Official Cricket Thread

Window · Jul 17, 2019

AegonSnake said:
England did exactly that. Watch the post game interviews from the players.

In which case it's even more unfair because the chasing team is in a better position to assess whether the game will end up a tie depending on how things unfold in late stages of the second innings. No team in their first innings is planning on pacing their innings on the off chance the game results in a tie not once but twice so that they can win on an arbitrary rule. And even then, I would wager England wanted boundaries to meet the required run rate, not for a super over tie. Who in the world would think about hitting a boundary for a super over tie vs winning the game in the innings itself when they were like 6 down with a handful of overs to go?

crazy monkey · Jul 17, 2019

Geoff said:
The mods are going to sniffing around in here sooner or later though...any of them post in here that we can get to quietly change the title?

I will request mod.

Zappy · Jul 17, 2019

kmag said:
You quite like Swann. I don't think there's any point in us continue to discuss this. Aggers is a pumped up little right wing English nationalist who's mask slips a bit when ever England win and moreso when they lose. Tuffers is great apart from when he's talking about cricket which is a bit of a handicap on a programme about Cricket, his insight into the game is mostly that batting is hard and he's glad he didn't have to bowl pace.

Don't know why you're comparing Coney with Smith, TMS in general was the most partial of partial commentators during the entire final. They were fucking praying at one point.

Wow. I've never read such a ridiculous post. Aggers a jumped up right wing English nationalist. Go on I will play. What evidence do you have to support that?

As for TMS being partial...good. That's what I want. Real atmosphere. Not commentators pretending they aren't going through the wringer just like everyone else.

I loved Vaughan praying. It's what everyone else was doing.

Deleted member 31104 · Jul 17, 2019

Zappy said:
Wow. I've never read such a ridiculous post. Aggers a jumped up right wing English nationalist. Go on I will play. What evidence do you have to support that?

As for TMS being partial...good. That's what I want. Real atmosphere. Not commentators pretending they aren't going through the wringer just like everyone else.

I loved Vaughan praying. It's what everyone else was doing.

Funny I'd prefer to actually know what is going on on the pitch, but there you go.
Last time I checked, the BBC was not an England only broadcaster, not that you'd know it. I don't expect it to be poe faced, but I expect a modicum of impartiality. Sunday went miles absolutely miles beyond that.

Aggers took Linkear to task for posting pro-remain stuff on twitter, made some shady comments about Archer before the ECB changed it's rules.

Zvonimir Boban · Jul 17, 2019

I remember giving Aggers the side eye 10-15 years over some stuff he said about subcontinental players/teams but can't remember exactly what it was.

More recently he went ballistic at Jonathan Liew

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2019/may/13/jonathan-agnew-row-with-journalist-bbc

Liew wrote: "'A huge call,' warned Jonathan Agnew. 'Morale and camaraderie is a big part in team performance.' Which feels instinctively unarguable – who doesn't love morale and camaraderie, after all? – until you begin to ask why Archer is deemed such a grave threat to it."

There was a comparison with Agnew's warmer welcome for Gary Ballance, a white player of Zimbabwean origin. Further down, and summing up a lot of elements above, Liew wrote: "There's an incendiary word you could posit to describe all this, but I'm not going to use it."

This was the first response from Agnew: "Fucking disgraceful. You have massive chips on your shoulder ... you are a racist."

Liew replied that this was not about name calling but a wider societal issue to do with "the huge privilege we enjoy in the media, the subtle and often unconscious biases that occasionally seep into our language … Happy to engage further on this topic if you are prepared to put your pantomime outrage to one side. If not apologies for the offence caused and I wish you well."

What came next was an unanswered blurt of abusive fury.

Agnew: "You really have issues"

Agnew: "Apologise now".

Agnew: "I'm going no further on the advice of people who know you and think you are a cunt. I know you are. Think on."

Agnew: "CUNT"

Agnew: "You are so strange I don't know if you'd be upset to know those who think you are a cunt"

Agnew: "If you think so in hindsight then you have a chance. If you don't ...

Agnew: "I'm SO angry"

Agnew: "Book yourself in somewhere"

Agnew: "You need help"

Agnew: "Who the fuck are you?"

