Thread: Cricket scores around the world

Originally Posted by Wally Dorian Raffles

Call it winging if you like Bob, but the fact that England field so many foreign players will always be a talking point..

Sorry, I must've missed the new rules.

Having an English parent makes one not English, right?

Growing up in England from a very early age and primarily having a British passport makes one not English, right? How may so called Australians still have British passports, I wonder?

They need them, can't get bar work in London without one.....

^ times have changed bob. Almost every bar in Sydney has a Pom pouring beers these days..

Ok, so we all understand the system that allows England to poach foreign players. It's obviously a touchy subject for you guys, and even though I have made a few posts about it, I accept that it is part of the system that favours England , but that is just the way it is. As I said in an earlier post, we can take comfort in knowing that England , with so many county teams, and a much larger domestic pool of players, still can't ( or don't ) field an 11 who are produced by the English system alone.

We could discuss this until the cows come home, but neither of us are budging on our opinions regarding the fairness of the system.

So on with the cricket!

I think it is great that Afghanistan has made it to the World Cup. What a great thing for the people of the war torn country to feel good about. They seem to have some very talented players and will definitely give the other minnow teams a run for their money. It would be nice to even see them score some upset wins against the big boys.

In other cricket news, ABC radio in Australia has lost the rights to broadcast matches to a commercial station. This is quite big news for cricket fans in Australia who grew up listening to the cricket on the ABC - who also stream on the Internet . You can't help think that CA is putting money before the growth of a sport that is already much less popular than it used to be..

Mumbai Indians win CLT20
Good match

Originally Posted by Bobcock

Blah blah blah.......

Still haven't comitted yourself to what qualifiicions apply in WDR world.....

Until you put your cock on the block we don't give a hoot what you think.

Yep. I admit that it really is a hard question to answer.

My main point is that England have a lot more players from other cricket playing nations who qualifie to play for them.... I mean it's not like there are many Indians with a New Zealand heritage, is it - get my point?

But to answer your question , once a player has played international cricket ( including under 19's) he should have to wait, say 8years before he can switch countries, even if one of his parents was born in pommyland.

". . . a young off-spinning opponent of ours walked into the England dressing room after taking a few wickets for KwaZulu Natal in a tour match in Durban and plonked himself down next to me, asking if I knew of any English teams he could play for. I thought he meant club cricket and almost gave him my brother's number and told him to try Fives and Heronians but it turned out he had bigger ambitions than that..."[36]

— Nasser Hussain on Kevin Pietersen, Mail Online

ODI series(Ashes warm up) starts on the 10th in India
Good luck Australia

Originally Posted by Bobcock

cos pietersen never represened South Africa at any level to my knowledge and still served a 6 year period between arriving and playing in the test team despite having an English mother.

He only served a 4 year period according to wiki - and was picked immediately after that minimum requirement time was up.

Originally Posted by Wally Dorian Raffles

He only served a 4 year period according to wiki - and was picked immediately after that minimum requirement time was up.

Sounds like a Pakistani leg spinner without an Australian mother or father

Originally Posted by Wally Dorian Raffles

Originally Posted by Bobcock

cos pietersen never represened South Africa at any level to my knowledge and still served a 6 year period between arriving and playing in the test team despite having an English mother.

He only served a 4 year period according to wiki - and was picked immediately after that minimum requirement time was up.

It's a grey area, yes he played 4 years County Cricket but he was resident in the UK playing club cricket for 2 years prior.

Which number was the relevant number in terms of his International Qualification I do not know.

as for being picked immediatly for the test team why wouldn't you?....he's qualified and a world class player..... would seem rather stupid not to. Certainly a far greater candidate than a leg spinner who seeks political asylum and has his Aussie passport fast tracked to fill a need in the national cricket team.

Not FOr the national side, but he played first class cricket for 4 years in SA before jumping ship.

Again....not correct, he played 2 years of first class cricket. Natal B where he played as a 17 year old is not first class cricket.

He blamed the quota system, but that was not the reason why he wasn't getting picked.

really show some proof otherwise, Natal had a quota system, he was not getting picked, it has nothing to do with the National team, he was never even close to that, he was hardly on the radar of the national team at such a young age.

Anyway, it's clear that your dislike of Pietersen clouds your objectivity in discussing him..... he more than qualifies for English on blood and residency and yet you still choose to debate him over and over and over again.....

The real agenda is crystal clear.

In fact thinking about it.... he was able to have a UK passport from birth as a British Citizen and yet still had to serve a qualification period. Sounds to me like he was rather hard done by...... as was Trott, sounds like it's harder to play for Englsnd that anyone else and yet these guys till want to do it.

