Advertise on CBF

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4

Author Topic: Mongoose + Gareth Andrew  (Read 7602 times)

0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

petehosk

  • Administrator
  • Forum Legend
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8816
  • Trade Count: (+39)
Re: Mongoose + Gareth Andrew
« Reply #30 on: September 02, 2010, 09:48:26 AM »

I did find some of the descriptions funny.
One of the commentators said it looked like an oar!

But the funniest was saying it looked like you could make pizzas with it.
The goose definitely causes a lot if discussions and opinions
Logged

alexrickyponting

  • International Captain
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1222
  • Trade Count: (+6)
  • WWTD
Re: Mongoose + Gareth Andrew
« Reply #31 on: September 02, 2010, 09:55:25 AM »

The Tremlett and Andrew innings were completely different, one was a fun quick slog in a dead game and the other was proper cricket shots to build a huge total. Lets remember that Gareth Andrew came in at almost exactly the same position as Walters did for Surrey. Played sensibly to reach 50 off 41 balls and then powered on to 100 in only 17 more.
didnt say they were the same merely that tremlett was hitting it as far, andrews was a quality innings. im not and never will attempt to defend stuart walters, he has done hardly anything in 2nd team cricket yet was captain of surrey last year, has done nothing this year yet regularly plays ahead of what few talented youngsters we have e.g roy and walters and spriegel have pretty much blocked out laurie evans who has been scoring for fun in the 2's with little or no reward and has thus moved on.

The oval is one of the largest playing surfaces in England and all of Andrews sixes cleared it with ease. Maybe he could have hit the ball further but that might have compromised the timing of the shot or made him loose his shape which could easily mean his mis hit or even missed the ball. You don't get any more runs for hitting the ball 20 rows back than you do for it only just reaching.

fair enough about no more runs for it going 20 rows back than for it only just reaching, not all of his sixes reached it with ease. i counted 3(i think) that landed inches over the rope. isnt the 20% more power thingy of the mongoose partly meant to help mishits still go the distance?
Logged
Yeah yeah yeah I'm still about

Ayrtek Cricket

  • Forum Sponsor
  • International Superstar
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14750
  • Trade Count: (+53)
  • www.AyrtekCricket.com
    • Ayrtek Cricket
Re: Mongoose + Gareth Andrew
« Reply #32 on: September 02, 2010, 09:58:49 AM »

Tremlett is 9ft 4 tho and his arms are therefore pretty long which effect momentum/force due to length of levers/fulcrum/pivot etc so no suprise he hits a long ball....i think its hard to quantify the performance of any bat due to the fact each one if different due to a natural material being used to make it from.
Logged

alexrickyponting

  • International Captain
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1222
  • Trade Count: (+6)
  • WWTD
Re: Mongoose + Gareth Andrew
« Reply #33 on: September 02, 2010, 10:01:27 AM »

im just going to agree with you tom, im still half asleep and that confused me :-[ :D
Logged
Yeah yeah yeah I'm still about

Ayrtek Cricket

  • Forum Sponsor
  • International Superstar
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14750
  • Trade Count: (+53)
  • www.AyrtekCricket.com
    • Ayrtek Cricket
Re: Mongoose + Gareth Andrew
« Reply #34 on: September 02, 2010, 10:06:12 AM »

Im sure norbs will know alot more than me as its not my area of expertise when it comes to going into maths/physics....we touched on it in biomechanics during my degree in terms of the basics!!
Logged

peplow

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6791
  • Trade Count: (+77)
Re: Mongoose + Gareth Andrew
« Reply #35 on: September 02, 2010, 10:15:50 AM »

Yeah the longer his arms the more of a mechanical advantage he has
Logged

Bez013

  • County 2nd XI
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 302
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Mongoose + Gareth Andrew
« Reply #36 on: September 02, 2010, 10:19:04 AM »

Tremlett looks like he has a bit of extra muscle at the moment as well.

The thing is Gareth Andrew wasn't trying to smash the cover off the ball, he was timing it.

The straight six (I think off Schofield) easily went the distance and was pretty flat and he didn't appear to try to smash the ball.
Logged

peplow

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6791
  • Trade Count: (+77)
Re: Mongoose + Gareth Andrew
« Reply #37 on: September 02, 2010, 10:21:19 AM »

Also what impressed me was the fact there were very little mishits, no chances given really, just sustained hitting,
Logged

Canners

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5085
  • Trade Count: (+10)
  • go hard or go home
Re: Mongoose + Gareth Andrew
« Reply #38 on: September 02, 2010, 12:37:24 PM »

all the shots looked very correct, some lovely drives

was very enjoyable to watch and some greatadvertising for the goose, i noticed he even mentioned it in his interview :)
Logged
I don't know how to put this, but, I'm kind of a big deal.

petehosk

  • Administrator
  • Forum Legend
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8816
  • Trade Count: (+39)
Re: Mongoose + Gareth Andrew
« Reply #39 on: September 02, 2010, 12:41:31 PM »

I do have a question for everyone.......
why has nobody mentioned Solanki's knock?
His shots were sublime, the ball went like a rocket, and it was the base on whch the whole win was built!
Logged

Tom

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5607
  • Trade Count: (+33)
    • www.cricketinsight.co.uk
Re: Mongoose + Gareth Andrew
« Reply #40 on: September 02, 2010, 12:47:04 PM »

Because no-one cares about Fearnley!  :P
« Last Edit: September 02, 2010, 12:58:01 PM by Tom »
Logged

Buzz

  • Administrator
  • International Superstar
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 12676
  • Trade Count: (+13)
  • Clear your mind, stay still and watch the ball
Re: Mongoose + Gareth Andrew
« Reply #41 on: September 02, 2010, 12:51:35 PM »

Because no-one cares about Fearnley!

That is somewhat harsh. Dave (procricket) cares deeply about Fernley - as, in fact do most of those born in the 1970's, all of whom will have had a fernley (probably an Ian Botham Attack) as their first bat.
Solanki's innings was sensational, when he makes runs it looks very easy. I just which it wasn't always against Surrey  >:(
Logged
"Bradman didn't used to have any trigger movements or anything like that. He turned batting into a subconscious act" Tony Shillinglaw.

petehosk

  • Administrator
  • Forum Legend
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8816
  • Trade Count: (+39)
Re: Mongoose + Gareth Andrew
« Reply #42 on: September 02, 2010, 12:52:56 PM »

Considering his knock was the better of the two, then it is a little harsh!
Logged

Tom

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5607
  • Trade Count: (+33)
    • www.cricketinsight.co.uk
Re: Mongoose + Gareth Andrew
« Reply #43 on: September 02, 2010, 12:55:14 PM »

I said that tongue in cheek but in all honesty, the Mongoose and the bloke using it is always going to get more coverage and mentions than any other bat. Fearnley, Adidas or otherwise.

When I was walking around the Oval last night Mongoose in hand I was surrounded by people wanting to look at it, would it have been the same with Solanki's Fearnley?
« Last Edit: September 02, 2010, 12:57:31 PM by Tom »
Logged

petehosk

  • Administrator
  • Forum Legend
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8816
  • Trade Count: (+39)
Re: Mongoose + Gareth Andrew
« Reply #44 on: September 02, 2010, 12:59:49 PM »

No they wouldn't....but alas, that seems to be the way of the World!
Solanki's knock was excellent and pure class. No slogging, just gorgeous shots!

So I bet you would love to see the end of test matches too? Too old fashioned for you?
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4
 

Advertise on CBF