He lost his nerve after the first 6 and bowled them right into the fellas slot, still the same thing happened to Broad in 2007 and he became a legend afterwards. I would have liked to have seen Willey or Jordan take the last over, I actually texted my mate and said I didn't fancy Stokes to get the job done, just a gut feeling. Morgan put Jordan in an over too early
Stokes has done an excellent job at the end of the innings in the tournament, so with hindsight we could all say it was a daft decision to bowl him but everything pointed to him bowling the last over. Unfortunately he got it wrong, and with the talent the WI have you only have to be a fraction off. My issue was that after the first two sixes maybe he could of tried something different. However, we have got to the final playing good cricket with pretty much all of the team available for the next tournament. I have no doubt Stokes will be there.
Yeah he is a good player, I think the worry was the mentality of his bowling, he didn't mix it up like you said. He will come back a lot stronger
IMO the thing that made this tournament is the Indian crowd. For them cricket is everything (essentially their only real sport) and when you see the shots of the crowd its everyone from young, old, rich and impoverished its a religion to them. Maybe thats why the IPL (may have that wrong) is so huge too… Great game though. I wonder if Brathwaite would have knocked the last 2 for 6 if the runs hadn't already been on the board..
Poor choice of words, its probably the least interesting form of cricket but granted it can be the most exciting. Its like saying 5-a-side football is more interesting because its end to end and there's more goals.
No, right choice of words. Standard cricket is crap and dull. The shortened format because it is 'exciting' it holds more interest for people. Interesting to note that this format draws people in that don't watch normal cricket. Standard cricket is like Rugby League - not very interesting at all.
Its just dumbing down cricket for the masses, it enjoyable sure but it doesn't compare to the real thing.
No, it's better than the real thing. That's the reason they introduced the short format version. Normal cricket was dying on its arse and they needed a trigger point to get people interested in cricket again.
Gutted for the lads. Really thought we had them. Terrific tournament. Well done India for hosting it & the Windies for winning it. England are a fairly young side & will bounce back. I want them to capitalise on this & do well in the next limit overs tournament, which i think is the World Cup in England. Don't see think this will harm Stokes, he'll be as up for the Test matches against Sri Lanka & Pakistan as anyone.
Not much bothered about cricket, sat and watched most the game in a bar, had a look at live commentary just as it updated at the end of the 19th over. 19 from 6. We've won I thought. I told everyone we've won it, they ain't getting 19 from 6.
I'm half and half on this! Not sure what 'standard' or 'normal' cricket is. 20/20 cricket draws folk in because it's accessible, ie often played early evening, because it's affordable and because it's good fun. County cricket struggles because it's played during the day when folk are at work/school and it can be a bit dull, test cricket is absolutely not crap and dull, that's why it sells out all over the world. I also like rugby league...
For me, Test cricket is the pinnacle of the sport and brilliant to watch, I think i will always prefer it. I do think they are starting to prepare surfaces more now that enables a result. T20 is cricket for Americans, However, it is pretty entertaining and as Plum suggested, its more accessible and very exciting. I like both/all 3 formats, they all offer something a bit different in tactics and entertainment.
