What a (TEST) match!
Suresh K S
worth a series of 7 ODIs and more.
What made Bell poke at that one outside the off, we'll never know. The
man doesn't seem to know his Onions!
Suresh
Luke Curtis
As Michael Vaughan often says in the TMS commentary England don't do
boring!!!
-
XBox 360 GT: Broton69
--
ButIstillneedtoknowwhat'sinthere! Thekeytoanysecurity
systemishowit'sdesigned! Thatdependsonwhyitwasdesigned!
Ihavetoknowwhatwhoeverdesigneditwastryingtoprotect!
(Blakes 7, City on the Edge of the World - Vila in typical panic mode)
Don speaks the truth
Don't denigrate one format for the other...a long standing sermon
which is not followed by many RSCers...except for the last hour or so,
the day was thoroughly boring to watch...it may be good to see the
scorecards and reports of the test match though...take it from me, i
watched much of this test match.
Don
Luke Curtis
What more do you want from a test match? fine bowling with wickets
falling on D1, a battling century from Kallis, 5 wickets from 17 balls
on the morning of D2, great bowling from Morkel and Steyn, a
spectacular almost game winning 183 from Smith and intense pressure in
the 4th innings for a day and a half with great knocks from Strauss,
Cook, Trott, Bell and Collingwood under huge pressure...
Don speaks the truth
>
> - Show quoted text -
all is well in hindsight but to watch the proceedings is quiet
boring...im sure
no rscer watches the full 90 overs of a particular day of a test
match.
Don
HVS
If you allow for popping out to the loo, fetching a sandwich, and
other time away from the telly, I've certainly watched all 90 overs
of a test-match day.
--
Cheers,
Harvey
Don speaks the truth
>
> - Show quoted text -
Have you watched 90 overs of all the days of a test match? And what
about 90 overs of all the 5 days of all the test matches of your
country?
Leave alone 90 overs of all 5 days of all tests of all the
countries :-)
Don
HVS
Excellent strategy: if proven wrong, change the question until you
get an answer you'd prefer to hear. I like it.
Following that practice, let's ask another question: does anyone
here regularly watch 90 overs play on more than one day of a given
5-day test?
Answer: yes. And I'm sure I'm not the only poster here who does
that.
--
Cheers,
Harvey
tendulkar.com
What's the point? I'm sure I can find people who go to Casino's
everyday of the week and play slot machines. Doesn't mean slot
machines are exciting
Dave (SA)
I watched all 5 days at the game.
I only missed 1 session. The last one yesterday.
HVS
> On Jan 7, 12:14�pm, HVS <use...@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 07 Jan 2010, Don speaks the truth wrote
>>
>> Following that practice, let's ask another question: �does
>> anyone here regularly watch 90 overs play on more than one day
>> of a given 5-day test?
>>
>> Answer: �yes. �And I'm sure I'm not the only poster here who
>> does that.
>
> What's the point? I'm sure I can find people who go to Casino's
> everyday of the week and play slot machines. Doesn't mean slot
> machines are exciting
"What's the point?" It interests me, and I enjoy it.
And, yes -- the fact that some people like slot machines and play
them every day *does* mean that slot machines are exciting to some of
those people.
It's curious that you find the idea that "people are different and
like different things" such a strange concept to grasp.
tendulkar.com
The point is, people who like 'Slot Machines' don't go around making
statements like
* Slot machines are the real thing.
* Real men like slot machines
* Poker is killing slot machines & we should make every attempt to
preserve it
Don speaks the truth
Dude i was only contesting this one point made by the OP.
"> And they say that Tests aren't interesting? That last hour alone
was
> worth a series of 7 ODIs and more.
Most of these pimps of Test cricket always post such comments at the
end of
a Test match after reading the report and looking at the
scorecards...im sure most
of them won't have watched one full session of a Test match...point is
why denigrate ODIs for Test cricket which gets real interesting to
watch only during the end stages of a 5 day affair....its not as if we
find Day 3 and Day 4 exciting when some batsman is plundering the
bowlers on a lifeless track. Bottomline, this test looked like no
result till the last session...and the fall of wickets was there due
to the usual tension of preserving one's wicket leading to the fall of
the wicket itself at the end stage of a test match when a team is
chasing a target and batting to save the game...dosen't justify the
boredom of the previous sessions of dour defence.
I am not saying ODIs is a great thing...even ODIs have become routine
affairs nowadays with only the end stages getting interesting...which
justifies what i wrote about any game becoming interesting or great
for a person only on hindsight after reading its scorecard or match
report.
Don
Luke Curtis
I certainly listened to at least 90% of the test, the only times I
missed out was between leaving work and getting home when I was out of
range of my Digital Radio - that is the case of virtually every
England series in the last 5 years - the only exception would be Aus
and NZ away because of the time difference.
Andrew Dunford
"Dave (SA)" <david.b...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:48dc95f0-0df0-41dc...@m3g2000yqf.googlegroups.com...
So let me get this straight. After 28 hours of cricket, and with your team
in sight of victory, you wilfully left the ground.
I do believe this is the first rsc instance of a spectator Running Away
(tm).
