaughan has never scored a ton in one-dayers, yet you seem to think that yesterday was a good performance. I guess he almost made it… Maybe if the ECB carpeted him for his procession of piss-poor performances, and demanded he lead by example, the Poms’d do a little better in all forms of the game. The Brearley defence has worn far too thin - it’s long past its use by date. When Vaughan manages to play well against a decent side when they are at the top of their game - us, SL, SA or NZ - and does so consistently, only then should his efforts be considered up to par. Frankly, he should have followed Fletcher’s lead and given it all away - but as an Australian, I like that he’s still around, because while the Poms continue to refuse to clean house we don’t have to fear them. England just managed to beat a Windian rabble. It was pathetic. I suppose any wins in the upcoming series against them will also be a sign that the Poms are turning the corner? Considering they are in even more distress than the Poms, it should be an absolutely stultifying series - a real Battle of the Titans.
I’m assuming you have your Pom hat on today, after all, we shellacked the Kiwis the other day - but you’ll change sides again when next they beat us, which they may well do.

Wraye wrote:
April 22nd, 2007 at 8.47 am

Oohh, emotions are high. It’s only a game, folks!

To answer a few earlier posts, I don’t think Nixon has solved the WKT issue at all, only opened it. He is no spring-chicken, he is a good keeper but not an automatic selection and I, for one, would be just as happy to have him in the England side as well as with Leicestershire but he can’t last. We have to find another keeper. And Broad should have been given more overs than Plonkit but that is another issue. My captain didn’t bowl Ruwan yesterday til the death, then he took 7.2-1-18-5.

I have faith in God though I have no faith in the Church. So, I have faith in cricket though no faith in either the ECB or ICC and considering that I am in cricket administration myself, will probably be pilloried by someone for that statement. Point is, I have faith and am going home to the UK for the Series because I want to see these changes and want to see if they work - on both sides. A win is a win and fair dues to Vaughan for doing his bit on the day. As for tomorrow, let’s see.

Caroline wrote:
April 22nd, 2007 at 2.01 pm

Gee, 13th Man, will you come the to “Kick Aussie Heads” therapy group as a special guest? My shooting skills could do with some honing.

Kathy, I didn’t know you were a journo! Or are they just surmising wildly? Good comments, and you pick whichever bloody hat you like, as long as it’s not got corks ’round it.

Steve, whilst your theory on projection is quite accurate, it’s comments like 13th Man’s last, that perpetuate the Aussie arrogance issue, and give the decent folk a bad rep.

And I have just one thing to say to you Wraye - buggrit, buggrit, buggrit - I can’t be having with all of this! (hooray, another Discworld fan!)

marcus wrote:
April 22nd, 2007 at 3.10 pm

Caroline, I’m an Australian and I’ve never seen anyone wearing a cork hat. Anywhere. Ever. It’s just one of those silly national stereotypes, like microwaved beer for the British.

Other than that, I agree with everythng you and Kathy said. 13th Man, if Vaughan made 80 at better than a run a ball and England wound up winning, then that’s really a good innings. There are plenty of good batsmen in the world who don’t devote themselves to their personal stats. I always enjoyed watching Mark Waugh start throwing his bat once 50 had been reached far more than I like watching Steve Waugh or Ricky Ponting graft or bully their way to a 150+score. If I could have seen David Gower, Viv Richards and Keith Miller in their primes, I’m sure I’d have felt exactly the same. At the end of the day, it’s only a game!

Wraye wrote:
April 22nd, 2007 at 7.33 pm

You’re joking, surely? No cork hats? Not even one? You have upset and wounded me deeply, Marcus. All my ideas about Oz blown out of the water. So now I’ll hurt you - I have seen Gower and my Dad saw Miller.

13th Man wrote:
April 23rd, 2007 at 3.23 am

And yet you choose to live in my country Caroline. I’d be happy to drive you to the airport if you promise to piss off - if you don’t like us, or our country, just leave. If you love England so much, why don’t you just go back there? Yet another whinging Pom that won’t live there. Your comments and opinions are meaningless - you enjoy all of the privileges and amenities of living here, yet constantly deride us - you are as pathetic as your other half, Kathy the pseudo-Pom.

