Cricket 2004 in North America

O

ogtrini

Guest

Will cricket 2004 be available in Canada? if not can i buy it from the u.k and will it work on my ps2 or do i have to get something else in order for it to work? please let me know. i want dis game :)
 
sadly enough my cpu beats all requiremnts but the video card...same with mp2...it beats all requiremtns but vram...well i will give u a heads up, i plan to break into one of your houses(preferably somebody witha good spec) and take your cpu, dont worry i will reutrn soon as i am done wiht c2k4(about a year)
 
Originally posted by ogtrini@Nov 5 2003, 01:30 AM

Will cricket 2004 be available in Canada? if not can i buy it from the u.k and will it work on my ps2 or do i have to get something else in order for it to work? please let me know. i want dis game :)

I don't know if it will be available in Canada, but the UK version wouldn't work as North America is on the inferior NTSC TV system, not the PAL system. That's the PS2 version mind you, the PC version would work fine, and will be a lot better.

However, as Canada are one of the teams, I suppose there's an outside chance that the Canadian Cricket Association might do some sort of offer where you can get the game from them.
 
please man the CCA ist even organized well...and andrew he could mean he gota ps2 from england?
 
andrew are u joking? The CCA...is just room or little aprtment in missuaga...plus y would thye give us a game...it would just cost them, and they barely sent canada to winides to play in the recent bowl....and adrew may i know where it said ICC recgonzies canada...plus icc is a bit of a joke
 
I can't remember where it said, nor can I be bothered looking. And why is the ICC a joke?

Without wanting to get too far into real cricket, the CCA never intended to send a full strength side to the Red Stripe Bowl, they wanted to try out new players before Canada take part in the 6 nations trophy and intercontinental cup next year.
 
the ratings are pure corrupt...in favourof england...certain laws work in englands way...ie players going to england...i feel if u have played for your countyr for a certain period of time, then u cant switch...i dont even think hick shouldnt have switched...england may have invaded but your nationalty is your nationality...moreover if players switched....think about it pak and ind would combine and would demolsih eveyr team in the world including australia...we just use spin...also icc is so inconsisent with punishments

I didnt say icc is a full joke but i said they were a BIT of a joke
 
Originally posted by amir51@Nov 6 2003, 03:30 AM
the ratings are pure corrupt...in favourof england...certain laws work in englands way...ie players going to england...i feel if u have played for your countyr for a certain period of time, then u cant switch...i dont even think hick shouldnt have switched...
If the ratings are in favour of England, why have England never been number one?

Have you any idea how long someone has to live in a country before they can play for it? FIVE years. In Hick's case the laws were tougher, he had to live in England for 7 years.
 
but i still find that unfair, just because englanded invaded doesnt mean u go back....moreover englands is never number oen because there is no formula...to rank them up their....moreover they changed there rating system duringthe first test at lords between zim and eng and the funny thing is eng went from from 7 to 3 or 4
 
What has England invading and colonising a country hundreds of years ago got to do with someone choosing to play for another country?

The rating system was not changed during the England .v. Zimbabwe Test. Older games were taken off the calculation.
 
i find that wrong...england had a bad run and that was taken off....it isnt the other teams fault englandcouldnt make super sixes...
 
You've gone from talking about the Test ratings to talking about the super sixes in the World Cup! I give up.

And it wasn't just England who had matches taken off, everybody did.

If you don't know what you're talking about, don't bother.

And as I said before, which you seem to be ignoring now....... What has England invading and colonising a country hundreds of years ago got to do with someone choosing to play for another country?
 
I jsut feel the icc should have stronger by laws...like all these south africans, aussies and zimbawaweans all fel they r english descent and feel the right they have a chance to go to england, een though they have served the countyr for a certain time(ie Warne was thinking about it, Law was thinking about it and now flower signs as an englishmen)...i find itquite unfair...moreover...

what was this topic about oh yeah c2k4 in north america, i dont think it will be because there isnt a big enough market, yes i know there is many who want it like I but again we dont make a big market...maybe all u board memebrs should migrate to canada or Us...but canada has the true cricket talent(we made cwc)...lol
 
It has nothing to do with the ICC.

The reason the players can play in England is that they have a European Union passport. Under European Union law, if you have an EU passport you can not be restricted from working within the European Union. If they want to play for England, however, they have to live in England for at least 8 months in a year, for 5 years, ie. they have to essentially give up their careers for their country.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top