Stanford 2020 for $20 Million

[Sureshot]

I was comparing them to the West Indian cricketers and West Indies in general. We don't need this money, and I'd take a loss to improve the game in the West Indies.

 

[aussie_ben91]

If you asked anyone who watches England, who isn't English then they'd say the exact same thing about Pietersen carrying England. Sure there is the old game where someone else stands up but in general and 85% of the time, it's all about Pietersen making a score or England are doomed and when Pietersen doesn't play or doesn't make runs then England aren't that much better then Bangladesh.

Yeah, Stuart Broad is a deadly Test Match bowler. He is technically better then Johnson, that's why he constantly fails in Test cricket despite bowling the most bowler friendly conditions in world cricket. Atleast Johnson takes wickets, you can't fluke taking International wickets for a period of 3 years and he takes more genuine wickets then what Stuart Broad does.
Just admit it, Stuart Broad is the most overrated young bowler in International cricket. He hardly looks dangerous and struggles against New Zealand. He gets destroyed by decent ODI batsman aswell (Yuvraj Singh hitting him for 6 sixes in an over). His Test bowling average will never drop below 30.

 

[King Pietersen]

Yeh, because Bangladesh and Zimbabwe have a full top 5 plus Keeper who average 40+ in Test Cricket. Use your intelligence for once Ben. If we were so dependant on Pietersen the other guys would be averaging under 35, but they all average over 40. No team with 6 players averaging over 40 are carried by 1 specific player.

Yeh, Broad really gets destroyed by decent ODi batsmen. Oh hang on, he was the best bowler by a mile in the England-South Africa series, the team that are 2nd in the world, with guys like Gibbs, Smith, and Kallis in their side. He really got destroyed by them in his 5-23 from 10 overs didn't he. I'm looking forward to the 2009 Ashes, Broad's going to be a real top bowler at that stage and he'll rip into your batting line-up, while Johnson gets spanked about by Ian Bell. Going to be very enjoyable.

 

[Leicester Fox]

Ben obviously the fact we beat Australia without KP in must mean you're really crap. Or the fact KP has only hit about 1 century in an England win. Scoring 296 against the saffies with a KP duck? Bowling them out so cheaply we don't need him? But yeah carry on, why let facts get in the way of your argument.

As for the Broad hate you are right, but he will prove you wrong in due course, just like he did to all the haters in ODI's. No doubt whatsoever, especially as the selectors seems to like him so much

 

[karnog]

Actually Ben has a point. Cook and Bell make pretty 40 to 60s so whenever there's a quick wicket or two you can never rely on them. They're there to support not to take any game by the scruff. Strauss and Vaughan have been woefully out of form. Flintoff had a bad time of it with the bat. Shah is unproven. It all rested on Pietersen and Collingwood. If either performed England would be very competitive and possibly win. Ben's emotions are getting the better of him though. Even without KP and Colly performing England are light years ahead of Bangladesh and Zimbabwe.

 

[Skater]

The Stanford Superstars were simply awesome. I voted for Sylvester Joseph to captain them in the poll after seeing the first match, but Chris Gayle was superb. An absolute masterstroke to bowl Darren Sammy first, when England would have been expecting Jerome Taylor and Daren Powell. I don't think I've seen a gameplan work so well on a cricket field before.

I feel the result was right, even before the Superstars played like this. Our players don't need the money. You can say that they earn about as much in a year as a Premier League footballer does in a week, but that is still a huge amount compared to the everyman in this country. Our players were going to buy flash new cars (in Graeme Swann's case a new fridge!) whilst the Superstars players were going to do much more noble things with the money. Lionel Baker is going to finish his mother's house, Andre Fletcher is going to invest it. Great stuff.

This whole week, in one word, has been enjoyable. Paul Allott was spot on when he said the British press had gone to Antigua with a pre-determined idea of what this series was, and now it has been a good tournament they can't admit it because they will be hypocritical. Stanford seems to be doing this for the right reasons. He said he wanted to get cricket back in the West Indies, and he has certainly done that by the look of the quality of cricket and the size of the crowds. People complain about the money, but that is what sport is.

 

[Ollie_H]

Maybe there should be a new AA group formed ...Arogant Aussies

 

[karnog]

I hope your not including me in that group
I think England are a good side. All they need is a good number 3 and they're set. Like i said Shah is unproven.

 

[Ollie_H]

Naa i'm not including you in it mate...

 

[karnog]

sweet

Couldn't have been much easier for either Chanderpaul or Sarwan. They did nothing. Absolutely nothing. Easiest mil i've ever seen.

