Sport Today

> Ramapriya

> what about paul, then ??!!

> My bad.
> Mary :)

>>I've always felt that his technique isn't somehow tight enough to
>>inspire confidence, but sending him at 4 was sacrificial no less. Was
>>KP serving time out for any absence from the field?

> No, they think KP will score more runs at 5 than 4.

> There's also the fact that Collingwood is a much better player than
> Bell. At least, we have been informed of this by the ultimate arbiter,
> Paji, and to suggest otherwise would disappoint him greatly.

> >>I've always felt that his technique isn't somehow tight enough to
> >>inspire confidence, but sending him at 4 was sacrificial no less. Was
> >>KP serving time out for any absence from the field?

> > No, they think KP will score more runs at 5 than 4.

> > There's also the fact that Collingwood is a much better player than
> > Bell. At least, we have been informed of this by the ultimate arbiter,
> > Paji, and to suggest otherwise would disappoint him greatly.

> Paji's confusion is understandable.  After all, he only watches until the
> shine has left the new ball, then switches off and waits impatiently for the
> proper cricket to start again.

>> > keyboard and brought forth:

>> >>I've always felt that his technique isn't somehow tight enough to
>> >>inspire confidence, but sending him at 4 was sacrificial no less. Was
>> >>KP serving time out for any absence from the field?

>> > No, they think KP will score more runs at 5 than 4.

>> > There's also the fact that Collingwood is a much better player than
>> > Bell. At least, we have been informed of this by the ultimate arbiter,
>> > Paji, and to suggest otherwise would disappoint him greatly.

>> Paji's confusion is understandable.  After all, he only watches until the
>> shine has left the new ball, then switches off and waits impatiently for
>> the
>> proper cricket to start again.

> This looks like a smear campaign to discredit someone who said Bell
> should not have been played in Ashes 2005. Some of us always maintained
> Bell was a great talent but not ready in 2005 vs Aus.  There is no
> attempt to gloat here, we all know what Bell was able to accomplish in
> 2005 Ashes.
> After the 2005 series, Bell's inclusion for test matches was supported
> by many of us.

> G Thorpe was what we wanted in 2005. The eng mgmt (and their RSC
> die-hard followers) made it a competition between Thorpe and KP to
> divert attention from Bell.  For many of us it was Bell Vs Thorpe in
> the playing X1.  After Thorpe was forced to retire, Collingwood was the
> choice. He would have done better than Bell in 2005 - it does not mean
> the same equation will hold good for ever.  Now Bell is ahead of
> Collingwood eventhough the former had a lean time in India not so long
> ago.

> Just to set the record straight for the benefit of those who are
> willing to know the truth.