Zimbabwe Cricket

[Nada Bee]

They get their "star" players back, and look what happens lol

Zimbabwe won the toss and decided to field

New Zealand 1st Innings
452 for 9 (89.0 overs)

Zimbabwe 1st Innings
59 all out (29.4 overs)

Zimbabwe 2nd Innings
5 for 1 (4.0 overs)

 

[West Ealing Bee]

They got a couple of their better players back, but Andy and Grant Flower and Henry Olonga still leaves a bloody big hole in the team.

Probably their best 2 batsmen and their second best bowler.

 

[Nada Bee]

Well its currently;


Zimbabwe 2nd Innings
10 for 1 (12.0 overs)

and Bond's bowling so far;

S E Bond 6.0 6 0 0

6 maidens in a row? surely a world record at test level?

 

[NorthamptonBee]

Bit early to write them off in this test though!

 

[Les Beeavinu]

16-2 now. Mugabe will probably come in and demolish the ground tomorrow.

 

[The H]

Well its currently;


Zimbabwe 2nd Innings
10 for 1 (12.0 overs)

and Bond's bowling so far;

S E Bond 6.0 6 0 0

6 maidens in a row? surely a world record at test level?

:no:

i'll dig up some stats on Hughie Tayfield and RG Nadkarni later....

 

[The H]

Batsmen faced with the problem of playing Bapu Nadkarni's left-arm spin had two scoring options to choose from: nil and negligible. .......He crowned that with Test cricket's finest display of quantity-control bowling, with 23 successive maidens in his 32-27-5-0 against England at Madras in 1964.

Hugh Tayfield, who died in hospital at Durban on February 25, 1994, aged 65, was one of the most successful bowlers ever produced by South Africa and one of the greatest off-spinners the game has seen. .......Tayfield was, with Trevor Goddard, at the centre of South Africa's containing cricket of the 1950s; he bowled 137 consecutive balls without conceding a run against England at Durban in 1956-57.

 

[Nada Bee]

wow.

puts Bonds 36 to shame :d

 

[The H]

& 99 a/o

 

[Mr Tree]

Batsmen faced with the problem of playing Bapu Nadkarni's left-arm spin had two scoring options to choose from: nil and negligible. .......He crowned that with Test cricket's finest display of quantity-control bowling, with 23 successive maidens in his 32-27-5-0 against England at Madras in 1964.

Hugh Tayfield, who died in hospital at Durban on February 25, 1994, aged 65, was one of the most successful bowlers ever produced by South Africa and one of the greatest off-spinners the game has seen. .......Tayfield was, with Trevor Goddard, at the centre of South Africa's containing cricket of the 1950s; he bowled 137 consecutive balls without conceding a run against England at Durban in 1956-57.

meanwhile, i heard Pietersen and Freddie criticised for their "20-20" attitude on day 1. i know which i'd rather watch

 

[The H]

depens if you had tickets for day 1 or 5 lol

 

[West Ealing Bee]

And the ICC think this lot should be playing Test cricket.

I reckon England and Australia could win within 130 overs against this lot.

 

[Edmundo]

Even worse than Bangladesh?

 

[Jimbee]

Well, Bangladesh won the Test and ODI series against them.......

 

[West Ealing Bee]

Even worse than Bangladesh?

I think the Bangladesh team might beat these by an innings

The NZ attack is good but nothing special at International level. To not reach 100 in either innings on a pitch where the opposition made 450+ in a day shows that they are just not good enough, or even close.

 

[Mr Tree]

bowled out twice in a day - laughable

 

[Indian Bee]

Batsmen faced with the problem of playing Bapu Nadkarni's left-arm spin had two scoring options to choose from: nil and negligible. .......He crowned that with Test cricket's finest display of quantity-control bowling, with 23 successive maidens in his 32-27-5-0 against England at Madras in 1964.

Good to see English batsmen having difficutly scoring against the Indian spinner

Nice of you to bring that up Mr H

 

[Indian Bee]

And the ICC think this lot should be playing Test cricket.

I reckon England and Australia could win within 130 overs against this lot.

India would win within 100 overs

ok I bet H is looking up some stats now as I type trying to find the last time India played Zim....

 

[The H]

was the 16th shortest match on record.