The other interest to declare here is that Agnew has done something similar but far less serious and bullying with me. Those who know him say Agnew is a very nice man, that he can just be thin-skinned. This is probably right. In my case Agnew was angered by an article in which I said I preferred TalkSport's coverage and the Agnew-style voice could be a bar to cricket for some who found him slightly bumptious and Middle England.

In response he sent me a weirdly personal angry message. Later there was a strange email late at night referring to a listener interaction, and telling me "people like you" don't realise how loved he is, how nice he is, what a beautiful person. In the course of which he took time to very lovably call me "a wanker". Which is, you have to admit, quite funny.

I don't think Jonathan Agnew is a racist. I don't think Liew ever suggested he was one but read the messages to Liew and something else emerges. Not just the sense of a pattern of unpleasant behaviour but something wider too. Abusing younger journalists from a position of power is a damaging thing to do. Even more uncomfortable is the spectacle of one of English cricket's most influential media figures abusing a young English journalist of Chinese heritage who has brought up an issue of race, who is trying to talk about nuance and about the way we use language.

Fuck Aggers.

AllThingsPurple · Jul 17, 2019

Zvonimir Boban said:
I remember giving Aggers the side eye 10-15 years over some stuff he said about subcontinental players/teams but can't remember exactly what it was.

More recently he went ballistic at Jonathan Liew

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2019/may/13/jonathan-agnew-row-with-journalist-bbc

Fuck Aggers.

Not seem all that before, have to admit it's pretty damning.

bomma man · Jul 17, 2019

I kinda assume that anyone involved in cricket, especially English cricket where it's the sport of the elite, is probably a right wing fuckhead until faced with evidence of the contrary.

Zvonimir Boban · Jul 17, 2019

bomma man said:
I kinda assume that anyone involved in cricket, especially English cricket where it's the sport of the elite, is probably a right wing fuckhead until faced with evidence of the contrary.

It's OK, at least we've got Moeen

https://i./i/pix/2014/07/28/article-2708595-2011D2CE00000578-566_634x546.jpg

bomma man · Jul 17, 2019

Zvonimir Boban said:
It's OK, at least we've got Moeen

https://i./i/pix/2014/07/28/article-2708595-2011D2CE00000578-566_634x546.jpg

Legend

amanset · Jul 17, 2019

Tell you what, all this talk of unfairness, changing the rules, sharing the cup...

You can guarantee it wouldn't be happening if England had lost in the same way. The usual suspects come out of the woodwork because they get to have a go at England for a bit.

Their salt gives me strength.

amanset · Jul 17, 2019

Joe Spangle said:
We will call it the 'Bat of GOD'

No we fucking won't.

What that is named after, the "Hand of God" was a deliberate form of cheating that the perpetrator refused to acknowledge for decades afterwards. This incident was an accident that was apologised for directly afterwards.

Every time it is referred to as the "Bat of God" it is a fucking insult to Stokes and those responsible should be ashamed of themselves.

And yes, it is noticeable that it is mainly coming from Indian and Australian sources.

Again, the salt.

amanset · Jul 17, 2019

bomma man said:
I kinda assume that anyone involved in cricket, especially English cricket where it's the sport of the elite, is probably a right wing fuckhead until faced with evidence of the contrary.

It really isn't tje sport of the elite. You're kind of showing that you don't really know much about the elite at all.

bomma man · Jul 17, 2019

amanset said:
It really isn't tje sport of the elite. You're kind of showing that you don't really know much about the elite at all.

I'm not talking about the South Asian grassroots fans. I'm talking about the white elite that dominate the commentariat and admin of the game, not to mention the membership at Lord's (check out how many showed up to the women's WC final). They aren't exactly poor are they?

Check out the graph on page two of this: https://www.sportmr.co.uk/pdfs/170815_SportMR_Spotlight_on_Cricket.pdf

AB is the only social class where cricket fans are over represented, and they are disproportionately old.

effingvic · Jul 17, 2019

Zvonimir Boban said:
It's OK, at least we've got Moeen

https://i./i/pix/2014/07/28/article-2708595-2011D2CE00000578-566_634x546.jpg

Legendary beard damn

Zvonimir Boban · Jul 17, 2019

amanset said:
No we fucking won't.

