Originally posted by star me kitten: And I wonder why some think it's a rubbish version of the great game? Maddy...FFS.
It takes skill to constantly get after the bowling and it takes skill to constantly bowl cheap overs. I agree it's not 'pure' but it's a damn sight more exciting than 50 overs cricket, which still has the bore of the middle overs. I like all three forms of the game - it's cricket. It's meanlingless totally, it's also harmless though.
Originally posted by RedDuster: This will please Danny boy. NO Middlesex presence, not even the Shah!
Prior as keeper - perleeese B@s ... that really tarnishes your record as a selector!
Who'd you pick Merlin, seriously? Middx are quite a poor T20 team. Possibly Shah certainly.
Shah would be my only pick ... the rest are deffo not T20. Mind you Chaminda Vaas joins us this coming season... but, cany as he may be, methinks age is catching up with him, especially in T20 bang-abouts (thinking here only for the Mddsx team effort).
Saw Bruce in a televised 20/20 last season, and he comfortably out-bowled Tremlett.
I'm not totally covinced by Benham either, but it would be good for at least one untried player to be given a go.
Not playing Collingwood is unthinkable.
I'd much prefer Ben Phillips to Bruce or Jones. He's done it at the toughest times year in and out and there's also no way I wouldn't go into the T20 game without two spinners.
Benham is sheer duffness. Gidman if you want someone in the lower middle order IMO. I'd replace Collingwood with Sales, who smacks the hell out of the ball and goes from ball 1. He averages 35 and strikes at 140 and most importantly averages well over two 6's per innings.
- perleeese B@s ... that really tarnishes your record as a selector!