 

[aussie_ben91]

Ben obviously the fact we beat Australia without KP in must mean you're really crap. Or the fact KP has only hit about 1 century in an England win. Scoring 296 against the saffies with a KP duck? Bowling them out so cheaply we don't need him? But yeah carry on, why let facts get in the way of your argument.

You lost 5-0 with KP. The only Test Match you put up show form of challenge was in the 2nd Test at Adelaide. It's not a cocinidence that that's the only Test that Pietersen scored a 100 in and the only Test that an Englishmen scored a 100 in, in the entire series.

Yeh, because Bangladesh and Zimbabwe have a full top 5 plus Keeper who average 40+ in Test Cricket. Use your intelligence for once Ben. If we were so dependant on Pietersen the other guys would be averaging under 35, but they all average over 40. No team with 6 players averaging over 40 are carried by 1 specific player.

Yeh, Broad really gets destroyed by decent ODi batsmen. Oh hang on, he was the best bowler by a mile in the England-South Africa series, the team that are 2nd in the world, with guys like Gibbs, Smith, and Kallis in their side. He really got destroyed by them in his 5-23 from 10 overs didn't he. I'm looking forward to the 2009 Ashes, Broad's going to be a real top bowler at that stage and he'll rip into your batting line-up, while Johnson gets spanked about by Ian Bell. Going to be very enjoyable.

LMFAO @ the Broad ripping through the Australian lineup comment.
He'll never rip through the Australian batting lineup, we're just too good for a mediocre bowler like Broad.
His the sort of bowler that Matthew Hayden will absolutely toil up and constantly walk down the wicket and swat him over midwicket for 6.
Mitchell Johnson is a better bowler then Broad will ever be and that's saying something!
The only bowler from England that's capable of ripping through a decent Test batting lineup is Andrew Flintoff.

You read into statistics too much. England truly does struggle when Pietersen doesn't make runs. English supporters are getting defensive because they know I'm right.

 

[Leicester Fox]

Wait till next year.

I was talking aout ODI's. In tests we are more reliant on KP atm yes, but that is more down the fact Bell,Fred and Strauss are unreliable whilst Cook and Collingwood are both out of form.

 

[King Pietersen]

You lost 5-0 with KP. The only Test Match you put up show form of challenge was in the 2nd Test at Adelaide. It's not a cocinidence that that's the only Test that Pietersen scored a 100 in and the only Test that an Englishmen scored a 100 in, in the entire series.

Wrong. Cook made a hundred at Perth, Pietersen didn't.

LMFAO @ the Broad ripping through the Australian lineup comment.
He'll never rip through the Australian batting lineup, we're just too good for a mediocre bowler like Broad.
His the sort of bowler that Matthew Hayden will absolutely toil up and constantly walk down the wicket and swat him over midwicket for 6.
Mitchell Johnson is a better bowler then Broad will ever be and that's saying something!
The only bowler from England that's capable of ripping through a decent Test batting lineup is Andrew Flintoff.

You'd imagine that the South African batting line-up would be too good for Broad as well then if he's only mediocre. But his 5-23 in 10 overs against the 2nd best ODi team in the world proves he's not medicore. He's one of the top opening bowlers in ODi cricket. Later on in your post you claim that I'm reading too much into statistics, yet you support Mitchell Johnson, who without his statistics would be seen as an awful bowler. As I mentioned before, Broad's got similar pace, better accuracy, can bowl to plans, got good variations, gets better bounce, and has been incredibly unlucky not to big up more wickets in Test cricket. The only series where he looked out of his depth was in Sri Lanka, he was immense in New Zealand, and the introduction of Anderson and Broad into the Test attack helped us win that series.

Harmison and Anderson aren't good enough to rip through a batting lineup then? You're so biased that it's untrue. Harmison's a brilliant bowler, and in swinging conditions Anderson's the best in the world. Ask New Zealand, India and South Africa

You read into statistics too much. England truly does struggle when Pietersen doesn't make runs. English supporters are getting defensive because they know I'm right.

No, if I knew I was wrong I wouldn't have bothered with continuing the argument. Seems to me that you're the one on the defensive, considering I'm the one who's actually given any evidence to prove my argument. I gave a number of examples to disprove your Pietersen theory and could have given alot more. Also, you claiming that I read into statistics too much is one of the funniest things I've ever read. You're the one who claims Gordon Greenidge is a medicore player because of his average.

Here are a few more Pietersen examples if you want them:

England vs Australia- 2005 Old Trafford- Pietersen fails, Vaughan makes hundred, Bell makes 50, 2nd innings, Pietersen fails, Strauss makes hundred.

