ThePortForum.com

DRT wrote:

djewesbury wrote:Derek: If your team needs a terrorist, one whose bomb might as likely go off in the dressing room as on the pitch, go with KP. But that way lies a whole universe of pain and excuses as the whole team is pushed aside for one man's ego.

It is not my team that is opening the door to let him in. It's yours. Best of British with that one.

Yes, I forgot, you have a team of your own. How's that working out for ya?

At the risk of arguing against myself (again), the KP stuff is telling. I think it has gone too far and I don't see a way back for him. Having said that Boycott did have a point when he said that it was as much the lack of leadership, or the kind of leadership of the England side which meant that KP was allowed to dominate the dressing room. The point that Daniel makes about Broad is rooted in a similar problem. Somebody needs to have a word with him and have effective sanctions if he doesn't listen. But good leaders don't have to go to those sanctions because they get the message across. There have always been massive egos in sport, arguably this is helpful, but I don't remember any of them getting hossed out of the side because they are unmanageable.

I think that it is spot on that the new leader of ECB is not ruling anything in or out, given the state of the one day side this is not just sensible it may just wake up some of the side to what is happening. They are losing and playing poorly then responding in press conferences by saying how well they are doing.

And these sideswipes at the Scottish team are a distraction. Just because the Irish team are doing well and should be given a shot at test status does not mean that the other associate members are a problem. I think that some of the most enjoyable matches have involved these sides, they improve their game and a few sides which have a rather inflated view of their abilities (most notably England) get the odd jolt. Keep them all.

When I read your first paragraph, and saw the name Boycott, I suddenly recalled that he was something of an unmanageable ego himself in his day, hated in the dressing room, constantly making returns to the side when everyone thought all his 'bridges had been burnt', to appropriate a more recent phrase. How times change.

djewesbury wrote:When I read your first paragraph, and saw the name Boycott, I suddenly recalled that he was something of an unmanageable ego himself in his day, hated in the dressing room, constantly making returns to the side when everyone thought all his 'bridges had been burnt', to appropriate a more recent phrase. How times change.

Indeed, and Lilley, Illingworth, Trueman, Botham, the list goes on and on but they were managed. I don't think KP is that special in this regard. Broad certainly isn't.

I was on a plane between Ireland and England while England were getting beaten by Ireland; but as a follower of both I look forward to watching it later this evening.
Now that I am on English soil I declare the run-up to tomorrow's tasting officially commenced.

An excellent game of rugby, particularly for the (almost but not really) neutral. A great display of strength and dominant possession by Ireland for most of the game and credit to England for keeping going right to the final whistle. Lots of mistakes from both sides but also lots of good things to build upon. Highly entertaining.

Now that all of the debate about dressing room terrorists has subsided could someone please answer this?

DRT wrote:I have just noticed that the game between Australia and Bangladesh was abandoned without a ball being thrown. No points were awarded but both teams are showing as having completed three games, leaving Australia just one point above England in the table.

Will they try to replay that game or do the teams just have to deal with it as if it were a loss?

As I understand it, it can't be replayed. No time (perversely, given the excessive six-week schedule). So it's effectively a loss to both.

I see from the BBC Sport app that [url=Morgan blames bowlers after defeat
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/31680446]Eoin Morgan has belatedly worked out what he's there for[/url]. (Wonder what the England hotel bar was like for today's rugby?)

djewesbury wrote:As I understand it, it can't be replayed. No time (perversely, given the excessive six-week schedule). So it's effectively a loss to both.

Interesting. So when the World Cup is played in the UK the teams who are scheduled to play on the rainy days go home and those lucky enough to catch 40 overs of dry weather go through to the knockout stages. A well thought out strategy by the organising committee.

If you want well thought-out, could you please join the long queue over there?

djewesbury wrote:I see from the BBC Sport app that [url=Morgan blames bowlers after defeat
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/31680446]Eoin Morgan has belatedly worked out what he's there for[/url]. (Wonder what the England hotel bar was like for today's rugby?)

What a spineless git.

Hapless though they are, I bet the bowlers are looking forward to getting him back in the nets.

Why didn't they bowl Tredwell? Anyone know?

Perhaps he didn't sign the form agreeing to be publicly blamed by the captain in the event of a defeat?

DRT wrote:Perhaps he didn't sign the form agreeing to be publicly blamed by the captain in the event of a defeat?