What that is named after, the "Hand of God" was a deliberate form of cheating that the perpetrator refused to acknowledge for decades afterwards. This incident was an accident that was apologised for directly afterwards.

Every time it is referred to as the "Bat of God" it is a fucking insult to Stokes and those responsible should be ashamed of themselves.

And yes, it is noticeable that it is mainly coming from Indian and Australian sources.

Again, the salt.

amanset said:
It really isn't tje sport of the elite. You're kind of showing that you don't really know much about the elite at all.

For someone who claims to relish elevated sodium levels you seem to be quite annoyed.

It's a little peculiar.

Hamchan · Jul 17, 2019

amanset said:
Tell you what, all this talk of unfairness, changing the rules, sharing the cup...

You can guarantee it wouldn't be happening if England had lost in the same way. The usual suspects come out of the woodwork because they get to have a go at England for a bit.

Their salt gives me strength.

Well yeah. England are in the big 3, the top 3 villains of Cricket up there with Australia and India. That you haven't won a World Cup before this is besides the point, y'all are the still the enemy to everyone due to your size, money and influence on the game.

Basically expect everyone besides your own countrymen to want you to lose and do so embarrassingly. We in Australia are already used to it and the Indians seem used to it to.

bomma man · Jul 17, 2019

Also like... there are reasons outside cricket why a bunch of former colonial assets might cheer against their former owner...

crazy monkey · Jul 18, 2019

I got it changed. Let me know if more is needed.

amanset · Jul 18, 2019

Zvonimir Boban said:
For someone who claims to relish elevated sodium levels you seem to be quite annoyed.

It's a little peculiar.

You don't think equating Stokes with one of the most famous cheaters in sport is insulting?

And you know that it is done because of the saltiness of the Indians and Aussies.

Window · Jul 18, 2019

Yeah I don't think it's fair to Stokes to call it The Bat of God, considering the reason for coining the term the Hand of God. It was a freak and lucky incident, not intentionally breaking the core rules of the game like Maradona.

All that is besides the point of calling people who wish NZ would have won salty though. Nobody's going after England anymore than India or Aus tbh. Neutrals just like to back the underdog and NZ supporters would want NZ to win or course. Odd persecution complex from English cricket fans. Just enjoy the win.

Hamchan · Jul 18, 2019

Do other Australians even know what the "Hand of God" is? I sure didn't! Soccer ain't that popular here in terms of following professional competition.

I liked Bat of God because it was God's luck that gave England the win. Had no idea it was a reference to something else.

Dan · Jul 18, 2019

Why has this been renamed the official cricket thread when there's one here?

https://www.resetera.com/threads/cricketera-ot1-weird-a-bit-random-not-what-i-was-expecting.15037/

Hamchan · Jul 18, 2019

Dan said:
Why has this been renamed the official cricket thread when there's one here?

https://www.resetera.com/threads/cricketera-ot1-weird-a-bit-random-not-what-i-was-expecting.15037/

I think just because this one had more activity and more people posting, so a better place to move forward from here.

Also the old thread never appears for some reason when I search "Cricket".

Dan · Jul 18, 2019

Hamchan said:
I think just because this one had more activity and more people posting, so a better place to move forward from here.

Also the old thread never appears for some reason when I search "Cricket".

Well, it would have more activity, this was based around the World Cup and the actual OT is in the usual Hangouts section.

They should be merged.

Zappy · Jul 18, 2019

kmag said:
Funny I'd prefer to actually know what is going on on the pitch, but there you go.
Last time I checked, the BBC was not an England only broadcaster, not that you'd know it. I don't expect it to be poe faced, but I expect a modicum of impartiality. Sunday went miles absolutely miles beyond that.

Aggers took Linkear to task for posting pro-remain stuff on twitter, made some shady comments about Archer before the ECB changed it's rules.

I asked for evidence of Aggers being a "jumped up right wing English nationalist". Do you actually have any? Because that's a big accusation. I rather suspect that Agnew and I may be of differing political opinions. But to accuse someone of being a jumped up right wing English nationalist without a single piece of supporting evidence is a bit much.

