Re: South Africa v England, 2nd Test, Durban, Dec 26-30

by Merlin on Mon 21 Dec 2009, 22:08

taipan wrote:
skully wrote:So what's Trott do then? Waste time? Or hang around looking mortified when dismissed? Or just a boring farker with the bat?

Looked OK in T5 of Ashes 09.

No it is the timewasting between balls we are talking about.

Aye, he's the classic idjit fidgit ...
Twitching, adjusting pads, scuffing the crease, three look-arounds, peering down the track ... he does the lot!!!

But if it pisses off the Sniffer - go fer it Trotter ... top man!

by skully on Mon 21 Dec 2009, 22:19

And he's a Yarp (which must really peeve Smiffy). Cool

by Brass Monkey on Mon 21 Dec 2009, 22:37

Trev's got my team, or vice versa.

by Merlin on Mon 21 Dec 2009, 22:54

Strauss(c)
Cook
Trott
Pietersen
Collingwood
Prior+
Swann
Broad
Bresnan
Anderson
Onions

Bresnan for Bellhop.
Bowls cleverly and can bat a bit.

by Shoeshine on Mon 21 Dec 2009, 23:31

Yep, if it annoys Smiffy, then carry on doing it. Though actually it seemed to me that all the bowlers had to do was carry on running in. Trott seems like one of those players who settles down as the bowler starts his run up, so he would have been ready and was ready when they aborted the run up. In any case, it's not for the bowlers to decide he isn't ready, why not just carry on?

by Merlin on Mon 21 Dec 2009, 23:42

Sniff always likes a moan, a whinge, a bleat ...no matter what the issue.
One must make allowances for the sad farquar ... 11 runs in the match can't have excited him much !

by Shoeshine on Mon 21 Dec 2009, 23:51

England bowlers have complained about the timewasting involved in him wandering out to the middle, only to have to wander back to the pavilion a few minutes later.

by JKLever on Tue 22 Dec 2009, 00:22

Shoeshine wrote:Yep, if it annoys Smiffy, then carry on doing it. Though actually it seemed to me that all the bowlers had to do was carry on running in. Trott seems like one of those players who settles down as the bowler starts his run up, so he would have been ready and was ready when they aborted the run up. In any case, it's not for the bowlers to decide he isn't ready, why not just carry on?

Though of course it's the batsmans job to be ready when the bowler is. Because Sniff made such a sook about it - you can bet the umpires will be watching out for it.

by Shoeshine on Tue 22 Dec 2009, 00:35

JKLever wrote:
Shoeshine wrote:Yep, if it annoys Smiffy, then carry on doing it. Though actually it seemed to me that all the bowlers had to do was carry on running in. Trott seems like one of those players who settles down as the bowler starts his run up, so he would have been ready and was ready when they aborted the run up. In any case, it's not for the bowlers to decide he isn't ready, why not just carry on?

Though of course it's the batsmans job to be ready when the bowler is. Because Sniff made such a sook about it - you can bet the umpires will be watching out for it.

The way I saw it, it was the bowlers who baled out of their run-ups, rather than Trott pulling away. He just seems to be one of these people who fiddles around and then is ready for the bowler when they're running in. There was no reason for them to stop their run-ups, it's down to them. If he keeps pulling away when they're in their delivery stride, that's a different matter.

by taipan on Tue 22 Dec 2009, 00:40

The problem wasn't Trott bailing. It was the fact that he wasn't ready when they turned. And he must have taken at least 3 minutes to get ready at the start of his innings

by Shoeshine on Tue 22 Dec 2009, 00:48

taipan wrote:The problem wasn't Trott bailing. It was the fact that he wasn't ready when they turned. And he must have taken at least 3 minutes to get ready at the start of his innings

Some players do get ready as the bowler heads in though. He was in position and waiting when they bowlers decided to abort their run up. That's their decision, not his. As I say, if he pulled away in their delivery stride, different matter, but he didn't. I don't see why the bowlers didn't just carry on. As it stands, they have no case.

by taipan on Tue 22 Dec 2009, 00:56

Shooey, I could understand that if it was a couple of instances. The fact was that it happened on numerous occasions and to all the bowlers.
You know as well as I do that bowlers, especially quickies, don't like aborting their run ups. The only common factor in this was Trott.

by Shoeshine on Tue 22 Dec 2009, 01:03

But they didn't have to abort their run-ups. That's their call that they did so. They should stop being such big babies about it and carry on. As I say, if Trott then pulled away repeatedly they might have grounds for complaint, but he didn't and they don't.

by taipan on Tue 22 Dec 2009, 01:07

Shooey, you are trying to defend the indefensible. Why did it happen with any of the other batsmen? I notice you gloss over his buggering around at the beginning of the innings.

by Shoeshine on Tue 22 Dec 2009, 01:15

I don't really see why it's indefensible. Seems like a lot of whingeing over very little to me. He's not the first player to fiddle around at the crease and won't be the last. I repeat that it was the SA bowlers who decided not to bowl, not him. The Australians never moaned about it, and let's be honest, they're quite quick to moan about anything.