Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Cricket World Cup 2023

Williamson out of the world cup then with a fractured finger

So unlucky. He didn't even get hit by a bowler. He got hit by the ball during an attempted run out.

Anyway, tournament has been trash so far. Maybe today will be better. And maybe not.
 
So unlucky. He didn't even get hit by a bowler. He got hit by the ball during an attempted run out.

Anyway, tournament has been trash so far. Maybe today will be better. And maybe not.

I wouldn't even call it an attempted run out. He was just coasting in and the fielder hiffed it at him anyway. This should have been his swansong. Latham seems a fairly good captain though.
 
Curran is supposed to be the all-sorts death specialist. I still don't see it. I see him get tonked like this more often than not.

But Curran and Woakes have flopped in the WC so far.

We'll see if the match is competitive, but this innings has shown the value of the 50-over format. Afghanistan off to a flyer, England pulling it right back, and now the game feels like it's in the balance.
 
Don't know what your beef with Curran is. He's a brilliant player.

This has been the shittest world cup since 2007 however. 50 over cricket is surely dead. They can't wedge more cricket in than they currently do.

Major league baseball hasn't messed with its format since its inception so I've no idea why we keep doing so. Lose 50 overs, clearly nobody cares about it, T20 and tests please.
 
Major league baseball hasn't messed with its format since its inception so I've no idea why we keep doing so. Lose 50 overs, clearly nobody cares about it, T20 and tests please.

The cricket world cup has only been held 12 times but there have been half a dozen different winners.

How many countries have ever won the World Series?
 
Cricket seems to have an inferiority complex thats all. Constantly trying to reinvent itself. I mean, we have the fucking Hundred now. The most ludicrous yet. Test cricket is the apex. Let's leave that. And have T20 to understandably get families in for a 3 hour evening out. The 50 over thing is neither here nor there and there's simply no time for top players anymore to do it all.
 
My beef with Curran is that I don't think he's very good. He had a very good T20 WC last year, but aside from that, he's done very little at international level. His ODI numbers are ordinary.
 
My beef with Curran is that I don't think he's very good. He had a very good T20 WC last year, but aside from that, he's done very little at international level. His ODI numbers are ordinary.

Ben Stokes' numbers aren't great either. Curran strikes at the right time.
 
Ben Stokes' numbers aren't great either. Curran strikes at the right time.
Stokes' numbers are way better than Curran's. In tests, he has more wickets per game at a better average, and he has scored more than 50% more runs per game at a 50% higher average. In ODIs, Stokes' numbers reflect what he is, a batting allrounder - his batting numbers are very strong. Curran has the batting numbers of a bowling allrounder and bowling numbers of a batting allrounder in every format except T20I, in which he has the numbers of a bowling specialist.

wrt striking at the right time, I did a bit of a dive into Curran's test numbers a while back because commentators kept saying that he had the 'knack' of taking important wickets. He doesn't. His wickets are evenly distributed between top and lower order. If anything there is a bias towards taking the lower order.
 
Last edited:
Stokes' numbers are way better than Curran's. In tests, he has more wickets per game at a better average, and he has scored more than 50% more runs per game at a 50% higher average. In ODIs, Stokes' numbers reflect what he is, a batting allrounder - his batting numbers are very strong. Curran has the batting numbers of a bowling allrounder and bowling numbers of a batting allrounder in every format except T20I, in which he has the numbers of a bowling specialist.

wrt striking at the right time, I did a bit of a dive into Curran's test numbers a while back because commentators kept saying that he had the 'knack' of taking important wickets. He doesn't. His wickets are evenly distributed between top and lower order. If anything there is a bias towards taking the lower order.

I think my point is that they seem to both have the knack of turning up in the big moments

Edit: I don't particularly rate him either and I know you dont watch the IPL but he does put in some very impressive performances there when required. He wouldn't get paid millions if he didn't. He's a good cricketer, using his capabilities to their maximum.
 
We've looked exhausted in the last few games. Great for Afghanistan if they can close this out.
 
Back
Top Bottom