Did england choke?


Tagged ,

20 thoughts on “Did england choke?

  1. golandaaz says:


    A Bangladeshi win was long over-dew

  2. Yup, they sure did. Not only Choke. They whined a lot. Blunders in captaincy, selection, wicket-keeping, no discipline in bowling. –> Chocked. However, in their defense, they batted horribly as well.

  3. Vinay says:

    With the number of S Africans in the side (missing KP), it isn’t a surprise. Looks like every choke is tied back to the S Africans :)

  4. diogenes says:

    No they did not choke but all English sides in whatever game have a habit of leaving their supporters biting their umbrella handles in frustration. Somehow, it is not English to qualify too easily.

  5. diogenes says:

    trust me….I have been following England in all sports since 1967…..and I have the lack of hair to prove it

  6. South Africa lost to England because they have more Saffers than England… and England lost to Bangladesh because they have more Saffers than Bangladesh! It’s all about the Saffers!

    This should tell you clearly that: “Yes, they choked!”

  7. Lost = Choked?

    I thought Bangladesh choked myself.

  8. Lizzy says:

    I think you can only choke if you’ve got yourself into a winning position – we lost the bloody match when Prior walked out to the middle with Strauss

    • jrod says:

      Lizzy & Dean, 8 wickets down, over 50 runs to get, 9th ranked side in the world, position to win? Anyone can lose, England did way more than that.

  9. Lizzy, we have never solved the opener or wicketkeeper problem, it’s getting as bad as the old No.3 in the test team problem, look how long it took us to sort that out.

  10. theSinghConnection says:

    now now…lets not get carried away and throw words like “choke” every time a team manages to lose a game.the misuse of words is the sole reason why words like “winning” and “bling” are dead.

    i realize that england only needed to take 2 wickets defending 60 odd but because they did not do so does not imply a choke. sorry broski but your logic choked on that one. pakistan vs new zealand- the last 4 overs- now that was a choke.

    i got a better headline for you instead!


  11. jogesh99 says:

    England should reach the finals – theirs are the only games worth watching.

  12. raghu says:

    Yes Dean , the Banglas choked , but recovered jsut in time. But the number of wides by England ???? No way they will cross QF [ if they manage to enter ]

  13. DID INDIA CHOKE? 5/13 off just under 6 overs, thats choking territory.

    By the way, did Ireland choke yesterday as well?

    That Kevin O’Brien has choked every time he has picked his bat up since the England game.

    I thought Graeme Smith choked today as well, just 16 runs from 29 balls, what was he playing at?

    Bloody Choker

    @ Raghu, yes the wides were unbelievable, I think Jimmy Anderson choked on a mosquito in that one particular over at the end.

  14. ElishaCook says:

    I hope the final is India – England. With both these two teams, there’s no way it couldn’t be a nail-biter.

    • jrod says:

      Dean, complacency starts it, but they weren’t complacent at 40 runs, 30 runs and 20 runs, that was good old fashioned panic brought on by the sudden realisation they could lose a game they’d thought they’d won. Many a choke started with complacency, over confidence or thinking the game is over.

  15. kalyan says:

    History is repeating. England controls the destiny of so many countries

  16. Jrod, at 25-20 runs they were desperate, thats not necessarily choking though. Every tight game gets hectic when you get to the business end of it.

    England didn’t suddenly lose the plot and start doing mad out of character things that they don’t normally do. I know you will probably point to Jimmy Anderson’s over, but he has been bowling like a club cricketer since the first week in January (no offence meant to club cricketers).

    I suppose you could say that maybe he choked, but as I said, he has been crap for weeks now. If anything, that over was more in keeping with his recent performances – rather than something out of the ordinary.

    My take on it is this, after they got the 8th wicket I think that England thought the last two wickets were a formality. They were probably walking around the outfield thinking the game was won and that they didn’t have to worry about the West Indies game any more.

    In my view, when you choke, you lose your abiltiy to perform the simple basics of your particular field. I didn’t see any major change in England’s performance during that final few overs. They have been inept for weeks now, it was just a continuation of that.

    Their gameplan or their execution of it didn’t change, the wheels didn’t suddenly fall off. They just came up against a capable bloke who beat them. England didn’t bowl a string of full tosses (well, no worse than usual of late) or drop simple catches, he just simply put England away.

    Examples of England choking are the T20 game against Holland in 2009. We couldn’t hit the stumps with about 4 run out chances from 10 yards or less in Broad’s final over, I think we even dropped a simple catch as well. Thats losing your ability to do the basics of the game under pressure.

    Or England losing their nerve in the 1987 world cup final when the winning line came into sight, Gatting’s reverse sweep etc.

    I’m not trying to be awkward or pick an argument, and I see your point and where you are coming from Jrod. I just think we just have fundamentally different takes on what ‘choking’ is. I have read of lot of stuff about choking over the last couple of weeks and think it is an over used word. It is getting used now almost every time a team loses.

    I wouldn’t be surprised to see a massive choke on Thursday though:)

    • jrod says:

      Dean, All words are overused, with choking I think it’s used when a team that should win, loses, and the pressure of the situation gets to them, that is what I saw happen to England.

Comments are closed.