Racehorse TALK

Other Talk => Sports Talk => Topic started by: gratlog on 2008-Dec-15, 08:32 PM

Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2008-Dec-15, 08:32 PM
For those of us who like this game


http://cricketnsw.com/news/news-archive/2011/10/17/live-streaming-of-bupa-sheffield-shield-match

http://crictime.com/live-cricket-streaming.htm

http://deepextracover.com/

http://cricketarchive.com/

http://www.espncricinfo.com/
Title: Cricket
Post by: Bundy on 2008-Dec-16, 08:46 AM
Wrong area G...  :lol: ....next thing ya know we will have political bullshit discussions under our beloved Racing Talk...  :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: MagiC~* on 2008-Dec-16, 09:16 AM
G what are you doing ?   :lol:

Can a Mod move this to the sporting section please  ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2008-Dec-16, 10:58 AM
Don't know how I did that.  :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2008-Dec-16, 12:15 PM
They both should be in the team grats  emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2008-Dec-16, 03:52 PM
Krejza is in, Watson 12th man.

I'll be disapointed if Haddin doesn't say 'Bolwled Warnie' at least once during Krejza's first over - there won't be any easier opportunity for some nice clean sledging than that :)
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2008-Dec-16, 05:31 PM
I see no reason why the boks batsmen will score runs this time around. I't the same old faces

The series will come down to a battle of the bowlers. They do seem to have a lot of strike power, especially at Perth.

Why do we look after visiting teams by giving them the best conditions. We should be playing their fast bowlers in Adelaide
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2008-Dec-17, 05:55 AM
All I can gather from my poll is that 55% of the voters don't know much about cricket  :lol:

Only joking.
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2008-Dec-17, 06:41 AM
Experience should be a factor for the Boks batters now Wily, there might be some names that we have seen before but their record through recent yes suggests they've been on the improve, the 3 looks good and in form and they have one of the best all rounders in the game today. Agree, if they aim up under the away pressure they look to have a very good bowling attack. Have been looking forward to this test for some time, I hope both sides aim up and we get a good one.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2008-Dec-17, 08:47 AM
Kallis has only had the one good test innings with the bat over the last 12 months triples, he's woefully out of form. His last 20 times at bat shows highs of 132, 74, 64 with 13 innings under 20 - compared to his 20 innings before that where he got 6x50's and another 5x100's.

As for his bowling... they've hardly been giving him a run lately, more often than not he bowls less than 20 overs in a test - he makes Symonds' figures look good at the moment   :biggrin:

He does seem to have the habit of taking key wickets though, it's just they usually reward him with a rest and throw Steyn back in at the new batsman from what I've heard.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2008-Dec-17, 10:01 AM
So what will SA do when they win the toss today... I assume we're still sending Ponting out there with his awesome two-up skills to hand the opposition first choice?

Surely they'll jump in and bat, although given they have a 'mind coach', I guess anything is possible if they try to over analyse the situation and are drooling over the WACA bounce.
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2008-Dec-17, 10:07 AM
Who ever wins the toss will bat, I hope it's Australia as I want to see this Boks bowling first up on a deck that might well be helpful, and I want to see if so if Hayden and co can aim up.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2008-Dec-17, 12:10 PM
Wow, Ponting won a toss and Australia batting   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2008-Dec-17, 12:13 PM
This is going to be a great first couple of hours.

Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2008-Dec-17, 12:25 PM
I want to watch the first race at Eagle Farm at 1228pm but I'm afraid I might miss Hayden going out at 1233pm.

He lasted longer than I thought he would :what:
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2008-Dec-17, 12:50 PM
Hope you didn't switch over to a race at the wrong time Gratlog...   :shy:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Friar Tuck on 2008-Dec-17, 12:51 PM
 :censored:Ponting  :lol:   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2008-Dec-17, 12:55 PM
2/14. Gee they were good balls that did the work.

I wish Hayden would quit before being sacked. He deserves that at least.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Duke of Astor on 2008-Dec-17, 12:59 PM
Before the game started TERRY ALDERMAN said the pitch was a real disappointment.

He thought it had been made to last the entire 5 days, so that the "CORPORATES" could enjoy  the weekend.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2008-Dec-17, 01:01 PM
Nah, he's got the MCG on boxing day next Grats - you can mark him down for a 100 there already, his record in the boxing day test is Bradman-like, maybe they should just bring him back for that game each year  :)
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2008-Dec-17, 01:06 PM
Ironically, in hindsight, this would have been a great toss for Ponting to have lost   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: kicker on 2008-Dec-17, 01:20 PM
As I said in the other forum, sad as it is, Hayden's time has come. Can't see him being dropped but I'll be astounded if he doesn't announce his retirement by the end of this series.
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2008-Dec-17, 03:33 PM
how much longer do we have to put up with listening to that fool M Slater? :mad: :wacko: :slaphead:
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2008-Dec-17, 03:38 PM
this f#$kwit thinks i'm blind! :wtf:
pictures with the radio,that works. :thumbsup:
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2008-Dec-18, 12:21 PM
Got my jobs for today done , so now for another good day of cricket I hope.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2008-Dec-18, 12:25 PM
I think the Aussies will be pretty pumped after yesterday, was looking like it was going to be a really crap day early on, but 340+ is definitely respectable and SA will be disappointed they didn't keep them under 250 at most - they would have been thinking <200 was on the cards when they had us 3/15.

Up to the Aussie bowlers to see if they can push the advantage further.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2008-Dec-18, 01:05 PM
Has anything been mentioned about SA's slow over rate yesterday? They wen't 30 mins over time and still ended up one over short for the day, will be interesting to see if they get fined  ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2008-Dec-18, 01:06 PM
Agree, Australia have at least 100 more than they should have got. Australias score is good, and done quickly with 300 + on day one, especially when having been in deep trouble. The Boks lost the plot after lunch yesterday, they bowled poorly, and consistently, got carted and let Australia back into the day and the game. The Boks have some advantage that there's 4 days left on a nice track, if good enough they should be able to occupy the crease and knock up a commanding total (and lead), but their bowlers need a huge kick in the arse.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Antitab# on 2008-Dec-18, 02:09 PM
Mitchell Johnsom amazes me.

He is a terrible bowler at test level but batsman seem to enjoy committing suicide against him. That shot Mackenzie played was dreadful.

I would like to see a montage of the wickets Johnson has got in India and in the New Zealand series, 3/4 of them are half trackers or half volleys,dunno how he does it.

In saying that there isnt much in this track I have loaded up on a draw. Reminds me of the wicket in Perth 4 years ago where these 2 teams had a draw and the high scores were in the 3rd and 4th innings where Hodge got 200 and then the Aussies couldnt get Jaques Rudolph out.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2008-Dec-18, 02:29 PM
Three years ago  ;)

http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/match/226371.html (http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/match/226371.html)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Antitab# on 2008-Dec-18, 04:34 PM
Mitchell Johnsom amazes me.

And another one wide of off stump that Smith manages to drag back onto his stumps.

Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2008-Dec-18, 04:37 PM
Anti,
Mitch is the new Botham.

Both served up some of the biggest crap ever seen but got wickets
Title: Cricket
Post by: Puntermatt on 2008-Dec-18, 05:45 PM
LOL - Thought of you straight away Anti when Johnson took his wicket.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2008-Dec-18, 07:43 PM
here is the latest photo of antitab 8.40pm EDST.


(http://www.senukesux.com/images/amazed.jpg)

Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2008-Dec-18, 07:43 PM
A mate of mine had a big whack at less than 3.5 ducks in 1st innings.
He was devastated yesty when Ponting then Hussey went without scoring.
Now with 4 SA wickets remaining he's looking ok
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2008-Dec-18, 07:50 PM
A mate of mine had a big whack at less than 3.5 ducks in 1st innings.
He was devastated yesty when Ponting then Hussey went without scoring.
Now with 4 SA wickets remaining he's looking ok

OL you've gone and done it now.   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2008-Dec-18, 07:51 PM
  :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2008-Dec-18, 07:52 PM
I've got a knack haven't I?   :lol:

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2008-Dec-18, 07:54 PM
Shit! The dunce was meant to be Antitab at 8.49   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2008-Dec-18, 07:55 PM
COME ON!!!!! :thumbsup:

Great spell by MJ and haddin was fantastic
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2008-Dec-18, 08:16 PM
Geez Antitab, you're being a bit harsh on the guy I think... he goes ok   :lol:

In all seriousness, I think he's got deceptive pace, usually up around the 150kph mark and the weird angle being a lefty is a plus - the batsmen probably think they should be targeting him and consequently play a little looser, which would be why he gets so many bad shots on bad balls... either way, that was a fantastic spell tonight though.
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2008-Dec-18, 08:17 PM
agree.terrific evening of test cricket.
not 5mins before Johnson started his rampage,Justin Langer was on the radio saying how bad test cricket is.
looked pretty good to me. :thumbsup:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2008-Dec-18, 08:30 PM
Langer is a great commentator

"Australia would really love a wicket right now"

Fair dinkum
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2008-Dec-18, 08:33 PM
Well I'm with Antitab and Wily, the guy is a pie chucker. He was rushed in to the national team, under done, as the new "fast" bowler to save Australian cricket, just like Lee was. He's now the koala bear of Australian cricket, nobody dares touch him. He's 20/80, 20% quality and 80% crap, and he keeps getting wickets with his crap balls which makes him (and his stats) look far far better than he is. I hope he can learn and improve on the job, as when he does hit a line a length he can bowl some quality stuff, but it imo just ain't consistent enough and he dishes up so much garbage, regularly.
Title: Cricket
Post by: coinswell on 2008-Dec-18, 08:46 PM
I've never been a fan of Johnson either but he seems to be improving. 

Geoff Lawson said on BSB this morning he had a lot of skills still to learn especially in terms of swinging the ball...BUT....His angle was good to claim de Villiers and Kallis.  I thought 2 of his most impressive deliveries were a couple of searing in swinging yorkers that didn't take wickets.  Also thought the slower ball to get Morkel was very intelligent bowling and whilst he was lucky to get the debutante it was an awkward rearing delivery at the body and very difficult for the batsman to deal with effectively.

One thing you can't question is his attitude as he has shown with the bat as well as the ball.

Good on 'im for today.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2008-Dec-19, 06:43 AM
You've sumed him up very well, 7's  emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: Antitab# on 2008-Dec-19, 07:09 AM
Johnson bowled a couple of good balls yesterday to get De Villiers and Kallis but I still have huge doubts. He didnt really break his record with 3 of his wickets were from poor balls and a 4th was given out off the elbow.

There has never been a left armer who has had long term success in test cricket who cant bring the ball back in to the right hander. Johnson relies totally on angling accross the right hander and bad shots. Until he learns to bend it back batsman will have to keep comitting suicide as much as anything else for him to get wickets.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2008-Dec-19, 07:49 AM
Tell me a bowler that doesn't get wickets with ordinary balls

You guys that are bagging him wouldn't be if he was family or friend.

Give the bloke a break, he's young and improving and can bat a bit also.

Once he gets his inswinger working to the right hander he'll be unplayable, take it from a fellow lefty  ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2008-Dec-19, 07:55 AM
You're right lars

and he can bat bloody well  emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: Antitab# on 2008-Dec-19, 08:23 AM
Once he gets his inswinger working to the right hander he'll be unplayable, take it from a fellow lefty  ;)

That pretty much sums it up but its a big IF.

The alternative is he doesnt learn to bend it back and he is out of the team and playing Shield cricket for WA within 18 months.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2008-Dec-19, 08:25 AM
Am I the only one who saw the ball clearly deflect off the bat before it got anywhere near Duminy's elbow?

Tubby and Heals could only focus on whether it hit him on the gloves or the arm (clearly a lot higher than the gloves), but that was well after it took a pretty big deflection off the middle of the bat...

Whatever you think of Johnson's ability, his spell last night was clearly top shelf... he made them play, he completely out psyched Morkel and bowled some amazing delvieries - clearly his best spell in test cricket so far, but it was a beauty.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2008-Dec-19, 08:31 AM
...and I thought he had the inswinger (to the right handers) working pretty well there last night - I don't think he got a wicket with one, but he bowled two stunners in a row at one point (might have been to Kallis?) which probably was a factor to him getting the caught behind a few balls later with the one that held its line.
Title: Cricket
Post by: kicker on 2008-Dec-19, 08:37 AM
He seems to be getting more & more roundarm in the Malinga the Slinger mould. Maybe he has always bowled that way & I haven't noticed :/but i certainly noticed it last night.
Title: Cricket
Post by: motorboater on 2008-Dec-19, 10:43 AM
IMO i don't think Johnson deserves the bagging he gets. He might not have the control of McGrath, but somehow he seems to keep bowling wicket taking deliveries.  I'm happy to have him as long as he keeps getting wickets. He'd have a pretty impressive strike rate i reckon.

Though i'm glad to see he's gotten rid of the leg side tripe he used to bowl.
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2008-Dec-19, 12:06 PM
Here we go again. Cannot complain about the first two days, that is for sure.
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2008-Dec-19, 01:33 PM
Please let Hayden get a few runs. :sweat:
Title: Cricket
Post by: kicker on 2008-Dec-19, 01:53 PM
Should buy a lottery ticket after that call.
Title: Cricket
Post by: kicker on 2008-Dec-19, 02:04 PM
This is painful
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2008-Dec-19, 02:08 PM
  :biggrin: He'll come good
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2008-Dec-19, 02:15 PM
Should buy a lottery ticket after that call.

Just desserts?
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2008-Dec-19, 02:15 PM
now I know he got lucky earlier but seriously how the  :censored:  was that ever out. Thought I was going blind when Nicholas went off. Then the replay proves I still have 20/20 vision and as always thought Mark Nicholas is just a tosser with a fancy accent.
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2008-Dec-19, 02:18 PM
One of the worst decisions that I have seen. emthdown
Title: Cricket
Post by: kicker on 2008-Dec-19, 02:19 PM
Poor bugger, think the cricketing gods are telling him something.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2008-Dec-19, 04:13 PM
He'd be a  :censored: idiot to listen to the cricketing gods.
4th dud decision this summer.

The challenge system has to come into action.

it's a joke that a blokes career will be on the line through inept umpiring. :mad:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2008-Dec-19, 10:01 PM
Great knock by Haddin,

Gilly was a massive loss but this bloke will out perform any other keeper bat in the world  emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: parrapete on 2008-Dec-20, 08:31 AM
Perhaps Hayden was given out LBW
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2008-Dec-20, 08:53 AM
It would never have happened if he was given out LBW earlier not playing a shot   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2008-Dec-21, 12:10 PM
Have to be happy with this game for the entertainment value 8-)
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2008-Dec-21, 12:27 PM
In another couple of hours we'll know whether to be happy or not, lol  ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2008-Dec-21, 12:28 PM
The first session will show us the winner.
Hopfully Binga 7 Mitch will strike early.
the boks have a long tail
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2008-Dec-21, 01:59 PM
Another crap ball grabs a wicket   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2008-Dec-21, 02:34 PM
saffers going to do this easily.
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2008-Dec-21, 02:41 PM
saffers going to do this easily.

Agreed - have closed out my lay on SA to win the series at a loss.  :sweat:
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2008-Dec-21, 04:47 PM
If only one of our other bowlers had of thrown down a few more bad balls... Johnson tried hard, but needed someone else to step up and spray a few with him   :biggrin:

Good win to SA, plenty of swings in this test match, good to see - boxing day should be a cracker, can't wait (we're still going to struggle to take 20 wickets though I think)
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2008-Dec-21, 05:09 PM
Agree toasty, getting wickets is tough.
I guess they struggled too so all is not lost.

not sure what we can do with the bowling.
Personally, I'd have Bracken in there because he's about the only bloke in the country who can swing the bloody ball.

We clearly miss a talented spinner.

In saying all of that we weren't far off. That Dumny bloke was woeful for the first 20 minutes and on most days would have been cleaned up. may have been a different story with an ounce of luck
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2008-Dec-21, 07:21 PM
Surely we call this for what it is  :(   (declaring my interest in backing the Boks)

This has to be one of the worst defeats in Australian history.

For goodness sake, we have just been rolled on the last innings at 414, hold the phone, 4 runs short of the all time record at 418 for the last innings.

WTF!!!   :sweat:

Worst still, (and this is coming from someone who has just has a sensational result on this game) from the second session onwards until late yesterday Australia were in complete control of this game. I've been saying for months, we can't bowl out 20 wickets to win a test. Full stop.

More still, my confidence in backing the Boks was that (I thought) they were a far better side than we thought. Not to be. Post lunch day 1 they were very ordinary, poor line and length, carted as they should have been, there after no spine in their batting order from 5 down wards when it mattered. And then when it mattered they won!!!

I hate to say this (but has been the case for a few months now) we have a fair side at present.   
Title: Cricket
Post by: Lucky on 2008-Dec-21, 07:28 PM
i agree triples - the pitch was a road and the prices offered all the way thru for a side that was at best a avery average sheffield shield bowling attack amazing
Title: Cricket
Post by: kicker on 2008-Dec-22, 09:44 AM
They cannot possibly continue with Lee & Siddle together. Both of them are straight up & down with little or no variation. Where did Siddle come from anyway??? I heard he'd only played 13 first class matches & 2 of those are Tests???? I could understand if he had bags of wickets & an average in the late teens or early twenties from those 13 matches but that aint the case. I certainly don't think he strikes fear into the hearts of any batting line up & Lee is in the same boat at the moment.
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2008-Dec-22, 09:56 AM
My prediction--

Aussies will win next one easy and the last will be a draw due to bad weather.
Series 1-1

This will fatten my betting accounts up nicely.  :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2008-Dec-22, 10:44 AM
In all seriousness how do Australia win either of the next two tests? To do so they obviously have to bowl out 20 wickets, but we just don't have the attack, nor the depth and or replacements. Spinners, where have anything of quality gone? Krejza appears to be the best, but is very, very expensive. Melb and Sydney, inparticular the later normally support spin yet it appears Krejza and Clark are it? And we need some major partnerships, and teamtotals to put some pressure back on the Boks, especiall their middle to lower order which looked ordinary (on the only occasion they had to bat, lol).

