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

Which wouldn't be a bad thing. I think all scheduled ICC male cricket events are being held in big three countries- as this was. It'd be good for the game to be a bit more evangelical. Why not in the WI, the holders? Or SA, where the game could do with a boost.

According to the Future Tours Programme there is a 3 week slot in September for a 2018 WT20, though some test nations would be hard pressed to schedule some T20i series as preparation. South Africa's tour of Sri Lanka could in theory have LOIs first in August, then Tests in May 2019 but red ball cricket is hardly ideal preparation for the 2019 World Cup. Australia, Bangladesh, New Zealand and West Indies are going to be hard pressed in finding suitable venues to get some T20is under their belt.

I feel a Biennial WT20 is an overkill, it doesn't seem long ago since the last edition in Bangladesh and the 2012 edition in Sri Lanka doesn't feel much signifiance. It's a shame 20 over cricket can't be added to the 2020 Tokyo Olympics as an Under 23 competition, akin to Football. That way a void can be filled, whilst promoting the sport and giving associate and affiliate nations tournament exposure.

are you sure that isn't for the Champions league.
Champions league 3 week slot still haven't been removed from the FTP and I believe they won't either, IPL 2/Mini will replace it.
Also in 2018 WI will be hosting the womens T20 world cup.

This World Cup was a magnificent success. I cant help but feel that tournaments like this will continue to hammer the nail into test crickets coffin.

I am not dogmatic, I know others are. I love test cricket, but to say I have been as thrilled or enthralled as I was with this tournament when watching test matches, Id have to go a long way back. Most of test cricket is stuck in this endless struggle for relevance, and as an England fan it sometimes feels like we go to sides like South Africa all raring to go, while the home team can barely motivate themselves to turn up. They much rather be doing something else.

I cant be bothered to fight T20 anymore, I am going to embrace it.... hell, I want more of it.

The first paragraph made me instantly think of the point raised in the second (before I got to it). The amount of articles that have centered on Ben Stokes being potentially England's greatest ever player I have had to read would make you think that he served up 4 toe crunching yorkers that cartwheeled a succession of West Indies batsmans stumps, instead of bowling the worst over under pressure you could ever see.

The English cricketing press literally print whatever they want, they are more invested in proving themselves and their previous narratives right then providing any balance.

We hear all this stuff about how tough he is under pressure, that he would bowl that over everytime and wanted to because he backs himself; but then when it all goes wrong under pressure, when he literally crumbled and didnt have a clue, people flood to call his detractors nasty, question players who criticise him as not being contrary to the game (who no doubt have to listen to him get in their grill all match until you smash him out the park and beat him, and at that point he curls up like a child and crys to himself on the floor), and even try to have the gall to question other players off field behaviours.

When Ben Stokes goes out drinking and gets kicked off a tour, its a learning curve. When he punches something made of metal in anger its just because hes passionate. When he shouts and swears at other players on opposition teams its part of the game. If its a black West Indian, its proof of a poor attitude, that he doesnt know honour, that he is actually a gangster.

It defies belief really. Maybe the press can shut up about Ben Stokes and Marlon Samuels sideshow and simply congratulate a team that has been laid to waste in the world's press for being constant underachievers.

I thought I was bitter, but some of the presses bitterness towards this Windies win is ridiculous. The best team won, we should salute that, not tarnish it with a load of nonsense.

What a soap opera! What a load of crap.

Rumours that several top players are members of the Ovalteenies.

Don't mess with them.

There was a problem with Australia when half the side wanted to sing the Ovalteenies song after a victory. Half wanted to stick with the traditional team song. This led to a falling out between Clarke and Justin Langer, with Bailey doing nothing to stop it.

That was a few years ago now though. Things may have changed.

The Ovalteenies were later accepted thanks to a spelling change.

They became the Ovalteeneez. Suddenly cricketers wore bling and hung out with Snoop Dogg. Then up popped a splinter cricket group - The Horlikz squad.

I gather there was some unpleasantness when the two rivals met.

Another excellent article from a contributor at The Roar. This one is by a respected journo, even.

It does nothing to excuse stupid recent behaviour from Samuels (neither does it try to), but is focussed solely on Warne's failings.

shane-warne-is-my-idol-no-longer

Arthur Crabtree wrote:It was Cook who spent a summer saying 'something should be done' about commentators, Warne and Vaughan I remember. In interviews, directly after games. That seems like threatening language, seen in the light of allegations against Samuels. Yet the English press just wrote glossy pieces about how nice he is. Cook brought embarrassment on his team at that time. Manhandling Jayawardene on the pitch. Slating Morgan after the WC. His aloof and incoherent communications with the media. But it was his inability to be crticised that comes to mind after the press response to Samuels. And he was mostly supported anyway, certainly nothing like the Nicholas drivel.

It feels typical of the Pravda like cricket reporting in the UK, the way there has been so much press rehabillitating Stokes in the last week. The volume of it has been surprising. And little balance achieved between his on field behaviour, and the reaction of the West Indians to it.

Blimey , Arthur : you must have been a tricky bowler to face - judging by the amount of spin you can impart to a few lines of text ! Reckon this is one of your better efforts though : managing to divert a discussion on the World t20 and a few crass comments from Samuels into yet another sledge at Cook ! He must have thought he'd be safe from your relentless pursuit during a limited overs contest with which he has had no involvement

I guess you really haven't forgiven him for shooting your cousin's pet badger or whatever it was...

Some people in the press have indeed gone a bit over the top in criticism of Samuels. But I do think there is a considerable difference between he and Stokes going at each other on the field (they are both big enough to handle that and it doesn't bother me at all) and the making of disparaging comments in post-match interviews. Thought Brathwaite showed a lot more class in his comments - but the whole thing isn't really worth the column inches already devoted to it so , not to prolong the saga , that's all I'm going to say on it.

Pretty good example of how on message the cricket press has become in the UK. The Samuels incident makes it current again. The comparison with Cook is pretty valid given the particulars of the commentator they both criticise and the very different reactions to the criticism. It's still relevant, because it still goes on, as with the uniformity of the press rehab of Ben Stokes. I guess Giles Clarke would say we should all move on, but why- nothing's changed. I don't understand why my post isn't utterly valid.

A bit off topic, but am I the only one who is irritated by the song "Champion" by Bravo?
I didn't like it the first time, and irritated me even more the 2nd time I watched it.

They should just stick to cricket, is what I feel.

Arthur Crabtree wrote:Pretty good example of how on message the cricket press has become in the UK. The Samuels incident makes it current again. The comparison with Cook is pretty valid given the particulars of the commentator they both criticise and the very different reactions to the criticism. It's still relevant, because it still goes on, as with the uniformity of the press rehab of Ben Stokes. I guess Giles Clarke would say we should all move on, but why- nothing's changed. I don't understand why my post isn't utterly valid.

The irony is, someone is saying Cook shouldnt be dragged into a discussion about a limited overs tournaments he didnt take part in.... but didnt Cook drag himself into the post tournament debate last time when no one essentially asked him for a contribution? Apparently he felt that England wouldnt have been utterly rubbish had they picked him, and wouldnt have lost in the group stages.