Sep 27 - Sri Lanka v New Zealand
- Thread starter Paki007
- Start date
Fenil
PC Cricket Leagues Legend
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2011
This was the 3rd time that a T20I match played between this two teams has went into the super over. This is also the first time SL has managed to win the match against NZ in the superover. In 10 head to head matches, the scores stand 5 each for both sides. Shows how nail bitting the matches have been between the two teams.
Based on 4 overs? When he was bowling with an injection to dull his injury pain? You might be right, but it's a bit early to be making those kind of calls I think. Fair to say that Nicol got a hold of him, not sure any of the other Kiwis did.
Glad Rob Nicol finally got going last night. Have to admit that after a few overs and he was almost caught out at deep square, I was hoping that he WOULD get caught so McCullum could come in.
Glad Rob Nicol finally got going last night. Have to admit that after a few overs and he was almost caught out at deep square, I was hoping that he WOULD get caught so McCullum could come in.
StinkyBoHoon
National Board President
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2009
- Location
- Glasgow, Scotland
some odd bowling changes by the captains there. both teams under-used their seam options (sri lanka not even bowling perera) even though spin was proving no more effective.
hope they play dananjaya a bit more, I'm not sure he's particularly special yet but it's nice to see a young kid with such enthusiasm running about giving it his all.
----------
oh war, not this old chestnut. he's simultaneously the most over-rated and under-rated bowler about.
he's been injured for ages (And was carrying an injury in this match actually) and has hardly played. "back to his average self" you mean the most economical bowler at the world cup? he's managed 2 twenty20s since then and one of them included a 6 wicket haul against australia.
hope they play dananjaya a bit more, I'm not sure he's particularly special yet but it's nice to see a young kid with such enthusiasm running about giving it his all.
----------
oh war, not this old chestnut. he's simultaneously the most over-rated and under-rated bowler about.
he's been injured for ages (And was carrying an injury in this match actually) and has hardly played. "back to his average self" you mean the most economical bowler at the world cup? he's managed 2 twenty20s since then and one of them included a 6 wicket haul against australia.
War
Chairman of Selectors
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2010
- Online Cricket Games Owned
StinkyBoHoon said:
Based on what i've seen of him in recent series, i think their is much evidence to support the talk that some form of "decoding" of his bowling has happened since superb 2008 debut series of his vs India.
Kumar and Mahela are smart leaders of SRI too who i know rate him. The fact that they too in tests since Murali has retired has being using Herath and Randiv alot too, is also a pretty good sign that they also think something is not right with him, instead of being influenced by media hype or him being over-rated etc..
Even in that series when he took 6 for vs Australia, i put that down to just AUS being bamboozled by him on the night. Otherwise after that game, AUS played him very competently en route to winning the preceding ODIs on that tour.
StinkyBoHoon
National Board President
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2009
- Location
- Glasgow, Scotland
they played him fairly well, he took 3 against them in the last game and he was sri lanka's second highest wicket taker in the series although it was a pretty poor series for them.
and what about during the world cup? he was the most economical bowler.
he's a good bowler in the limited over formats, not a great one but he certainly knows what he's doing. any other bowler had returned similar figures over two matches they'd probably be noting that the pitch out there wasn't really that helpful for spin bowlers, that the bowler in question was carrying an injury and had bowled poorly in his last over. they wouldn't be trotting out this buzz word "decoded" which is just lazily applied to mendis.
and what about during the world cup? he was the most economical bowler.
he's a good bowler in the limited over formats, not a great one but he certainly knows what he's doing. any other bowler had returned similar figures over two matches they'd probably be noting that the pitch out there wasn't really that helpful for spin bowlers, that the bowler in question was carrying an injury and had bowled poorly in his last over. they wouldn't be trotting out this buzz word "decoded" which is just lazily applied to mendis.
War
Chairman of Selectors
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2010
- Online Cricket Games Owned
Yea no doubt he was the most economical and was very dangerous in the world cup to most teams on helpul home pitches.
But as i said, even for the big final, the very astute senior guys like Sanga and Jaya, still axed him from that final, in somewhat fear of the Indian batsmen based on the pummelling he got from them in the 2009 test series in India i reckon.
Maybe that was bad decision from those two at the time, but it does highlight that even those in Sri Lanka had some reservations about his ability.
But as i said, even for the big final, the very astute senior guys like Sanga and Jaya, still axed him from that final, in somewhat fear of the Indian batsmen based on the pummelling he got from them in the 2009 test series in India i reckon.
Maybe that was bad decision from those two at the time, but it does highlight that even those in Sri Lanka had some reservations about his ability.
ferg512
International Coach
I think thats pretty unfair that we didn't even get a point from this game. I have no problem with the super over but why not give the winner 2 and the loser 1?
What's happened to McCullum's scoop? The way he played Tait with it in his first T20I hundred was really quite superb, yet even since then it seems that he's put it away, especially recently. It would have been perfect last night against Malinga in the super over, considering that every ball was going to be full. Also I've seen Nathan McCullum play it as well, yet he wasn't prepared to use it against Malinga at the death either.
None the less our bowlers lost it in the first several overs, that match really had no right to be that close. It was always going to come down to Sri Lanka's top three, considering the averageness of their middle order, and we just didn't execute any sort of plan to them. Southee should probably just bowl overs 14, 16, 18, and 20, because bowling length in the powerplay to quality batsmen is just suicide.
None the less our bowlers lost it in the first several overs, that match really had no right to be that close. It was always going to come down to Sri Lanka's top three, considering the averageness of their middle order, and we just didn't execute any sort of plan to them. Southee should probably just bowl overs 14, 16, 18, and 20, because bowling length in the powerplay to quality batsmen is just suicide.
I'm right with you sir. Seems ridiculous that Ireland and West Indies can get a point for getting rained on, but NZ get nothing for tieing a match. My way to solve it would be both teams should get a point, and the winner of the super over should get a bonus point.
StinkyBoHoon
National Board President
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2009
- Location
- Glasgow, Scotland
agree, I don't really see why tiess are a problem, the halved points probably makes for a fairer system seeing who goes through than NRR does.
well, I tend to think it was a poor decision. it seemed well weird that a player previously left out of the squad, and therefor behind even the back up spinner, all of a sudden jumped up the pecking order and started in a final.
my opinion on mendis is he doesn't toss it up enough now, he was bowling loopier in that 2008 series. I saw him play live last year and he tends to spear the ball at the ground too much. I think this is helping batsmen get to the pitch of his bowling too much and on unhelpful tracks is probably why when they come down the wicket to go after him he can get rattled. I don't really think the "decoding" thing plays much of a part.
well, I tend to think it was a poor decision. it seemed well weird that a player previously left out of the squad, and therefor behind even the back up spinner, all of a sudden jumped up the pecking order and started in a final.
my opinion on mendis is he doesn't toss it up enough now, he was bowling loopier in that 2008 series. I saw him play live last year and he tends to spear the ball at the ground too much. I think this is helping batsmen get to the pitch of his bowling too much and on unhelpful tracks is probably why when they come down the wicket to go after him he can get rattled. I don't really think the "decoding" thing plays much of a part.
Chewie
BCCI President
I think that sort of thing makes it kinda unfair because the amount of points that should be generated from a match should always be 2 otherwise it can be unfair; a team that is in a tie has the potential to get more points sort of thing. Having 0.5 and 1.5 however would be a bit better