13th Man wrote:
April 23rd, 2007 at 4.05 am

Marcus: consider Vaughan’s innings in context. He has done nothing in ODI over the course of his entire career, yet one decent innings against woeful opposition in a meaningless game is cause for jubilation? What absolute nonsense. If he can only perform under those circumstances, the fact is that he doesn’t desrve the opportunty to perform - he needs to make way for someone who can perform under all conditions.
I find your - and Wraye’s - observations that it is only a game amusing. On this blog the ‘game’ is a vehicle for constant anti-Australian racism of the most overt nature, but apparently that is acceptable. A response to this, however, engenders the refrain ‘it’s only a game’.

marcus wrote:
April 23rd, 2007 at 6.43 am

Actually, 13th Man, I get really annoyed whenever British journalists try to paint Australia as a bad country, because of our so-called “racist” crowds, etc. I think Monty Panesar’s reception last year blew all of that right out of the water. But most of it on this blog seems to be more like ribbing than actual racism- like the phrase “whinging Pom” for example.

And maybe Michael Vaughan should be dropped. At the very least he shouldn’t open. But an 80 will always be a good score no matter what the circumstances. If he can only score runs when the pressure’s off, then by all means drop him. But a little disappointment is all he should show- I think very poorly of those players who can’t accept not making a double-hundred. Even Bradman could take an 80 in his stride.

13th Man wrote:
April 23rd, 2007 at 6.55 am

Consider the outcome had he managed to score that 80 in a game that counted. Hard to imagine, I know - because he’s never done it! He should be ashamed of himself - the national captain who can’t deliver when it matters.
Low level racism is absolutely pervasive here - clearly you weren’t around in 2005.

Caroline wrote:
April 23rd, 2007 at 1.42 pm

Hey - I wasted a whole film and a half of Dad’s on David Gower at the WACA in 86/87. Didn’t realise I had wasted so much, but when the film was processed (way back in the pre-digital days!) there was the evidence: totally obsessed!

13th man, I have sufficient admiration for many Australian ways, amenities and personal qualities, to live here to my own satisfaction, and in that regard my opinions matter to me. If you don’t like the ‘blatant anti-Australian racist abuse’ (that’s in inverted commas so you can tell I am being sarcastic . . .) on this blog, perhaps you should take your own advice and leave. I would quite happily drive you to the metaphorical airport.

Personally I am quite proud of Vaughan. He has had the year from hell being injured and under the cloud of ever resuming any playing career. To get back within a few months to international level is a huge achievement. So he wouldn’t get into the Australian team. So who would from England, or many other top test nations, for that matter? Whoop-de-doo. The point is, there is no-one better to take his place at the mo, and he is likely to keep improving as he gets used to playing again, so let’s just get on with it. Personally I think the human side of players, faults and all, is more interesting than statistics. Stats do not maketh the man, as those fans of Mark Waugh and David Gower have commented already. Who was it who said, “lies, damn lies and statistics”?.

liz wrote:
April 23rd, 2007 at 5.12 pm

i definately think Nixon should at least be given a shot at the test matches this summer…. age is no problem for me as long as someone performs and personally i think Nixon performed better than the youngsters in the team recently. It would also give moores the time to get a young replacement in the sidelines

i read somewhere that Nixon was bouncing around like a school kid and the journalist got a quote and Nixon said , ‘ ive waited all my life to be here” i think he dam well proved how much it meant to him by the attitude he played with.

one of the upside of being almost deaf is that i lip read very well. and nixon has made me chuckle a lot during his stints. One thing that came across is just how encouraging he his, one particular point was when he was at the crease with collingwood . who looked considerably ill at ease in one match and he said, we can do, this be patient.(when all the others had fallen through panic) and how patient they and we were for those winning runs.

Kathy wrote:
April 23rd, 2007 at 8.01 pm

Yeah, he has a grand attitude. And I’d love to be able to lipread while watching cricket.

Matt wrote:
April 24th, 2007 at 12.38 am

>I definately think Nixon should at least be given a shot at the test matches this summerâ€¦. age is no problem for me as long as someone performs and personally i think Nixon performed better than the youngsters in the team recently. It would also give moores the time to get a young replacement in the sidelines

How old was Stewart when he retired? 40?

And we have seen the result of him and Stuart Broad playing or England - Leicestershire were stuffed on Sunday like an over-ripe marrow.

Matt

liz wrote:
April 24th, 2007 at 12.22 pm

Mat well….. im in kent so no more to say really …… lets see if we can stay at the bottom of the table! ( well almost bottom)

Comments

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

« The Matthew Hayden show | Main | Aussie fans: a case study »

The Corridor (a cricket blog)

"Peering down the corridor of uncertainty. It’s about cricket, sport and journalism"

Quotehanger

Recent Posts

The headlines

The news

TWC

Related pieces

Search

Eat your feeds

Tags

Tag Cloud

Polls

Sponsors ?

Cricinfo blogs

Cricinfo articles

Scorecards

England v West Indies, Super Eights, Barbados