England vs Australia, 2005 Edgbaston- Pietersen fails 2nd innings, Flintoff makes 78.

England vs West Indies- Chester Le Street- Pietersen fails in first innings getting a duck, Collingwood scores hundred.

England vs India- Mumbai- Pietersen fails in first innings, Strauss scored hundred, Shah scores 88

England vs Pakistan- Multan- Pietersen fails in first innings, Trescothick makes hundred, Bell scores 71.

England vs Sri Lanka- Kandy- Pietersen fails, Bell makes 83 (Thought he doesn’t make runs when Pietersen fails? =/)

England vs Pakistan- Old Trafford, Pietersen fails, Cook and Bell make hundreds

England vs Sri Lanka- Colombo- Pietersen fails, Vaughan and Cook make 80’s

England vs New Zealand- Wellington- Pietersen fails, Ambrose and Collingwood make big runs with hundred for Ambrose.

England vs New Zealand- Napier- Pietersen fails 2nd innings, Bell (=/ Made runs again) and Strauss make hundreds.

England vs New Zealand- Old Trafford- Pietersen fails 2nd innings, Strauss makes hundred.

England vs New Zealand- Lords- Pietersen fails 1st innings, Vaughan makes hundred, Strauss and Cook make 60’s.

England vs South Africa- Headingley- Pietersen fails 2nd innings, Broad and Cook make 60’s.

England vs South Africa- Edgbaston- Pietersen fails, Cook and Bell make fifties

 

[aussie_ben91]

Pietersen's played atleast over 100 International games since 2005 and there have only been 14 times when he hasn't contributed but someone else has. I said approximedly 85% of the time aswell. Point proven, thank you.

LOL
Broad's put together one good performance in bowler friendly conditions in a ODI.
Mitchell Johnson's destroyed India twice in subcontinental conditions, both 4/14 and 5/29.
Those performances don't make Johnson a "world-class" bowler.
Also, the fact that you say Broad has "similar pace, better accuracy, can bowl to plans, got good variations, gets better bounce, and has been incredibly unlucky not to big up more wickets" is a complete exaggeration. Broad only looks comparable to Johnson because he bowls in more favourable conditions. If Broad had've taken the same roote as Johnson has in his career then Broad would rank along side the likes of Mohammad Sami as he would easily succumb in difficult conditions.
Johnson has also dismissed far more superior batsman then what Broad has. As in players who average over 50 in Test Cricket and have decent ODI's records. I could've added lesser batsman but Johnson would still be miles ahead and it's more a waste of time then anything else.

List of Class Batsman Mitchell Johnson has dismissed:
Tests: Rahul Dravid (3), Virender Sehwag (3), Sachin Tendulkar (2), Mahela Jayawardena and Kumar Sangakkara.
ODIs: Sachin Tendulkar (3), Mahela Jayawardena (2), Rahul Dravid, Shivnarine Chanderpaul, Kumar Sangakkara, Virender Sehwag, Kevin Pietersen and Brian Lara.

List of Class Batsman Stuart Broad has dismissed:
Tests: None.
ODIs: Kumar Sangakkara (3), Mahela Jayawardena, Jacques Kallis and Younis Khan.

 

[King Pietersen]

Those were only Test match examples actually Ben, so 14 examples from 43 tests, doesn't work out at 85% from where I'm sitting.

As for players that Broad has dismissed:

Tests:
Brendan McCullum, Stephen Fleming, Ross Taylor, Hashim Amla, Mark Boucher, AB De Villiers and Neil McKenzie

ODi's:
Younis Khan, Dwayne Bravo, Yuvraj Singh, Gautham Gambhir, Sourav Ganguly, MS Dhoni, Kumar Sangakkara, Mahela Jayawardene, Brendan McCullum, Scott Styris, Jacob Oram, Herchelle Gibbs, Graeme Smith, Jacques Kallis and JP Duminy.

They're all top quality batsmen, you can't surely deny that.

Did you do any research or just make your you picked out a major list for Johnson on purpose? Also, I'd agree that Johnson has taken more class players out in Test Cricket, but that doesn't tell the whole story, his dismisal of Dravid was shocking in the last Test, one of the widest balls that I've ever seen get a wicket, surprised Dravid managed to reach it. Broad's not exactly had the chance against class opposition either, he took wickets against New Zealand, took a few against South Africa. Under Pietersen he's started taking wickets, he struggled with Vaughan as captain, Vaughan didn't seem to have faith in him, using him as the last option, but he took 5 wickets in 30 overs in the final test of the England-South Africa series. Also, his series average was ruined by the ridiculously flat Lords pitch where both teams scored huge runs.

Broad's batting > Johnson's as well