EvNZ T1 D1

EvNZ T1 D1

Post by Mike Holman » Sat, 22 May 2004 05:00:23


There are new notices all over the Pavilion telling Members that the
use of mobile phones anywhere in the Pavilion (including the concourse
and balconies) is *strictly* forbidden, which helped to keep the noise
down a bit, so it was a mild shock to hear someone blethering into one
on the bus home. But what he was saying was about right: "It was an
interesting day rather than an exhilarating one." And if the rest of
the series is of this quality, we're in for a tough series with the
result entirely unpredictable from this point.

For most of the day, it reminded me of heavyweight boxing: these teams
are awfully big - Graham Thorpe is a reasonably ordinary-sized bloke,
but amongst this lot, he looks more like Harry Pilling. And the two
teams spent several hours slugging at each other winning a round here,
losing a round there, with no real advantage being gained either way,
until a little flurry at the end.

The sun was bright as I arrived, and it was pleasantly warm. It seemed
only appropriate that the middle doors and windows of the Long Room
were wearing sunglasses. That's what it looked like from inside behind
the new contravision sightscreen which looks white enough from the
middle, judging by the TV coverage. There will apparently be "other
arrangements" when there is a white ball in use.

It was a day on which to bat, and Fleming did. Hoggard opened up from
the Pavilion End, and Harmison from the Nursery, each with two overs
of complete tripe which got clattered around for 26. They got some
control back after that, but New Zealand were off and motoring and
kept the score chugging along at a good rate until the drinks
interval.

Not that England were without encouragement: the sponsors had arranged
free entry for hundreds of schoolkids, who formed a large block in the
Mound Stand, with treble voices piping "England! England!" as a sort
of Barmy Cadet Force. (Since the trips are arranged through the
schools and are supervised by teachers, they all get back on the bus
at tea-time, leaving the ch***efforts to the Army, who basically
hadn't turned up or had gone to sleep by then.)

Neither Harmison nor Hoggard had really made either batsman play when
they didn't feel like getting a boundary, and Flintoff and Jones took
over. Scoring ground to a halt. H&H had basically been pitching it
short and wondering what would happen, but F&J adopted the plan of
bowling back of a length outside off in a disciplined and accurate
way, and after four consecutive maidens Fleming was frustrated enough
to chase a wider one from Jones and give a hard catch above Strauss's
head at backward point.

Astle arrived and was obviously keen to get on with it, but had little
idea of where the ball was. He got runs because he sometimes made
contact and the ball ended up going where there wasn't a fielder, but
neither he nor the bowler could have had much idea why.

80/1 at lunch was a good-looking score, but England seemed to be right
back in it.

So after lunch, the events of the first session were repeated, though
this time it was Astle playing positively - now scoring his runs by
*deciding* to hit the ball where there weren't any fielders and
carrying out his intentions - while Hoggard and Harmison served up
obligingly unintelligent bowling, and the score rattled along to 150
in no time flat, sometimes known as "an hour or so".

Time for F&J to put a stop to the nonsense, which they did, Flintoff
striking first by getting one to leave Astle and edge a catch to Jones
the Mitt, and Jones the Ball doing the same for Styris very shortly
afterwards, thus delighting the many people who haven't backed Hussain
in the HHTC. Given what else Jones the Mitt did behind the stumps,
this was really rather surprising. Adam Gilchrist's dubious claims to
be regarded as a Test-class wicketkeeper will certainly be enhanced if
this kind of rubbish is considered acceptable. For keeping of this
standard, we require centuries as payback for keeping Read out, not
pretty 30s and 40s.

Macmillan came and hung around for a bit, looking most uncomfortable,
and then went in to tea.

He came out again after tea and still looked uncomfortable, even
though H&H were back on. The difference was that they had switched
ends, and both looked immediately more effective. There were a number
of maidens, and a couple of runs, and then Hoggard trapped Macmillan
plumb lbw and it was 174/4.