The Lineker thing was simply Agnew being frustrated that he as a paid BBC employee wasn't allowed to express opinion on twitter on those subjects but Lineker was. But they've changed the rules only a few days ago so Aggers can say what he likes (within reason).

As for the Archer thing - again it was a huge stretch to suggest that was racist. It was simply about the late drafting of a player into the squad weeks before a world cup. Which is unusual.

Zappy · Jul 18, 2019

Zvonimir Boban said:
I remember giving Aggers the side eye 10-15 years over some stuff he said about subcontinental players/teams but can't remember exactly what it was.

More recently he went ballistic at Jonathan Liew

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2019/may/13/jonathan-agnew-row-with-journalist-bbc

Fuck Aggers.

He was annoyed at being called a racist over a tweet that was not about race. I'm not surprised. He apologised for his outburst and as the article explains "I do not think he is a racist"....he might be someone who can't take personal criticism well.

But it is ridiculous to take a tweet like that and try and extrapolate it.

He's been nothing but full of praise for Archer this world cup.

Hamchan · Jul 18, 2019

Dan said:
Well, it would have more activity, this was based around the World Cup and the actual OT is in the usual Hangouts section.

They should be merged.

I don't particularly care really besides the search problem. As long as the word "Cricket" is separate and easily searchable then anything is fine.

Put in a request to the mods if you want it merged.

AllThingsPurple · Jul 18, 2019

Hamchan said:
I don't particularly care really besides the search problem. As long as the word "Cricket" is separate and easily searchable then anything is fine.

Put in a request to the mods if you want it merged.

We should keep this name over cricketera as I imagine the one word is what is stopping the search results

Joe Spangle · Jul 18, 2019

amanset said:
No we fucking won't.

What that is named after, the "Hand of God" was a deliberate form of cheating that the perpetrator refused to acknowledge for decades afterwards. This incident was an accident that was apologised for directly afterwards.

Every time it is referred to as the "Bat of God" it is a fucking insult to Stokes and those responsible should be ashamed of themselves.

And yes, it is noticeable that it is mainly coming from Indian and Australian sources.

Again, the salt.

Well I didn't analyse the phrase as deeply as you, it was merely reference to an umpiring/referee mistake that may have swung a match.

And no salt here mate, Im English!

bomma man · Jul 18, 2019

Team of the tournament imo:

Sharma
Warner
Williamson (cap)
Root
Al-Hasan
Stokes
Carey (wk)
Starc
Archer
Boult
Bumrah
Jadeja (sub)

Apologies to Roy and Bairstow, but I had to have both or neither, and I couldn't exclude Sharma. It was very hard to find a proper 4 & 5, and I didn't even bother with a full time spinner. Al-Hasan, Williamson and Root will manage between them.

Zvonimir Boban · Jul 18, 2019

amanset said:
You don't think equating Stokes with one of the most famous cheaters in sport is insulting?

And you know that it is done because of the saltiness of the Indians and Aussies.

I'd love to be compared to one of the GOATs and I'm sure Stokes will be able to hold back his tears when he looks at his world cup medal.

You sound saltier than any Indian or Aussie that I've seen moaning.

Window · Jul 18, 2019

bomma man said:
Team of the tournament imo:

Sharma
Warner
Williamson (cap)
Root
Al-Hasan
Stokes
Carey (wk)
Starc
Archer
Boult
Bumrah
Jadeja (sub)

Apologies to Roy and Bairstow, but I had to have both or neither, and I couldn't exclude Sharma. It was very hard to find a proper 4 & 5, and I didn't even bother with a full time spinner. Al-Hasan, Williamson and Root will manage between them.

Ferguson should be picked over Boult. Better strike rate and average and picked up more wickets. Also needs a pinch hitter down the order. Stokes does that role okay but he's not enough alone. It's been a tough tournament for middle order batsmen. Root is great at accumulating runs at a steady pace but Williamson does that already and I think it would be better to have someone who can steady the innings but also be more aggressive if need be. This is where Kohli can be so good but he didn't really have a great tournament.

