³ÉÈËÂÛ̳

I was just wondering if Graeme has seen his wikipedia entry which describes him as arrogant for writing this column when he's only a, 'part-time,' member of the England squad. A bit harsh if you ask me.....

Swannie was clearly not at the game on Wednesday. The game started at 3pm, it should have got going earlier as the clouds were high in the sky and the track reasonably dry. Punters paying £55 each were made to suffer and despair so the ECB could get their 24.1 overs in, for it to constitute a no refund.

I am astonished that an international cricketer would be playing in an ODI without knowing the rules.

It may be complicated but surely the whole team must be intimately aware of the ramifications or shortened matches as Duckworth / Lewis computations.

If you came off the pitch seriously not knowing the result, something is seriously adrift. It's your job to know the rules inside out. I hope you'll take the trouble to study them carefully before the next game.

Good luck on Saturday.

I saw The Incredible Hulk on Wednesday, Graeme, and to be perfectly honest I enjoyed the trailers and the Orange advert much more.

Also, who would you consider to be the Hulk of the England team? Mild-mannered to start off with but could explode with rage at any moment? Ian Bell maybe?

Just had a look at the wikipedia entry, that is ridiculous what they are saying about graeme writing columns when not in team, He is asked to by the bbc , papers etc, does not do it off own back for own good!

Id have a word swanny boy!

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Let me get this straight then Graeme. New Zealand need 7 runs from 6 balls to win the match. They had McCullum well set and batting well. England didn't look remotely like taking a wicket, and yet you thought the match was up for grabs?!

Why can't the England team be honest and admit they dodged a bullet Wednesday night?

This is exactly what is putting me off the England team for the last few years now, the patronising interviews they give.
How the England team can continually not even hint at been honest in saying that they got off with a miracle at Edgbaston when they were staring defeat in the face.

Collingwoods interview was a disgrace where he was saying that England were just as dissapointed to come off as New Zealand were, was that why Mr Collingwood was in the umpires ear taking an eternity to get through the overs as the bad weather was coming? He also tried to say the paying customers wouldn't be going home with a sour taste left in their mouth because they got to see more cricket than they expected, I suggest some of the England players start paying top whack to see these games and be treat with the contempt the fans were on Wednesday and still tell me it didn't leave a sour taste in the mouth.

It was an awful advert for cricket yet again on Wednesday and if Team England didn't see that then I fear they are wrapped up too cosily in their protected Team England bubble.

Nickyboje

Well said. Sitting in the freezing cold...Grateful for what. On-off cricket is not good to watch, it disjoints the players rhythm and wanes the fans' enthusiasm. A poor show boys and the t**ts at the ECB.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Hey Swanny, was just wondering.. since you have facebook, do you read all of the messages you get from fans??

Good luck for the upcoming ODI matches! Hope you lads will win :)

"Anyone who questions the timing of the abandonment is just being ludicrous."

You're tarring a lot of respected individuals within the cricket world with that giant brush. I've seen plenty of experts come out and criticise the decision over the past few days.

You are right to say that the conditions were such that the match needed to be abandoned. The contentious issue for me is this: was the weather at the end of the 19th over any worse than the weather at the end of the 18th over, or the theoretical 20th over? I doubt it.

All the people watching knew what was going on - it was crystal clear from the looks on the players faces from respective sides. To suggest otherwise and dismiss as ludicrous the views of a large section of the paying public and your peers and predecessors is patronising and arrogant. You can only bite the hand that feeds you so many times before it gets withdrawn.

A refreshing change would be for someone on the England team to come down with a dose of honesty and admit that they were lucky. Please don't insult our intelligence again.

Actually, incredulous as I am at the thought that a professional sportsman is at any time unaware of the situation, the rest of your comments make me think that you might be telling the truth...

Come on you guys - what are you trying to say? That there was some evil conspiracy between the England captain, the team, the umpires and the match referee to say that it was impossible to continue? Get real -there was no conspiracy of any kind.

Luke Wright also observed how difficult it was to bat with rain pouring into his face......

The fact is, the weather spoilt it, and yes, Vettori was disappointed (although he spoilt it rather when making his allegations about slow over rates - 'it's gamesmanship and I would have done the same'); how many thousand times has that been so in all forms of cricket? If you want an indoor game well OK but don't go to somewhere outdoors.... Having sat through umpteen matches with the rain pouring down and the brolly up and nobody out there on the pitch, well guess what, it's life.

The only thing which was a bit silly was the 30-minute interval and I see that steps have been taken to change that already.

I would echo Estsark's (#12) comments...

"Anyone who questions the timing of the abandonment is just being ludicrous."

You're tarring a lot of respected individuals within the cricket world with that giant brush. I've seen plenty of experts come out and criticise the decision over the past few days.
-----------------------------------------

I would also say that any international cricketer who doesn't know that 20 overs constitutes a match is also 'just being ridiculous.'

As for not 'even being remotely aware' of your slow over rate, England being as frustrated as NZ at the result, and the game being 'up for grabs,' those comments just defy belief.

And yes Vettori said the England team had employed some gamesmanship, but he also at least was honest enough to have said that had NZ been in the same position they would've probably done the same.

This is the second time I've read your blog, Mr Swann, and it will be the last. What a load of patronising, rose-tinted tosh.