The Boks were $34 to win the series 3-0 before the first test, stranger things have happened.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-22, 01:38 PM
The Sydeny test will be lucky to see a days play

Australia really should not have been bowled out in either innings in Perth, our Batsmen threw their wickets away. ( Clarke, Symonds and Hadden ) If these guys did not fritter their wickets away, it would have been a tame draw.
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2008-Dec-25, 11:12 AM
The support for Australia generally, in Australia particularly in betting markets opens up plenty of opportunities.

The Boks were $3.20 into the first test, win, are now $1.58 to win the series yet we can take $3.15 them head to head in the 2nd test, which imo is a dam nice bet. Throw in the Boks to win the series $5 2-0 or $7 3-0. Hello, plenty of value for mine. Especially when I have a real question over this Australian sides ability under pressure right at the moment. A number of players at either end of the list out of form, or yet to find it, a few others imo who have had a soft run for some time and look good against ordinary sides, not so good under some decent pressure. In addition I reckon the Boks are still on the up.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2008-Dec-25, 10:35 PM
It'll only take a Boxing Day test to put us back on the right track  ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2008-Dec-26, 10:08 AM
nail in the coffin.

bye bye Hayden. Great career.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2008-Dec-26, 10:23 AM
He's got one more innings yet, don't be so hasty   :biggrin:

But I agree, it's looking very shaky - if he can't get runs on this ground, then as great as he has been, it's probably time to move on  :tears:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-26, 10:35 AM
Its time for Phil Hughes to come in in Sydney.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2008-Dec-26, 11:50 AM
I doubt they will make changes until after this summer, so I reckon he'll get the Sydney test in as well to try and retain his spot for the ashes.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2008-Dec-26, 12:08 PM
What was the run of outs for Taylor?
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2008-Dec-26, 12:14 PM
whn was Hayden made the captain. Must of missed that appointment to the top job.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2008-Dec-26, 12:20 PM
Whats the captaincy got to do with the length of a batting run of outs.

I remember Waugh averaged about 25 over 3 series before he announced his lap of honour
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2008-Dec-26, 12:22 PM
it's got everything to do with the ease of being dropped.  ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2008-Dec-26, 12:57 PM
By that I can only assume you don't know the answer to my question
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2008-Dec-26, 01:00 PM
by your answer I can only assume your letting your man crush get in the way of common sense.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2008-Dec-26, 01:05 PM
Whats the captaincy got to do with the length of a batting run of outs.

and if you want it explained to you as you apparently can't figure it out here it is.

1)drop batsman who is captain = need to find batsman external to team and captain internally who is considered good enough to lead team.
2) drop batsman only = replace with batsman only.

nah nothing to compare between them is there. I mean there is no importance placed on leading the country and finding a replacement so why would that have any influence at all .  :rolleyes:
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2008-Dec-26, 01:37 PM
Do you reckon Ponting was a better skipper when he had Gilchrist there to help out?

Apparently Gilly was the real motivator in the team
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-26, 01:39 PM
Most captains will look a heck of a lot better with Gilly, McGrath, Langer and Warne in the side.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2008-Dec-26, 02:36 PM
Why do batsmen ie Ponting, play defensive to an off spinner when there is a bat-pad present?
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2008-Dec-26, 02:41 PM
Most captains will look a heck of a lot better with Gilly, McGrath, Langer and Warne in the side.
I reckon Gilly was far more valuable than the others to Ponting. On the field the others were good but it was of the field that Gilly showed his true worth
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2008-Dec-26, 03:05 PM
Langer????  :what:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-26, 03:48 PM
If anybody thinks Langer was not worth his salt in the Aussie team, they are not worth talking cricket with.  :/
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2008-Dec-26, 03:53 PM
Langer was a fine player, but shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath as Gilchrist, Warne and McGrath... it would seem that Wily isn't the only one around here with a man crush   :biggrin:

With a test average of 45, he's a long way down the list of our best test openers... for starters, Hayden has played a few less tests and scored nearly 1000 more runs.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Puntermatt on 2008-Dec-26, 04:59 PM
This is an evenly poised test match at this stage assuming we finish the day five wickets down. Kudos to Punter for his ton - it comes just after I suggested to friends it could be time to move him down the order to #6 - a position Border adapted to very well as his career wound down.

On the subject of batting order changes, it may be time to consider a few long term changes. Perhaps move Hussey to opener, Katich to first drop and Punter to fourth? What do you good folks think? Stranger things have happened......

As for Haydos, I'm his biggest fan but after this morning I cannot support his continued retention in the side unless he scores a reasonable amount of runs in the next two or three innings. Many retired players have revealed they lost the mental side of their game before the physical side of it and Haydos no longer appears to have the patience or application to hang around for an hour before starting to build his innings. I've been waiting for him to revert back to the successful formula he applied to score 138 against the Poms in the fifth test at The Oval - only playing at balls bowled on the stumps and leaving everything else alone but alas he continues to flay and dabble at balls well outside off. And this is without taking into consideration the recent achilles problems that have hampered his footwork. If we had Warnie, Pigeon and Gilly still in the side and were winning with ease, then we could afford to carry Haydos for another series or two but alas, we can't do that anymore. I hope he can prove us all wrong with a fighting career saving innings in the next fortnight.

PM

Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2008-Dec-26, 05:43 PM
Katich has secured an openers spot.

Why the need for moveent in the order.

All that needs to happen after Sydney is Jacques in Hayden out.

I mean Jacques has averaged 47 in 19 innings with 6 50's and 3's tons.

Symonds out, Haddin to 6 and Hifenhaus/Krezja/whoever in. We can afford to strengthen our weakness and have 5 specialist bowlers as they can bat a bit.
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2008-Dec-26, 06:36 PM
Not that different to day 1 in Perth. Ponting out at 24 would have been very inetersting. Boks are still inconsistent with their line and length. On this wicket, against an inconsistent attack Australia should finish with 400 + with their first dig, and a commanding position, that I very much doubt. Days 2 to 4 will be very interesting on what looks an excellent batting track.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Puntermatt on 2008-Dec-26, 08:54 PM
I hear you Arakaan re Katich.

My reasoning is based on the fact that Katich usually bats first drop for NSW and I think he would be capable there at test level also. I think should Hussey be moved as a long term proposition, he would be better served at opener than first drop for example.

In terms of career averages, Hussey is our best batsmen despite his current dry spell - why not give him the chance to build an innings every time he bats?



 
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2008-Dec-26, 09:12 PM
I hear you Arakaan re Katich.

In terms of career averages, Hussey is our best batsmen despite his current dry spell - why not give him the chance to build an innings every time he bats?


So he doesn't get that batting at 4.  :what:
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2008-Dec-26, 10:14 PM
PM, typically you put your best batsman in at #3, and the 2nd best at #4 - the openers primary job is to see off the new ball, which will make those first few overs a bit easier when your big guns get to the crease... at least that's the theory. Take nothing away from the openers, they obviously have to be top shelf, you want them to stick around as much as possible and make big scores, but they also need to get a lot of experience with facing those first 10+ overs, so consistency at the top of the order is pretty crucial.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2008-Dec-27, 08:53 AM
Ara, my whole point was, HOW LONG WAS THAT RUN OF LOW SCORES THAT HE HAD.

NOTHING TO DO WITH DROPPING ANYONE
I was curious as to how long it lasted, i can't recall. Thats it, pure and simple :wacko:

Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2008-Dec-27, 10:11 AM
it was 21 innings without a 50(18 months). then the 100 at edgbaston. and the 4 innings after the ton totalled 4 runs.

of course after all that he went on to make the 334 some 15 months later.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2008-Dec-27, 02:19 PM
Thank you.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2008-Dec-27, 03:33 PM
Gee, Siddle has improved out of sight since Perth - I guess this is why he's in the team, obviously shown something like this before... not lucky wickets either, he's sending down absolute rockets and digging them in at a nice length - hope he can keep this up for a bit longer  :thumbsup:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2008-Dec-27, 03:39 PM
Toasty

I didn't rate him too highly either but he's on fire. Such a different bowler. I wonder if anyone is advising these blokes. what role is the coach playing?

I just said to my brother in law, it proves, once you select someone you have to stick with them for a reasonably long time. Calls for his axing after one home test were a wank
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-27, 04:15 PM
The panic shown from Australian cricket fans ( on most forums )after Perth was one big wank.
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2008-Dec-27, 04:27 PM
Hope you aren't thinking that this game is over yet.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-27, 04:40 PM
Gratlog Australia should go into the second innings with at least a 150 run lead, with the best batting conditions ahead of them.

If we do not lead when South Africa have to bat again by at least 450+ than it will all come back to the batting. The batting let us down in perth not the bowling. That was NOT a result wicket, it should have been a draw.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2008-Dec-27, 09:33 PM
It'll only take a Boxing Day test to put us back on the right track  ;)

 ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-28, 10:24 AM
Onya Hussey he is batting like a tail ender and doing their job with the ball.   :noteworthy:
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2008-Dec-28, 11:06 AM
Hope you aren't thinking that this game is over yet.

Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2008-Dec-28, 11:14 AM
I thought that I might see Hayden get out before the first at the Sunshine Coast today, but It might not happen now.  :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-28, 11:16 AM
Again it is really not a result pitch. Australia needed to get through the tail and build a massive target and bat South Africa into submission.

Really neither side should lose this game, it will take very very poor batting to do so.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2008-Dec-28, 11:46 AM
They're certainly preparing 5 day pitches
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2008-Dec-28, 11:59 AM

 . . . . now repeat after me,

against good opposition Australia can't get 20 wickets to win a test . . .

against good opposition Australia can't get 20 wickets to win a test . . .

against good opposition Australia can't get 20 wickets to win a test . . .



 :tears:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2008-Dec-28, 12:02 PM
Not on these pitches  :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2008-Dec-28, 12:04 PM
funny didn't seem anything wrong with the pitch on the first 2 days.  ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2008-Dec-28, 12:10 PM
Again it is really not a result pitch. Australia needed to get through the tail and build a massive target and bat South Africa into submission.

Really neither side should lose this game, it will take very very poor batting to do so.

But what is a result pitch? Something that falls a part by day 4 so if you win the toss you basically win the the match  :what: :what:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-28, 12:18 PM
Basically, yes.

If Australia batted to their full potential on days 1 and 2 and batted for the full 5 sessions, as we basically did throughout our reign through the 90s and 00s, the opposition are generally speaking demoralised and the super bowling attack we had would carve through them.

This attack needs heaps of run from the first innings and plenty of time to bowl the opposition out twice. Its all very well to bat quickly and get 350-400 but our batsmen are giving the opposition far too much time to build an innings and give themselves ( the opposition ) an opportunity for a win.

During the great era, most off our opposition was batted out of the match, was totally demoralised and were defeated before the 4th innings.

IT IS NOT THE BOWLERS FAULT. IT IS THE BATTING THAT IS LETTING US DOWN.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-28, 12:24 PM
The point lost on most people is, Australia should not have lost the first test, they should have batted the opposition out of the match and made it so only ONE team could win. And the same can be said on this deck.

It is not so much that it is a none result wicket, it is the fact that really the team batting 4th should be batting to survive not to win.

Australia should be batting by tea  :sweat: that gives them 4 sessions to bat South Africa OUT OF THE MATCH and leave it that there only two options an Australian win or the more likely a good fighting draw as it should have been in Perth.
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2008-Dec-28, 12:25 PM
IT IS NOT THE BOWLERS FAULT

Sorry mate, don't agree.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2008-Dec-28, 12:25 PM
To a point you are right, Ponting (until this test) hasn't been on top of his game, Hussey is struggling and we've discussed Hayden at length  :p while Symmons is always hit and miss.

So it's been up to Katich and Clarke.

On the flip side we don't have the firepower we once had in the bowling department
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2008-Dec-28, 12:36 PM
Siddle has bowled nothing but short crap all morning.

Some of Ponting's bowling changes, and negative field placements have been equally poor. Mind you, backing a one legged Symonds was always going to be a stupid decision that would haunt him.

Sth Africa, as exposed in the first dig in Perth (and recent tests prior) don't have a strong batting tail, yet we're making them look talented!!

And forget the wickets. These wickets are no different to what we have won numerous tests on, we just don't have the fire power to mount consistent pressure to take the wickets.
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2008-Dec-28, 12:41 PM
Got me  :censored: why they have Symonds there.  He admitted he wasn't 100% fit
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2008-Dec-28, 12:45 PM
Got me  :censored: why they have Symonds there.  He admitted he wasn't 100% fit

still happy to see my sole neither in the poll. yet to be proven wrong.   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2008-Dec-28, 12:50 PM
Authorized - being 1-0 down in the series, we can't just bat SA out of this match, it's a must win game, so the longer this goes on, the more of a risk we'll need to take in the 2nd innings... we can't just bat on all day tomorrow and into the first session of day 5, out bowlers need time to get them out, and we have to do that to keep the series alive - a draw is almost as bad as a loss if we want to win this thing. Even if drawing the series is still ok, I don't think we can afford to let this one get away too.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-28, 12:51 PM
The batmen i was dissapointed in in Perth were, Clarke, Symonds and Hadden in both digs. They where in and should have all got hundreds plus. The 3 of them got themselves out in both innings, rather than the bowlers doing anything to get them out.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-28, 12:55 PM
I agree with that BT, but this wicket is a batsmens paradise. People simply have to aknowledge that.

I also agree this attack is not a scratch on the Warne, McGrath  and Gillespie attack, but as good as our attack was our batsmen generally speaking did the job and gave them plenty of time and runs.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-28, 12:56 PM

 . . . . now repeat after me,

against good opposition Australia can't get 20 wickets to win a test . . .

against good opposition Australia can't get 20 wickets to win a test . . .

against good opposition Australia can't get 20 wickets to win a test . . .



 :tears:


At the end of the day 777s our batting side should not be bowled out twice either, by any attack on these decks.
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2008-Dec-28, 01:02 PM
Completely agree Authorized.

Which only confirms my view prior to the first test, we have an ordinary side on the slide.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2008-Dec-28, 01:11 PM
At the end of the day, a first innings total of 400 should be enough to win... it's always nice for the batsmen to make more, but it's the bowling that wins tests... and our bowlers got us in a wonderful position here, they just don't have the consistency - a bit like New Zealand, dangerous in one-dayers where they can put it together for some great short spells, but toothless in a test match trying to produce over five days.

You've only got to look at the West Indies over the last couple of decades, having probably the best batsman in the world in Lara, but let down because their bowling attack couldn't get the job done.

Still plenty of time to win this test, but they're going to need a big final 2 days.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2008-Dec-28, 01:35 PM
This has been painful viewing.

Duminy is not that bloody good but they certainly are trying to talk him up for some reason.

We've dropped catches, misfielded and the captain has made some very odd decision
Title: Cricket
Post by: Puntermatt on 2008-Dec-28, 01:43 PM
Yeah Wily - feels like I'm getting a frontal lobotomy.

Anyone know why Punter hasn't given this chap a bowl given that he has a better career best bowling effot than the ACB's Mr Marketing, B Lee.

SM Katich 2001-2008 34* 16 128.5 13 479 13 6/65 6/90 36.84 3.71 59.4 1 0 24 0
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-28, 01:44 PM
Keppler Wessels is of the opinion that he is not far short of the second coming. He may well be that good wily.

I think this has got to the stage where AUSTRALIA are now demoralised and when South Africa eventually get their turn to bowl, nay well go straight through the Aussies. This was the sort of thing that Australia did to the opposition when they where at their peak.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-28, 01:49 PM
.
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2008-Dec-28, 01:56 PM
Australia's response in their second dig will set the course for the balance of this series. IMO we are poor under some pressure any way, well this is going to be some pressure. We've let them off the hook today, and now had all advantage turned full 360. The Boks will come out pumped up, with little to lose now from here, yet everything to gain. As BT said above, Australia have to win this test to make a play at the series, well that now won't happen and at best they'll be under the pump further going into Sydney trying to draw the series (which they won't). Unbelievable.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-28, 02:19 PM
I am now demoralized.

When will Greame Smith declare ?

Why would he, Sydney will be a wash out ?

South Africa have the series wrapped up.

 :sweat:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-28, 02:37 PM
One positive for Ricky Ponting, Australia need to only bowl another 26 overs for the day at the start of the final session. This must be the first time in his captaincy that they are in front of the voer rate ?   :nowink:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-28, 03:30 PM
I wish NINE would show more of the Lady in red.  :love:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2008-Dec-28, 03:32 PM
It's the worst ton I have ever seen.

the plonker couldn't hit it off the square.
On the pie chart for his 100 he hit 10 balls to the off side  :lol:

It's the first time i've been critical of Punter but today, he lost the plot
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-28, 03:35 PM
If thats the worst you have seen, than you have clearly never seen a bad 100, which is fair possibility. The bloke can play.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2008-Dec-28, 03:51 PM
Author

He's poked, prodded, nudged, french cut, played & missed and struggled to hit Husseys long hops cleanly.
It's been embarrassing for us and him
Title: Cricket
Post by: manikato1 on 2008-Dec-28, 04:01 PM
Wily,

I have seen Haydon, Bevan and Ponting hit far worse hundreds than that, and thats only including Australians.  He came in a a really difficult time, when SA were battling to avoid the follow on, and has got 150 odd.  It hasn't been a sparkling hundred by any means, but he doesn't look that kind of player he looks a compact worker of the ball, and he's done that well.

