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

sussexpob wrote:

he might be totally innocent and it was 100% Duckett but surely he should be punished

Can I make this quote the thing that appears on the bottom of all my posts? Gold dust

Would be the 2nd Signature named after me on this forum.
Actually 3rd had one named after me in Uni after being drunk.

sussexpob wrote:

Making_Splinters wrote:If this whole situation happened within the squad, and with only the ECBs choice guard on site, how is it even making the news?

It does feel that we're in for another repeat of the last tour where scapegoats were needed.

Spot on, Splints

Yeah they are obviously going to make it look like certain players were the reason for the whitewash and that is why they will be dropped.
Already had ECB Newman stating players will be dropped in NZ/picked on Behaviour, 2 batsman under pressure etc, basically named and shamed the players that were present at the bar.
Also isn't it funny suddenly the information that Duckett had a warning or management didn't like him getting drunk either in Bangladesh or India last year comes to light now.
pretty obvious some players are going to get blamed like KP did 4 yrs.

Apparently it only made the news because ECB were scared the Aussie newspapers were going to get the story or someone would post it on You tube or social media.
at the moment it seems ECB only cares about the PR and the sponsorship they looking for.
They desperate to get rid of the drinking image of england at the moment.

I am still trying to get my head round the point your making? Innocent people who get attacked need to be punished for the other person being a plank?

Sorry, nope..... no matter how hard I try, I cant make sense of it

I really wouldnt want to be caught whistling in the 3rd test, thats all I am going to say

sussexpob wrote:I am still trying to get my head round the point your making? Innocent people who get attacked need to be punished for the other person being a plank?

Sorry, nope..... no matter how hard I try, I cant make sense of it

What I was saying was that even if Anderson was 100% innocent I would still charge him for being at the wrong place at the wrong time or for just being part of it.
although in reality Anderson wasn't 100% innocent he obviously had some sort of blame for it as well, can't really see why duckett would poor a drink over anderson otherwise and it was noted they were having an argument at the time.
what doesn't make sense is for him to be clear of all blame which is odd when england are saying Senior players are not leading by example.
It doesn't really make sense to me that they saying Senior players are not changing their behaviour or not listening and when the senior players do something wrong nothing happens to them anyway.

from that I get the impression if you are a senior player in the English side you can basically do anything you want and the management can't touch you, but if you are new player or youngster then you can't really get away with the stuff the senior players are getting away with.

Without the details, its tough to know.

sussexpob wrote:Without the details, its tough to know.

true suspect the detail will come out soon though especially if england lose and ECB start to get rid of players as the scapegoats.

they might give Pietersen a recall, just so they can sack him again. Strauss would like that

Going to NZ I would like to see

1 Cook
2 Hameed
3 Root
4 Bairstow
5 Malan
6 Stokes
7 Livingstone
8 Roland-Jones
9 Bess
10 Broad
11 Anderson

Not sure Stoneman can be left out?

Or the keeper bat at four?

Arthur Crabtree wrote:Not sure Stoneman can be left out?

Or the keeper bat at four?

They won't leave Stoneman out. Can't see him making a 50 in these last two games though. He isn't very good in the field. At short leg he is not very sharp like say James Taylor.

Stewart
"My experience is that that is not too high for a keeper - I would have liked to have batted at four consistently if I was keeping wicket".
Also Bairstow and Root like batting together.

Fair enough. Not conventional though. I'll have to look up keepers in the top four.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine ... pe=batting

Clearly it's been done, though not for long by many, and those who have done it for a long period, scored fewer runs.

Doesn't mean it can't work though.

22 for Stokes and 2-0-22-1 for Canterbury.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/42465259

Colly must have told them he won't be available for another year at least