Girlfan (#14)

Come on you guys - what are you trying to say? That there was some evil conspiracy between the England captain, the team, the umpires and the match referee to say that it was impossible to continue? Get real -there was no conspiracy of any kind.
----------------------------------------

I don't think anyone's saying it's a conspiracy, I think people are taking umbrage with what Swan is saying, and how he's saying it.

So are you saying that Graeme Swann should be a total genius media performer and should have his every word examined in the sort of forensic way we'd expect in a court of law? Oh, the obliqueness of the accusation - I don't like the way he's said this that and the other, I don't like his rose-tinted attitude blah blah blah.

For crying out loud, Swann is a sportsman, not a media performer. or an actor. I've seen this kind of reaction so many times on this website and it shows how lacking in understanding some contributors are.

I want to see the England team performing on the pitch. I don't give a monkey's about how they appear to the not-quite-so-objective-as-they-think-they-are media or indeed fans who just want to pick holes in every word and sentence they utter (invited by said media).

well said girlfanLondon.

I was very suprised that 20 overs needed to be bowled, but hey.
Leave Swanny alone - he plays the cricket, he doesn't make the rules of it
Qs for Swanny
1 - what do you think of hawkeye - as a batter and a bowler? Should it be used more often?
2 - Do you enjoy pinch hitting at the top of the order?
3 - Will you be able to play any 20 20s for Notts if they make the quarters of finals day?

oops, quarters OR finals day.
finals day has the semis not the quarters

Hi Swanny,
As England prepare to play at Bristol, I can see the rain pouring down outside my window. After all it is the longest day of the year! You guys must spend a serious wedge of your lives hanging around and waiting to play because of our dire weather. How do you amuse yourselves in the English dressing room? Are there any of the guys who resembled caged tigers, or are you all cool as cucumbers? Is it that easy to switch back on to the match, or have you been caught out thinking about your last chess move/hand of cards/I spy game instead of cricket?

As it's an international match, why can't the ECB factor in a "reserve" day, as has been known to occur in World Cup games where the weather is likely to intervene. As things turned out, Warwickshire were playing an away game on the Thursday, so this arrangement would have caused them no disruption at all. Any thoughts...

Plenty of international cricketers are not aware of the rules. In Shaun Pollock's case, a dressing room miscalculation cost him his wicket. We saw a World Cup Final where difficult rules were in operation. Practically every England spectator gave Michael Kasprowicz out in the Ashes when technically it was an incorrect decision. Few players and even fewer spectators would have been aware of that rule.

All teams use gamesmanship. All teams give media releases to cover up the fact they played badly. If they were honest, Vettori would have been on the floor howling and crying after the Second Test saying how the Kiwis had bottled it bigtime and thrown the game away. Admittedly if we had honesty we'd have had some hilarious 'South Africa have bottled it' performances in the media circus.

Just wondering when Dr Comfort and the Luid Revelations will be making their next appearence.

Yes it was dark Swanny and you may not have been able to see the end of your chin but domestic Twenty20 is played in those positions to block refunds. ..Get on with it! Would you have come off if it was the Stanford game? Err, no...

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Hi Graeme
I was at the game on Saturday at Bristol (situated in the 'mental' stand which initiated that extraordinarily well organised mexican wave.)
Firstly..I'd like to say that you saved England from a huge embarrassment, and my mum in particular took a shine to you, saying 'I like him, that Graeme Eagle, he's made of the right stuff, in't he.'
Praise indeed.
But my question is:
Would you rather have a test century or a number one platinum album?

and..
if you had to have a cricket team made up entirely of non-cricketing celebrities, who would your top 11 be?

We also made you a chant on Saturday:
'Go Go Graeme Eagle, la la la..'
It's a winner.

Eloise, Bristol

I was at this game and yes, the conditions had worsened dramatically by the end of the 19th over - with reference to the comment above, they were much worse than at the end of the 18th, the rain started pouring down, umbrellas were going up rapidly and they had no choice but to go off.

But did Graeme Swann seriously not know that 20 overs were needed for a result until the team walked off? I don't necessarily blame him for not knowing this himself, but why didn't someone tell him before the end of the match?

I would have thought that a competent captain or coach would have made this rule quite clear to the team in a game where it looked like 20 overs a side might not be possible, as it had potential to affect the result (and indeed did so). Either Swann is making things up or there are serious team management issues here.

More generally I think the England team still don't quite understand that people who are paying £55 a ticket expect some entertainment. They often rather give the impression that they are playing the game for their own benefit and that the spectators who pay their wages are an incidental irritation who can be messed about by whatever means they find appropriate, be it slow over rates or whatever.

At least 2020 is starting to sweep this attitude away, shame England haven't caught up with it yet.

Swanny isa stand up comedian off the park too, his memorable 30 minute piece at Northampton emptying the bars. .

The bars were in the same room as him.

Monty 0-27 off 2 overs. Your place is still safe.

Forget about the cricket, tell us more about the night out in Soho!

Hi Graeme,

Thanks for your reply last week. Just to clarify though, an alpaca is not a camel like goat. It is a kind of llama with a floppy fringe.

Anyway. This week I was wondering what you would do about the scourge of our city centres? The urban seagull. Are you in favour of culling or a more humane approach? If so what?

Ta.

I was at the game on Saturday too and would love to know if the players get distracted by Mexican waves, streakers, fancy dress, inflatable bananas, beer snakes et al. What's the best inflatable* you've seen?

*at the cricket obviously - not during your birthday outing to Soho.

Swanny me old china.... If you will excuse the expression.

You must be sick as a parrot....