Cricket-Match-Special ... A forum for discussion

Arthur Crabtree wrote:ITV have WC highlights. Non England games to be shown on ITV3.

Big surprise that expected BBC to get it since they usually use the Raido comms as pundits for the games involving england.
Surprised ITV 4 not showing non England games since that is ITV 4 sports channel and not ITV 3.

It is ITV4. Too shift lagged to bother checking, and didn't think anyone would notice....

Yes my predictions of ECB looking to have a minimum of 2 Tv broadcasters is correct.

"And in a move that may shock Sky, the current broadcast partners, the county chairmen have suggested that future TV deals should see coverage shared between free-to-air and subscription providers. The presentation talks of: "A balance between terrestrial and satellite: at least two broadcasters"."

Question now is can ECB even get the FTA channel to even be interested on the TV rights.

Ok I closed my eyes, but it was difficult to type. So they're open now, and I can tell you that whilst they were closed all I could see was rain.

I'm a big fan of captaincy in cricket, believing it to be a vital part of the game but, with no England player in any of the formats showing any sort of basic captaincy skills (although most can toss a coin), I'm now tempted by the oft held D/L view that there is no point having a captain, and it should be awarded to one of the players on a game by game basis just so the umpires have someone to go to. At least that way England won't ruin their chances by sticking to an out of form, hopeless captain, who only unbalances the side and keeps more deserving players out.... just because he is their captain.

As soon as genuine captaincy material appears (develops), then go back to sticking by your captain. Sadly, and probably as a result of the Flower tenure, there just doesn't seem to be a cricketer, worthy of wearing an England shirt, who appears to have any reading, or knowledge or understanding of the game at all. England cricketers are becoming mindless drones............ and the worst part about it is that head coaches/team directors seem to prefer it that way.

But role of captain does have value, as seen with McCullum. And as implied by problems when you don't have a good skipper, a la England.

Arthur Crabtree wrote:But role of captain does have value, as seen with McCullum.

indeed it does.

sadly England don't have anyone who has an original thought in their head. When england do find a player who doesn't have to have a series of instructions (see below) written down for them to take onto the field, make him captain...... and stick by him

1. Bowl Anderson and Broad (not at the same time.... we are not allowed to do that)
2. put your fielders where shown on the diagram (attached)
3. If it isn't going well, do not under any circumstances change anything... we have the best computer analysis programme in the world. It's very good and it costs us a lot more money than you do.
4. Don't forget to pick up your copy of the answers to the most likely post match questions from the dressing room BEFORE you go out to meet the press

Set the most defensive field possible, whenever possible.

IS YOUR SLIP NECESSARY.

Arthur Crabtree wrote:Set the most defensive field possible, whenever possible.

IS YOUR SLIP NECESSARY.

Depends which dress you're wearing AC.

Arthur Crabtree wrote:Set the most defensive field possible, whenever possible.

IS YOUR SLIP NECESSARY.

you see, that's a question.... won't work at all

NO SLIPS

see how easy that is?

Come on AC.... switch on!

I've been neglecting this thread recently, when Moores, Downton and (he's not even in the job yet) Graves have been providing turmoil and good material. But I can't ignore Alastair Cook's belief that his captaincy skills and man management would have led England through the group stages of the World Cup. Welcome back Steely.

And then it's just three more games right?

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/m ... rs-captain

And come aboard Paul Newman, bridling at being asked/told once to often to support our leader, Data Peter. It's taken a while. ECB, you don't have to ask.

I think you saw in Australia the dangers of making such a big decision so close to the tournament. I don’t know what’s gone on on that tour, and I can only speak from watching a little bit from afar, but it did look like the lads were shell-shocked from the first two games. That’s when you need real leadership to help steer you through that.

The kind of leadership that saw England to five series losses in a row. When their manager said that one of the reasons Pietersen was sacked was because Cook couldn't stand up to him.

I was fully confident we would get out of our group, and from there, you’ve got to win three games in a row – that’s how this World Cup has worked.

He's just written the future here. England got rid of him because that sort of scenario wasn't plausible. Cook needs a Piers Morgan figure to say this stuff for him, because it makes him look ridiculous.

I can’t speak about what’s gone on there in depth, but you always back yourself, and I would have loved to have had the opportunity that was taken away from me. The selectors made that decision because they thought it was the best for English cricket. Hindsight has probably proved them wrong, but now it’s very easy to say that

There's the entitlement. He failed. It would have been better to keep Cook, he thinks. They kept him too long. His sacking was a desperate gamble brought on by the desperation of the situation.

The Test team] was in a good place. I wouldn’t say all of it [confidence] has been [broken], but a hell of a lot of it has been. You have to remember that it is a different format and you get a change, but all teams are grouped under the same English cricket umbrella, and we can’t be naive enough to think that it’s not,” he admitted

The Test side is a basket case. He just got whitewashed in Australia. He lost his country's first ever home series to Sri Lanka, who were a struggling team. He can only remember the one thing that went well, the second half of the India series. This is politics, just repeating your success, and denying the failare. He's just created a schism right down the middle of the England international set up. And he's complaining that the ODI side has damaged his chances. How about how Morgan had to deal with the dire situation Cook left.

if he genuinely thinks we would have ben better with him still in the team then he is even more deluded than I thought

he is almost right in one thing , making such a big decision on the eve of the tournament wasn't helpful , it should have been made a year ago

hindsight hasn't shown the decision to remove him as captain was wrong as there is absolutely no way he can prove we would have done better with him there and our record with him in the team doesn't support it either. the only decision that was wrong in hindsight was replacing him with ballance

The only positive decision the selectors made was to get rid of Cook, though sadly too late. He is in fact very fortunate to still be captain of the test team.
If England are ever going to face facts and start playing well we need the WI tour to be another failure. Sadly looking at the WI that's likely to be a vain hope.

rich1uk wrote:if he genuinely thinks we would have ben better with him still in the team then he is even more deluded than I thought

he is almost right in one thing , making such a big decision on the eve of the tournament wasn't helpful , it should have been made a year ago

hindsight hasn't shown the decision to remove him as captain was wrong as there is absolutely no way he can prove we would have done better with him there and our record with him in the team doesn't support it either. the only decision that was wrong in hindsight was replacing him with ballance

Shame the press can't push him on this stuff.