England vs New Zealand | 3rd ODI | Bristol | 21/06/2008

Taurus

Local Club Star
Joined
Aug 28, 2006
Runs
2,055
Post of the Week
3
England are 73/6 chasing a mere 182! A typically English collapse, I would say. Collingwood's captaincy after having the Kiwis in a similar position was atrocious - bowling himself and Luke Wright ahead of Graeme Swann (4-0-10-1) and allowing Elliott and Mills to get the Kiwis back into the game. He'll have to score some runs here to make up for it...
 
not much happened except for couple of streakers. They didn't make it to ground. Wasn't shown on TV but discussed on radio. I don't know if TV commentators covered it.

Eng is also behing D/L - they were behind when only 2-3 wickets had fallen and they are behind even more
 
without bond, nz cricket is seriously boring to watch. Same for eng without flintoff.
 
during lunch break Modi was interviewd. Ind-Eng match in Mumbai will not be at Wenkhede stadium as that is being demolished and will be recostructed. The match will probably be at some stadium next (or close by) to it. Grounds at Mohali and Jaipur??? are also going to go through reconstruction or major refurbishment. Then there will be other stadiums after that

Dravid was interviewd and asked about appeals for umpiring and he said he was not sure how it will work yet
 
Last edited:
TruSachFan said:
without bond, nz cricket is seriously boring to watch. Same for eng without flintoff.
ENG still has KP.

NZ is a boring AND terrible especially in test cricket
 
Now probably 3rd person in Eng innings being told to leave the stadium. First one probably was the first streaker which may have been fined 1000 pounds too.

This happened a minute or two after a pink beach ball was on the ground but could be for something else
 
last person is not kicked out. Big cheers in stands as he comes back. commentator think he was the owner of the Pink beach ball and probably told to take care of his property
 
Collingwood out LBW Southee - his 4th wicket
Eng 152-8 - need 31 more
 
GONE!!!!!!!!!!!!! Wat a catch by the keeper down the leg side, has a little jugle but it sticks!!!!!!!!!! Broad gone 160/9!
 
Tremlett out
160-9 - need 23 off 25 balls - also about 8-10 runs behind on D/L
 
Can England get these runs??!!! You never know, a few outside egde 4s...
 
Yaay! Blondie boy nicked it down the legside. Great catch from Pumpkins/hopkins.
 
NZ win!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Wud have been 2-1 if it wasnt for the farce!
 
f.b.m said:
Yaay! Blondie boy nicked it down the legside. Great catch from Pumpkins/hopkins.

Haha seems like we're all supporting NZ today
 
Hang on...

I left the house. NZ were about 70-6. Sleep inducing stuff.

How the hell did they win this???
 
Very, very poor from England. There were times in both innings where we looked to have the game sewn up, but allowed New Zealand to get on top of us. England are carrying too many passengers but aren't prepared to get rid for the sake of consistency. The likes of Bell, Wright and Bopara simply do not look good enough to occupy places in the top six currently, whilst Ambrose at seven seems suited more to Test Matches than to ODIs (he doesn't really have any strokes). The lower order is very strong indeed, but when they're regularly required to knock 100+ runs off at 4+ an over, you can't keep expecting miracles.

Credit to New Zealand - they batted with guts then used the impetus gained towards the end of their innings to keep coming at England. They might easily have let Swann, Collingwood and Broad guide us home, but stuck to their guns and eventually grabbed a deserved, turnaround victory. However, I stand by my assertion in beginning this thread where I said that Collingwood's poor captaincy in bowling himself and Wright over Graeme Swann cost England the match. I think that Swann is mysteriously under-rated by Collingwood; he's a very good lower order batsman and a canny ODI bowler in a similar mould to Daniel Vettori. Even if he hadn't taken a further wicket, he might have been the difference between chasing 170 and chasing 182.

Throughout his time at Nottinghamshire he has proven himself against some excellent batsman in the one-day game (and four-day for that matter). He shouldn't have to play second-fiddle to some jumped up technical nightmare called Luke Wright, who is frankly awful in every respect currently. His technique, both in batting and bowling, is the ugliest to be found anywhere in world cricket. Another criticism I have of England's selection - Owais Shah. Owais Shah should not have to bat below Ravi Bopara, who relative to Shah has achieved absolutely nothing in any form of the game. Shah has scored massive runs in the county game, season after season, nearly scored more Test runs in either of his debut innings than Bopara did on the whole tour of Sri Lanka, and also has a ODI hundred to his name despite the considerable disadvantage of batting at six. He should be batting at 4.
 
Last edited:
Okay, highlights about to begin on 5. Let's see where England went wrong.
 
Tim Southee..the U-19 superstar continues to impress.It has to said though,England are a pretty poor ODI side. Collingwood, Bell, Shah are decent but nothing great and will never be. Ambrose,Wright ,Swann are just not good enough to play International cricket. Colling wood is a poor captain btw...he should have gone for the kill when NZ were 70-5,some of his field placements were pathetic to say the least.To top it all,they have this fantastic attitude towards shorter formats of the game.
 
maamrut said:
Tim Southee..the U-19 superstar continues to impress.It has to said though,England are a pretty poor ODI side. Collingwood, Bell, Shah are decent but nothing great and will never be. Ambrose,Wright ,Swann are just not good enough to play International cricket. Colling wood is a poor captain btw...he should have gone for the kill when NZ were 70-5,some of his field placements were pathetic to say the least.To top it all,they have this fantastic attitude towards shorter formats of the game.

Agreed - Kevin Pietersen is their one superstar in one-day cricket, otherwise it is a pretty poor team.
 
Graeme Swann has had a really good start to his international career. He's been good in the lower order, has bowled economically both in ODIs and Twenty20s, and has regularly contributed wickets to the cause at averages of 30 and 13 in ODIs and Twenty20s respectively. He's not outstanding, but his record is good and suggestive of a player who is more than capable of playing international cricket. He is currently out-bowling and out-batting the highly rated (as a ODI player) Daniel Vettori in this series. I may be biased considering my Nottinghamshire links, but I think it's far-fetched to dismiss him as "just not good enough."

I also don't think England are that bad a ODI side - we're not good by any stretch of the imagination, I admit, but we have had some very good results under Moores and Collingwood. I'm thinking of recent series results, and it probably stands up pretty well against most of the 'best of the rest' teams:

New Zealand 3-1 England
Sri Lanka 2-3 England
England 4-3 India
England 1-2 West Indies
Next Best after the semi-finalists in the WC

The bowling has really improved - Stuart Broad is a fantastic ODI bowler, it's simply the batting that is lacking. Add Flintoff to this team and it's actually starting to look quite strong. If only Trescothick...
 
yep..my comments alluding to batting actually.Bowling is great btw..and about Swann..just didn't impress me as a batsman,but fair enough if he is considered a lower order bat.My apologies.
 
A very good effort from the Kiwis.

Whilst the ball moved around a bit all day, they took every chance that came their way in the field. Good captaincy from Vettori today too.
 
Back
Top