Oram's name had been first out of the hat for the middle order place,
and he started to look very convincing very quickly. Off the last ball
off one Harmison over, and the first ball of his next one, he simply
leaned into straight drives which whistled past the stumps into the
Pavilion fence. Even so, scoring was still difficult, and it had
become exceedingly grey overhead. 180-odd/4 looked like being about
230 by the close, which would not have represented any great profit
for winning the toss. But England were also falling behind the rate,
and the new ball was approaching, so it was time to wheel on El Rey de
Espana.

Oram must have thought it was his birthday. One doesn't expect much of
Giles, but he didn't live up to even those expectations. Oram just
belted him all over the place and grabbed the momentum for New
Zealand.

Eventually, the new ball arrived, taken first by Flintoff and
Harmison. Although Flintoff had been the second-best bowler on show to
Jones the Ball, who was mostly in the good-to-very-good range today,
Jones is known not to like the shiny cherry, so Fred had to do it.
Suddenly, there was an appeal, Harmison was delighted, and a bloke
called Richardson walked back to the Pavilion. A lot of people
clapped, although I couldn't quite work out why. He'd been willing
enough to run up and down while the other blokes batted, but the
applause seemed rather excessive to me.

Oram was definitely Man Of The Day, being the first player to take the
game and shake it roughly by the throat and give his side an
advantage.

However, this is a pitch which has been feeling listless for some time
and it could well be completely dead by the middle of Saturday. I
think it's going to be difficult for anyone to take wickets on this
surface, as it seems pretty unlikely to break up and give feeble
spinners like Giles and the Vettori of the last couple of years the
massive assistance they would need to trouble a halfway decent
batsman. Though it is possible that the underduck ball will be a
potent weapon, if any of the pacers know how to bowl it.

Cheers,

Mike

 
 
 

EvNZ T1 D1

Post by Gafoo » Sat, 22 May 2004 05:44:11

Quote:

> Suddenly, there was an appeal, Harmison was delighted, and a bloke
> called Richardson walked back to the Pavilion. A lot of people
> clapped, although I couldn't quite work out why. He'd been willing
> enough to run up and down while the other blokes batted, but the
> applause seemed rather excessive to me.

This is the sort of reaction you get when the ODO crowd starts
watching test matches.

 
 
 

EvNZ T1 D1

Post by John Hal » Sat, 22 May 2004 05:45:10



<interesting report snipped>

Quote:
>However, this is a pitch which has been feeling listless for some time
>and it could well be completely dead by the middle of Saturday. I
>think it's going to be difficult for anyone to take wickets on this
>surface, as it seems pretty unlikely to break up and give feeble
>spinners like Giles and the Vettori of the last couple of years the
>massive assistance they would need to trouble a halfway decent
>batsman. Though it is possible that the underduck ball will be a
>potent weapon, if any of the pacers know how to bowl it.

Channel 4 have been reporting the groundsman, Michael Hunt (they
carefully avoided calling him Mike), as saying that the pitch is drier
than he would like (it seems that he can't have believed the weather
forecast that the last 4 or 5 days would be warm and dry). He's worried
that the tiny cracks it has at present might widen enough to be a
problem. If that should happen, then the uneven bounce would probably
help bowlers of all types.
--
John Hall

               "Distrust any enterprise that requires new clothes."
                                     Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862)

 
 
 

EvNZ T1 D1

Post by The Cricket Nu » Sat, 22 May 2004 06:40:37


Quote:
> <excellent report clipped >
> Cheers,

> Mike

Excellent report! Love to read more,

-The Cricket Nut

 
 
 

EvNZ T1 D1

Post by Andrew Dunfor » Sat, 22 May 2004 06:45:26


Quote:


> <interesting report snipped>
> >However, this is a pitch which has been feeling listless for some time
> >and it could well be completely dead by the middle of Saturday. I
> >think it's going to be difficult for anyone to take wickets on this
> >surface, as it seems pretty unlikely to break up and give feeble
> >spinners like Giles and the Vettori of the last couple of years the
> >massive assistance they would need to trouble a halfway decent
> >batsman. Though it is possible that the underduck ball will be a
> >potent weapon, if any of the pacers know how to bowl it.

