NZ v Bangladesh Test #1
-
@Cyclops said in NZ v Bangladesh Test #1:
@MN5 said in NZ v Bangledesh Test #1:
both openers get tons.
when was the last time this happened ?
back when Glenn Turner and that other bloke got a massive partnership in the 70s?
Vincent and Richardson in the early 2000s
Sorry ... not the test I was thinking of...
AUS vs NZ Cricket Scorecard, 3rd Test at Perth, November 30 - December 04, 2001
Get cricket scorecard of 3rd Test, AUS vs NZ, New Zealand tour of Australia 2001/02 at Western Australia Cricket Association Ground, Perth dated November 30 - December 04, 2001.
-
-
@rotated said in NZ v Bangladesh Test #1:
Rig and Bell did it against Pakistan in an early 00's test where we flogged them too. Before that Turner/Jarvis as MN5 says.
It's come up a few times on the Sky commentary over the past few years as the openers have gotten close on a few occasions.
Yeah, was looking at previous 200+ opening partnerships and Twose/Spearman managed 214 but Twose only got 94. (the other 4 both openers got to 100, and in the Bell/Rigor game we didn't manage 200).
-
Don't think wags was a nightwatchman. Just moving him up the order. Killing it
-
-
-
@MajorRage said in NZ v Bangladesh Test #1:
Wagner going apeshit. Much more interesting this evening.
I farken love Wags
-
@Cyclops said in NZ v Bangladesh Test #1:
Watling coming out indicates that we're still a long way away from declaring. I probably would have sent Colin in to hope for another Wagneresque innings. Lead is already close to 300.
We should give ourselves plenty of time to get them out. A day and a half should do it. Or even put them in for an hour tonight
-
Styris going on about a back foot no ball, about how it is first point of contact.
The law states:
21.5.1 the bowler’s back foot must land within and not touching the return crease appertaining to his/her stated mode of delivery.
So I read that as if your back foot touches the line it's a no ball.
Bowler landed on his toes and then bought his heel down onto the line. I would say the umpire is correct in calling no ball as that was part of his back foot landing.
What says The Fern?
-
@booboo said in NZ v Bangladesh Test #1:
Styris going on about a back foot no ball, about how it is first point of contact.
The law states:
21.5.1 the bowler’s back foot must land within and not touching the return crease appertaining to his/her stated mode of delivery.
So I read that as if your back foot touches the line it's a no ball.
Bowler landed on his toes and then bought his heel down onto the line. I would say the umpire is correct in calling no ball as that was part of his back foot landing.
What says The Fern?
I read it as all being at the time it lands. Agree that it's not completely clear though.
-
-
It's a Saturdee in Hamilton for crying out loud. it's not like Eminem is playing.....so how come there's about as many spectators as there is players?
Bangladesh sure aren't much of a drawcard.
Nice to see KW smash an unbeaten double, this guy sure is good.
Also amusing to see @mariner4life s mate CDGH smash quick runs against a demoralised attack and ensure his spot in the test team for at least the next 10-15 tests.
@Virgil not wrong, that is some effort from numbers 1-3
-
@mimic said in NZ v Bangladesh Test #1:
Pretty selfish to declare after reaching his milestone
I thought he didnt care much for stats
Why not wait for CdG.. give him a couple of overs..Maybe because with the lead as it was they had settled on declaring at drinks - and Kane managed to get enough balls faced to score his 200. Hardly selfish and given what happened against sri lanka, extra time on what is a friendly pitch is not a bad idea
No ball Law | MCC
