• The forums will be unavailable for a few hours on Saturday 6th June, when they do return they will initially be in a degraded state with some features missing, but normal posting/reading will be possible. The main website will not be affected by these updates.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

England vs Sri Lanka - 1st test

Status
Not open for further replies.

rentaghost said:
Its absolutely f***ing ridiculous that Trott gets some stick and borders on racism. His knock was as usual phenomenal and the bedrock of our innings. MOM? close call - I would have went for Swann but its far from a ridiculous choice
Click to expand...

You can't knock his contribution and he is going from strength to strength his stubbornness, focus and application is something england have needed for years even if at times he is a little boring and irratating. Him being SA doesn't bother me tbh might as well use our immogration laws to benefit us IMO and many SA have a very English background anyway.

Still didn't win us the match though.

essex boy said:
will only be temporary if we dont win in the sub continent
Click to expand...

you said england need to beat two good sides this summer now after a win against one its not good enough:lol:

Conditions are two way streets India need to come and win over here to prove they're the best team.
 
rentaghost said:
Its absolutely f***ing ridiculous that Trott gets some stick and borders on racism. His knock was as usual phenomenal and the bedrock of our innings. MOM? close call - I would have went for Swann but its far from a ridiculous choice
Click to expand...

I don't like Trott cos I think he's a mercenary and of course he played a good innings but with our lower order I still think we could have made 600. Without Swann we'd never have won though. That's an opinion based on cricket not racism.
 
eddyfinn said:
You can't knock his contribution and he is going from strength to strength his stubbornness, focus and application is something england have needed for years even if at times he is a little boring and irratating. Him being SA doesn't bother me tbh might as well use our immogration laws to benefit us IMO and many SA have a very English background anyway.

Still didn't win us the match though.



you said england need to beat two good sides this summer now after a win against one its not good enough:lol:

Conditions are two way streets India need to come and win over here to prove they're the best team.
Click to expand...

Were nothing more than South Africa A anyway, only two of the top 7 are English born :lol:
 
Andy.SAFC said:
Strange that not a thing was made of Strauss and Prior being born in South Africa until Trott and Pietersen came into the team.
Click to expand...

It's not as simplistic as that though is it. Those two are far more 'English' than the two you mentioned.

I know the majority just say pick the best team but it would be nice if three English lads played ahead of those two and Morgan.
 
NorthCountryBoy said:
It's not as simplistic as that though is it. Those two are far more 'English' than the two you mentioned.

I know the majority just say pick the best team but it would be nice if three English lads played ahead of those two and Morgan.
Click to expand...

I know, that's not the point I was making. Before Trott and Pietersen (who has an English parent) came into the side no one cared that Strauss and Prior were born in South Africa. It's only now there are more Saffers in the team that them two get mentioned.

And also, the people who are complaining about the number of none English players in the team are probably also talking about Ben Stokes getting a call up.
 
Last edited:
surprising but magnificent win for England, really bowled well.

As for this whole english debate, i personally dont have a problem with the Pietersens,strauss,prior,kieswetter,morgan who from an early/ish age set out to play for England, they showed a commitment and desire to qualify in some cases to play for their adopted country.

Trott is slighty different in that he chose to play after being overlooked by South Africa but that makes him no different to Tahir who now plays for SA, and Nash for WI.

IMO if your good enough to play test cricket then you should do everything you can to play. Cos it cant be right that for example someone as talented as S Law only played 1 test for Australia.

I know this is long, and apoligies if you feel ive wasted your time, feel free to hit me next time you c me ;)
 
Andy.SAFC said:
I know, that's not the point I was making. Before Trott and Pietersen (who has an English parent) came into the side no one cared that Strauss and Prior were born in South Africa. It's only now there are more Saffers in the team that them two get mentioned.

And also, the people who are complaining about the number of none English players in the team are probably also talking about Ben Stokes getting a call up.
Click to expand...

At least Stokes had some education here which makes him fair game ( but I see your point).

Re Scotch saying it's not right that Stuart Law only played one Test, well it's just tough. Should George Best have been allowed to play for Italy in the 1970 World Cup because Northern Ireland weren't that good?
 
NorthCountryBoy said:
At least Stokes had some education here which makes him fair game ( but I see your point).

Re Scotch saying it's not right that Stuart Law only played one Test, well it's just tough. Should George Best have been allowed to play for Italy in the 1970 World Cup because Northern Ireland weren't that good?
Click to expand...

Im saying that cricket allows players to switch countries if they do the qualy time and that unless they change the rules we should just accept that the Trotts of the world will play for whoever they can bcos clearly they r good enough.
 
scotch said:
Im saying that cricket allows players to switch countries if they do the qualy time and that unless they change the rules we should just accept that the Trotts of the world will play for whoever they can bcos clearly they r good enough.
Click to expand...

You are of course correct in saying that nothing illegal regarding qualification has gone on, but in the cold light of day it's just wrong, no if's but's or maybe's.
 
It's nice to see the English cricket system can take a bunch of the world's cast offs and turn them into a team of world beaters. They must look on with very envious eyes indeed :lol:
 
scotch said:
surprising but magnificent win for England, really bowled well.

As for this whole english debate, i personally dont have a problem with the Pietersens,strauss,prior,kieswetter,morgan who from an early/ish age set out to play for England, they showed a commitment and desire to qualify in some cases to play for their adopted country.

Trott is slighty different in that he chose to play after being overlooked by South Africa but that makes him no different to Tahir who now plays for SA, and Nash for WI.

IMO if your good enough to play test cricket then you should do everything you can to play. Cos it cant be right that for example someone as talented as S Law only played 1 test for Australia.

I know this is long, and apoligies if you feel ive wasted your time, feel free to hit me next time you c me ;)
Click to expand...

Trott played for South Africa Under 19 as did Pietersen, the same age as Cook when he made his England debut :lol:
 
To be fair isn't Trotts mother English, same with KP.

I know what your saying.

Is there any highlights of the final day up? Im in Oz.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top