I don't know why people think Smith should declare, surely runs are easier to get in the first dig than the second?
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2008-Dec-28, 04:11 PM
I wasn't aware that we couldn't bowl anyone for more than two overs in a row any more... surely if Ponting wants to completely let the panic set in, it's time to give Haddin a bowl   :biggrin:

And yeah, no way should SA declare - why should they, any runs they get now are ones they won't have to get in the 2nd innings should it get to that, and they really won't care if it ends in a draw... they definitely want to bat Australia out of a result if they can being 1-0 up already.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2008-Dec-28, 04:15 PM
Manikato

"compact worker of the ball" is one way you could put it.


Incapable of off side stroke play is another  :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2008-Dec-28, 04:18 PM
Oh what an interesting 3 overs to finish an amazing day . . .
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-28, 04:18 PM
That is the first time the bloke has gotten out against Australia. His average should be 217. As it is, it is 108.5
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2008-Dec-28, 04:36 PM
108.5 is about as many inside edges onto his pads that he hit  :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2008-Dec-28, 04:47 PM
Maybe he did well to get a bat on those balls  :p
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2008-Dec-28, 05:31 PM
BETFAIR

1.47 Draw
5.30 Sth Africa
7.60 Australia

Will Ponting declare at some stage or let it fizzle into a draw if he has that opportunity?

I'm thinking the 5.30 isn't a bad bet.

Any thoughts?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-28, 05:33 PM
Not sure they will get 2 full days but as far as i am concerned there are two possibilities South Africa win or a draw.
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2008-Dec-28, 05:46 PM
How long have you blokes been following cricket?

I get these blokes in my earhole, all the time, about what should be the odds for a win for team A, a draw, or a win for team B, game after game, and my answer's always the same....Cricket's a funny game, anything can happen.

Is that piking it?

Maybe.

Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-28, 05:56 PM
  :lol:  Yes Geoff it is piking it, As tipsters it is so much better for the ego to tip a result either or anyway it goes before hand.  :beer:
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2008-Dec-28, 07:25 PM
Maybe tipsters do that, sporting philosophers don't.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2008-Dec-28, 07:43 PM
C'mon Geoff, you know what odds mean... of course funny things can still happen, 7.60 says there is a 13% chance that funny things can happen - sounds about right doesn't it?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-28, 07:51 PM
due to the strength of my cricketing philosophy i know that there are 2 realistic possibilites on this wicket.
Title: Cricket
Post by: manikato1 on 2008-Dec-28, 08:18 PM
But wouldn't it be true to say that at the start of the day today there were only 2 possible results, Australia win or draw?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-28, 08:39 PM
If Australia dismissed South Africa quickly this morning with a lead of 150+ and than batted to their full potential, which they have failed to do for a while now, than yes that would have been the likelyhood. If however they led by 450 but gave the Afrikaans 4-5 sessions to get those runs than South Africa would have been in it up to their ears.

It will take Australia 1 hour OR so to wipe of the deficit tommorrow they will than have 5 hours or 75 overs to build a lead of around 350+ and give themselves a chance to bowl South Africa out.

Really Australia has to bat until an hour into day five just to take the game totally out of South Africa's reach. They would need to lead at that stage by 300 at least with 75 overs remaining. If they are all out by stumps tomorrow night they would only have a lead of around 300, thats scoring at 4 runs an over. South Africa could choose to chase that or they could just bat out the day.

The scenarios are all very interesting. I favour the draw scenario.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Antitab# on 2008-Dec-28, 09:00 PM
Wily

I gave you more credit as a judge, JP can bat. Today was the first day he was legitimately dismissed in the series.

In the history of test cricket there wouldnt be 3 blokes who have played 2 better and more important innings in their first 2 matches. He will be a star.

We will see what a few blokes are made of in the next 6 sessions.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-29, 09:49 AM
Haydos is on fire.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-29, 11:31 AM
3/21 at lunch with Australia well and truly in the box seat.
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2008-Dec-29, 11:33 AM
Roflmao   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-29, 11:40 AM
 :censored:
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2008-Dec-29, 11:52 AM
 ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-29, 12:45 PM
The South Africans are certainly doing more with the ball than Australia. That would have alot to do with the atmospheric preasure there today. Its clearly a darker day today than it was yesty.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-29, 12:46 PM
HOW DOES ONE DELETE A THREAD OR POSTING ?
Title: Cricket
Post by: MagiC~* on 2008-Dec-29, 12:53 PM
You don't, either edit it and say something like
edit.
deleted or even just a dot

Or you can ask a Mod to remove it
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-29, 12:54 PM
 8-)
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2008-Dec-29, 03:24 PM
Bugger. Wouldn't that rip the fork out of your nightie?

Ponting goes for 99.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2008-Dec-29, 03:52 PM
He obviously didn't take his Swisse multi-vite today  :tears:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-29, 04:25 PM
South Africa need 182 runs to win and wrap up the series, forgone conclusion on this wicket.

Where does Australias batting line up rank ?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-29, 04:28 PM
In the fair dinkum department, if Australia wrapped up the tail yesterday morning with a lead of 150+ and the opportunity to bat in that heat they'd be winning this game.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2008-Dec-29, 04:31 PM
if the saffers win then Sydney is the perfect opportunity to blood Hughes.

series dead, ground/pitch he is familiar with and can't do much worse than the bloke he would replace has in the recent past.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2008-Dec-29, 04:51 PM
Yes, I'd be surprised if Hughes doesn't replace Hayden in Sydney... even if we manage to find a miracle here and win, lol.

Obviously a replacement is needed for Lee too, will miss the next game with his injury - Watson or Hiffenhaus... can't say either would be overly inspiring, may need both of them in there even?
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2008-Dec-29, 04:55 PM
In the fair dinkum department, if Australia wrapped up the tail yesterday morning with a lead of 150+ and the opportunity to bat in that heat they'd be winning this game.

Authorized - I want you to write this out 50 times... Batsman win One Dayers, Bowlers win tests - ok  :)

600 runs is more than enough to win a test match... our bowlers got us into a great position in SA's first innings, but sadly have gone missing since. This lead is obviously nowhere near enough to give us a realistic chance of winning, but IMO the bowlers have way more to answer for than the batsman.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2008-Dec-29, 04:59 PM
Watson will replace Symonds.

Hilfenhaus in for Lee, Bollinger in for siddle.

that's what I'd do along with Hughes. Match means nothing lets see what they can do.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-29, 05:03 PM



Graeme Smith batted this evening like Gordon Grenidge, Justin Langer and Matthew Hayden at their best.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-29, 05:06 PM
I think that is a simplistic way to look at it Burnt Toast. Batting takes the opposition out of a game, Australia should been the only team to be able to win the game realistically after day 2, but the courage and skill of South Africa's tail was telling on a tarmac.
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2008-Dec-29, 05:15 PM
While I don't agree with it Hayden will be given the last test in Sydney as his farewell.

I'd replace Hayden with David Hussey, bat him down the order and open with M Hussey (who made all his shield runs as an opener). Watson to replace Symonds (what a master stroke bringing him back, word is Ponting all but demanded he be picked for Perth), Bollinger for Lee (great record on his home track). I'd have no problem giving Hiffenhaus a run in Sydney to see how he came up in a dead leg in place of Siddle. I'd take Hughes on tour to SA and begin to blood him there, they'll also have the possible option of Jaques being back. God only knows where the next test quality spinner is coming from.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2008-Dec-29, 05:38 PM
What has Symonds done wrong? He's batted well... I can't understand why they took so long to give him a bowl yesterday, but when they did he was tidy and economical - if Ponting stopped changing them every two overs he probably would have built some nice pressure - I see no reason to drop him at all.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2008-Dec-29, 05:38 PM
Can't see why they would drop Siddle after a couple of tests seeing as they rated him so highly to pick him in the first place.
Shafting blokes after a game or 2 is moronic selection policy  and player career management.

Watson will probaly come in for Simmo but they may opt for a 2nd spinner
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2008-Dec-29, 05:40 PM
Toasty, didn't you see him hobble after the ball every time he chased it?

He's clearly injured and didn't bowl much because of that. He has to go if he can't bowl 20 overs
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2008-Dec-29, 05:54 PM
I just don't think Symonds attitude ever looks right. I actually don't think he has batted well, he's a soft wicket, and 57, 37,  27 and 0 is hardly setting the world alight (granted he has numerous mates). In most of his 4 digs he has come in when under pressure and hasn't / doesn't knuckled down when required to build a score. Playing him with this injury was a joke. I've had some problems with Watson's selection at times in the  past but after standing up and contributing in India in difficult conditions I couldn't believe that he was shafted as he was for to make way for this cowboys return. At least with Watson he always looks like he's rolling his sleeves up to have a go for the team, that'd be the last thing I could ever say of Symonds.
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2008-Dec-29, 06:27 PM
Agree with what most have said:

- Watson in for Symonds (who was a shocking selection to start the series in the first place)
- Bollinger/Hilf to replace Lee (I'll leave it up to the selectors to who is in better form  8) )

But Hayden HAS TO GO - threw his wicket away again today and clearly doesn't have the mental concentration for it these days. Hughes or Rogers the only candidates to replace him IMHO.

Siddle keeps his place thanks to 4 first innings wickets.

PS - Terrible decision to bowl a half fit Lee tonight - even at his best he leaks runs. We needed tight economic stuff and hopefully a couple of wickets. This game was done after Lee's first over.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2008-Dec-29, 06:37 PM
7's, think you're a bit harsh on Symmonds batting. I thought he pulled his head in and took his time in those digs. He didn't come out swinging by any means.

Got a cracker today, it happens.
His 3 digs have averaged about 40, not bad for a number 6 allrounder.
The problem is he couldn't contribute with the ball.

I really think we've been spoilt and demand too much from the guys
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2008-Dec-29, 06:47 PM
In saying that, in the last 25 digs Hussey has scored less than 20, 13 times. It's been all or nothing for him of late and he's averaging 18 from the last 2 series. 2 for this series.

A philosophical question, how long do we stick with players.
A mate today demanded that 2 series was enough time for anyone, no matter who they are. I didn't agree
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2008-Dec-29, 07:29 PM
A mate today demanded that 2 series was enough time for anyone, no matter who they are. I didn't agree

Depends, if he is Steve Waugh he's  :censored: d as soon as possible, If he is Heydo he can be there as long as he likes.
Title: Cricket
Post by: bgm1409 on 2008-Dec-29, 07:33 PM



Graeme Smith batted this evening like Gordon Grenidge, Justin Langer and Matthew Hayden at their best.
Been a damn long time since Hayden was at his best.  Changes for Sydney--Hayden out--Rogers in, Symonds out--Watson in (by default--neither are test quality), Lee out (injured)--Bollinger in
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2008-Dec-29, 07:45 PM
Stevie averaged 25 for 25 digs after the ashes tour. He was certainly given enough chances to get back to form.

By my reckoning, on the Waugh/Taylor barometer, Haydos has nearly another 15 digs up his sleeve  :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2008-Dec-29, 07:54 PM
I agree to give Rogers another shot, Hughes will be there for a long time once he gets there
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-29, 08:16 PM
[attachimg=#]

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2008-Dec-29, 08:53 PM
Depends, if he is Steve Waugh he's  :censored: d as soon as possible, If he is Heydo he can be there as long as he likes.



Geoff, I recounted to a mate tonight how you'd harped back to the Waugh's being hard done by.

He suggested you ask messieurs Jones, Blewett & Mathews etc about the favours given to them.

No One will ever forget M. Waugh and the sri lankan farce. :p
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2008-Dec-29, 09:58 PM
Watson will replace Symonds.

Hilfenhaus in for Lee, Bollinger in for siddle.

that's what I'd do along with Hughes. Match means nothing lets see what they can do.

While it makes sense Ara it won't happen. You and I know they wont make that many changes to a team at once. Considering there will be 2 forced changes due to the injuries I doubt there will be others, Siddle will retain his spot and I reckon Hayden will too.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2008-Dec-30, 06:58 AM
Gintara - given that we've already lost the series, and the preference to favour guys playing on their home grounds, I think we will see Hughes in for Hayden... any talk of dropping Siddle is ridiculous - sure, he needs to improve his consistency and has some way to go yet, but they need to stick with their selection for a while longer yet and see if he can develop into a handy test bowler... and dead rubber just makes the decision to stick with  him a no brainer, he's there to develop and get experience, they can give that to him without a result on the line... that will also make the Hughes selection easier.

I think it is fair to say that Hayden's career is at an end. I can't see them giving him one more game when there's a perfect situation to blood a youngster.
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2008-Dec-30, 07:00 AM
Surely it is the selectors themselves that should be looked at.
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2008-Dec-30, 09:09 AM
Surely it is the selectors themselves that should be looked at.

Agree Grat's, plenty of questions there.

And now Watson out for a few months.  :/
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-30, 09:13 AM
The Aussie cricketers do not seem to be handling the stress real well.  :sad:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-30, 09:20 AM
Condition do look as though they may suit swing bowling today, even for Siddle and Lee if he bowls.

Might be a chance for Australia yet.  8-)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-30, 09:35 AM
Brett Lee should be sacked for no other reason than his bloody NO BALL count.  :censored: ing pathetic.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-30, 01:19 PM
WELL DONE SOUTH AFRICA

They are an absolute joy to watch in every facet of the game.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-30, 01:29 PM
Well summarised by Ricky, The BATSMAN lost the series for Austrlia. Sure its the bowlers fault we did not win, but it is the BATSMANS fault we lost.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Friar Tuck on 2008-Dec-30, 01:59 PM
Victorian all-rounder Andrew McDonald and NSW left-armer Doug Bollinger are set to be called up into a squad of 13 for the Sydney Test.

McDonald's selection follows the return of Shane Watson's injury curse and the form and fitness concerns surrounding Andrew Symonds, who has been unable to bowl medium pace in the Boxing Day Test because of an injured knee.

Bollinger is favoured to replace Brett Lee, who will miss the remainder of the summer with a stress reaction in his left foot.

The left-arm quick is coming off a six-wicket performance to bowl the Blues to a Shield victory over South Australia and has taken 14 wickets in the three matches since he returned from the national tour of India at a cost of 22.14 runs each. McDonald has 15 wickets and 324 runs for the season.

While the selectors are understood to have made two enforced changes, Matthew Hayden is expected to retain his place for the SCG finale amid intense speculation about his future beyond this series against the South Africans, who are on their way to a famous series victory on the final day of the Boxing Day Test at the MCG.

smh.com.au

Title: Cricket
Post by: stuey102 on 2008-Dec-30, 02:12 PM
Lol lol McDonald. What a joke

All the selectors should be sacked if this is true.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-30, 02:19 PM
I do not get to see alot of Shield cricket, but his stats stack up okish for an allrounder.

Why they insist on all rounders i am not sure.
Title: Cricket
Post by: stuey102 on 2008-Dec-30, 02:24 PM
Just pick the best 6 batsman, best keeper and 4 best bowlers. Regardless of whether they are left or right handed, bowl pace or spin. If there is an all-rounder that can fit in one of those categories then good.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2008-Dec-30, 03:09 PM
I think nearly all of our bowlers can be counted as all-rounders at the moment can't they?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-30, 03:41 PM
I would agree with that BT, Unfortunately only Johnson could be considered up to test standard ( at the moment ) in one of the art forms.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2008-Dec-30, 04:11 PM

I think it is fair to say that Hayden's career is at an end.


I can't agree and thakfully the selectors don't either.

They've got something right atleast  emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2008-Dec-30, 04:15 PM
I'd luv to speak to someone within the organisation and find out what role the bloody coach has played in all of this
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2008-Dec-30, 04:24 PM
I think nearly all of our bowlers can be counted as all-rounders at the moment can't they?

Well they can't be called bowlers can they?

Couldn't defend our 2nd innings in Perth nor set this test up after having them on the ropes, took 14 wickets in Perth now 11!!!!
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-30, 04:58 PM
Thats say more about our poor batting than it does our bowlers.

As i said earlier, we can blame our Batsman for losing this game, our bowlers take the blame for not winning it.
Title: Cricket
Post by: coinswell on 2008-Dec-30, 05:00 PM
How dumb are the selectors?   >:(

Perfect opportunity to blood another opener blown.  Still they have not got much right this year. :mad:

As I said on the other, soon to be late, forum Hayden should have been punted after the NZ series.  He is not part of the future, he is part of history and that is what he should be.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2008-Dec-30, 05:40 PM

So we drop our most prolific opener in decades on the strength ofa series in India & NZ :wacko:.

With that policy we'll have a losing team of kids for the next decade..
if thats they way you treat champions you'll erode team moral in 30 seconds, thank god you don't have a say
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2008-Dec-30, 05:45 PM

So we drop our most prolific opener in decades on the strength ofa series in India & NZ :wacko:.


when he is 37 and looking every bit of it indeed you do drop him.  ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2008-Dec-30, 05:47 PM
Would you have taken him to India given the fact that his previous series he averaged 83?

Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2008-Dec-30, 06:02 PM
Wily,

ome little point you will never look at is that between that series and India was what 6 months. A period during which Hayden was basically a crippled crock.

So after a serious injury he comes back at 37 and continues to fail horribly including against the all conquering Kiwi attack, and can't get past the 20's at best. Time is well and truely up.

Shouldn't be in Sydney but will be given it. I suppose I can give him that thanks to the gutless selectors.

I remember they did it to Healy, never even let him go after the 1st test at the Gabba.
Everyone cried foul, yet by showing some balls the selectors gave us the best batsman/Keeper we will ever have.

You never know, if you don't give the kid a go.  ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2008-Dec-30, 06:04 PM
You don't think keeping an out form oldster effects team moral wily ?
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2008-Dec-30, 06:19 PM
test
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2008-Dec-30, 06:29 PM

So we drop our most prolific opener in decades on the strength ofa series in India & NZ :wacko:.

With that policy we'll have a losing team of kids for the next decade..
if thats they way you treat champions you'll erode team moral in 30 seconds, thank god you don't have a say

Wily - that is too short sighted. No one is doubting that Hayden has been a magnificent player for Australia throughout his career. The fact is he is past his best, Australia has just lost a series at home, and must enter a rebuilding phase.