Wait a moment. You can't have it both ways; you complain if he 'finds positives' in dire defeats, then you complain that he criticises the poor performance of his bowlers. I think he was right to criticise them, even if he doesn't know why he's right; and even if the selection is at least partly to blame too.

Finally getting to watch the rugby. Why do England keep sending their kick-off to Zebo on the 22?

Have you ever managed a team, Daniel?

The first rule of management is to take it on the chin when it all goes tits up. Never, ever, blame your team in public. Take it on yourself and learn from it. Then fix it.

This whinging little boy is not fit to manage anything if this is how he behaves when it goes wrong. It is now too late for him to man-up. His team will think he is weak and will not believe he will stand with them in a crisis. Boycott is correct - no aura of leadership = no leadership.

I do not manage teams. I need no team. I am a one-man mission.
But I understand the theory of man management.

DRT wrote:This whinging little boy is not fit to manage anything if this is how he behaves when it goes wrong. It is now too late for him to man-up. His team will think he is weak and will not believe he will stand with them in a crisis. Boycott is correct - no aura of leadership = no leadership.

Yes consider the different approach, where Morgan goes to the press conference and avoids singling anyone out for criticism, "...team game, we all need to look at our contribution and work hard to improve, can take some positives, Joe had a great innings, blah blah."
He can then walk out of the press conference back into the next team meeting and absolutely rip the heads of his bowlers, "I don't want to be in that position again, having to blunder my way through a press conference after a f****** rubbish performance. My batting needs to improve, but so does your bowling. I'M TALKING ABOUT YOU BROAD AS WELL, so you can stop looking so smug."

djewesbury wrote:I understand the theory of man management.

Not if you think Morgan was justified in making those comments. Not even close.

DRT wrote:

djewesbury wrote:I understand the theory of man management.

Not if you think Morgan was justified in making those comments. Not even close.

I didn't say I did. I said I thought you had previously.

flash_uk wrote:

DRT wrote:This whinging little boy is not fit to manage anything if this is how he behaves when it goes wrong. It is now too late for him to man-up. His team will think he is weak and will not believe he will stand with them in a crisis. Boycott is correct - no aura of leadership = no leadership.

Yes consider the different approach, where Morgan goes to the press conference and avoids singling anyone out for criticism, "...team game, we all need to look at our contribution and work hard to improve, can take some positives, Joe had a great innings, blah blah."
He can then walk out of the press conference back into the next team meeting and absolutely rip the heads of his bowlers, "I don't want to be in that position again, having to blunder my way through a press conference after a f****** rubbish performance. My batting needs to improve, but so does your bowling. I'M TALKING ABOUT YOU BROAD AS WELL, so you can stop looking so smug."

Exactly.

I can see why you all work such long hours.

djewesbury wrote:

DRT wrote:

djewesbury wrote:I understand the theory of man management.

Not if you think Morgan was justified in making those comments. Not even close.

I didn't say I did. I said I thought you had previously.

Yes, you did...

djewesbury wrote:I think he was right to criticise them

DRT wrote:

djewesbury wrote:

DRT wrote:

djewesbury wrote:I understand the theory of man management.

Not if you think Morgan was justified in making those comments. Not even close.

I didn't say I did. I said I thought you had previously.

Yes, you did...

djewesbury wrote:I think he was right to criticise them

Yes, that's what I said, didn't I?

djewesbury wrote:I can see why you all work such long hours.

I don't. I make others work long hours. You just aren't getting this are you?

Amn't I?

djewesbury wrote:Amn't I?

No. You're not. And stop trying to undermine a sensible discussion with this nonsense.

djewesbury wrote:

djewesbury wrote:Amn't I?

No. You're not. And stop trying to undermine a sensible discussion with this nonsense.

Sorry. I promise I'll behave now.

djewesbury wrote:

djewesbury wrote:

djewesbury wrote:Amn't I?

No. You're not. And stop trying to undermine a sensible discussion with this nonsense.

Sorry. I promise I'll behave now.

Good.

djewesbury wrote:

DRT wrote:

djewesbury wrote:

DRT wrote:

djewesbury wrote:I understand the theory of man management.

Not if you think Morgan was justified in making those comments. Not even close.

I didn't say I did. I said I thought you had previously.

Yes, you did...

djewesbury wrote:I think he was right to criticise them

Yes, that's what I said, didn't I?

Have you been on the diesel oil again?