Andrew
Andrew Dunford
"tendulkar.com" <tendul...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:3028f83e-3f24-4826...@f5g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
The point is that Harvey is merely rebutting a stupid claim made by Don. He
never claimed that Test matches were Exciting (tm) but merely impied that he
enjoyed watching them.
Andrew
dodo
> "Dave (SA)" <david.baker...@gmail.com> wrote in message
I believe that is his yesterday not yours .... you date line crossing
kiwi
dechucka
"Don speaks the truth" <don2...@rediffmail.com> wrote in message
news:f0138029-a469-4e0e...@m26g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
========================================
I do
Andrew Dunford
"dodo" <dod...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4ea79245-ff76-4835...@33g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
Fair enough. Let me tell you that I have seen Friday, and it ain't what
it's cracked up to be.
Andrew
Don speaks the truth
> "dodo" <dodo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
Another stupid statement written in a hurry by Dungford, LOL.
Don [foot in the mouth and dungford go together...old jungle saying]
Jellore
Agreed, however it was a wonderful knock which was instrumental in
England saving this Test match.
Jellore
wrote:
Seems to me like you don't like Test match cricket. It was wonderful
from start to finish.
Jellore
Speak for yourself. You may need to find yourself another hobby Don.
Jellore
I watched 3 full days live at the SCG this week, went home, showered,
changed and proceeded to watch 90 overs at Cape Town. So I guess that
makes 180 overs in a day!
Jellore
That would be an extremely bad habit. Are you comparing watching Test
matches with bad habits?
Andrew Dunford
"Jellore" <jel...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:1a1a6db6-84ce-461f...@upsg2000gro.googlegroups.com...
He's sour because his proclamation the previous day of Steyn being the best
bowler in the world sadly didn't translate into results on the final day.
Andrew
jzfredricks
> bowler in the world sadly didn't translate into results on the final day.
Steyn did bowl a bloody excellent spell, mind you, against Colly. A
wicket would have helped. Perhaps he should've bowled a little more on
the stumps.
Don speaks the truth
> "Jellore" <jell...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
This just does it. You have now proved yourself to be a cow dung
littering
asshole in rsc who just speaks nonsense time and again poking at the
imagined emotions of your antagonist.
Don
Ben Gussey
I don't feel the need to denigrate one format for another. I am
thoroughly enjoying the Big Bash in Oz at the moment and it's great to
see the big crowds the format is sparking (they had to turn people
away in Adelaide - when was the last time that happened in domestic
cricket in Oz?). I am even going to venture out and watch the next
match on Wed (I am definitely a cricket on the couch viewer,
generally). So the T20 format has its benefits and I don't believe in
comparing it with Test cricket.
However, the last session of the Test match yesterday was certainly
one of the most gripping things I've seen in a long time. I was about
to go to sleep at midnight and ended up passing out at 3am and I don't
even support Saffa or England. As for watching every moment of every
day? To me, that's a great benefit of Test cricket. I can drive
somewhere and listen to some on the radio, then come home and watch
more on tele. Then I can pop in and watch some at the ground the
following day etc etc. It provides constant access to entertainment
over 5 days but it does not demand my complete availability.
On the other hand, I never sit down and watch a complete T20. I'll
still pop out for the odd food/toilet break or check something else on
TV; and I've noticed most people do the same thing. So, watching an
entire T20 start to finish is not necessarily done by many.
Don speaks the truth
>
> - Show quoted text -
You as usual failed to get my point. The OP had denigrated the ODIs
which i countered by raising a question whether anyone watches
Test matches fully except going gung-ho over it due to some exciting
end to it as per scorecards and match reports.
Don [i watched a lot of this Test and at many times during the 5 days
it looked boring]
jzfredricks
> which i countered by raising a question whether anyone watches
> Test matches fully except going gung-ho over it due to some exciting
> end to it as per scorecards and match reports.
I'm a huge fan of Test cricket, but I'd like to say that one of the
things that *I* like about it is I don't HAVE to see every over. I can
go down the shop, or do other stuff for a bit, then come back to it.
Tests ebb and flow, and at their entertainment peak they draw me to
the TV like no ODI or T20 could ever hope to do. Limited overs is just
hit and giggle. Tests invoke deeper, truer emotions.
I also watched last night, and it was awesome. I really like how the
broadcasters showed a lot of the crowd's faces.
R Bharat Rao
wrote:
> all is well in hindsight but to watch the proceedings is quiet
> boring...im sure
> no rscer watches the full 90 overs of a particular day of a test
> match.
When India is batting, I usually record the game and watch every ball
-- when India is bowling, I frequenty skip ahead. Of courrse, now
that I've switched to Willow, I admit those days are long gone -- boy
I miss the "back 10 seconds"
Bharat
R Bharat Rao
wrote:
> Have you watched 90 overs of all the days of a test match? And what
> about 90 overs of all the 5 days of all the test matches of your
> country?
> Leave alone 90 overs of all 5 days of all tests of all the
> countries :-)
Several times in person at the ground... Not counting when I showed
up a bit late, of course:-)
Bharat
R Bharat Rao
> I watched 3 full days live at the SCG this week, went home, showered,
> changed and proceeded to watch 90 overs at Cape Town. So I guess that
> makes 180 overs in a day!
