Cricket... the game, not the insect

[bilby]

Test Cricket is about batting failing to score all the time.

I strongly disagree. Test cricket is about defending your wicket (for batsmen), or about getting batsmen out (for the bowlers and the fielders).

Limited overs cricket is about runs. Test cricket, much less so - the winner in a test is the first team to bowl their opponents out twice, and if neither team can do this in the time allotted, the match is drawn - which is a very common occurrence.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

My thoughts? *crickets*

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Test Cricket is about batting failing to score all the time.

I strongly disagree. Test cricket is about defending your wicket (for batsmen), or about getting batsmen out (for the bowlers and the fielders).

It isn't as funny that way though.

Limited overs cricket is about runs. Test cricket, much less so...

Unless you are captained by Ben Stokes.

- the winner in a test is the first team to bowl their opponents out twice...

If the first team batting has the lead after their second innings, that statement isn't true. The team with the most runs, if the losing team has been bowled out is the winner.

 

[bilby]

Test Cricket is about batting failing to score all the time.

I strongly disagree. Test cricket is about defending your wicket (for batsmen), or about getting batsmen out (for the bowlers and the fielders).

It isn't as funny that way though.

Limited overs cricket is about runs. Test cricket, much less so...

Unless you are captained by Ben Stokes.

- the winner in a test is the first team to bowl their opponents out twice...

If the first team batting has the lead after their second innings, that statement isn't true. The team with the most runs, if the losing team has been bowled out is the winner.

What I meant to say was that you cannot win without bowling your opponents out twice.

Only if both teams achieve that feat do runs matter; Hence the ability to declare - a test captain can decide that his team has enough runs on the board, and that his time is better spent trying to get wickets than it is trying to get any more runs; And the follow-on - a captain can choose to keep bowling at his opponent, rather than going in to bat, if that opponent is clearly inferior at defending their wickets after both teams have been in once.

Test cricket is primarily about wickets. Limited overs cricket is primarily about runs.

Of course, there are secondary considerations that can influence the final result, but that's the key reason why people who like cricket, hate 20 (or 50) over matches.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

With rain in the Ireland fixture, the US qualified for the Super Eight, which is utterly unexpected. Pakistan is going to be asking lots of questions. The US will be in a group with England, South Africa, and West Indies. The other big news is that Bangladesh moves on while New Zeeland doesn't.

It is hard to really get a feel for what any of this means, whether there is parity or whether this was a complete waste of time. The other group is Bangladesh, India, Australia, and Afghanistan. So while we've definitely whittled a lot of dead wood like Uganda, Oman, and Scotland, the final 8 don't look Super.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

US held tight with South Africa, losing by 18 runs. South Africa wasn't able to capture the huge usual take in the last few overs, where as the US were down 76-5 (11.1), and managed to turn the collapse into a possible though unlikely comeback. That was mainly done via the bat of Gous in the second half of the chase.

I'm completely unaware of where the US is finding this.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

And the US collapses, falling to West Indies and England like a rock. Don't know whether they were finally figured out, but their performance what was expected in the Tournament from the get go. But congrats a rather over their weight class performance. Afghanistan and Bangladesh play the final game to set the finals. Afghanistan can move on and replace Australia with a solid win against Bangladesh.