Now unless you think we are going to pull players from nowhere and turn our decline around in 12 months, his career will be over by the time we hit our next peak. A dead rubber is the perfect time to blood a new player to gain invaluable experience and the selectors have once again made a blatant mistake.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2008-Dec-30, 06:57 PM
Guys,
Whilst he may be past his PEAK, I don't think he is going as bad as the media has hoodwinked you all into believing.

A realistic review of his past 12 digs suggests that he has been shafted in 6 of them. Form is about momentum and he has been shafted big time, that can't be denied.

There is still a question mark over kat, long term & jaques is injured. Kat has also played some woeful shots this series as well

The selectors have clearly stated that want Hayden to go to the ashes, I agree.
Hughes can tour S.A as a member of the squad then onto the UK. Time is on his side.
If kat doesn't measure up, and we've dumped hayden and Jacques doesn't get to the pitch what the hell do we do if Hughes doesn't step up and perform.
Even if I did agree that haydos is out of form, now is not the time to disrupt the top order. Hughes can get a go in south Africa if hayden continues to fail. i don't think he will.

My Ashes prediction is that Hayden & Hughes will open together by the 3rd test.

The comparison With heals is laughable. yes he should have been given a farwell. Just because he wasn't we invent some rule to shaft everyone else as well....lunacy
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2008-Dec-30, 07:20 PM
Guys,
Whilst he may be past his PEAK, I don't think he is going as bad as the media has hoodwinked you all into believing.

actually I used  thing that is known as one of the senses - It's called Vision.

A realistic review of his past 12 digs suggests that he has been shafted in 6 of them. Form is about momentum and he has been shafted big time, that can't be denied.

hope your not counting the perth dismissal, would never had happened had he been rightfully given out a few overs beforehand.

There is still a question mark over kat, long term & jaques is injured. Kat has also played some woeful shots this series as well

  :lol:  really Katich had gone at over 58 for the 11 tests since recalled. At the same time hayden has gone at low 30's.  ;)  Jacques is back in 2-3 weeks, already training and doing time in nets.


The selectors have clearly stated that want Hayden to go to the ashes, I agree.

Then they should be sacked.

The comparison With heals is laughable. yes he should have been given a farwell. Just because he wasn't we invent some rule to shaft everyone else as well....lunacy

The comparison is when the time is right and the right decision made the benefits can be wonderous. The upside in keeping a 37yo going at low 30's at best is nil. The upside in a 20yo who has suceeded every time he has been asked to step up a level, is immense.
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2008-Dec-30, 07:42 PM
Katich has earned the right to play woeful shots given he has arguably been our best performer the past 6 months.

Hayden has had all series to dig down and grind out an innings (as Clarke did in the first dig here) and has had a loss of concentration on a number of occassions and thrown his wicket away.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2008-Dec-30, 07:59 PM
Speaking of grinding out an innings.

Hayden, Katich, Clarke, Ponting  & Haddin all went hard at the ball....why????

The cry from the team for days was. "We will back ourselves"
That was the approach that lost the ashes.

What role has the coach in determining out tactics?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2008-Dec-30, 08:00 PM

While it makes sense Ara it won't happen. You and I know they wont make that many changes to a team at once. Considering there will be 2 forced changes due to the injuries I doubt there will be others, Siddle will retain his spot and I reckon Hayden will too.

 ;) ;) ;)

Ok there was 3 forced changes but once that was known the selectors were never going to change the rest of the team too  :beer:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2008-Dec-30, 08:23 PM
Astute, very astute.

You can join me on the new selection panel  :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gammalite on 2009-Jan-01, 08:41 AM
Guys,
Whilst he may be past his PEAK, I don't think he is going as bad as the media has hoodwinked you all into believing.

A realistic review of his past 12 digs suggests that he has been shafted in 6 of them. Form is about momentum and he has been shafted big time, that can't be denied.

There is still a question mark over kat, long term & jaques is injured. Kat has also played some woeful shots this series as well

The selectors have clearly stated that want Hayden to go to the ashes, I agree.
Hughes can tour S.A as a member of the squad then onto the UK. Time is on his side.
If kat doesn't measure up, and we've dumped hayden and Jacques doesn't get to the pitch what the hell do we do if Hughes doesn't step up and perform.
Even if I did agree that haydos is out of form, now is not the time to disrupt the top order. Hughes can get a go in south Africa if hayden continues to fail. i don't think he will.

My Ashes prediction is that Hayden & Hughes will open together by the 3rd test.

The comparison With heals is laughable. yes he should have been given a farwell. Just because he wasn't we invent some rule to shaft everyone else as well....lunacy

What more does Kat have to do for people See see his is fine as an opener ?
He has the form on the board now in the last 4 series we have played ( WI, India, NZ and SAF ).
On your basis that Kattich is in trouble because he has played a few ordinary shots then M Clarke should be out of the side as well  :rolleyes:
Hayden is done. His form in the last few years had been in decline and at the moment he simply does not have the answers.
They should have played Hughes or Rodgers in this test match in preparation for what is to come.
The media have not hoodwinked anyone as far as Hayden goes. Having had plenty of time to watch  Hayden (due to back surgery a few months ago) i have seen all of his innings since he came back in India and every time he has started to look OK he has tried to force the issue and got out to stupid shots. He had a couple of poor calls in India here he was given out but he has also survived a few LBW calls that should have been given and forget the Perth test where he was given out off the pad. He should have been already out for a duck because he survived a plumb LB that should have been given.
Time to look for the future.
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2009-Jan-01, 10:54 AM
Talking with a mate last night who knows his cricket, and he's a big rap on Andrew McDonald and reckons he's a promising talent. I've seen very little of him, interested to see how he aims up in this next test.

Speaking of which, current markets $3 pick your choice. So after two test wins against a side that gets weaker by the week you can still take $3. Unbelievable. Imagine if Smith wins the toss and the Boks happen to bat first, lol.
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Jan-01, 11:55 AM
I reckon this bet is a cert  :biggrin:

Corey B to win the jockey Challenge today , then under 4 ducks in the Test match this week
11:51:49 41551 * Jockey Challenge:JOCK MstPts RAND 3-2-1 01/01 C BROWN $2.70
         20371 * Cricket:T3 Aus-SA No.MatchDucks O/U Under 3.5 Ducks $1.85
          $1 = $4.99

Anyone else have any silly bets on the cricket. You don't have to have a fortune on them to have a bit of fun. See who has the silliest bet on this otherwise dead match.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Jan-01, 11:57 AM
Grats, your Lucky Hayden only has 2 innings.   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: qwertyu1234567 on 2009-Jan-01, 01:25 PM
The Baggy PINK

Day 3 of Sydney is to be PINK
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Jan-01, 01:56 PM
Grats, your Lucky Hayden only has 2 innings.   :biggrin:

cruel ,but true.

Sorry Wily  :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2009-Jan-02, 08:56 AM
Australia have been (roughly) $1.80 for the 1st test, $2 for the 2nd and now $3 for the 3rd. The Boks have been $3 plus for each occasion, have enjoyed two (in the end) comfortable wins, did so losing the toss on both occasions and batting second, and did so losing only 14 wickets in Perth and then 11 in Melbourne yet will be dished up at $3 plus again. Hello.

Further more the Boks retain the same winning combination, which has only improved with the outings and would now feel somewhat confident if not in control given their history making series win (dead rubber test and complacency factors a consideration). But I and others made the point prior to the 1st test, this Boks side is a bloody good side. They have not lost a series for a number of years, drew in India, won in England and had won 9 tests in 08 before they got to Oz.

Australia on the other hand have been falling off their lofty perch for some time, further enforced with the now known injury issues. Since being $1.80 fav's in Perth we have lost both opening bowlers (Clarke a day or so prior), am now blooding inexperienced potential (Siddle and who ever partners he and Johnson in Syd) and can't for the want of trying find a wicket taking, game turning spin bowler. The skipper (rightfully) is well under the pump, form issues continue and their confidence and composure surely must be at low levels. They may well bounce back as a team, one would hope that those fighting qualities are produced, and surely one would think Hayden and Hussey are due, lol.

Confidence and pressure are huge ingredients in any sporting contest, and for mine the Boks hold all the aces here. Half their line up has only had to bat once in either winning test, the Boks have cleaned up 20 wickets in each test, something the Australians haven't done (or even looked remotely like doing), and even with the changes I'd suggest it'll still be their biggest problem. The Boks greatest challenge is themselves, I reckon they've shown enough of the right stuff through the last 3 wks to manage that all right.

Yet you can still take $3 + the team 2 up with the same combination, all the confidence and the running. Looks like stealing to me, but certainly way way overs.
Title: Cricket
Post by: grommy5238 on 2009-Jan-02, 10:16 AM
we've all been wrong

haydo reckons him making runs is not the most important  facet to his game --its the experience he provides that makes the difference

in that case bring back all the retirees

cheers
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-02, 10:33 AM
Talking with a mate last night who knows his cricket, and he's a big rap on Andrew McDonald and reckons he's a promising talent. I've seen very little of him, interested to see how he aims up in this next test.


I wouldn't think they'd se;lect him if he didn't have talent.
Tell your mate he should have been a rocket scientist   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Jan-02, 10:38 AM
I wouldn't think they'd se;lect him if he didn't have talent

This is the Aussie selectors that we are talking about, so anything is possable.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-02, 10:47 AM
Fair call  :p
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-02, 04:00 PM


On your basis that Kattich is in trouble because he has played a few ordinary shots then M Clarke should be out of the side as well  :rolleyes:
Hayden is done. His form in the last few years had been in decline and at the moment he simply does not have the answers.
They should have played Hughes or Rodgers in this test match in preparation for what is to come.
The media have not hoodwinked anyone as far as Hayden goes. Having had plenty of time to watch  Hayden (due to back surgery a few months ago) i have seen all of his innings since he came back in India and every time he has started to look OK he has tried to force the issue and got out to stupid shots. He had a couple of poor calls in India here he was given out but he has also survived a few LBW calls that should have been given and forget the Perth test where he was given out off the pad. He should have been already out for a duck because he survived a plumb LB that should have been given.
Time to look for the future.


Gamma,  I don't ever recall saying Clarke & kat should be out of the team.


As for haydos, having also seen every ball he's faced since India, i guess it's best to say, I've stated my view and won't be convinced to change. I'm comfortable in my assessment.

Might change if he fails tomorrow though :sweat:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gammalite on 2009-Jan-02, 06:43 PM


On your basis that Kattich is in trouble because he has played a few ordinary shots then M Clarke should be out of the side as well  :rolleyes:
Hayden is done. His form in the last few years had been in decline and at the moment he simply does not have the answers.
They should have played Hughes or Rodgers in this test match in preparation for what is to come.
The media have not hoodwinked anyone as far as Hayden goes. Having had plenty of time to watch  Hayden (due to back surgery a few months ago) i have seen all of his innings since he came back in India and every time he has started to look OK he has tried to force the issue and got out to stupid shots. He had a couple of poor calls in India here he was given out but he has also survived a few LBW calls that should have been given and forget the Perth test where he was given out off the pad. He should have been already out for a duck because he survived a plumb LB that should have been given.
Time to look for the future.


Gamma,  I don't ever recall saying Clarke & kat should be out of the team.


As for haydos, having also seen every ball he's faced since India, i guess it's best to say, I've stated my view and won't be convinced to change. I'm comfortable in my assessment.

Might change if he fails tomorrow though :sweat:

4 hundreds and 4 fifties in his last 32 iniings is hardly compleeling reading either. I have hoped all along that he has made a score and i really hope he does in Sydney as well. I just think we are at a time in Australian Cricket where we have to look past this seasons schedule and look to start rebuliding the side with players that are going to give us 8 to 10 years of cricket.
This was the perfect time to select Hughs.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-02, 07:06 PM
Gamma, you mention 32 innings.

I'm staggered you're critical of that period of time as that series, 32 innings ago, was the start of the series against the Poms. He averaged 52 for that series

After that averaged 83 for the series against India.

Perfectly good form I'd suggest, what did you want him to average :wacko:
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2009-Jan-02, 07:19 PM
I'm with Gamma, the selectors have been slow to move in general and now with a dead rubber test it was time to move. Although from what I continue to hear Ponting always gets the team he wants, so he has backed guys like Hayden all the way.

Wayne Bennett has always said, the hardest thing about professioal sport is the timing of moving great and or good players on. So many are retained due to past efforts not current contribution. Far better in most cases to be a year or a series early than late. A new face was required for Syd, if we take Hayden to England we are kidding ourselves.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-02, 07:30 PM
7's

what if he scores runs this test then tops the averages in South Africa?

Would we be kidding to take him to the Ashes then?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-02, 07:36 PM
Theres more chance of Australia being rid of group 1 handicaps.
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2009-Jan-02, 08:42 PM
7's

what if he scores runs this teat then tops the averages in South Africa?

Would we be kidding to take him to the Ashes then?

Mate, that's what we hoped and needed in India, then against a pop gun Kiwi attack and now against the Boks, why at his age and current form would we look to and hope that he'll do it on the next tour, or the next tour? Sooner or later we have to move on. He's been a wonderful talent, I've loved watching the guy bat and will miss his attacking approach but the time has long come.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Arsenal on 2009-Jan-03, 08:35 AM
If it looks too good to be true it probably is ,but at  the odds on the test you can back both to win and show a profit UNLESS there is a draw .Aust is 2.85 and Seth Efrica 3.25 draw is 2.50 but with fine weather forecast hardly likely weather will be a factor.So I think I'll try them both.  emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-03, 09:38 AM
They are fairdinkum fricken kidden. When the hell will they fix these side screens.  :censored:  :censored:  :censored:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gammalite on 2009-Jan-03, 10:21 AM
Gamma, you mention 32 innings.

I'm staggered you're critical of that period of time as that series, 32 innings ago, was the start of the series against the Poms. He averaged 52 for that series

After that averaged 83 for the series against India.

Perfectly good form I'd suggest, what did you want him to average :wacko:


I went back 32 inning to give an idea, i could have gone back a bit further but that would have made it look worse. I know what he averaged and i can give you all his scores if you want. I simply went back two seasons. If you want to talk about averages before the Poms he averaged 36 against the fearsome Bangers  :p
If he had of played like he did against India last year we would not be having this discussion.
You can spin the averages any way you want but he has still only acored 4 100's and 4 50's in his last 32 iniings. His current opening partner has scored the same in his last 20.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-03, 03:43 PM
THE BATSMEN HAVE AGAIN LET US DOWN.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-03, 03:54 PM
However it's definitely bowler friendly, it'll be over inside 3 days one way or the other
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-03, 04:03 PM
I dissagree, it will be a good deck tomorrow and probably day 3. 4 and 5 will be interesting. We will need Clarke and Hadden there tomorrow to build a respectable 1st innings target.

The good thing is you can already see footmarks so that will be good for the spinners.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-03, 04:06 PM
The thing a will say in the defence of the batsmen they were all out to good balls rather than getting themselves out.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Jan-03, 04:40 PM
well Haddin definately got a corker of a delivery.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-03, 07:31 PM
What a load of crap - the batsman haven't let us down at all, do you need 600+ in the first innings for a pass mark or something? 350 is a competitive 1st innings  total in any test match in Australia, and I'm pretty confident they'll get to that at least. 400 should win you more than you lose + draw and any more than that is a bonus.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-03, 08:38 PM
they'll get to that with tail again, showing that the wicket is not that bad.

How often have the top 4 got us to 150 this season ?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-03, 08:46 PM
Australias top 4........164........88............184.........145........130
Australias top 5........166........148..........223.........145........162
Australias top 6........259........157..........277.........165........237

The batsmen have let us down.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Jan-03, 11:39 PM
and on what I saw I'll be stunned if we see Ronald again unless he take 5+ wickets.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-04, 06:44 AM
I'm beginning to wonder if you only watch cricket on the sub-continent Authorized   :biggrin: ... do you expect everyone in the top order to make 100+ or something? As long as Clarke goes on to get his ton, 31-47-0-30-100+-15-38 is a completely respectable (and common) total - sure, it's nice to see two of them up around the 100 mark, but is pretty rare to see any more than that dig in for a good score.

Just did a quick check of statsguru on cricinfo, and in the last 30 years in Australia, there have been 17 Tests where we have batted first and scored between 300 and 375, of those matches we've won 9, lost 1 and drawn 7 (that 1 loss was game 1 of this series in Perth btw).

If you want to criticise the batsman, I think you need to give credit to the SA bowling attack, it's very balanced and offers a lot of variety - it's not as good as we had 10 years ago, but it's definitely good enough to stop us throwing up massive totals.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-04, 08:05 AM


... do you expect everyone in the top order to make 100+ or something?


If you want to criticise the batsman, I think you need to give credit to the SA bowling attack, it's very balanced and offers a lot of variety - it's not as good as we had 10 years ago, but it's definitely good enough to stop us throwing up massive totals.
[/color]



2 very good points toasty.

The public, via the moronic media, are now demanding all of the bats score a ton everytime they go out to bat. The occasional failure is not tolerated.

It's a joke.
People need to look at history and around the world to see the demands we place on our players exceed any realistic thought process.

Before this series, Smith was average about 28 against us and McKenzie has an average of 35.

We don't and haven't heard any hysterical cries to sack them.

full credit to the Boks, they have bowled bloody well
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-04, 08:42 AM
My point has been from the very start, that this very very inexperienced bowling attack of ours has been lambasted as being very mediocre. People seem to forget that more often than not McGrath, Warne and Gillespie had massive totals to attack with and the opposition were basically in survival mode from the get go.

This batting side of ours is scoring the runs quickly but also getting out quickly and therefor are giving the opposition bats plenty of time to accumulate runs. The opposition are under no pressure at all to score quickly or try to defend to save the game.