> Channel 4 have been reporting the groundsman, Michael Hunt (they
> carefully avoided calling him Mike), as saying that the pitch is drier
> than he would like (it seems that he can't have believed the weather
> forecast that the last 4 or 5 days would be warm and dry). He's worried
> that the tiny cracks it has at present might widen enough to be a
> problem. If that should happen, then the uneven bounce would probably
> help bowlers of all types.

There was a little evidence of uneven bounce even on the first day, albeit
mostly harmless.

Mind you, at Hamilton recently Vettori and Adams had a hole the size of a
dinner plate to bowl into, and they still didn't make any impact.

Andrew

 
 
 

EvNZ T1 D1

Post by Mike Holman » Sat, 22 May 2004 07:01:33

On Thu, 20 May 2004 21:45:10 +0100, John Hall

Quote:


><interesting report snipped>
>>However, this is a pitch which has been feeling listless for some time
>>and it could well be completely dead by the middle of Saturday. I
>>think it's going to be difficult for anyone to take wickets on this
>>surface, as it seems pretty unlikely to break up and give feeble
>>spinners like Giles and the Vettori of the last couple of years the
>>massive assistance they would need to trouble a halfway decent
>>batsman. Though it is possible that the underduck ball will be a
>>potent weapon, if any of the pacers know how to bowl it.

>Channel 4 have been reporting the groundsman, Michael Hunt (they
>carefully avoided calling him Mike),

And so they should. He's always been known as Mickey, a form of our
common name to which I won't answer.

Quote:
>as saying that the pitch is drier
>than he would like (it seems that he can't have believed the weather
>forecast that the last 4 or 5 days would be warm and dry). He's worried
>that the tiny cracks it has at present might widen enough to be a
>problem. If that should happen, then the uneven bounce would probably
>help bowlers of all types.

Mick Hunt is the precise mirror image of Keith Boyce, who used to
express such intense surprise that his perfect Headingley strips
turned out to be demoniacal minefields by teatime on day one. He's
never yet been known to have one of his horrified predictions of a
badly-deteriorating pitch come true, and if he's only worried that
something "might" become a problem, I'd expect the pitch to last a
week. But point taken.

Cheers,

Mike

 
 
 

EvNZ T1 D1

Post by Andrew Dunfor » Sat, 22 May 2004 07:36:05


<snip>

Quote:
> Astle arrived and was obviously keen to get on with it, but had little
> idea of where the ball was. He got runs because he sometimes made
> contact and the ball ended up going where there wasn't a fielder, but
> neither he nor the bowler could have had much idea why.

> 80/1 at lunch was a good-looking score, but England seemed to be right
> back in it.

> So after lunch, the events of the first session were repeated, though
> this time it was Astle playing positively - now scoring his runs by
> *deciding* to hit the ball where there weren't any fielders and
> carrying out his intentions - while Hoggard and Harmison served up
> obligingly unintelligent bowling, and the score rattled along to 150
> in no time flat, sometimes known as "an hour or so".

Astle's innings encapsulated the balance problem in NZ's middle order: they
have a whole bunch of players who seem best suited to batting at five.  None
of Styris, Astle or McMillan have ever looked like a Test number four to me,
a problem which is exacerbated when Fleming opens the innings.  Which is why
I'd have Sinclair in the team, having decided that while Cairns and Oram
occupy the six and seven spots (at least nominally), there's only room for
two of Styris, Astle and McMillan.

Quote:

> Time for F&J to put a stop to the nonsense, which they did, Flintoff
> striking first by getting one to leave Astle and edge a catch to Jones
> the Mitt, and Jones the Ball doing the same for Styris very shortly
> afterwards, thus delighting the many people who haven't backed Hussain
> in the HHTC. Given what else Jones the Mitt did behind the stumps,
> this was really rather surprising. Adam Gilchrist's dubious claims to
> be regarded as a Test-class wicketkeeper will certainly be enhanced if
> this kind of rubbish is considered acceptable. For keeping of this
> standard, we require centuries as payback for keeping Read out, not
> pretty 30s and 40s.

