On a batting wicket, essentially missing a strike bowler.......
Harsh i think.
Plus, the lead allowed for runs to be conceeded. The field placings were all about wickets. How often would England have had 5 slips, a gully and often 1 or 2 short legs in place if runs were an issue?
Balls were also allowed to reach the boundary in order to keep men on strike, then there are the byes.
I felt for both prior and Ramdin in that game. The bounce at times on that pitch made their job a bloody nightmare.
Posted By: megson on February 20th 2009 at 11:26:08
Message Thread
- Aggers has his test summary spot on for me (Other Sports) - megson, Feb 20, 11:13:13
- Not sure I agree (Other Sports) - yarmyyarmy, Feb 20, 11:17:57
- Plenty of very cheap runs for the Windies in that second innings (Other Sports) - KentonCanary, Feb 20, 11:50:42
- On a batting wicket, essentially missing a strike bowler....... (Other Sports) - megson, Feb 20, 11:26:08
- I think the mistake was made by declaring too late in the 2nd innings (n/m) (Other Sports) - Brandonio, Feb 20, 11:17:20
- Anderson should've been trying to launch them out of the ground rather than scratching (Other Sports) - yarmyyarmy, Feb 20, 11:19:13
- Yes (n/m) (Other Sports) - duke of york, Feb 20, 11:39:48
- Anderson should've been trying to launch them out of the ground rather than scratching (Other Sports) - yarmyyarmy, Feb 20, 11:19:13
- Not sure I agree (Other Sports) - yarmyyarmy, Feb 20, 11:17:57
Reply to Message
In order to add a post to the WotB Message Board you must be a registered WotB user.
If you are not yet registered then please visit the registration page. You should ensure that their browser is setup to accept cookies.