|We hope you enjoy your visit.|
You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.
Join our community!
If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:
|England v Australia|
|Topic Started: September 3, 2009, 1:40 pm (207 Views)|
|Mackem ref||September 3, 2009, 1:40 pm Post #1|
Two points I would like to raise:
1) How come a game is abandonned for having a dangerous bowlers run up. when there is a game starting on exactly the same pitch less than 24 hours later, that manages to get underway on time. Add to this the fact that conditions "weren't going to significantly improve", and the fact that the abandonned game was only a twenty20, whereas the game that got underway was a 4 day county game. Where is the sense in that?
2) How can England say it was a good decision to abandon the game, with regards to the safety of the players, and then go and play football as a warm up. England have a history of football related casualties:
James Anderson twisted his ankle in New Zealand
Ian Bell turned his ankle ahead of the 3rd Ashes test
Matt Prior had a back spasm before the 4th Ashes test
And the lastest one: Joe Denly injuring his knee ahead of the 1st ODI
All of these are football related injuries that have occured to the England cricket team in the past, yet they want a game abandonned, all because one part of the square is a little bit damp. What a complete joke!!!
Rant over :@
|Life's a bitch, and then you die|
|1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)|
|« Previous Topic · Cricket · Next Topic »|