Jones wasn't great.  The various failures to stop the ball were one black
mark against his name, but the real clincher for me came part-way through
the afternoon session.  Having spent the first few hours being slightly
irritated that G Jones resembled another cricketer but I couldn't think who,
this was the point at which I finally twigged that he was in fact Paul
Wiseman with gloves on.

Quote:
> Macmillan came and hung around for a bit, looking most uncomfortable,
> and then went in to tea.

> He came out again after tea and still looked uncomfortable, even
> though H&H were back on. The difference was that they had switched
> ends, and both looked immediately more effective. There were a number
> of maidens, and a couple of runs, and then Hoggard trapped Macmillan
> plumb lbw and it was 174/4.

If anybody has managed to work out what exactly McMillan was trying to
achieve during his almost-strokeless vigil, do let me know.

Quote:
> Oram's name had been first out of the hat for the middle order place,
> and he started to look very convincing very quickly. Off the last ball
> off one Harmison over, and the first ball of his next one, he simply
> leaned into straight drives which whistled past the stumps into the
> Pavilion fence. Even so, scoring was still difficult, and it had
> become exceedingly grey overhead. 180-odd/4 looked like being about
> 230 by the close, which would not have represented any great profit
> for winning the toss. But England were also falling behind the rate,
> and the new ball was approaching, so it was time to wheel on El Rey de
> Espana.

> Oram must have thought it was his birthday. One doesn't expect much of
> Giles, but he didn't live up to even those expectations. Oram just
> belted him all over the place and grabbed the momentum for New
> Zealand.

The funny thing is that Oram is actually a poor player of spin.  Fortunately
he didn't receive anyway.  Even so, I reckon The King was worth a try a bit
earlier, for no other reason than to change the attack to Richardson.

Quote:
> Eventually, the new ball arrived, taken first by Flintoff and
> Harmison. Although Flintoff had been the second-best bowler on show to
> Jones the Ball, who was mostly in the good-to-very-good range today,
> Jones is known not to like the shiny cherry, so Fred had to do it.
> Suddenly, there was an appeal, Harmison was delighted, and a bloke
> called Richardson walked back to the Pavilion. A lot of people
> clapped, although I couldn't quite work out why. He'd been willing
> enough to run up and down while the other blokes batted, but the
> applause seemed rather excessive to me.

The Richardson innings wasn't really a definitive example of the genre.  You
may have found his 'stroke play' anonymous, but he actually managed a higher
quotient of front-foot drives than normal, even if he did let about 40 balls
pass outside the off stump between shots.  He did however manage to
underline why he is such a valuable player in *this* batting line-up, not
that a team such as Australia would have any use for him.

Quote:
> Oram was definitely Man Of The Day, being the first player to take the
> game and shake it roughly by the throat and give his side an
> advantage.

I think Astle also achieved something similar in the first hour after lunch,
although at that time NZ seemed somewhat non-plussed to have achieved a
front-running position, and promptly fell back into the pack.

For those of us watching on telly, the undoubted highlight was some
excellent close-up footage of Flintoff picking his nose whilst fielding in
the slips.

Thanks for the report.

<snip>

Andrew

 
 
 

EvNZ T1 D1

Post by Mike Holman » Sat, 22 May 2004 07:56:26

On Fri, 21 May 2004 10:36:05 +1200, "Andrew Dunford"

Quote:



>Jones wasn't great.  The various failures to stop the ball were one black
>mark against his name, but the real clincher for me came part-way through
>the afternoon session.  Having spent the first few hours being slightly
>irritated that G Jones resembled another cricketer but I couldn't think who,
>this was the point at which I finally twigged that he was in fact Paul
>Wiseman with gloves on.

I think what got me was when there might have vaguely been a run-out
chance, and Jones had stationed himself to take the return about 15
yards in front of the stumps.

Quote:

>> Macmillan came and hung around for a bit, looking most uncomfortable,
>> and then went in to tea.