Geoff · Jul 18, 2019

I don't think Williamson was that great never mind POTT. With the greatest of respect to him and his team and the NZ fans, and I mean that genuinely, that was not a great performance overall. Kane was clearly the best batsmen but he should not have been able to get away with that SR and be so successful. Shit pitches and a great attack kept them in it. He is a ludicrously good batsmen but I don't think he's really suited to ODIs, not to modern ODIs anyway, which were in short supply in this tournament. Strike rate in the 70s when you're taking more balls than anyone else is too slow (20 less than Kohli and Root last time I checked)

AllThingsPurple · Jul 18, 2019

Glad to see Roy getting his chance in the test side. Dunno what I would have done if I had to watch Keaton Jennings bat again.

AllThingsPurple · Jul 18, 2019

Geoff said:
I don't think Williamson was that great never mind POTT. With the greatest of respect to him and his team and the NZ fans, and I mean that genuinely, that was not a great performance overall. Kane was clearly the best batsmen but he should not have been able to get away with that SR and be so successful. Shit pitches and a great attack kept them in it. He is a ludicrously good batsmen but I don't think he's really suited to ODIs, not to modern ODIs anyway, which were in short supply in this tournament. Strike rate in the 70s when you're taking more balls than anyone else is too slow (20 less than Kohli and Root last time I checked)

Agree he wasn't even close to player of the tournament but disagree with the rest of the assessment. His numbers are so similar to Roots. I think he was put under extra pressure to not lose his wicket this WC because no one else was doing anything with the bat.

Window · Jul 18, 2019

Geoff said:
I don't think Williamson was that great never mind POTT. With the greatest of respect to him and his team and the NZ fans, and I mean that genuinely, that was not a great performance overall. Kane was clearly the best batsmen but he should not have been able to get away with that SR and be so successful. Shit pitches and a great attack kept them in it. He is a ludicrously good batsmen but I don't think he's really suited to ODIs, not to modern ODIs anyway, which were in short supply in this tournament. Strike rate in the 70s when you're taking more balls than anyone else is too slow (20 less than Kohli and Root last time I checked)

In a vacuum, yeah his stats don't look hot. Keep in mind though he was the bedrock NZ's batting. They often had no one else to turn to. He had to play cautiously and get runs on the board. Look at how many English batsmen feature in the top 20 run getters and then look at NZ. Taylor was their next best bat and he averaged 39 at SR of 75. Williamson was immense in that respect. Extend that to top 40 and things look even more dire for NZ.

404LinkNotFound · Jul 18, 2019

Since this is now the OT. Ive never bought a cricket game before ,is Cricket 19 a good buy?

Zvonimir Boban · Jul 18, 2019

Zappy said:
He was annoyed at being called a racist over a tweet that was not about race. I'm not surprised. He apologised for his outburst and as the article explains "I do not think he is a racist"....he might be someone who can't take personal criticism well.

But it is ridiculous to take a tweet like that and try and extrapolate it.

He's been nothing but full of praise for Archer this world cup.

Here is the Jonathan Liew article which set off Aggers. You should read the whole thing.

It's not about Aggers, he's only in there for one quote. The "There's a word you can use here" is a couple of paragraphs later, after Vaughan and Bayliss have been quoted.

Aggers looked at an article written by an ethnic minority about how institutional and societal racism manifests itself consciously or subconsciously as double standards and did that thing that racists do of yelling "HOW DARE YOU CALL ME RACIST?!?!?!?! YOU'RE THE REAL RACIST" when that isn't at all what happened because they don't give a fuck about talking about the actual issue being discussed.

So I repeat, fuck Aggers.

PS Remember that time that Aggers got annoyed at Liew for daring to bring up the issue of white/class privilege and the old boys club and then being snide about that too?

I do.

Zvonimir Boban · Jul 18, 2019

404LinkNotFound said:
Since this is now the OT. Ive never bought a cricket game before ,is Cricket 19 a good buy?

If you've played a previous big ant cricket game it's basically the same thing again.

bobnowhere · Jul 18, 2019

Geoff · Jul 18, 2019

He did effectively call Aggers a racist in public and that's not on imo. Of course he was pissed off at that.