Again Australia will in all likelyhood have 400 on the board but be all out before lunch or shortly there after. This gives the opposition plenty of time. At Australia peak and even with this batting line up, they were getting 400+ but batting through until tea or after on the 2nd day completely taking any hope away from the opposition of winning the game, they usually had only one option DRAWING the game.

This bowling attack of Australia's is not getting that luxury and not experienced enough to withstand the pressure.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Antitab# on 2009-Jan-04, 09:02 AM
Authorised has a valid point.

Our batsman have got plenty of starts and none have managed a big hundred to allow us to score 450-500.

Katich, Ponting, Clarke, Symonds and Haddin have all regularly thrown away promising starts with some awful shots.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Jan-04, 09:15 AM
Warne deserves a call up.  :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-04, 09:48 AM
There really is no need to look for an all rounder.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gammalite on 2009-Jan-04, 10:04 AM
I'm beginning to wonder if you only watch cricket on the sub-continent Authorized   :biggrin: ... do you expect everyone in the top order to make 100+ or something? As long as Clarke goes on to get his ton, 31-47-0-30-100+-15-38 is a completely respectable (and common) total - sure, it's nice to see two of them up around the 100 mark, but is pretty rare to see any more than that dig in for a good score.

Just did a quick check of statsguru on cricinfo, and in the last 30 years in Australia, there have been 17 Tests where we have batted first and scored between 300 and 375, of those matches we've won 9, lost 1 and drawn 7 (that 1 loss was game 1 of this series in Perth btw).

If you want to criticise the batsman, I think you need to give credit to the SA bowling attack, it's very balanced and offers a lot of variety - it's not as good as we had 10 years ago, but it's definitely good enough to stop us throwing up massive totals.

I agree but there are a couple of concerns that are hurting us i the batting department. Without the help of the bowlers in the last three series we would not have hit the 350 target. I dont expect that the top order all make a score but the problem is with Haydne and Hussey both really struggling it outs a lot of presure on the others to score. That pressure along with South Africas ability to bowl to their plan leads to the players in form getting out playing stupid shots. The batting line up is still pretty good. The ony change needed is Hayden as he is only 20% of the player he was. There is a concern with Hussey at the moment as well but he will get a more time. At least we do have a proven test opener coming back from injury in the next few weeks along with a young bloke in Hughs who if you watch him you wonder how he can continue to score runs but he does in all forms of the game.
Obviuosly we are suffering more in the bowling department at the moment with a lack of experince or poor form meaning we sturggle to bowl to a plan or even a reasonable line.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-04, 12:24 PM
I don't think the scoring rate has changed all that much... they've been scoring close to 100 runs a session for the last 20 years - we're under that rate in this game btw. When we had a great bowling attack, test matches were rarely going to the 5th day.

... I do agree that we don't need to pick an all-rounder though, especially while we have Johnson, he seems to be handling that role quite nicely lately.

Good innings by Clarke btw, he's in great form lately... but like every batsman, he's had his lean times too.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-04, 02:07 PM

Good innings by Clarke btw, he's in great form lately... but like every batsman, he's had his lean times too.

His lean time was in the last test when he was woeful.

Just shows how quickly things can turn around.

Mind you, being dropped 3 times and french cutting to fine leg a few times instead of onto his stumps helped as well.

last test he would have been caught for 13. I do think we've played without luck this series so good luck to him for soaking up a ton of it this dig 8-)
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-04, 03:09 PM
I don't think you'd find too many century makers that didn't have a couple of chances along the way Wily, luck is definitely a part of it.

I can't understand why Johnson has again been snubbed with the new ball - sure, he's probably our best bowler with the old ball at the moment, but he's pretty handy with the new one too and with Clarke and Lee out of the side there's no question he's our #1 strike bowler at the moment, yet despite picking up 11 wickets in Perth, Ponting is persisting with throwing the new ball to the new blokes... wtf?


Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-04, 03:48 PM
I'm an old bowler toasty and hate batsmen having luck. They have enough things in their favour without getting luck as well  :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-05, 11:30 AM
Is McDonald bowling as good and tight as his figures indicate, or have SA already given up trying to win this and just batting for time?

(sucks being back at work, lol)
Title: Cricket
Post by: woodywob on 2009-Jan-05, 04:22 PM
it takes a Victorian ......... GO SIDDLE !
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gammalite on 2009-Jan-05, 04:42 PM
Bollinger has been unlucky with a couple of the LBW decisions. Should have at least 1 wicket , possibly 2. Has had 3 very good calls turned down with only the last of then being slightly dubious.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Jan-05, 05:27 PM
well lets see what Hayden does considering it's his third innings. Was as plum LBW as you'll ever see today.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-05, 05:36 PM
Clearly you didn't watch much of the play today  :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2009-Jan-05, 06:00 PM
You would have had a few stiff scotches over those last 6 overs Wily?  8-)

How good was the vision of Hayden's wife at the end, sitting right on the edge of her seat ......... all she needed was the worry beads   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Jan-05, 06:30 PM
I watched most of he day wily.

At least the saffers have finally decided to play even stevens. 10 against 10.  ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Jan-05, 06:48 PM
Did the ump think that there was some bat in Haydens LBW?

He was dead set in front of the stumps
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-05, 06:59 PM
Grats

it's virtually impossible for a right arm bowler, around the wicket to get an LbW

especially when he was so wide out on the crease.  The ball hit him in line but the angle takes the ball down the leg side.

The ball wasn't swinging back.

Draw a graph and you'll see what I mean

It was a close but correct call and certainly had more doubt than the 6 other appeals that also got turned down today.

the ones that ara clearly didn't see 8-)

Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-05, 07:00 PM
You would have had a few stiff scotches over those last 6 overs Wily?  8-)

How good was the vision of Hayden's wife at the end, sitting right on the edge of her seat ......... all she needed was the worry beads   :lol:


  :biggrin:  Yes mate, it was tough. I could feel half the country deathriding the bloke but he did well. So very nicely timed shots  emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Jan-05, 07:01 PM
Ta .  I've never really played the game and rely on the Ch 9 team to tell me what is happening
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2009-Jan-05, 07:07 PM
Grats

it's virtually impossible for a right arm bowler, around the wicket to get an LbW

especially when he was so wide out on the crease.  The ball hit him in line but the angle takes the ball down the leg side.

The ball wasn't swinging back.

Draw a graph and you'll see what I mean

It was a close but correct call and certainly had more doubt than the 6 other appeals that also got turned down today.

the ones that ara clearly didn't see 8-)



Wily your bias no's no bounds. He was stone cold plumb, and he knew it. Yes there has been some other poor decisions, don't no that the count is 8, maybe 2 or 3, but this one was plumb.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Jan-05, 07:19 PM
Grats

it's virtually impossible for a right arm bowler, around the wicket to get an LbW

especially when he was so wide out on the crease.  The ball hit him in line but the angle takes the ball down the leg side.

The ball wasn't swinging back.

Draw a graph and you'll see what I mean

It was a close but correct call and certainly had more doubt than the 6 other appeals that also got turned down today.

the ones that ara clearly didn't see 8-)



of course if the player is right back all the way to the stumps ala Wily's man crush and the ball has barely 50cm left to travel it is hitting the stumps and sending them all the way back to Boucher who would've taken one of the stumps with a lovely diving catch.

facts only get in the way when love is involved.  :p
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-05, 07:49 PM
7's

As I said, basic geometry my friend.


Don't fal for what that Hawkeye things shows you. It's only good for side on views over straight lines ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-05, 08:12 PM
Peter Siddle is the best fast bowler to ever come out of Victoria.    :noteworthy:
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2009-Jan-06, 10:00 AM
These next two days captaincy from Ponting will be very interesting to watch. The Australians are clearly in the box seat and should win from here, especially with Smith missing and them only having to now get 18 wickets. But Ponting has always been quite defensive / negative with his declarations, and from memory the majority have been when leading a series and able to call the shots with a draw not such an issue. He is now down 2 nil, has lost the series, is under plenty of pressure generally, and will have to make a caculated declaration allowing himself time to attack and bowl out 9 wickets. The runs shouldn't be a problem, around 250 should be plenty I'd have thought, the task will be getting through the Boks top order, then through all 9 and leaving himself enough time to do so.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-06, 10:06 AM
How much value does Ricky Ponting place in the "official ranking", this could affect his declaration if they get the chance to make one ?

I'd imagine they will declare at tea giving themselves 4 session on a deteriorating wicket to get the 9 wickets, Smith may bat if absolutely needed.

By tea, Australia baring losing quick wickets should lead by close to 380 +. 
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-06, 10:10 AM
I disagree to part of that Triples... losing this test, especially from here would be catastrophic - so there's no way he'll declare until they've taken an SA win out of the equation (nor should they), but obviously they will still want to try and win. They should have plenty of time though, especially since I doubt SA will take up a hard run chase (they almost seemed to be batting for a draw as soon as Smith went off injured in their first innings), so a lead of 350+ with say an hour to play today will probably be enough of a lead... I think he'll want a little more than that, but we should get at least 10 overs at them today and then the full 90 tomorrow, which should be plenty of time if the bowlers don't go missing again.

Have to get their first though, anything could change today   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-06, 10:16 AM
There was something about the way Hayden went off than that tells me that might be it.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Puntermatt on 2009-Jan-06, 10:37 AM
Sorry Wily, we can't pick Haydos for SA on the evidence in front of us at the moment and you know that I'm a huge supporter.

If I had my way, I'd drop him from the one day series and send him back to Shield cricket, telling him we'll pick him for SA if he scores more runs than Hughes, Jacques and co over the next 6-8 weeks. If he succeeds, he can be selected on form and merit with his experience being a bonus.

PM
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-06, 11:04 AM
I agree with that Puntermatt.   emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-06, 03:02 PM
Looks like we've come out swinging after tea - I reckon we'll declare with a lead of about 400 - they might even keep going until there's 15 overs left for the day, which at the current rate might give them a lead closer to 420... and Smith definitely won't bat, so that's a plus  :)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-06, 03:04 PM
What a sport Ponting.  8-)

South Africa should win from here.   emthdown
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2009-Jan-06, 03:08 PM
375 off 116 (approx) overs (3.2 an over). Not on this track, with out Smith leading them.

Australia should win, they looked to bowl straighter yesterday and get more out of the cracks than the Boks have, in particular Siddle. It they just stick to a straight line and length the track and ball will do the rest. And playing defensively as they did through their first innings when trying to play for time won't help them, 116 overs is a long time to try and hang around on a crap wicket.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-06, 03:11 PM
I got into a bit too early, lol - I'm definitely surprised at that declaration, like I said, I thought they'd go for a little more to take the SA win out of the equation, but he's probably thinking they won't put up a serious chase, especially without Smith so taking the punt and getting a little more time... damned if you do, damned if you don't I guess - might make it interesting though  :)
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-06, 03:15 PM
It's there if they want to go for it Triples - we scored at 3.8 this innings and 3.26 in the first innings... SA only clipped along at 2.7 in the first innings, but they did put the brakes on pretty early.

They *shouldn't* get it, but I reckon their could be some serious sweating going on tomorrow afternoon  ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-06, 03:26 PM
I don't know what Healy is worried about with the hair touching, the bum gropping looked suss.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Antitab# on 2009-Jan-06, 03:44 PM
Terrific declaration.

Allows Australia to have a decent crack with the 2nd new ball if neccesary.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Jan-06, 08:09 PM
Dave Warner having  some fun in the 20/20.

could get a call up to the one-dayers for Aus this season.
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Jan-06, 09:05 PM
Doubt whether he'll use the double-sided bat early on again.

Might be useful against the spinners and pie-chuckers, but not the quicks in their first spells.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-07, 07:31 AM
It should never have been allowed in the first place
Title: Cricket
Post by: Puntermatt on 2009-Jan-07, 10:35 AM
Does anybody else have mounting concerns about Haddin's keeping? His dropped catch in the 9th over yesterday was nothing short of appalling. Did anyone else notice during the replays that at the point of delivery or just before, Haddin moves his left foot about 20cm to his left. As a result, when the ball goes to his right, a fairly regulation chance became a spectacular dive to the right, just missing the take. To make matters worse, Haddin then has a bit of a chuckle and a laugh about it. I'd like to see him behave like that after spilling one of Lillee or Thommo....

Cricinfo and Ian Healy have been letting him off lightly but for mine, he is a technically poor keeper who is also frequently guilty of not staying down long enough.

Siddle to Amla, 2 runs, Haddin's dropped him! Thats a good delivery from Siddle, pitching and straightening off a length, Amla pushes at it off the back foot and gets a healthy edge but Haddin, diving low to his right, fluffs the take, tough though it was
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-07, 10:37 AM
He is a super keeper and any suggestion other than that is sacrilege.     :noteworthy:
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2009-Jan-07, 10:42 AM
Does anybody else have mounting concerns about Haddin's keeping? His dropped catch in the 9th over yesterday was nothing short of appalling. Did anyone else notice during the replays that at the point of delivery or just before, Haddin moves his left foot about 20cm to his left. As a result, when the ball goes to his right, a fairly regulation chance became a spectacular dive to the right, just missing the take. To make matters worse, Haddin then has a bit of a chuckle and a laugh about it. I'd like to see him behave like that after spilling one of Lillee or Thommo....

Cricinfo and Ian Healy have been letting him off lightly but for mine, he is a technically poor keeper who is also frequently guilty of not staying down long enough.

Siddle to Amla, 2 runs, Haddin's dropped him! Thats a good delivery from Siddle, pitching and straightening off a length, Amla pushes at it off the back foot and gets a healthy edge but Haddin, diving low to his right, fluffs the take, tough though it was


I totally agree - his keeping has been ordinary verging on disgraceul all series. But I guess that is to be expected now that everyone seems to be going for wicketkeeper/batsmen these days rather than specialist keepers.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-07, 10:50 AM
He has looked every bit as good and reliable as Boucher. To say he is bordering on disgraceful is abit over the top.


Who in the state ranks is better ?

Do you guys get to see much state cricket ?
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2009-Jan-07, 11:00 AM
He has looked every bit as good and reliable as Boucher. To say he is bordering on disgraceful is abit over the top.


Who in the state ranks is better ?

Do you guys get to see much state cricket ?

Honestly I don't (are shield games ever televised)? But there must be a better fielding wicketkeeper somewhere in the country than Haddin or our stocks must be struggling. I just don't remember such blatant takes being missed for years. Maybe we were just spoiled with Gilly and Heals.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Antitab# on 2009-Jan-07, 11:04 AM
His keeping in India was embarrassing.

It has been better in Australia but he is no where near test match quality. In fact disgraceful is pretty apt description.

He is over 30 so I wouldnt imagine his keeping will improve.

The question is does his batting make up for his keeping shortfall. Given the structure of the current team and the lack of an all rounder I think his batting will probably save him for a while.

From what I have seen Hartley the Queensland keeper is easily the best keeper in the country. However of the 6 state keepers he is probably the 6th best batsman.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-07, 11:28 AM
Not sure if you're using the new theme or the old theme Antitab, but that orange text you're using for your posts is pretty hard to read on the new theme... then again it could be just me, my eyesight is starting to hit the wall a bit I think, lol

EDIT: Thanks Antitab - that colour works much better  :thumbsup:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Puntermatt on 2009-Jan-07, 12:54 PM
65.2 Hauritz to Duminy, no run, sharp turn, and a drop! Rips across the bat from outside leg stump, Duminy comes forward and then tries to get bat out of the way but the ball takes a fine edge that Haddin cannot hold on to, thats a terrific delivery but Haddin couldn't get the gloves up in time 
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-07, 01:30 PM
We have to win this from here don't we  :shy:

SA have definitely given up the chase with the required run rate now over 5, but can they hold on for another 40 overs or so? Surely not... but plenty of weird things have been happening this series. lol.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-07, 02:16 PM
You would think the only thing that could save South Africa would be a storm.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-07, 02:35 PM
Cricinfo's Tobian Clayton (who lives in Sydney) says it's hailing at his house and has been raining for 35 minutes.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-07, 02:54 PM
Without doubt the most perplexing question in world cricket at this moment is why Harris would come in in front of Steyn ?
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Jan-07, 04:06 PM
Graeme Smith.   emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Jan-07, 04:09 PM
Matthew Hayden now can't even catch. F him off.
Title: Cricket
Post by: woodywob on 2009-Jan-07, 04:16 PM
why are they not surrounding the batsman ?

will be too late soon ......
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Jan-07, 04:20 PM
I hope it's a draw.

That will mean not only getting rid of Hayden but also the gutless selectors who didn't drop him after Melbourne.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-07, 05:02 PM
Boo  :censored: ing hooooo  :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-07, 05:04 PM
Cracker of a last ball from Mitch after than crap over before hand when smith had to play one ball.....go figure

Anyone writing off this team after this summer has rocks in their head.

Steyn & Ntini playing and missing 60000 times summed up the series.

We'll be winning over there next month  emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2009-Jan-07, 05:12 PM
Anyone writing off this team after this summer has rocks in their head.

We'll be winning over there next month

Well let me know if you have trouble getting on, Boks are specials.  ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-07, 05:29 PM
We won 3 zip over there last time and we can't possibly drop as many catches and have the bounce go against us like it did this time. I don't expect to see bails being dislodged and landing back in place and  with the challenge system we won't be seeing our blokes fired out caught off their pads.

If the petulant Indians had received some of the crap our boys had this series they would have gone home after the first test

This series could easily have gone the other way even with us being below our best  emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-07, 05:35 PM
The way Siddle has come on this series, the fact Stuart Clark will be back and a touch of luck going our way we could very well win in South Africa.

It will be a great series and a loss will not be the end of the world.

There is absolutely no need for the selectors to panic. Just find one new opening batsmen and the rest will fall into place.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-07, 05:41 PM
Have they announced the one day series team yet..
It was meant to be today
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2009-Jan-07, 08:05 PM
Another sporting dummy spit . . . . .