Shortest Tests by Balls Bowled
656 Australia v South Africa Melbourne 1931/32
672 West Indies v England Bridgetown 1934/35
788 England v Australia Manchester 1888
792 England v Australia Lord's 1888
796 South Africa v England Cape Town 1888/89
815 England v South Africa The Oval 1912
872 New Zealand v Australia Wellington 1945/46
883 South Africa v England Centurion 1999/00
893 Australia v Pakistan Sharjah 2002/03
911 Australia v England Sydney 1894/95
940 South Africa v Zimbabwe Cape Town 2004/05
941 England v West Indies Leeds 2000
976 England v South Africa Leeds 1907
983 West Indies v Australia Port of Spain 1994/95
1006 South Africa v England Port Elizabeth 1895/96
1011 Zimbabwe v New Zealand Harare 2005/06
1014 South Africa v England Port Elizabeth 1888/89
1034 Australia v England Brisbane 1950/51
1034 England v West Indies Birmingham 1995
1041 New Zealand v England Christchurch 1983/84

 

[West Ealing Bee]

If Zimbabwe had batted first it would have lasted a shorter period I suggest.

 

[The H]

or if McCullum & Vettori had got out cheaply..

 

[Edmundo]

Re: was the 16th shortest match on record.

Shortest Tests by Balls Bowled
656 Australia v South Africa Melbourne 1931/32

From that match, look at these bowling figures!

Ironmonger 7.2-5-6-5

 

[Mr Tree]

match figures of nearly 23 overs bowled, 11 wickets, 24 runs conceded

 

[Mr Tree]

can you imagine it happening these days?!

Wyatt won the toss and put West Indies in on a sticky wicket.
West Indies were all out for 102, whereupon England batted and
declared at 81-7, Wyatt's idea being to get WI in again on the
bad pitch. Hoping that the conditions would improve, Grant
opened the innings with his bowlers, but when Headley came in at
number seven and was out for a duck, he too declared at 51-6. It
was now, because of stoppages for weather, just after tea on the
third day, leaving England over a day to make 73 to win! Wyatt,
like Grant, reversed the batting order: Hammond came in at six
with the score at 29-4; when Wyatt, batting at number eight,
joined him, the score was 48-6. These two, however, dug in, and
eventually saw England to victory by four wickets. What a nail-
biter. Hammond described his two innings of 43 and 29* as the
hardest he'd ever played

 

[The H]

not sure #8 should be in there :suspect:

 

[SC]

Oh Dear !!!

2nd Test now on and Zimbabwe lose 6 wickets in the very first session Yet another sub-100 score on the cards.

 

[Jimbee]

SE Bond (RF) 7.0 3 11 5 1.57

Good to see Shane Bond back.

 

[West Ealing Bee]

Shane Bond takes 5-11

 

[West Ealing Bee]

SE Bond (RF) 7.0 3 11 5 1.57

Good to see Shane Bond back.

I'm sure batsmen aren't agreeing

 

[Jimbee]

Comeback city

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/shared...et/scorecards/2005/8/12238/html/scorecard.stm

 

[Jimbee]

NZ 48 for 2 at the close, maybe not so one sided after all.

 

[SC]

it doesn't get any better ...

1st ODI and NZ have hit, what i believe to be the highest ever ODI team score and they only batted for 44 overs rather than the normal 50 overs. 397-5 is there really any point

 

[West Ealing Bee]

it doesn't get any better ...

1st ODI and NZ have hit, what i believe to be the highest ever ODI team score and they only batted for 44 overs rather than the normal 50 overs. 397-5 is there really any point

I'm almost certain it's a record.

And I think Blignaut conceding 96 runs in an ODI is also a record.

And is there a point, no, none

 

[West Ealing Bee]

I'm almost certain it's a record.

And I think Blignaut conceding 96 runs in an ODI is also a record.

And is there a point, no, none

2nd highest, Sri Lanka scored 398 v Kenya in 95/96, but did it in 50 overs.

 

[West Ealing Bee]

And Blignaut's figures are only the 3rd worst.

Martin Sneddon conceded 105 from 12 overs for NZ v England in 1983, with 1 maiden lol
And A de Mel conceded 97 from 10 overs for SL vs West Indies in 1987/88