• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

PS .. its a tea towel so i'm certain she will :smiles:

Used to own one many, many moons ago. I'm ok on normal games, but because that was limited overs AND limited runs per player I thought it was different and the fact we scored more than them at the end of the innings would be the relevant bit of the result.
 
Used to own one many, many moons ago. I'm ok on normal games, but because that was limited overs AND limited runs per player I thought it was different and the fact we scored more than them at the end of the innings would be the relevant bit of the result.

Nope, the relevant bit is that we won. The amount of runs doesn't determine how impressive the victory was (because you'll only ever score a few more runs than the opposition), it's the number of remaining wickets that shows that. It's like reporting a football score by saying that Southend won and scored 3 goals, you want to know what the other team did... and so cricket scores provide that by saying how many wickets fell.
 
Hahahahaha. Following on from Yorkie's line-up, what would be our best cricketing line-up?

I think:
1. Butler - either gets a century or a duck
2. Bailey - good technical batsman
3. Collymore - good average, goes for the most ambitious of shots
4. Barnard - flamboyant batsman, places his shots well
5. Maher - steady hand in the middle order
6. Benjamin - good stamina, good defensive batsman, also good as nightwatchman
7. Otto - deadly leg-spinner
8. Roget - deceptively fast bowler
9. Gower - medium-fast, accurate, swings well
10. Cadette - fast, better with a new ball
11. Powell - another fast bowler; more accurate than fast
 
Hahahahaha. Following on from Yorkie's line-up, what would be our best cricketing line-up?

I think:
1. Butler - either gets a century or a duck
2. Bailey - good technical batsman
3. Collymore - good average, goes for the most ambitious of shots
4. Barnard - flamboyant batsman, places his shots well
5. Maher - steady hand in the middle order
6. Benjamin - good stamina, good defensive batsman, also good as nightwatchman
7. Otto - deadly leg-spinner
8. Roget - deceptively fast bowler
9. Gower - medium-fast, accurate, swings well
10. Cadette - fast, better with a new ball
11. Powell - another fast bowler; more accurate than fast

nice.

I think Andy Rammell would be a very good cricketer. I see him as a medium-fast in the mould of Tim Munton. Tall, broad shouldered and a steady workhorse. I think he might be able to bat like Tim Bresnan as well.

Mark Bentley had the shoulders to be a good bowler. I can picture him lolloping up to the crease.

Stan would be a fast bowler. Tall, nasty with steepling bounce.

JCR might have a bit of Fidel Edwards about him. Quick and slingy.

Tilly would be a middle order left hand bat. Very offside (not in a Gary Jones sense) but with a high elbow and a touch of elan.
Mike Marsh would be a great middle order bat with a great technique and placement maybe alongside Ronnie Whelan who could time the ballwith ease. For my openers i will go for Deano and Chrissy.

Flavs would be like Chris Read: competent but conservative and unable to bat. and completely overratedRoyce would cover the gap between first slip better and be far better standing up against the slow bowlers and be an ugly but effective batsman
 
Sadly, Roy Mcdonough (Steady number 8 bat & part time swinger) is serving a life-time ban for a kung fu kick on an umpire who turned down a LBW appeal in a vital cup match.
 

ShrimperZone Sponsors

FFM MSPFX Foreign Exchange Services
Estuary Andys man club
Zone Advertisers Zone Advertisers

ShrimperZone - SUFC Player Sponsorship

Southend United Away Travel


All At Sea Fanzine


Back
Top