• The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state with some features missing, normal posting/reading should now be possible.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

Chanderpaul

Status
Not open for further replies.
Twisted

Twisted

Striker
Could he have been the difference? almost certainly, 540 runs from 7 innings, would have come in very handy, and he came over at around the same time we lost stokes to england and our batting stuttered badly, losing a couple of crucial games.

would have restricted warks too. such a shame, really loved the fact that we had him, shame it was such a short stint. would much rather see him be paid than the money poured into LO players like miller and whoever else we signed for this season that never played. fun though it was to see ross taylor smash it round a bit our one day side needs major work before it ever becomes competitive one or two players are not going to make it great suddenly.
 

essex boy said:
Stoneman bottled it and got 70 when set when he should have got 150 in another game.

that cost us
Click to expand...

top scored for us in that match though iirc, wasnt that the low scoring loss to notts? 70 in a low scoring match like that is as good as 150 in another
 
Twisted said:
top scored for us in that match though iirc, wasnt that the low scoring loss to notts? 70 in a low scoring match like that is as good as 150 in another
Click to expand...

cant remember which game but it was a soft dismissal anarl
he needed to win us the game and failed
 
essex boy said:
cant remember which game but it was a soft dismissal anarl
he needed to win us the game and failed
Click to expand...

fairly sure it was the low scoring notts game. plenty of players got a chance and failed, i know rocky shouild have gone on to get 100 but always think its harsh to blame the guy who top scored!
 
Twisted said:
fairly sure it was the low scoring notts game. plenty of players got a chance and failed, i know rocky shouild have gone on to get 100 but always think its harsh to blame the guy who top scored!
Click to expand...

man in form thats why

he had to put his hand up but failed.

nearly but not quite good enough which is why we have narrowly missed out on the league
 
essex boy said:
man in form thats why

he had to put his hand up but failed.

nearly but not quite good enough which is why we have narrowly missed out on the league
Click to expand...

bit harsh on rocky there, hes only played in 4 matches and is averaging 54.6 without a n/o

compare that to muchall 34 ave in 13 matches despite starting the season very well. smith & diva both averaging 38.

looking at teh numbers they suggest missing rocky has cost us rather than his play
 
Twisted said:
bit harsh on rocky there, hes only played in 4 matches and is averaging 54.6 without a n/o

compare that to muchall 34 ave in 13 matches despite starting the season very well. smith & diva both averaging 38.

looking at teh numbers they suggest missing rocky has cost us rather than his play
Click to expand...

key moments in key games win titles

with the way the season was shaping up, we had to win that game and failed
 
essex boy said:
key moments in key games win titles

with the way the season was shaping up, we had to win that game and failed
Click to expand...

laughable mate, out of 4 games drawn and 4 games lost youre going to pick stoneman as the reason we didnt win the league despite the fact hes played 5 games of the season, 3rd in our batting table with an average of over 50
 
Twisted said:
laughable mate, out of 4 games drawn and 4 games lost youre going to pick stoneman as the reason we didnt win the league despite the fact hes played 5 games of the season, 3rd in our batting table with an average of over 50
Click to expand...

Harmison and Plunkett bowling in 8 matches between them is another reason
 
essex boy said:
they have the pedigree to be 50 wickets a season merchants
Click to expand...

they sure do, no argument at all, but both have been bowling very inconsistantly more so in harmison's case, puds was just poor this year.

will be happy to see them come back next year and hopefully firing properly
 
essex boy said:
Harmison and Plunkett bowling in 8 matches between them is another reason
Click to expand...

Yeah, I agree with Harmison. Plunkett is so frustrating, he has the skill to be top class but just can't do it consistently.

Anyway back to Shiv, I loved watching him at the Riverside for those two years and would sacrificed an over seas twenty20 player to get him back for the LV next year.
 
Marko said:
Yeah, I agree with Harmison. Plunkett is so frustrating, he has the skill to be top class but just can't do it consistently.

Anyway back to Shiv, I loved watching him at the Riverside for those two years and would sacrificed an over seas twenty20 player to get him back for the LV next year.
Click to expand...

its a tough one to call, because if we had got him back after his stint theres a good chance it would have ment no time in the first team for ben stokes and who knows how he would have turned out without that time. with him and borthwick looking likely to end up missing some time each year thats a lot of runs going missing and factoring in diva and benks age there are going to be a lot of runs to replace in all formats of the game
 
It seems everyone you speak to on here and elsewhere would rather we had a top-class batsman for the championship as overseas player. I don't know why the management is therefore insistent on only splashing cash on limited over formats...... I see no reason why we can't just get someone in for the whole season, someone who will play in all cricket. Someone who is international class at the longer format will still be able to hold a bat in Pro40 and T20 after all! Roll back the years to the times where you'd get ONE bloke for all the season and all forms of cricket IMO. Mike Hussey anyone?!
 
Its the schedule of International cricket nowadays that no players can commit, you may have to look to retired players or those that are not involved in their international side.

Would love to see Hussey back but the points above, you have to replace him at stages throughout the season.
 
willo said:
Its the schedule of International cricket nowadays that no players can commit, you may have to look to retired players or those that are not involved in their international side.

Would love to see Hussey back but the points above, you have to replace him at stages throughout the season.
Click to expand...

Exactly, and it's cheaper to get them in for the t20 as it's on the whole a more condensed competition (think of hotel costs for instance for a player in the t20 team compared to someone who stays for the whole season as well as his wage).
 
brandon said:
It seems everyone you speak to on here and elsewhere would rather we had a top-class batsman for the championship as overseas player. I don't know why the management is therefore insistent on only splashing cash on limited over formats...... I see no reason why we can't just get someone in for the whole season, someone who will play in all cricket. Someone who is international class at the longer format will still be able to hold a bat in Pro40 and T20 after all! Roll back the years to the times where you'd get ONE bloke for all the season and all forms of cricket IMO. Mike Hussey anyone?!
Click to expand...

Apparently it's finances stopping us getting an overseas player in. When you take into account Harmison's and now Colly's wages that isn't going to help either.
The 2012 seasons going to bring a big decision for the club judging twenty20 ticket prices, attendances, popularity.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top