Pietersen resigns as England captain

Kevin Pietersen has resigned as England captain after his relationship with team coach Peter Moores broke down, Sky News has reported on Wednesday.

more to follow ...

AFP




England captain Kevin Pietersen resigned this morning after the England and Wales Cricket Board refused to concede to his demands for the future direction of the team.

Telegraph Sport understands that Pietersen sent a list of requests to the board that went further than the removal of Peter Moores as head coach. His future is still clouded in uncertainty despite the removal of Pietersen after only three Tests as England captain.

It is thought the ECB have decided to take a hard stand against Pietersen and that Andrew Strauss will be appointed as his successor later today.

Strauss has captained England before but a recent return to consistent form has propelled him back into the reckoning.

Pietersen is due to return from holiday on Thursday but by then it is likely the ECB will have completed its restructuring of the England management.

The ECB executive board held a teleconference late last night during Hugh Morris, the managing director of England cricket, was handed a mandate to take drastic action.

It appears Morris has canvassed the England players and backroom staff and that there is not a consensus of support behind the captain.

It is also apparent the ECB are keen to avoid setting a precedent that enables the captain to call the shots and dictate the structure of the side's management.

Moores' future remains undecided, and there is no information yet about whether he will coach the side in the West Indies next month.

Former England captain Bob Willis believes divisions in the England dressing room have led to Pietersen's decision.

"There's obviously been several cliques in the England team since the Duncan Fletcher era," said Willis.

"Andrew Flintoff and Steve Harmison were not part of the Fletcher family and it seems they get on with Moores better than they did with Fletcher.

"Flintoff and Pietersen are not like souls at all. Make no mistake they are not two peas in a pod so I can see Flintoff siding with Moores rather than Pietersen."  
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-07, 08:08 PM
He did say either the coach goes or he goes.

Good on him.

Does anybody know what the problem is between the two ?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Fewy on 2009-Jan-07, 08:10 PM
I think you maybe reading to much into Australia winning this test.
For starters it was a dead rubber. Secondly the Saffers lost their Captain early in their first dig (who is arguably the best batsman in the world at the moment), who knows what he would've got if he didn't break his finger.The deficit would certainly been allot less then it was. Then it took the Aussies a day and a bit and every over they had to bowl them out.
I will agree the bowling was much better in this test but i think the pitch certainly helped our bowlers, the lefties certainly had the cracks in the right place for them.
But a great match and hasn't Sydney now produced 2 of the best matches in recent times. Exciting stuff
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2009-Jan-07, 08:12 PM
Spot on Fewy.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Puntermatt on 2009-Jan-07, 08:48 PM
Wily, you couldn't be more wrong - Fewy is on the money.

We had to bust our guts toiling until two minutes to midnight to take 19 wickets against a team that had tuned out in a dead rubber. were without a captain and were batting last on a pitch with more cracks than a convention of plumbers.

To say that I'm very concerned about the SA and England series coming up is an understatement.

PM
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2009-Jan-07, 08:51 PM
England won't be easy, but they will be easier than the Boks, who smacked them away as well this yr. India and the Boks are the benchmark, I personally favour the Boks as the best test side in the world right now, Australia and England will be playing the Ashes for 3rd spot.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-07, 09:06 PM
I don't think theres a struck match between the teams

The rub of the green will decide each series at the moment

The Boks drew with india but lost a test to the poms this year  who India didn't lose to even though India lost to Sri Lanka who could only manage a draw with the Windies......ya get my drift  :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2009-Jan-07, 09:12 PM
I think you maybe reading to much into Australia winning this test.
For starters it was a dead rubber. Secondly the Saffers lost their Captain early in their first dig (who is arguably the best batsman in the world at the moment), who knows what he would've got if he didn't break his finger.The deficit would certainly been allot less then it was. Then it took the Aussies a day and a bit and every over they had to bowl them out.
I will agree the bowling was much better in this test but i think the pitch certainly helped our bowlers, the lefties certainly had the cracks in the right place for them.
But a great match and hasn't Sydney now produced 2 of the best matches in recent times. Exciting stuff

and he could have nicked the next one too  :rolleyes: while he wasn't out he wasn't good enough either to play a ball that put him out of the game.

Still credit to the man as he has stood up and led his side from the front for the series, before this tour he really has been more lip that substance against Aust averaging in the low 20s.

Yes it took them 4 sessions to bowl them out but really, how many attacks in world cricket would have done better? All this provided was how blessed we were in the last decade with McGrath / Warne etc.

Something that should be noted was the spirit that the series was played in, unlike the rubbish that India carried on with last year. It was just good to see two teams play hard but without the melodramas
Title: Cricket
Post by: manikato1 on 2009-Jan-07, 11:07 PM
The worst part about Australia's performance in the three games is that we won the toss in each of them, then had commanding positions in all three, but lost two and took all day to win the third on a deteriorating pitch.

Obviously Australia are a very good side, but I think they need to find more than just an opening bat:

Number six. Really, Symonds only just cuts it as a test batsman, and he really can only claim his spot as an allrounder, but he doesn't bowl often enough to be classed as such.  I don't think much of our front line spin options (Hauritz and Kreja it seems to me), so maybe he could play as a number seven with Haddin at eight, and use Symonds/Clarke as the spinners.

If that comes to pass, surely it is time to look at a keeper at eight, rather than a batsman who keeps.  Gilly wasn't the best keeper in the world(surprisingly, outstanding to the spinners but but just good standing back), but he was a better keeper than Haddin and a better bat to boot.  If we can bat to seven, then maybe we should look at a really top class keeper who can learn to bat at this level over time, much like Healy did, particularly if Mitch Johnson's batting form continues.

Is Ponting really a number three?  I have never thought so.  Like Hayden, he has benefited from a lack of high class swing bowling over the past decade, those hard hands early would have been found out by the great West Indian and Pakistani fast bowlers of the 80's.  I would like to see him swap with Hussey, who opened in Shield cricket and who can also up the tempo if things are going well.  Hussey does need to find some form though.

When Clark is back, we really need to work out our bowling attack.  I can't understand why Nathan Bracken is continually overlooked at test level.  A left hander who swings the ball, would be a good foil for the accurate seamer in Clark and the erratic but much improved Johnson.  This assumes that Brett Lee can't do a Lillee and become a great swing and seam bowler at the end of his career.  I think he can, but do we have the patience to let him learn in Test cricket, of would a season of Shield or County cricket do him the world of good.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-08, 06:54 AM
Some good thoughts there Manikato

Punters certainly a number 3 when he gets settled  :biggrin:

I reckon he's  a four at best but probably a 5  in any top Aussie team over the past 40 years  emthup

 1, 2 or 3 is such a hard position to bat in. Only the true greats succeed

Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-08, 07:27 AM
One day team is announced.  I wont bother with the 20/20 stuff


R. Ponting (c): TAS, 34
M. Clarke (vc): NSW, 27
B. Haddin: NSW, 31
J. Hopes: QLD, 30
N. Bracken: NSW, 31
S. Marsh: WA, 25
M. Hussey: WA, 33
D. Hussey: VIC, 31
N. Hauritz: NSW, 27
B. Hilfenhaus: TAS, 25
C. White: VIC, 25
S. Tait: SA, 25
P. Siddle: VIC, 24
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-08, 07:31 AM
Some interesting comments from the selectors

“The omission of Matthew Hayden from the KFC Twenty20 and Commonwealth Bank Series squads is not a reflection on his performances in the recent Test series but rather a strategic decision made by the National Selection Panel as we plan for these signature events. His possible selection for the upcoming tour of South Africa will be discussed as with all players when we select a squad after the round of interstate matches at the beginning of February.


“Mitchell Johnson will not take part in the two KFC Twenty20 matches or first two of the Commonwealth Bank Series matches. It has been advised by team medical and fitness staff that due to his workload over the last few months he should continue to be monitored. For this reason he will not be available for selection in these matches.

“It is exciting for Australian cricket that Shaun Tait has been selected in both the KFC Twenty20 and Commonwealth Bank Series squads. Although he has had some injury problems since playing a leading role in the 2007 ICC World Cup, he is an explosive weapon at his best and we hope he will play a key role in both forms of the game this summer,” Hilditch concluded.

“Michael Clarke suffered some ligament damage to his right thumb during the first 3 Mobile Test against South Africa in Perth. This injury has required pain killing injections in every batting innings since and for this reason we have decided the best course of action is for him to miss the first two KFC Twenty20 matches. We will continue to monitor the injury over the next four to five days and we are very hopeful of him being fully fit for the beginning of the Commonwealth Bank Series.”
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-08, 09:08 AM
It like Ian Chappell and Puntermatt said, Go back to first class cricket and kick some first class butt.

If does not score runs there, than he would not go.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-08, 05:36 PM
Sadly theres only one game Author
Title: Cricket
Post by: woodywob on 2009-Jan-08, 06:46 PM
obviously the selectors are waking up by realising the more Victorians you have in the side the more successful you will be as a national team ......
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-08, 07:06 PM
  :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Peterf on 2009-Jan-09, 09:20 AM
Australia winning the 3rd test will prove the worst thing that could have happened for Australian cricket. A whitewash would have forced a total rethink of both the composition of the team and the captaincy. Won't happen now, complacency will take over instead.

The gap between Australia and South Africa in this series was huge. Twice the Aussies got themselves into strong winning positions and had them ripped away by a superior side.

The Australian bowling simply wasn't nearly good enough. To win tests you need to take 20 wickets, not 14 or 11. When the Aussies couldn't defend 400+ at Perth and could take only one wicket in the 2nd innings at Melbourne the message should gave got through...

But a last gasp win against a unmotivated opposition with its main batsman and captain missing suddenly changes all that?

The selectors' statement regarding Hayden is bizarre. If they didn't drop him for his poor batting form what the f- DID they drop him for?

There is no room for nostalgia selecting sports teams. The best Hayden has to offer is a few more months. If he was making zillions of runs of course you keep him on. But, if not, then it's "thanks mate, 'bye".......
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-09, 09:31 AM
One of the few positives I can get out of this series is that Johnson / Siddle / Clark has the potential to develop into a pretty handy bowling attack... they aren't there yet (nowhere near consistent enough), but there are definite signs of improvement and another year or two experience at Test level should do wonders.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-09, 10:12 AM
If South Africa are so much more superior why did Australia ever get into winning positions ?

It was purely the inexperience and one slightly out of form ( injured) fast bowler that stopped Australia winning.

PANIC is not the answer.  There is no need for a major ANSWER at all.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gammalite on 2009-Jan-09, 10:16 AM
Australia winning the 3rd test will prove the worst thing that could have happened for Australian cricket. A whitewash would have forced a total rethink of both the composition of the team and the captaincy. Won't happen now, complacency will take over instead.

The gap between Australia and South Africa in this series was huge. Twice the Aussies got themselves into strong winning positions and had them ripped away by a superior side.

The Australian bowling simply wasn't nearly good enough. To win tests you need to take 20 wickets, not 14 or 11. When the Aussies couldn't defend 400+ at Perth and could take only one wicket in the 2nd innings at Melbourne the message should gave got through...

But a last gasp win against a unmotivated opposition with its main batsman and captain missing suddenly changes all that?

The selectors' statement regarding Hayden is bizarre. If they didn't drop him for his poor batting form what the f- DID they drop him for?

There is no room for nostalgia selecting sports teams. The best Hayden has to offer is a few more months. If he was making zillions of runs of course you keep him on. But, if not, then it's "thanks mate, 'bye".......

How are they white washing over the cracks ?
You can read whatever you like into the Hayden situation but at the end of the day unless he comes out and makes a few hundreds for Queensland he won't be heading off to South Africa.
As far as the bowling goes , well there is no real white washing going on there. They faced the best side in the world with an attack that contained members that where inexperienced or injured and out of form. Winning that last test with a bowling attack that had 1 bowler who had played 20 tests and 4 bowlers that had player 5 or less is hardly covering over cracks. That is the sign that they are looking in a new direction.
You can look at the wickets taken in Perth and Melbourne but the Lee was out of form and bowling 10 to 15km slower and not moving the ball. Siddle was only playing in his second and third tests. Johnson our best weapon was a vetran of under 20 matches. Krezja was in his second test and should not have been dropped and Hauritz is a one day bowler who keeps an end tight at best.
What are the serious problems ?
Hayden has been removed.
Ponting as captain. Well that depends on who you ask and i think Ponting gets a lot of stick becasue the team simply is not good enough. His body language with a poor side is not even close to some of the stuff that AB used to do in the same situation.
Husseys form is a concern.
As far as the bowlers go i was happy enough with the third test. Siddle has improved with every test. Johnson is going very well for a 20 test player. Bollinger was ok in his first test. The only real problem i have is Hauritz does not turn the ball enough to frighten anyone. They should have stuck with Krezja.
The other issue they have is trying to find bloody all rounders. Forget it. Johnson has shown he can make 20 to 50 in most digs. Siddle has looked good enough with the bat to suggest that he could average 20 odd. Krezja is also pretty solid with the bat. They should be looking at playing an extra batsman and relying on a few part timers to fill the bowling needs or a fifth bowler depending on the circumstances of the match and pitch.
I just dont see at all how winning the test with 4 very much inexperienced bowlers could be the worst thing to happen to Australian Cricket. they are already looking to the future which is why Hodge was not picked for the 20/20 or ODI games becasue he is on the wrong side of 30 (rightly or wrongly) despite him being pretty much the form player in the state comps.
It is also why they will pick Hughs. Yes we have got problems with the side and there have been some very questionable efforts by the selectors but when you see a lot of players aged around 23 to 28 starting to get a look in from the fringes then you are looking to the future and not just trying to cover the cracks with wall paper. If they can get Tait up and running then things start to look just a little better again when you consider that Tait , Johnson, Siddel  and Hilfenhaus are all around the 25 year old mark.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-09, 10:17 AM
Why would South Africa have been unmotivated ?That is the greatest crock of shit. They had the official WORLD TITLE to play for, a draw was not good enough a loss was never going to be good enough.

The 3rd test went the way of the first two test, this time Australia with the help of an injury to Graeme Smith was able to complete the job. To say South Africa was unmotivated was to say you obviously did not watch any of the matches at all.

There was plenty to play for for both sides in this non dead rubber.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-09, 10:28 AM
Whether SA were motivated or not in that last match is debatable... but they never went for the win at any stage - their approach to batting in the 3rd game was completely different from the first two matches (which had similar 1st innings from Aus in all cases) - they put the breaks on as early as they could.

I also think their bowling attack went missing in the first innings - you've got to remember that they have a fairly inexperienced attack too, particularly their main strike bowler Steyn, they got on top early and then complacency set in... there is no way you could say they had anywhere near the intensity during day 2 that they had during the rest of the series.
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2009-Jan-09, 10:30 AM
PeterF is spot on. And a few of us have been suggesting this for the last 6 wks, prior to the event.

The up side is that we have been playing a very good side. Far better to be measured against good opposition than weak. BT has a good point, Johnson has come on, Siddle has bowled some good spells and they both have potential (but both also still bowl a lot of crap). Stuart Clark is very important if he can return from injury ok. The development of a quality test class spin bowler is critical, as is the development on two new test class batsman (I'm still of the view that Hussey moves to opener and a new talent is blooded lower down the order).

The quality that we've enjoyed through the last 10 yrs with the outstanding game breakers in McGrath, Warne and Gilchrist really does beg the question as to whether S Waugh really was a good captain or just a luck traffic cop who just had to place a field and manage the bowling changes. Personally I though he was only fair captain, far to defensive over time, bloody lucky he had the gifted team around him that made him look good, and yes much more a traffic cop than a positive, attacking captain and leader. I also reckon Ponting suffers from much of that same influence, with his negative field placings, poor bowling changes and decisions and his indecisive team selections. He now doesn't have the superstars to win or save games for him, and it shows.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-09, 10:59 AM
BT, You could say that about their intensity on day 2 of all 3 tests.

At the end of the day there is no nead for panic. The idea that all Australian side should be as destructive as the Warne Magrath Gilchrist era is fanciful.

This is a far superior side than the 83-87 era.

Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-09, 02:21 PM
The 20/20 match on Sunday could be interesting... David Warner and Shaun Marsh set to open the batting for Australia.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2009-Jan-09, 08:11 PM

The selectors' statement regarding Hayden is bizarre. If they didn't drop him for his poor batting form what the f- DID they drop him for?

There is no room for nostalgia selecting sports teams. The best Hayden has to offer is a few more months. If he was making zillions of runs of course you keep him on. But, if not, then it's "thanks mate, 'bye".......

What's bizarre? That a guy who wont be around for the next world cup has been tapped on the shoulder for one dayers? and the selectors have decided to start rebuilding the side towards that.

As for our bowlers, well it's been fairly well explained above where we currently stand. An out of form / injured Lee, Injured Clark and the ever improving Johnson would be the top 3 pace and Krezja is the best option for off spin, although he has been expensive he does bowl wicket taking balls. Hauritz bowling at 95kms and not getting it above eye line is hardly the stuff required in test cricket, even his demeanor suggested he thought himself he was out of place.

Siddle impressed me this test, early summer I had (nearly) consigned him to pie chucker status but there were glimpses in this test of a bowler who will be around for a few years yet, hitting the deck hard.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Jan-11, 06:48 PM
Dave Warner having  some fun in the 20/20.

could get a call up to the one-dayers for Aus this season.

having some fun tonight as well.   emthup   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Jan-11, 07:00 PM
WWWWWWWAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRNNNNNNNNNNNNEEEEEEEEEEEEEEERRRRRRRRRR


we had warne now we have warner.   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2009-Jan-11, 07:03 PM
Dave Warner having  some fun in the 20/20.

could get a call up to the one-dayers for Aus this season.

having some fun tonight as well.   emthup   :biggrin:




Just reeks of ability this kid. Geezzz.