DRT wrote:

djewesbury wrote:

DRT wrote:

djewesbury wrote:

DRT wrote:

djewesbury wrote:I understand the theory of man management.

Not if you think Morgan was justified in making those comments. Not even close.

I didn't say I did. I said I thought you had previously.

Yes, you did...

djewesbury wrote:I think he was right to criticise them

Yes, that's what I said, didn't I?

Have you been on the diesel oil again?

Who said that?

Can we assume that "preparation for tomorrow" is going well?

Let me assure you, I mean to lead by example.

djewesbury wrote:Let me assure you, I mean to lead by example.

Since this hasn't been about cricket for several pages, I feel in no way that I would be taking the conversation on a tangent to ask "What have you started with tonight then?"

I too have been enjoying the rugby; I missed yesterday afternoon's match while working, but saw the evening session and today's game. Really enjoyable matches.

Ireland's try was excellent. Really well calculated. England on the other hand made a couple of important tactical errors - that kick to touch in the first half when George could have more or less guaranteed 3 from the kick, for example.
I must admit that my 22½ years in Ireland (compared to the 20¾ I lived in England) showed fairly clearly when I yelped that ball to the ground for Henshaw. On reflection, as an Ulster supporter, I see no contradiction here. I think when Ireland become a Test [cricket] nation it'll be a very difficult time for me.
Very tight. England had a good second half of the second half. They could have scored and converted a late try and made the score 19-16. But maybe that's in store for Twickenham next year.

Justin, are you out there? Were you watching?

Enjoyed the comments about Robbie Henshaw's background in GAA too. The skills learned from that are so valuable to the Irish players and they can't be copied by players who haven't had that training. Good to see.

djewesbury wrote:Very tight. England had a good second half of the second half. They could have scored and converted a late try and made the score 19-16. But maybe that's in store for Twickenham next year.

Indeed; they could have had two tries, quite easily. I didn't understand for what reason the referee called for an Ireland scrum on the Irish try-line during that attacking play by England, can someone enlighten me?

These days the play is so technical and the rules so complex that I have no idea what most penalties are called for, and judging from how little the commentators are able to add, I presume they don't know either.

Daniel,

Yes am out here, was up at Lake George (NY) listening to the match and now following the cricket. Not likely to be a double (or treble if you include Harrington's win). Anyone know a good port retailer in Manhattan? I am meeting someone for lunch later today around Washington Square.

Justin K wrote:Anyone know a good port retailer in Manhattan? I am meeting someone for lunch later today around Washington Square.

Astor Wines is very close, on Lafayette Street.

5-48. A bad innings against a good team.

No comment yet on the most exciting game so far in the World Cup? The Ireland - Zimbabwe game was just brilliant to listen to.

AHB wrote:No comment yet on the most exciting game so far in the World Cup? The Ireland - Zimbabwe game was just brilliant to listen to.

I missed that one but am watching Sri Lanka get off to a great start chasing 376 against the Australians. Delshan just hit seven boundaries in a row, including a complete over from big Mitch. If they can keep this up it might be an enthralling finish.

Are England out yet?

DRT wrote:Are England out yet?

They are now.

Where does England cricket go now? Such a fundamental lack of leadership in all areas - players, team, coaching. Seems to be a very poor culture in the dressing room.

The BBC, in an article entitled [url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/31792930]Cricket World Cup 2015: England knocked out by Bangladesh[/url], wrote:Bangladesh lie above only Zimbabwe, Ireland and Afghanistan, yet have now beaten England in three of their past four meetings.

We were rubbish.

jdaw1 wrote:

The BBC, in an article entitled [url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/31792930]Cricket World Cup 2015: England knocked out by Bangladesh[/url], wrote:Bangladesh lie above only Zimbabwe, Ireland and Afghanistan, yet have now beaten England in three of their past four meetings.

We were rubbish.

No, we weren't as good as that. Today's game was a breathtaking masterclass in achieving new depths of ineptitude. Surely this was the nadir. But well done to Aggers, who managed not to lose sight of the good story for the thousands of Bangladeshi fans in Adelaide.
The question is no longer who to sack but who to keep. Colin Graves's phone must be very warm.

I watched about two hours of the game this morning before catching a train to London and then kept track via the ECB app. It was indeed a complete display of how not to play cricket. Strangely, the only highlight was Bell's innings which was quite respectable given the target. Morgan should be taken out the back and shot. The others are hardly worthy of comment.