Zvonimir Boban · Jul 18, 2019

Geoff said:
He did effectively call Aggers a racist in public and that's not on imo. Of course he was pissed off at that.

Read the article.

Bringing up societal double standards is not the same as going up to every individual and saying "YOU are a racist"

Geoff · Jul 18, 2019

I have read. I read it when it was published and I've read it again.

He cites a lot of examples of people talking about the Archer selection and then suggests a word to describe "all this". We know what that word is and we know specifically which comments he was referring to because he has just listed them in the previous few paragraphs, Aggers' comments included.

Zvonimir Boban · Jul 18, 2019

Yeah because institutional racism and subconscious biases are a thing and need to be discussed.

The type of people who get personally offended by the issue being raised are usually either idiots or racists (or give zero fucks so are racist adjacent) so the fact that Aggers got so hot under the collar reveals quite a bit about himself.

Zappy · Jul 18, 2019

Zvonimir Boban said:
Here is the Jonathan Liew article which set off Aggers. You should read the whole thing.

It's not about Aggers, he's only in there for one quote. The "There's a word you can use here" is a couple of paragraphs later, after Vaughan and Bayliss have been quoted.

Aggers looked at an article written by an ethnic minority about how institutional and societal racism manifests itself consciously or subconsciously as double standards and did that thing that racists do of yelling "HOW DARE YOU CALL ME RACIST?!?!?!?! YOU'RE THE REAL RACIST" when that isn't at all what happened because they don't give a fuck about talking about the actual issue being discussed.

So I repeat, fuck Aggers.

PS Remember that time that Aggers got annoyed at Liew for daring to bring up the issue of white/class privilege and the old boys club and then being snide about that too?

I do.

Hang on a minute - was it "double standards" or was it that Aggers was expressing concern at bringing a newbie into a fairly well established WC squad a few weeks before the tournament? I read it as the latter. I imagine if suddenly Ballance for example had been parachuted into a WC squad that had more or less played together for the last 4 years exactly the same thing might be said.

I personally think that is the point Agnew was making. He's undoubtedly white middle class and undoubtedly will have some unconscious biases as we all do. But I think extrapolating that article from said tweet was a nonsense. The tweet made sense. And Agnew has been nothing but complimentary about Jofra since....

Geoff · Jul 18, 2019

They do need to be discussed but that discussion is not aided by padding it out with spurious examples that weaken the argument and needlessly damage reputations. Aggers wasn't upset about the issue being raised, he was, quite obviously, upset about being being personally accused of racism. Which most people would be upset about, especially given the benign nature of the comments under attack.

crazy monkey · Jul 18, 2019

Hi Dan request change of name from cricketera to cricket era so it is searchable. I do not have problem in merging but this side of the ot is more active compare to hangout it seems.

Dan said:
Why has this been renamed the official cricket thread when there's one here?

https://www.resetera.com/threads/cricketera-ot1-weird-a-bit-random-not-what-i-was-expecting.15037/

Bobson Dugnutt · Jul 18, 2019

This should absolutely be here, will just die on its arse again in hangouts

Hamchan · Jul 18, 2019

404LinkNotFound said:
Since this is now the OT. Ive never bought a cricket game before ,is Cricket 19 a good buy?

I find the Big Ant games to be very enjoyable cricket games (and it's not like there's much choice of the market these days). They are low budget and they always seem to have bugs but I find the gameplay satisfying. I think it's a good buy but if you can find Ashes Cricket for 1/4 of the price then it might be worth trying that out first because Cricket 19 isn't that big an improvement on it.

Zvonimir Boban · Jul 18, 2019

Geoff said:
They do need to be discussed but that discussion is not aided by padding it out with spurious examples that weaken the argument and needlessly damage reputations. Aggers wasn't upset about the issue being raised, he was, quite obviously, upset about being being personally accused of racism. Which most people would be upset about, especially given the benign nature of the comments under attack.

He wasn't personally accused of racism, Liew was talking about the English establishment as a whole and used quotes from a variety of individuals including players, coaches and media personalities to represent that.

Official Cricket Thread

User requested account closure

Self Requested Ban