His development should be fast tracked toward higher honours asap. You don't see them (the ball) like this, nor have the hand eye coordination that he obviously have without a whole lot of ability.

Boks tour pending?

Hayden who?
 
Title: Cricket
Post by: MagiC~* on 2009-Jan-11, 07:18 PM
Never heard of this guy till now and didn't realise the 20/20 was on so thought I had better go see what all the fuss was about .......



Wow, how good is this kid  ????

 :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Jan-11, 07:22 PM
well better settle down a little. Hasn't even played a first class game yet.


I wonder has anyone ever played a one day fr Aus having never played a single sheffield shield game.
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2009-Jan-11, 07:23 PM
well better settle down a little. Hasn't even played a first class game yet.


I wonder has anyone ever played a one day fr Aus having never played a single sheffield shield game.

Well he's about to through the next few wks, lol.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-11, 07:40 PM
Well that was AWESOME
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-11, 07:46 PM
well better settle down a little. Hasn't even played a first class game yet.


I wonder has anyone ever played a one day fr Aus having never played a single sheffield shield game.

He's the third player ever to have played any sort of match for Australia, without playing a first class game first... the other two guys were in the first ever test match back in 1877.

Triples, I don't think Hayden would be worried about him for the test matches... but Symonds definitely has something to worry about, especially for the ODI's, but might work out to be a handy #6 at test level one day soon too   :biggrin:

What a debut... as Gilly said, should have waited another week to sign his IPL contract - his price just went up.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-11, 07:57 PM
tHE South Africans are bloody incredible in the field.

I doubt i have seen a better fielding display over a whole summer as this nation/team.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-11, 08:03 PM
Dummy dropped a sitter and they were still gushing about him.

Does he put out for the boys??? 8)
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-11, 08:36 PM
I think they need to check if the speed gun is still setup correctly... 155kph, wow.
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Jan-11, 08:36 PM
Warner doesn't generate his power with a big wind-up, a big flowing backswing. It seems to me forearm muscle power and a good eye are his strong suits.

Boucher made the comment that this was the first time they'd seen him, so, unsaid was, that once his technique is scrutinised things mightn't be as easy for him.

Until that happens, let's play him as often as we we can.  

  
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-11, 08:49 PM
The impressive thing about Warner is that he wasn't just swinging the bat and hoping the ball was there - he picked every slower ball (and there were heaps), adjusted for different amounts of bounce, and didn't miss the middle of the bat too often... I'm sure they'll find some weakness if they look hard enough, but he certainly belongs there - I hope they rush him into the one day side.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-11, 09:24 PM
You guys are right - Duminy can't bat for shit, get him out of there  ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-11, 09:24 PM
Wilys favorite player is without doubt the real deal.  8-)
Title: Cricket
Post by: westie on 2009-Jan-11, 09:45 PM
Loved it.
Title: Cricket
Post by: westie on 2009-Jan-11, 09:47 PM
Man of the Match David Warner from Bondi.
Title: Cricket
Post by: stuey102 on 2009-Jan-11, 10:10 PM
Can someone tell Mark Nicholas that Warner has played One Day and 20/20 cricket for NSW. Talks about him like they have plucked him straight from grade cricket.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-12, 06:02 AM
They aren't counted as first class games stuey (don't ask me why), so as far as the record books are concerned they basically have picked him straight from grade cricket... as mentioned earlier in the thread, the first player since 1877 to play for Australia without playing first class cricket.
Title: Cricket
Post by: stuey102 on 2009-Jan-12, 08:31 AM
Yeah i know they aren't first class games but he has still played for NSW. Nicholas was carrying on like a pork chop about grade cricketers thinking they can now play for Australia as if they had picked Warner based on his form in grade cricket or something. It was like they were oblivious to the fact that he had been smashing them in the Ford Ranger Cup this year.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-12, 08:47 AM
Given that most of the games he's played for NSW have been midweek (usually a tuesday it seems), and he's not playing any shield matches - he probably is still playing grade cricket most weekends... in fact I'd be really surprised if he didn't play grade cricket a week ago.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gammalite on 2009-Jan-12, 10:24 AM
I am still pissed off the did not select him for the one day games. Obviously not a lot of people watch the Ford Ranger Cup on Foxtell given the amount of people that commented on who the hell is he. He did score 160 odd of 90 balls and a 97 off 40 odd balls in one day games for NSW this year as well. It was on the back of those games he was signed to play in the IPL a couple of weeks ago.
Hughs has been just as impressive in the short game so far as well but he tends to hit more fours and not as many sixes.
I think there are some in the media ( and the 9 comentary box ) who need to spend some time actually watching some of the state games on foxtell. Then maybe they might have some sort of clue as to what is going on....
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-12, 10:30 AM
Warner will be in the one day team - there's already talk of it... if he does ok in Brisbane tomorrow then it's practically a done deal that he'll be in the first ODI. Even if he doesn't crack the team this series, he'll be there before too long.
Title: Cricket
Post by: stuey102 on 2009-Jan-12, 10:31 AM
BT my point is that he wasnt picked out of grade cricket he was picked because of his form for NSW.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Jan-12, 09:47 PM
as good a hit as you'll ever see. :thumbsup:




Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-12, 10:41 PM
Just look at Imran Khan to realise how good this one is by Sir Isaac Vivian Alexander Richards

Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-13, 07:23 AM
q
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-13, 07:23 AM
You guys are right - Duminy can't bat for shit, get him out of there  ;)

First of all, I haven't seen anyone say he cant bat.

Personally, I think the hype far out did his performances.

He looked OK in that slap & tickle crap the other night but I won't get carried away with it.

He gets trapped on his stumps too much, hops around and french cut too often for my liking.

A smart captain will destroy him in the next series
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2009-Jan-13, 07:33 AM
c/ News Ltd papers, Hayden will announce his retirement from international cricket today.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-13, 07:48 AM
Surprise, surprise

Well done to all the turds in the media and the nuff nuffs who blindly follwed them.

Looks like you've got you way 8-)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Antitab# on 2009-Jan-13, 07:59 AM
0,13,0,29,83,16*,16,77,8,0,24,12,4,8,23,31,39.

383 runs at 23.

Wily, that his is last 17 test innings.

Your bias is blinding you and making you look silly.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-13, 08:07 AM
Anti

the point being that the crusade to rid him started before a ball was bowled in India.
Regardless of the 83, 79, katich run out and shit decisions we were told how bad he was. It was bullshit :mad:

The pressure from the sheep in the publ;ic and the plebs in the media mounted, and yes, he did start to struggle.

In short, they got their wish
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2009-Jan-13, 08:23 AM
That's sport Wily. If he wasn't 37, and his reflex's going he have been good enough to fight back, knock up some decent scores (and form) and stick it up everyone. But he wasn't, didn't, and now it's the media and public's fault?

He's been a super opening bat, loved his aggression, enjoyed a stella career and unlike most has been able to do it until 37. He's made the right decision, for the right reasons and should go out now with some dignity.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gammalite on 2009-Jan-13, 10:47 AM
Anti

the point being that the crusade to rid him started before a ball was bowled in India.
Regardless of the 83, 79, katich run out and shit decisions we were told how bad he was. It was bullshit :mad:

The pressure from the sheep in the publ;ic and the plebs in the media mounted, and yes, he did start to struggle.

In short, they got their wish


Give it up wily. There has been no difference in Haydens case as there has been for a number of players in the past. As great as Hayden has been he is not the player he was and at this stage we need to be looking towards some younger players who can give us 8 to 10 years service.
The so called sheep in the public could actually see what was going on unlike yourself who seems to have been blineded by some sort of bias towards Hayden.
In the end the numbers dont lie.
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Jan-13, 11:53 AM
.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Antitab# on 2009-Jan-13, 11:59 AM
I cant work out if it is Matthew Hayden or Justin Langer at the press conference.

They have morphed into one person and both dribble the same crap.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-13, 12:22 PM
In the end the numbers dont lie.


Well they do actually. Thats my point about the sheep.

Whats the saying?

Theres lies, damn lies and statistics
Title: Cricket
Post by: kicker on 2009-Jan-13, 12:25 PM
Well thank goodness for that. Watching this once mighty batsman scratch around for the last month trying to work out whether to attack or defend has been a very sad sight. Those dropped catches he used to swallow with the ease A B DeVilliers does now, clearly illustrate the reflexes just aint as sharp at 37 as they were at 30. That's a fact of life.

I wonder if the performance of Warner the other night was the reality check he needed? Anyway, I wish you well in the future Matthew Hayden, you were, apart from the last couple of months, a joy to watch.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-13, 12:27 PM
In the end the numbers dont lie.

Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-13, 12:28 PM
[q
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-13, 12:29 PM
[
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-13, 12:35 PM
I see Wily is foaming at the mouth   :biggrin:

Calm down, I'm sure Hayden will get a commentary gig or something, you'll still get to see him from time to time  ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-13, 12:36 PM
Yes, sorry about that toasty

Why is there no delete option to clean up that mess I just made?
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Jan-13, 12:40 PM
.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Jan-13, 01:21 PM
woohoo back to 11 against 11 again.   emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Jan-13, 02:22 PM
Feel a bit sorry for that Warner kid tonight.

A no win situation imo.

A lot will expect him to do the same thing tonight.  Good luck to him.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-13, 02:31 PM
I don't know grats - if he does it again tonight, it's likely the selectors will be forced to put him in the ODI side right away... if he has a shocker, no big deal, he's proved he should be here, his 20/20 spot is already secure for a while, but he'll probably need to wait a little longer to debut in the ODI site... which he was already expecting.

I hope he has a cracker, the more pressure on the selectors the better   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2009-Jan-13, 02:32 PM
Apparently the ODI side announced is only for the first two games, so plenty of time and opportunity for him to get a gig, as he surely will.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Jan-13, 02:35 PM
Just look at Imran Khan to realise how good this one is by Sir Isaac Vivian Alexander Richards

OL,

doubt there will be another with the swagger of Sir Viv.   emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: Fewy on 2009-Jan-13, 05:12 PM
I reckon the 2/1 on offer for the Saffers is over the odds for a game like twenty20.
I've loaded up and hope they win the toss. 8-)
Title: Cricket
Post by: woodywob on 2009-Jan-13, 07:36 PM
What a disgracefully looking ground ....
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-13, 08:14 PM
I think Haydos really missed Langer at the other end since he retired
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Jan-13, 08:20 PM
Is Wily Justin Langer?
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Jan-13, 08:31 PM
Is Wily Matthew Hayden?

Does anyone remember the shit Wily gave Steve Waugh?

What goes around, comes around.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-13, 08:36 PM
David Warner

From rooster to feather duster  :shy:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-13, 08:42 PM
Is Wily Justin Langer?

  :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-13, 08:44 PM
Thats the truth Ol.
As we saw in India, the understanding between him and Kat was lacking with that diabolical run out
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-13, 08:45 PM
Is Wily Matthew Hayden?

Does anyone remember the shit Wily gave Steve Waugh?

What goes around, comes around.


I do and I was right then as well.

Waugh wasn't missed, we continued on our merry way.

Hopefully well do the same now but I doubt it
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-13, 08:47 PM
David Warner

From rooster to feather duster  :shy:


That was always the danger.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-13, 08:59 PM
Don't tell me you guys are potting Warner already, give the guy a break, lol.

He looked a lot more nervous tonight - 2nd up syndrome, I think the pressure had built up a fair bit over the last couple of days.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-13, 09:06 PM
Can't see anyone potting him
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-13, 09:14 PM
Duminy's catch nearly as good as Fatty's   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-13, 09:16 PM
Fatty's catch

Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Jan-13, 09:34 PM
I prefer this version.  :biggrin:

Title: Cricket
Post by: MagiC~* on 2009-Jan-13, 09:35 PM
"Do I win a Car.... or something"

  :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gammalite on 2009-Jan-14, 09:00 AM
In the end the numbers dont lie.


Well they do actually. Thats my point about the sheep.

Whats the saying?

Theres lies, damn lies and statistics

Dont be calling me a sheep. I have watched every minute of him batting since he came back in India and have not mmissed a lot of his batting over the last 4 years. I cant help it if you could not see what was happening. I was hoping that every innings he would come out and make hundred but he is simply not the batsman he was. Age and time out through injury catch up with everyone. You can run back through his last 4 years and you can see the that he has been slowly declining. Even through the the India series last summer where he showed some really good form he was not hitting the ball in the same manner of the Hayden of old. I was at the MCG to see his 100 and that innings was more of a grafting innings combined with a few good shots and some slogs. You could see then that if he lost a little bit of touch that he would be in trouble scoring runs.
He is in the group of best openers to have played the game but his time had come and it has nothing to do with sheep or media or anything. It had everything to do with form.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gammalite on 2009-Jan-14, 09:03 AM
David Warner

From rooster to feather duster  :shy:

Nature of the game. At the end of the day the pitch was a little slow and really big hitting was not all that easy unless you played yourself in a bit.
With all the hype i suspected that he would be under a bit more pressure this time around.
Title: Cricket
Post by: coinswell on 2009-Jan-14, 09:17 AM
Having watched the Channel 9 cricket coverage and listened to the Big Sports Breakfast show in Sydney, I am of the opinion that Michael Slater is a very very ordinary commentator, much as I admired his batting (I also thought his autobio was pretty good).

Full of verbal diarrhoea and not much insight with a disconcerting propensity to laugh at his own, often pissweak jokes, he frequently gets things wrong e.g. he's caught it and in fact he's dropped it etc. - a bit like the overrated Jim Maxwell on ABC radio.  It happened on more than one occasion last night.

In terms of BSB Greg Hayes leaves him for dead in terms of overall sporting knowledge and media polish.  The show has actually been better since the principals have been on leave IMHO.

Personally, I reckon Ch 9 could trim their commentary personnel.  They don't need 3 at a time.  A team of Richie Benaud, Ian Chappell and Warney plus a good guest commentator from the visiting country e.g. Tony Cozier from WI, Ian Smith from NZ, Mike Atherton from England etc. would be an ideal balance possibly with Mark Nicholas if he could tone down the gushing a tad.  Heard Langer on ABC radio and he goes okay too.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Peterf on 2009-Jan-14, 11:27 AM
Ch 9 works on the absurd principle that if you can play the game you can also commentate on it. Most of the ex-player commentators still think they are playing for Australia, just using a microphone instead of a bat and ball.

 Healy, Slater, Warne, Taylor make no attempt at being objective - they're quite funny in short spurts but a constant diet of them quickly tires if you are not an Australian.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-14, 11:29 AM
Really i thought they were very good and quite fair in their comments.
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Jan-14, 11:36 AM
A bit rich an NZedder whinging about biased sporting commentators, isn't it?

I don't have much time for that lot, although I think Warne has prospects.

Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Jan-14, 11:56 AM
A bit rich an NZedder whinging about biased sporting commentators, isn't it?





I really enjoy the Kiwi NRL callers. They are so biased that they are funny imo
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-14, 05:03 PM


 Healy, Slater, Warne, Taylor make no attempt at being objective -




They have gushed about the boks to the point of being sickening. They called Duminy the best since Lara....that's Brian, by the way


You've attempted to drag our nation down evertime you've pounded your keyboard
I suggest you get the chip off your shoulder it's interfering with you ability to hear
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-14, 05:08 PM
Its fair to say Duminy is slightly superior to Martin Crowe, a serious superstar.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2009-Jan-14, 06:30 PM
Having watched the Channel 9 cricket coverage and listened to the Big Sports Breakfast show in Sydney, I am of the opinion that Michael Slater is a very very ordinary commentator, much as I admired his batting (I also thought his autobio was pretty good).

Full of verbal diarrhoea and not much insight with a disconcerting propensity to laugh at his own, often pissweak jokes, he frequently gets things wrong e.g. he's caught it and in fact he's dropped it etc. - a bit like the overrated Jim Maxwell on ABC radio.  It happened on more than one occasion last night.

In terms of BSB Greg Hayes leaves him for dead in terms of overall sporting knowledge and media polish.  The show has actually been better since the principals have been on leave IMHO.

Personally, I reckon Ch 9 could trim their commentary personnel.  They don't need 3 at a time.  A team of Richie Benaud, Ian Chappell and Warney plus a good guest commentator from the visiting country e.g. Tony Cozier from WI, Ian Smith from NZ, Mike Atherton from England etc. would be an ideal balance possibly with Mark Nicholas if he could tone down the gushing a tad.  Heard Langer on ABC radio and he goes okay too.

Coins, you've never sat up in a stand and seen someone dive for the ball not really knowing if they have held it? I ain't that easy at times imho and depends alot on where you are in relation to the catch being attempted.

As for the BSB, I have to agree that while Slater is 'polished' in presentation his overall sports knowledge is painfully limited, even Richie F was better!! although I like TK .......... a show with Greg Hayes and TK would be good.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Peterf on 2009-Jan-14, 06:41 PM
Gee, haven't seen so much thin skin in one place since I last ate Mum's custard....the flapping and squawking is hilarious.


Wily, criticising a group of cricket commentators isn't dragging your nation down, FFS. You're so one-eyed I wonder how the hell you do up your strides in the morning. Or do you catch it in the zip and is that why you're always so grumpy?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2009-Jan-14, 06:51 PM
Ch 9 works on the absurd principle that if you can play the game you can also commentate on it. Most of the ex-player commentators still think they are playing for Australia, just using a microphone instead of a bat and ball.

 Healy, Slater, Warne, Taylor make no attempt at being objective - they're quite funny in short spurts but a constant diet of them quickly tires if you are not an Australian.

While I would say they definitely show their support of Australia, the actual commentary on what is happening is certainly impartial. You only have to listen to when they crossed to Ponting and he made a crack about this being the first time this summer he had been praised from the commentary box.