On Boxing Day and the day after, my mates and I watched both Test
matches both days, and also a bit of the Ind-SL ODI. Of course, I did
nod off a few times, but still... Best Christmas gift from my
family...
Bharat
Jellore
No Don I "got" your point very well indeed....as it seems most other
posters did too.
tendulkar.com
> hit and giggle. Tests invoke deeper, truer emotions.
Actually I have seen more giggles in Test matches than during an ODI.
T20 matches are when the players are the most tense.
Mike Holmans
<don2...@rediffmail.com> tapped the keyboard and brought forth:
>On Jan 7, 9:31�pm, Luke Curtis <tlot...@NOSPAMgooglemail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 7 Jan 2010 08:17:42 -0800 (PST), Don speaks the truth
>> >Don't denigrate one format for the other...a long standing sermon
>> >which is not followed by many RSCers...except for the last hour or so,
>> >the day was thoroughly boring to watch...it may be good to see the
>> >scorecards and reports of the test match though...take it from me, i
>> >watched much of this test match.
>>
>> >Don
>>
>> What more do you want from a test match? fine bowling with wickets
>> falling on D1, a battling century from Kallis, 5 wickets from 17 balls
>> on the morning of D2, great bowling from Morkel and Steyn, a
>> spectacular almost game winning 183 from Smith and intense pressure in
>> the 4th innings for a day and a half with great knocks from Strauss,
>> Cook, Trott, Bell and Collingwood under huge pressure...
>>
>all is well in hindsight but to watch the proceedings is quiet
>boring...
For once, I actually agree with you.
http://blogs.cricinfo.com/diffstrokes/archives/2010/01/better_read_than_watched.php
>im sure
>no rscer watches the full 90 overs of a particular day of a test
>match.
As has been conclusively shown, though, this is nonsense. I can
confirm that Bharat, for instance, is quite happy to sit through an
entire day's play for every day on which the match takes place, as he
can confirm of me.
But no, I have not been watching every ball of this particular series.
I've been quite happy to let periods of the game go by while I keep
tabs on the score while doing something else.
Cheers,
Mike
--
cricd...@hotmail.com
> As has been conclusively shown, though, this is nonsense. I can
> confirm that Bharat, for instance, is quite happy to sit through an
> entire day's play for every day on which the match takes place, as he
> can confirm of me.
>
> But no, I have not been watching every ball of this particular series.
> I've been quite happy to let periods of the game go by while I keep
> tabs on the score while doing something else.
I suspect that what you can watch all the way through
is related to your age. Slow Test cricket is for the
very young and the very old -- or it used to be before
faster versions of cricket existed. I have watched hours
and hours of not particularly memorable "action" in my
youth, when each day seemed to have a thousand hours in
it, and life stretched in front of me infinitely long.
Now, I am under the illusion that I have other things to
do with my time, so all my watching (and more commonly
scoreboard-following) is done while engaging in other
activities. From seeing how people even older than
myself live their lives, I expect that in retirement
I'll find the time again to devote exclusive chunks of
it to cricket.
You may not be following every ball of the present
Eng-SA series, and I may not be, but I bet that many
people are.
There's an interesting side issue to this question: I
find (and I'm prepared to generalize and argue that
it's a common experience) that it's harder to stay
focused on cricket when watching it on TV than when
watching it live, or even when listening to radio
commentary. Being at the ground is such a rich
experience, with so much to look at, that I find my
mind does not wander. Radio requires a different kind
of concentration: you have to create a world in your
mind from the words you hear. In the beginning is
the word, and the word is the world, and it requires
concentration to keep it in your head.
TV, with its literal, reduced scale, its frequent
commercial breaks, and its zooming in on detail,
lets my mind wander. I find it easier to lose
interest in what's going on onscreen and to turn
to other things. If I miss something, I know
there will always be the replay. I suggest that
if somebody's entire experience of cricket is
based on TV, he/she is likely to come to find it
a less absorbing spectacle overall, and one that
does not demand close watching.
Luke Curtis
wrote:
perhaps he should go and create a newsgroup rec.sport.cricket.odi -
don't think it would be very busy though...
eusebius
Are yous aying his posts are somehow sacred?
I have seen many complete test match days, and I'm sure many complete
test matches. I don't watch complete test matches these days, probably
because I can't always find the time. I either find the 1st session of
an innings too dull, or more likely more nervewracking.
On the other hand, my watching a complete ODO I think would be even
rarer.
eusebius
> I suspect that what you can watch all the way through
> is related to your age. Slow Test cricket is for the
> very young and the very old
This is quite possibly true.
> There's an interesting side issue to this question: I
> find (and I'm prepared to generalize and argue that
> it's a common experience) that it's harder to stay
> focused on cricket when watching it on TV than when
> watching it live, or even when listening to radio
> commentary. Radio requires a different kind
> of concentration: you have to create a world in your
> mind from the words you hear. In the beginning is
> the word, and the word is the world, and it requires
> concentration to keep it in your head.
This is definitely true, and well put.