God Bless 'em.

Originally Posted by Bobcock

Anyway, it's clear that your dislike of Pietersen clouds your objectivity in discussing him..... he more than qualifies for English on blood and residency and yet you still choose to debate him over and over and over again.....

The real agenda is crystal clear.

Errmm, ...Bob, I have hardly mentioned KP in this thread besides the last few posts (after you brought him up) and he is actually one of my favorite cricketers .... as the quote from Hussain states, he has always been brash ....but that's what makes him entertaining.

So what is this crystal clear agenda you speak of?

I thought this was all healthy banter - but if you are seriously getting upset here then perhaps I was mistaken..

I don't take these forums very seriously, incase you haven't noticed.

And what have you done with marmite? he was due to add some funny snide comments here a while back now ..

^ why? Because I said that the quota system was not the reason he left SA? - millions of other people have said the same thing way before me, so feel free to send on my contacts. The general consensus is that he used the quota system as an excuse ... To a certain degree. He just wanted to play for England more than the country he was born in - and if the rules allow it, who can blame him.

I have no problem with any individual who has qualified to play for England through the current system. As I have said, KP is one of my favorite ( if not the favorite) cricketer out of the current players from any team. I love watching him play.

It's the system we are discussing here .... A system that allows England to poach more players than any other country. Do you not agree this is true??

I am looking forward to the cricket
then maybe the pre match sledging will cease
PKK v SA tour of the Emirates is coming up soon

1st test Bangladesh v NZ starts shortly
NZ to bat

Hot Spot will not be available to third umpires during the Ashes in Australia after Channel Nine chose to remove the technology. Decisions will now be subject to analysis by the Eagle Eye ball-tracker, audio from the stump microphones and slow-motion replays in case of a review.

Warren Brennan, the inventor of Hot Spot confirmed the development, saying the decision had been finalised as far as the use of technology was concerned. "It's their decision and that's what has been communicated to us. As far as I'm concerned, it is final,'' Brennan told the Sydney Morning Herald. ''We're just moving on with things. Channel Nine have got a new deal with Cricket Australia, which I know has cost them a lot more money. I gather there had to be some restructuring of costs.''

The costs of installing Hot Spot are around $10,000 a day for a four-camera system installed by Nine, which uses infra-red imaging to determine contact between the ball, bat or pad - that puts the series cost of Hot Spot at approximately $250,000. While the cost was a major determinant, the poor performance of the technology, especially during the Ashes in England, earlier this year was also a factor.

Hot Spot came under criticism during the Ashes series for various reasons, including the silicon-tape controversy. Before the fourth Test in Durham, a Channel Nine report alleged that a few England batsmen used silicon tape on the edge of their bats to evade Hot Spot - charges that were denied by England captain Alastair Cook and the ECB. Brennan released a statement and called for protective coatings to be removed from bats.

He conceded that these issues were a factor in Channel Nine's decision to axe Hot Spot, and reiterated his claim of bat coatings hampering the effectiveness of the system. "The point that I was trying to make was that it does significantly affect us,'' he said. ''The testing that we've done, and I haven't released that testing yet, is that when the coatings are on it does affect the Hot Spot signature."

Brennan expressed his disappointment at Cricket Australia's refusal to intervene, or to subsidise the cost of the technology. "I don't have a beef with Channel Nine,'' Brennan said. ''The disappointing thing for us is that Cricket Australia didn't engage at all with us to try and come on board and help with this situation. They just said, 'No, it's got nothing to do with us. It's Channel Nine's responsibility.' What's disappointing is we work in four countries at the moment - well, until recently. Cricket Australia is the only body that doesn't contribute to our costs for the DRS components.

"New Zealand contribute directly to us, the ECB contribute and also South Africa. My only beef is with Cricket Australia because we tried to engage with them several weeks ago and they refused. We need to continue to invest and improve the product so that everybody thinks it's getting better. If bodies like Cricket Australia won't come on board and contribute to that, there's not really any point in us continuing.''
http://www.espncricinfo.com/the-ashe...ry/678311.html

Interesting. The company wants money to improve their product. Bit cheeky. They should improve it themselves ..... And teach the 3rd umpires how to use it!

Aus v India T20 just started - watch online here: Hitcric.info - Watch Live Cricket Streaming and Highlights

^^I would be happier if they were able to use the best umpires in the world.
But because of that stupid rule they have now its not going to happen,any idea who is up for umpiring the ashes series ?

Originally Posted by Wally Dorian Raffles

Hot Spot will not be available to third umpires during the Ashes in Australia after Channel Nine chose to remove the technology.

It's not gonna help, Aussies still gonna lose...