>> He came out again after tea and still looked uncomfortable, even
>> though H&H were back on. The difference was that they had switched
>> ends, and both looked immediately more effective. There were a number
>> of maidens, and a couple of runs, and then Hoggard trapped Macmillan
>> plumb lbw and it was 174/4.

>If anybody has managed to work out what exactly McMillan was trying to
>achieve during his almost-strokeless vigil, do let me know.

I just watched it again on the highlights, and it's still a complete
mystery to me.

Quote:
>> Suddenly, there was an appeal, Harmison was delighted, and a bloke
>> called Richardson walked back to the Pavilion. A lot of people
>> clapped, although I couldn't quite work out why. He'd been willing
>> enough to run up and down while the other blokes batted, but the
>> applause seemed rather excessive to me.

>The Richardson innings wasn't really a definitive example of the genre.  You
>may have found his 'stroke play' anonymous, but he actually managed a higher
>quotient of front-foot drives than normal, even if he did let about 40 balls
>pass outside the off stump between shots.  

I went for a pee at one point, and my friend Jane (who says a big Hi!
to Bharat) told me when I got back that I wouldn't believe it, but
Richardson had just unleashed successive spanking extra cover drives.
She was right. I didn't believe it. And it's no good trying to prove
it with statistics, either.

Quote:
>He did however manage to
>underline why he is such a valuable player in *this* batting line-up, not
>that a team such as Australia would have any use for him.

I wouldn't want to diminish the potential value of his innings to his
team's cause in any way. I just don't think it would be wise for any
New Zealand fan tempted to praise his batting to be caught indulging
in ribaldry at the expense of Chris Tavare.

Quote:

>> Oram was definitely Man Of The Day, being the first player to take the
>> game and shake it roughly by the throat and give his side an
>> advantage.

>I think Astle also achieved something similar in the first hour after lunch,
>although at that time NZ seemed somewhat non-plussed to have achieved a
>front-running position, and promptly fell back into the pack.

I think he was out about ten minutes after I thought "Another twenty
minutes of this and they'll definitely be in front." He hadn't quite
got NZ to the point where they could imagine two more wickets down and
still feel reasonably comfortable.

Quote:
>For those of us watching on telly, the undoubted highlight was some
>excellent close-up footage of Flintoff picking his nose whilst fielding in
>the slips.

Stupendous.

Cheers,

Mike

 
 
 

EvNZ T1 D1

Post by Andrew Dunfor » Sat, 22 May 2004 08:38:27


Quote:
> On Fri, 21 May 2004 10:36:05 +1200, "Andrew Dunford"



> >Jones wasn't great.  The various failures to stop the ball were one black
> >mark against his name, but the real clincher for me came part-way through
> >the afternoon session.  Having spent the first few hours being slightly
> >irritated that G Jones resembled another cricketer but I couldn't think
who,
> >this was the point at which I finally twigged that he was in fact Paul
> >Wiseman with gloves on.

> I think what got me was when there might have vaguely been a run-out
> chance, and Jones had stationed himself to take the return about 15
> yards in front of the stumps.

Perhaps somebody had yelled "bowler's end" and he became confused.

<snip>

- Show quoted text -

Quote:
> >> Suddenly, there was an appeal, Harmison was delighted, and a bloke
> >> called Richardson walked back to the Pavilion. A lot of people
> >> clapped, although I couldn't quite work out why. He'd been willing
> >> enough to run up and down while the other blokes batted, but the
> >> applause seemed rather excessive to me.

> >The Richardson innings wasn't really a definitive example of the genre.
You
> >may have found his 'stroke play' anonymous, but he actually managed a
higher
> >quotient of front-foot drives than normal, even if he did let about 40
balls
> >pass outside the off stump between shots.

> I went for a pee at one point, and my friend Jane (who says a big Hi!
> to Bharat) told me when I got back that I wouldn't believe it, but
> Richardson had just unleashed successive spanking extra cover drives.
> She was right. I didn't believe it. And it's no good trying to prove
> it with statistics, either.

