Sport Today

> avinash sharma

> i agree, i guess the RAJ attitude is still showing.
> hope indians didnt have to bow before the f**king queen.

> avinash sharma

> Didn't Trescthick have a better series than Yuvraj?

> > Didn't Trescthick have a better series than Yuvraj?

> in terms of pure runs scored, yes. however, trescothick is an opener and
> therefore gets more opportunities to score runs than yuvraj, who comes in at
> #6 or #7.

> however, yuvraj played at least 4 innings which were instrumental in
> ensuring wins:

> a) 64* when india was 141/4 chasing 272 vs england
> b) 31 when india was 135/5 chasing 203 vs sl
> c) 37 when india was 59/4 chasing 188 vs sl
> d) 69 when india was 146/5 chasing 326 vs eng
> He also had a hurricane innings of 40* off 19 balls in the washed out match,
> where india definitely had the upper hand before it was called off.

> plus, he took 5 wickets at 21.20 at a strike rate of 21.6, including a spell
> of 3-39 in the first match vs eng

> trescothick, on the other hand, crossed 30 only 3 times in 7 matches, and
> two of those were in losing efforts.

> --
> stay cool,
> Spaceman Spiff

> Gimme, gimme, gimme some lovin' (good lovin')
> Hey, now you got to have lovin' (good lovin')
> You need it, I need it, well you got to have lovin' (good lovin')
> Say it again now, good lovin'.

> Hmmmm.
> Works both ways.
> Comes in late and has more chance of a not out, hence boosting his average.
> Youvraj had 7 innings in 7 matches, which suggests he got plenty of
opportunity
> to bat.

> > however, yuvraj played at least 4 innings which were instrumental in
> > ensuring wins:

> India won 5 games in the entire tournament, so with only one more win, he'd
have
> been instrumental in winning ALL India's games.

> > a) 64* when india was 141/4 chasing 272 vs england
> > b) 31 when india was 135/5 chasing 203 vs sl
> > c) 37 when india was 59/4 chasing 188 vs sl
> > d) 69 when india was 146/5 chasing 326 vs eng
> > He also had a hurricane innings of 40* off 19 balls in the washed out match,
> > where india definitely had the upper hand before it was called off.

> I see.
> A high SR can be important, but not all the time?
> I suggest you check the stats for the series.
> Trescothick had a SR of 107 *for the whole series*.

> > plus, he took 5 wickets at 21.20 at a strike rate of 21.6, including a spell
> > of 3-39 in the first match vs eng

> yup. Very good.
> In most of the matches he took *no wickets at all*.

> Yup, 2 fifties and 1 century in 7 matches.

> Spaceman, they both had good claims

> Sorry, but I find this comment to be bullshit.

> > Hmmmm.
> > Works both ways.
> > Comes in late and has more chance of a not out, hence boosting his average.
> > Youvraj had 7 innings in 7 matches, which suggests he got plenty of
> opportunity
> > to bat.

> yes, but he almost always came to bat in a crisis situation. and the way he
> handled it is admirable for a 22 year old.

> > > however, yuvraj played at least 4 innings which were instrumental in
> > > ensuring wins:

> > India won 5 games in the entire tournament, so with only one more win, he'd
> have
> > been instrumental in winning ALL India's games.

> yep.

> > > a) 64* when india was 141/4 chasing 272 vs england
> > > b) 31 when india was 135/5 chasing 203 vs sl
> > > c) 37 when india was 59/4 chasing 188 vs sl
> > > d) 69 when india was 146/5 chasing 326 vs eng
> > > He also had a hurricane innings of 40* off 19 balls in the washed out match,
> > > where india definitely had the upper hand before it was called off.

> > I see.
> > A high SR can be important, but not all the time?
> > I suggest you check the stats for the series.
> > Trescothick had a SR of 107 *for the whole series*.

> yes he did. so what's your point? jayasuriya had a sr of 112 iirc. the bit about
> yuvraj's 40 off 19 balls was just a throwaway about another quality innings he
> had played in the tournament.

> > Also, I'd suggest that with 12 overs bowled and England 1 down for 53, India
> > were far from having the upper hand. I don't have a complete breakdown, but
> > after 10.2 overs, India were 3-52.

> chasing a large target is always harder than setting a large target- especially
> when your best batsman is gone (i.e. trescothick).
> england has successfully chased a target of 275+ only twice in their odi
> history.

> > > plus, he took 5 wickets at 21.20 at a strike rate of 21.6, including a spell
> > > of 3-39 in the first match vs eng

> > yup. Very good.
> > In most of the matches he took *no wickets at all*.

> he only bowled in 4 matches. and he took at least 1 wicket in 3 of those.

> > > trescothick, on the other hand, crossed 30 only 3 times in 7 matches, and
> > > two of those were in losing efforts.

> > Yup, 2 fifties and 1 century in 7 matches.

> > Spaceman, they both had good claims

> that's all i'm trying to say.

> > but it was written: "are the organisers and judging panel trying to console
> the englishmen ??
> > how in the world did he get man of the series ??
> > what about the brilliant performance of Yuvraj throughout the series ??
> > This is absolute nonsense.....

> > Sorry, but I find this comment to be bullshit.

> mos selection is a currently a very subjective process. perhaps there needs to
> be a more objective measure ala pwc.

> --
> stay cool,
> Spaceman Spiff

> Come on all you pretty women, with your hair a*** down,
> Open up your windows cuz the Candyman's in town.
> Come on boys and gamble, roll those laughing bones,
> Seven come eleven, boys I'll take your money home.

> > mos selection is a currently a very subjective process. perhaps there
needs to
> > be a more objective measure ala pwc.

> are you unhappy with their choice?

>> yes, but he almost always came to bat in a crisis situation. and the way
>> he handled it is admirable for a 22 year old.

> True.
> But if you want to take into account such extraneous factors, Trescothick
> is a

> relative newbie too, especially in odos.