Cricket: Official Blackcaps thread the people’s #1
Nicholls edges one to the keeper but it was a no ball.Jimmy Smallsteps wrote: Mon Jan 04, 2021 1:12 am Yes, you'd have to say Pakistan have the upper hand at this stage of the game.
One of the pleasures of continuing to work from home is having the game on in the background.
I wouldn't get away with that in the office, especially in Australia.
-
Jimmy Smallsteps
- Posts: 914
- Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 8:24 pm
- Location: Auckland
Proceedings have swung firmly back in NZ's favour now.
NZ 198-3 with Nicholls on a chanceless 56 (
) and King Kane on 61.
NZ 198-3 with Nicholls on a chanceless 56 (
) and King Kane on 61.-
Carter's Choice
- Posts: 1504
- Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 8:44 pm
- Location: QueeNZland
That was a really shit review by Pakistan.
This reminds me of the Pakistan 1st innings, when Azhar Ali and Mohammead Rizwan looked really comfortable in the middle of their innings. NZ got a break through and then sliced through the rest of the team.
This reminds me of the Pakistan 1st innings, when Azhar Ali and Mohammead Rizwan looked really comfortable in the middle of their innings. NZ got a break through and then sliced through the rest of the team.
I wondered on another rugby forum what Williamson’s record could have been if NZ got to play the number of tests other sides manage. Looking into a few stats gave this some perspective. Alistair Cook had a twelve year test career and played 161 matches. Williamson has played for 10 years and is in his 83rd test.
Not sure what makes them light up but would say anyway the rules would supercede whether they're lit up or not, it's just used as a guide as far as I know.Trapper wrote: Mon Jan 04, 2021 4:47 am Lucky to survive that run out. Ball hits the wicket while he’s short but the bail not completely off. Not out. If the bails/wickets had lights on he’d be gone, right?
I don’t know either but I would have thought once the circuit is broken they light up, so if one end of a bail loses contact then they light up but its only hit and giggle cricket they are used anyway. I wonder if the laws are the same though in the shorter formats.Wignu wrote: Mon Jan 04, 2021 4:49 amNot sure what makes them light up but would say anyway the rules would supercede whether they're lit up or not, it's just used as a guide as far as I know.Trapper wrote: Mon Jan 04, 2021 4:47 am Lucky to survive that run out. Ball hits the wicket while he’s short but the bail not completely off. Not out. If the bails/wickets had lights on he’d be gone, right?
200 run partnership (that should have been ended when Nicholls was on 3)
I just noticed - nigh on 6pm and they have only bowled 77 overs so far today. That is bloody awful and the umpires should have been hammering them about it ages ago.
I just noticed - nigh on 6pm and they have only bowled 77 overs so far today. That is bloody awful and the umpires should have been hammering them about it ages ago.
I drink and I forget things.
Was it Brenda in commentary yesterday who first suggested doing away with drinks every hour then wound it back to suggesting a time restriction on the drinks break?Enzedder wrote: Mon Jan 04, 2021 4:55 am 200 run partnership (that should have been ended when Nicholls was on 3)
I just noticed - nigh on 6pm and they have only bowled 77 overs so far today. That is bloody awful and the umpires should have been hammering them about it ages ago.
No it was fatso McMillan. Brenda kindly pointed out the sponsors Powerade probably wouldn't be too with that.Kiwias wrote: Mon Jan 04, 2021 5:04 amWas it Brenda in commentary yesterday who first suggested doing away with drinks every hour then wound it back to suggesting a time restriction on the drinks break?Enzedder wrote: Mon Jan 04, 2021 4:55 am 200 run partnership (that should have been ended when Nicholls was on 3)
I just noticed - nigh on 6pm and they have only bowled 77 overs so far today. That is bloody awful and the umpires should have been hammering them about it ages ago.
Apologies to Brenda.-RB- wrote: Mon Jan 04, 2021 5:10 amNo it was fatso McMillan. Brenda kindly pointed out the sponsors Powerade probably wouldn't be too with that.Kiwias wrote: Mon Jan 04, 2021 5:04 amWas it Brenda in commentary yesterday who first suggested doing away with drinks every hour then wound it back to suggesting a time restriction on the drinks break?Enzedder wrote: Mon Jan 04, 2021 4:55 am 200 run partnership (that should have been ended when Nicholls was on 3)
I just noticed - nigh on 6pm and they have only bowled 77 overs so far today. That is bloody awful and the umpires should have been hammering them about it ages ago.
-
mrbrownstone
- Posts: 318
- Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2020 12:15 am
So as it turns out bowling Pakistan out for sub 300 was a very good effort yesterday.
Nicholls has certainly ridden his luck this summer, but it doesn't matter how you score the runs as long as they're on the board.
There's really not much left to say about Williamson. Never change
Nicholls has certainly ridden his luck this summer, but it doesn't matter how you score the runs as long as they're on the board.
There's really not much left to say about Williamson. Never change
-
Certain Navigator
- Posts: 324
- Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2020 8:34 am
Has he really been that much luckier than Williamson though? In the last couple of matches, the latter has also been dropped more times than I can count and, unlike Nicholls, hasn't had the bad fortune of being given out when not.Kiwias wrote: Mon Jan 04, 2021 1:32 am Great data on Nicholls: this summer he has been dropped 5 times, has been out to a no ball, and has a mis-strike % of 16%, yet is the BC's second-highest scorer behind KW. Definitely riding his luck.
Something I always reckon with cricket, is there any other sport where the opposition or luck whatever can make you look so good. As you pointed out Nichols has probably had not a lot more luck than Williamson etc, and I struggle to think of many test centuries I have seen from anywhere that haven't included a let off or 2. Watch almost any century by Warner for Aus and generally he has a couple of let offs, This was once pointed out to me by a pro cricketer , who said when a lot of cricketers go through a bad patch it's almost they just get unlucky and half chances etc are held where as when they going well same balls are missed. Maybe the best batsman just cash in on there luck? And in the case of the likes of Williamson etc do it looking so bloody elegant in their technique. I not a cricket tragic or anything but can watch him bat a bloody long time.Certain Navigator wrote: Mon Jan 04, 2021 8:40 amHas he really been that much luckier than Williamson though? In the last couple of matches, the latter has also been dropped more times than I can count and, unlike Nicholls, hasn't had the bad fortune of being given out when not.Kiwias wrote: Mon Jan 04, 2021 1:32 am Great data on Nicholls: this summer he has been dropped 5 times, has been out to a no ball, and has a mis-strike % of 16%, yet is the BC's second-highest scorer behind KW. Definitely riding his luck.