> >He did however manage to
> >underline why he is such a valuable player in *this* batting line-up, not
> >that a team such as Australia would have any use for him.

> I wouldn't want to diminish the potential value of his innings to his
> team's cause in any way. I just don't think it would be wise for any
> New Zealand fan tempted to praise his batting to be caught indulging
> in ribaldry at the expense of Chris Tavare.

I guess I'll just have to try harder to not get caught.

Richardson is a slightly imperfect example of a Boycott, in that he bats
dourly for 99 per cent of the time, then has sudden moments of madness and
plays reckless shots which result in his downfall on days when he enjoys
less luck than yesterday.

On reaching 50 Richardson appeared to offer a pointed Hussain-like gesture
to somebody in the stands.  As it was aimed in the direction of the Media
Centre at the Nursery End, I'll give the benefit of the doubt on this
occasion and assume the intended recipient wasn't you.

<snip>

Andrew

 
 
 

EvNZ T1 D1

Post by Mike Holman » Sat, 22 May 2004 09:00:48

On Fri, 21 May 2004 11:38:27 +1200, "Andrew Dunford"

Quote:



>> I think what got me was when there might have vaguely been a run-out
>> chance, and Jones had stationed himself to take the return about 15
>> yards in front of the stumps.

>Perhaps somebody had yelled "bowler's end" and he became confused.

Maybe, but I may not have been clear enough that the relevant objects
were arranged in the order Pavilion, fielder, Jones, stumps, stumps.

Quote:

<snip>
>> I wouldn't want to diminish the potential value of his innings to his
>> team's cause in any way. I just don't think it would be wise for any
>> New Zealand fan tempted to praise his batting to be caught indulging
>> in ribaldry at the expense of Chris Tavare.

>I guess I'll just have to try harder to not get caught.

>Richardson is a slightly imperfect example of a Boycott, in that he bats
>dourly for 99 per cent of the time, then has sudden moments of madness and
>plays reckless shots which result in his downfall on days when he enjoys
>less luck than yesterday.

>On reaching 50 Richardson appeared to offer a pointed Hussain-like gesture
>to somebody in the stands.  As it was aimed in the direction of the Media
>Centre at the Nursery End, I'll give the benefit of the doubt on this
>occasion and assume the intended recipient wasn't you.

It is of course possible that he didn't know where I'd be. I have a
feeling that I wasn't watching at the time, having decided that a cup
of coffee would be rather more interesting than what was happening on
the field, especially as the ceefax was becoming deeply interesting as
Joyce and Dalrymple put on about 300 at The Oval.

Funny you should mention Boycs. I remember that while composing the
original post, my mind flicked back to a 68 I saw him present at the
crease for against Middlesex at Lord's in about 1982, which took at
least five hours and may in fact have lasted the entire day. It was by
some distance the most excruciatingly dull innings I ever saw him
play. Yorks ended up winning the match by 68 runs.

Cheers,

Mike

 
 
 

EvNZ T1 D1

Post by R. Bharat Ra » Sat, 22 May 2004 11:29:46


Quote:
> I went for a pee at one point, and my friend Jane (who says a big Hi!
> to Bharat) told me when I got back that I wouldn't believe it, but
> Richardson had just unleashed successive spanking extra cover drives.

Big "Hi!" back.  Hey Mike is the schedule for the Champions Cup or
whatever the ODO rubbish is -- up yet?  Not that I'd come to England
to see it, but if I were in Europe at that time...

BHarat

 
 
 

EvNZ T1 D1

Post by CiL » Sat, 22 May 2004 13:23:30

On Thu, 20 May 2004 21:00:23 +0100, Mike Holmans

<snip>

Quote:
> For keeping of this
>standard, we require centuries as payback for keeping Read out, not
>pretty 30s and 40s.

Sadly Read has been weeded out and this guy is in, still much better
than Parthiv Patel ,, so thank your lucky underwear for that.

Quote:
>Oram must have thought it was his birthday. One doesn't expect much of
>Giles, but he didn't live up to even those expectations. Oram just
>belted him all over the place and grabbed the momentum for New
>Zealand.

actually he has troubles against Good spin bowling, despite his reach
n all that, but ofcourse to call Giles a good spinner is akin to
calling SRK a good actor.

Quote:
>Eventually, the new ball arrived, taken first by Flintoff and
>Harmison. Although Flintoff had been the second-best bowler on show to
>Jones the Ball, who was mostly in the good-to-very-good range today,
>Jones is known not to like the shiny cherry, so Fred had to do it.
>Suddenly, there was an appeal, Harmison was delighted, and a bloke
>called Richardson walked back to the Pavilion. A lot of people
>clapped, although I couldn't quite work out why. He'd been willing
>enough to run up and down while the other blokes batted, but the
>applause seemed rather excessive to me.

very unlucky dismissal too,  big inside nick nah edge and  resultant
deviation if not the noise should have been picked up by Hair.

he may have just run up n down as u say allowing the others to score
but that ofcourse is what is needed from someone in the top order in
this lineup, ala gary kirsten put one end up; 93 very valuable runs
and I agree with Andrew here, in evaluating Runhardson's contribution
n place in this lineup, priceless, for everything else you have
cairns, astle n co.

<snip with Thanx for a fab writeup>

CiL
In India being told by a newschannel that the new PM likes Methi roti
the most.

 
 
 

EvNZ T1 D1

Post by Shishir S. Patha » Sat, 22 May 2004 13:42:19


<snip>

Quote:
> On reaching 50 Richardson appeared to offer a pointed Hussain-like gesture
> to somebody in the stands.  As it was aimed in the direction of the Media
> Centre at the Nursery End, I'll give the benefit of the doubt on this
> occasion and assume the intended recipient wasn't you.

Are you sure this gesture was aimed towards the Nursery End?  I was watching
at that time, and I recall Sky comms saying that it was directed towards
someone in the NZ balcony, perhaps a team-mate.  Of course, it's possible
that I wasn't paying attention (enjoying an excellent masala dosa for the
evening snack), or the comms got it wrong.

Cheers, Shishir

 
 
 

EvNZ T1 D1

Post by CiL » Sat, 22 May 2004 13:46:25

On Fri, 21 May 2004 10:12:19 +0530, "Shishir S. Pathak"

Quote:



><snip>

>> On reaching 50 Richardson appeared to offer a pointed Hussain-like gesture
>> to somebody in the stands.  As it was aimed in the direction of the Media
>> Centre at the Nursery End, I'll give the benefit of the doubt on this
>> occasion and assume the intended recipient wasn't you.

>Are you sure this gesture was aimed towards the Nursery End?  I was watching
>at that time, and I recall Sky comms saying that it was directed towards
>someone in the NZ balcony, perhaps a team-mate.  Of course, it's possible
>that I wasn't paying attention (enjoying an excellent masala dosa for the
>evening snack), or the comms got it wrong.

yep I also saw that moment, heard the same, it was iirc Martin Crowe
who said that he is pointing towards a teammate, wonder who...
 
 
 

EvNZ T1 D1

Post by Chris Westo » Sat, 22 May 2004 15:09:32


Quote:


> <interesting report snipped>
> >However, this is a pitch which has been feeling listless for some time
> >and it could well be completely dead by the middle of Saturday. I
> >think it's going to be difficult for anyone to take wickets on this
> >surface, as it seems pretty unlikely to break up and give feeble
> >spinners like Giles and the Vettori of the last couple of years the
> >massive assistance they would need to trouble a halfway decent
> >batsman. Though it is possible that the underduck ball will be a
> >potent weapon, if any of the pacers know how to bowl it.

> Channel 4 have been reporting the groundsman, Michael Hunt (they
> carefully avoided calling him Mike), as saying that the pitch is drier

For years I have sat by the radio or in front of the television during these
test matches waiting, waiting, waiting.  Nobody ever did refer to him as
Mike.   I renew my vigil.

--
Chris Weston