If you want to hear bias, try watching a Warriors NRL match   :lol:   :wacko:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Peterf on 2009-Jan-14, 06:54 PM
Hmmm, does Ponting listen to the commentary while he's batting?   :what:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2009-Jan-14, 07:04 PM
What's his batting got to do with it  :what:

Obviously to you he must live in a bubble then  :wacko:  :nowink:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Peterf on 2009-Jan-14, 07:11 PM
My point is: when he's out on the field, how does he know what the TV commentators are saying about him?

Sounds like the Punter is developing a very thin skin, maybe he caught it off someone here?
Title: Cricket
Post by: coinswell on 2009-Jan-14, 07:14 PM
My point Gin is that Richie or the other good ones don't do what Slater does - Chappell for example might say 'it's in the air' and then actually wait for it to be caught, or dropped as the case may be.  It is even worse when Slater makes these comments and the cameras are struggling to keep up with the flight of the ball or where the fielder is so you don't get to see for yourself.  

His verbal diarrhoea is more of an issue for me and whilst he actually does have some insights these are drowned out by his continuous dribbling.

Funny thing is when he first started out on Channel 4 in the UK he didn't sound too bad - probably because he did not say as much.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-14, 07:23 PM
My point is: when he's out on the field, how does he know what the TV commentators are saying about him?

Sounds like the Punter is developing a very thin skin, maybe he caught it off someone here?

You see Pete, we have these things called newspapers over here - they usually give a pretty good sum up of what went on the day before... I'm sure Punter can read.

It was funny though as it was Gilly - in his first match of commentary - that gave Ponting the wrap... Heals immediate response was, 'this is only Gilly's first game up here... wait till he's had two or three more, he's still being nice to you at the moment' ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Peterf on 2009-Jan-14, 07:28 PM
You have newspapers? You mean Aussies can read? When the hell did that happen?

Smartarse, this discussion was about TV commentators, not newspapers. Try to keep up.

Title: Cricket
Post by: Peterf on 2009-Jan-14, 08:41 PM
Its fair to say Duminy is slightly superior to Martin Crowe, a serious superstar.

I have no idea what Martin Crowe has to do with this discussion, but I guess you felt the need to score a cheap point......  :noteworthy:

Crowe played 77 tests, scored 5444 runs @ 45.36, with a top score of 299. He made 17 test hundreds.

Duminy has played two tests. When he played another 75 maybe we will be able to work out who is the better player.

Will you make a note to get back to me, then?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-14, 08:42 PM
I'd imagine players relatives would tell them the good and the bad of the commentators.

Plus of course Ponting was being tongue in cheek.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2009-Jan-14, 08:52 PM
See Matt, good ol Pete doesn't understand that wifes, gf/s, brothers / sisters, mum & dad, mates or even other journalists may just pass on info to him.

Pete must think that when the Aussie captain walks past people they all stop what they were saying or talk in hushed tones behind their hands  :wacko: in case he hears what was said.

Maybe Pete thinks the Aussie cricketers actually spend the whole time in those big bubbles bouncing around like on the TV add  :slaphead:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Peterf on 2009-Jan-15, 07:34 AM
Right, thanks good ol' Gintara. I didn't know Australian cricketers had an army of spies, carefully monitoring the media and writing down everything that is said about them so they can report it back.

Dear me, are the Aussie cricketers really THAT sensitive? Poor souls.

Getting back to the topic, one of the things I find hardest to take about Slats, Taylor, Healy and co are their frequent attempts to talk up an Australian victory even when their side is well and truly in the crap.

Like the 4th afternoon of the Melbourne test. Just before the SA openers came out to begin an extremely gettable run chase, dear old Slats was still trying to convince himself the Aussies would win.  All they had to do, he breathlessly informed us, was to have the opposition 4/30 by stumps and they were right back in the game......
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2009-Jan-15, 07:46 AM
I'm with Coinswell, I'm not a Slater fan. Certainly verbal diarrhoea, but also a nancy, "sally anna" approach to his Ch 9 input, always gushing with over the top praise of anything Australian. I'd suggest he has gone too far the other way to make himself look nice and positive, as it wasn't that long ago when he could have counted on one hand the number of past team mates and cricket associates that would talk to him. Good luck to him and his career progress, but imo he is trying way too hard and should just try and relax and say far far less, and stop being so overly nice and gushing about just about everything. Wasn't it Richie that once said the key to quality cricket commentary was less is more?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Peterf on 2009-Jan-15, 08:14 AM
Well said, conswell. In my book, Taylor and Healy belong in the same camp as Slater.

Maybe its an age and experience thing. I don't generally mind Benaud, Chappell, Greig or Nicholas.

So perhaps the Terrible Three will settle down in 15-20 years.....

To be fair Kiwi commentators are no better. Smith is dreadful, constantly repetitive, Mark Richardson is as thick as a brick. I used to enjoy Jeremy Coney, quirky, intelligent, funny...as good as any I have ever heard.
Title: Cricket
Post by: coinswell on 2009-Jan-15, 08:59 AM
Yeah Coney is good - I like his quirky style.  Got himself in trouble over here many, many years ago - accused of making racist remarks whilst relating a very funny anecdote, concerning an incident in North Queensland from memory.

Smithy seems okay to me - fair with a good sense of humour - but we only heard him for the two test matches, so not enough time to be repetitive I guess - he might be back for the one dayers.  Martin Crowe isn't bad from what I've heard either.

Regarding bias - most of 'em are in my experience except maybe Richie Benaud and some of the English guys - they seem to love the self flagellation when their team is going badly.  Ian Chappell's bias is not so much along nationalistic lines - more towards the type of cricket he would like to see played and if someone is not doing that he will come down hard especially if they are not attacking enough or perceived to be selfish.  He couldn't cop Steve Waugh - I wonder why?
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Jan-15, 09:16 AM
Why?

Oh don't trot out that "Waugh is selfish because he doesn't farm the strike, looking at his average" line of bullshit that Wily's been trumpeting for years.

I think the success of the tail in this last series should have laid to rest forever the idea of "the batsman" taking as much of the strike as possible.

Facing the first five balls, eschewing three or four runs to take one on the last ball rarely succeeds. I remember Asif Iqbal doing it once, but usually it just wastes time accumulating less runs than taking them when on offer. 

 


Title: Cricket
Post by: Peterf on 2009-Jan-15, 10:31 AM
Coney is a very intelligent man with a bizarre sense of humour, it runs in the family. His brother runs a boutique winery in the Wairarapa and his website is hilarious. I didn't know about the incident Coinswell refers to, but it would be surprising if he didn't offend someone, somewhere.... :sad:

I find Smithy is banal and constantly repeats himself. Maybe he will improve with time.

Its a tough job, particularly in a test match. Five days of commentary, even in relays, with people hanging on your every word......not the easiest job the world.
Title: Cricket
Post by: twominutewarning on 2009-Jan-15, 08:12 PM
Greetings,


Is M.Clarke needed for the first ODI?
Title: Cricket
Post by: coinswell on 2009-Jan-15, 08:36 PM
JWH

As he said in this interview, it is not about Steve Waugh, it is about Australia.

http://in.rediff.com/cricket/2003/nov/11inter.htm

If you don't think Waugh played for the red ink against the Banglas to bump his average past the magical 50, then we'll have to disagree.

The 'farewell' tour/series when he announced his retirement, the running out of Damien Martyn in the Brisbane test of that series, the failure to farm the strike in Melbourne in 98 against the English when we lost by 12 lousy runs, the countless diaries, the carry on when he was rightly dropped from the one day team.

I respect his achievements, and greatly admire what he has done in India, but as a character gimme his brother (despite his lack of hunger for runs on occasion), Taylor, Warney or Chappelli any day.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-15, 08:56 PM
Watch out coins, the wrath of geoff is about to be unleashed  :lol:


By the way, you're right
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2009-Jan-15, 09:12 PM
Right, thanks good ol' Gintara. I didn't know Australian cricketers had an army of spies, carefully monitoring the media and writing down everything that is said about them so they can report it back.

Dear me, are the Aussie cricketers really THAT sensitive? Poor souls.



Who said anything about them being sensitive?  :chin: I think your dreaming again   :lol:

Do you really think any international cricketer (not just Aussies) wouldn't know what was being said about them whether it is in the commentary box or media in general?
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-16, 11:45 AM
I'm looking forward to todays game.

That 20 overs stuff leaves me a bit cold
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-16, 11:49 AM
One dayers are dead in the water if you've been reading the newspapers lately... all thanks to Dave Warner it seems   :lol:

Will be interesting to see what size crowd they get today though, anything less than the 68,000 or whatever it was they got in the Melbourne 20/20 and I'm sure we'll get inundated with more 20/20 is king articles over the next few days ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-16, 11:50 AM
Did I hear that they've tinkered with the rules a tad and moved the power plays?
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-16, 12:00 PM
The batting team gets to choose when one of the power plays takes effect... a rule they've been using in the state one day games for awhile now apparently.

There's also the changes to the comp - no longer a tri-series as we've had basically ever since ODIs started - instead we're playing 5 matches against SA, then 5 matches against NZ... SA and NZ don't get to play against each other... also means there are no best of 3 finals games at the end.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-16, 12:52 PM
I'll miss the finals system
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Jan-16, 01:06 PM
Just didn't get the crowds to the non Australian games
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-16, 01:12 PM
Just didn't get the crowds to the non Australian games

Will be interesting to see what the crowds and tv ratings are for games 3,4 and 5 against NZ if we win the first two games easily (or against SA for that matter)... seems to be the potential for a lot more dead rubbers this way - what if they were playing 5 games against Bangladesh or something, would everyone lose interest after the first game?

I'm not sure this is the best solution, but you never know, see how it goes.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-16, 03:37 PM
The opening stanza was certainly lacking in somthing.

Marsh is playing the same role as his namesake, not Rod
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2009-Jan-16, 05:30 PM
The opening stanza was certainly lacking in somthing.

Marsh is playing the same role as his namesake, not Rod

Well it is his old man Wily  ;) like father like son
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Jan-16, 05:40 PM
Shaun Tait.....gets a wicket then bowls 2 wides,whats that all about? :wacko: :what:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gammalite on 2009-Jan-16, 05:53 PM
You have newspapers? You mean Aussies can read? When the hell did that happen?

Smartarse, this discussion was about TV commentators, not newspapers. Try to keep up.



Actually Pete the newspapers have contained quite a few quotes from the commentary box this year.  Quite a number of times the stuff that has been said on air by Ian healy , Mark taylor and Ian Chappell has ended up in the papers the next day and a couple of times as a headline.
The players have a pretty good idea as to what has been said during the commentary.
Everyone outside Australia says our commentators are biased but who cares. We have had to put up with Greig for 25 bloody years so the rest of you can suffer having to listen to a few of our blokes and their bias comments .
Title: Cricket
Post by: twominutewarning on 2009-Jan-16, 07:02 PM
McKenzie is a three-toed sloth with 4 toes.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-16, 07:48 PM
Do the brains trust of the Aussie team set their fields via formula or CAN YOU PLEASE OPEN YOUR  :censored: ING EYES :mad:
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-16, 07:53 PM
Just to make everyone nervous... Australia has never beaten SA at the MCG in a ODI. Played 5 times, 0-5 the result   :unsu
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-16, 08:29 PM
I've never seen a cricketer so out of place at the international level as Van jaarsveld.

The hilarious thing is, he knows it himself, you can see it in his eyes  :lol:

Poor kid, totally out of his depth
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-16, 09:09 PM
Make that 0-6...  :/
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-16, 09:09 PM
And Botha is just as bad.

How the hell did they win that :wacko:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2009-Jan-16, 09:11 PM
More like how the hell did they nearly loose it  :what: should have been a walk in the park for SA and they nearly botched it   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-16, 09:15 PM
Gin. they nearly lost it because they don't have anyone to hit it from the square in the middle.

Same happened the other night as well when the hit 25 singles in a row.

Good luck to them but the balance of their side is wrong
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Jan-16, 09:21 PM
Haven't you blokes been taking much interest in cricket over the years? I know Wily has demonstrated he knows  :censored:  all, but Gintara what's your excuse? :o

That's what happens.

It's never over until it's over.

Well done to the South Africans. 

Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-16, 09:24 PM
Thats not nice geoff
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Jan-16, 09:26 PM
Maybe I'm being a bit harsh, Wily maybe you don't know  :censored:  all. :)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2009-Jan-16, 09:36 PM
I know that Geoffrey but with 7 wickets in hand needing roughly a run a ball for the last 100 balls should be a cake walk.

Both Duminy and McKenzie threw away their wickets (ok Duminy was beaten by the flight but ...)  they turned and easy victory into scrapping home.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Peterf on 2009-Jan-17, 06:52 AM
Same old story as the first two tests - the Aussie batsmen did the job, the team got into a winning position and the bowlers couldn't finish it off.

The only surprise was how the fielding fell apart under pressure.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-17, 07:02 AM
At least the bowlers didn't go missing for a whole day this time Pete (Bracken was fantastic)... in the end, it came down to one bad over, although it took them awhile to get rid of the Duminy/McKenzie partnership.

As for the fielding cracking under pressure, Tait has always been hopeless (pressure or otherwise)... the misfield on the last ball was pretty bad though ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-17, 07:29 AM
Tait has been a huge disappointment for a few years. Maybe frustration is a better word.
Hilfanhause was very poor last night and Bracken, once again proved what a good bowler he is.

Hopefully the selectors will wake up and give him a test before the ashes.

Not sure why White is in the team if he isn't bowling.  Is he the 6th best bat in the country???
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2009-Jan-17, 10:18 AM
Same old story as the first two tests - the Aussie batsmen did the job, the team got into a winning position and the bowlers couldn't finish it off.

The only surprise was how the fielding fell apart under pressure.

Amazing the perspective you get when you death ride one team isn't it   :lol:

Most sane people wouldn't have said the Aussies got enough last night, so not sure how you could say the batsmen did their job  :what:

SA were cruising to a gettable target yet nearly threw it away, partly to some ordinary shots and partly to the Bracken and co getting it right for a while.

The difference in the end simply came down to Ablie Morkel's sweet hitting, even the massive 6 off Bracken wasn't a bad ball  :o

Tait's impression of the harbour bridge while diving over the ball was funny though   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Peterf on 2009-Jan-17, 11:12 AM
Gintara, calm down......take a pill.

The SA score was the 3rd highest successful run chase in MCG history. Before the game Richie Benaud reckoned 260 was a par score. Is he insane, Gintara?

But okay, you want to look at the other team, let's do that. South Africa dropped catches, missed run outs, had a huge batting collapse in the middle order, got no favours from the umpires in several lbw close calls - but still won.

What does that tell you about the opposition, Gintara?

Fool yourself that the difference between the teams was one over if it makes you feel better. But once again the Aussies had South Africa by the throat and couldn't finish them off. Happened at Perth, again at Melbourne and again in this game.

Time for a reality check, mate.



Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Jan-17, 11:21 AM
The 20/20 game has shown that "par" totals for the one-day game need to be revised.......upward.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Peterf on 2009-Jan-17, 11:57 AM
A par total is whatever someone thinks it is.

Benaud, who knows more about cricket than most, reckoned par last night was around 260.

Over the years I have watched Aussie cricket teams humiliate Kiwi teams regularly, as well as beating everyone else in the world.

It became obvious to me that to beat Australia you need to do everything right, take every chance you are offered, field brilliantly, make direct hits on the stumps.....even then you would need the rub of the green from the umpires, Australian teams were that good.

But not this Australian side. The South Africans are currently on top physically and mentally. It will be interesting to see how the Australians fight back - and they will.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-17, 12:19 PM
Well, Pete, you've been banging the same drum since about 2001 when I first stumbled across you.

Finally, we're looking a tad vulnerable and not finishing teams off. Great predicting  :lol:

Our fielding has been woeful this season, our bats have lacked confidence, we've coped more bad decisions than the squealing Indians, the bounce of the ball has been right against us and we're blooding about 8 new players.

Still, the supposedly best 2  teams in the world have had to fight tooth and nail to beat us and as you said, we've let them off after having them on the rack.


he's a prediction that won't take 8 years to look like coming true, we'll win the next 3 series :thumbsup:

Title: Cricket
Post by: Peterf on 2009-Jan-17, 12:22 PM
Not bad, wily.

Just think how much more you might see if you opened the other eye.  :wacko:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Peterf on 2009-Jan-17, 12:39 PM
Crikey, wily, do you mean I've been putting up with your crap for seven years? I should get a knighthood....

What I have been saying is: With the loss of a string of world class players Australian cricket would come back to the pack and would no longer be the best in the world

Not rocket science, but you and some of your mates got all huffy and offended. Firstly because you didn't want to recognise the truth, but mainly because you hated the fact that it was a Kiwi telling it to you.

Pretty small minded, but never mind. The bleeding obvious has come to pass. Australia is no longer the best in the world, probably isn't even second best.

It won't last, the Aussies will bounce back, they always do. So go on blaming the umpires, never giving the opposition any credit, keep making excuses.....after all, that's what you do best.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2009-Jan-17, 01:33 PM
Pete if you took that chip off your shoulder you will see many round here have long believed the Aussies were on a downward spiral. We've all said it, it ain't some new kiwi proficy dreamt up   :lol:  We've all had the pleasure of watching Warne / McGrath / Gilly etc and knew it wouldn't last  :tears:

Par is just that Pete, the minimum that should be acceptable, you failed to mention that while 260 may have been suggested as par, most seemed to suggest that 280ish was what was going to be needed, left that bit out eh?

So I've said that the Aussies didn't get anywhere near enough and the bowlers only got it right for awhile yet I'm not looking both ways ....... yeah right.

One question Pete, your hero isn't Tony Grieg is it?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Peterf on 2009-Jan-17, 04:17 PM
Rewriting history, Gintara, how very convenient.....hindsight is wonderful skill.

I don't mind Tony Greig, let's face it, someone has to balance the constant cheerleading dances by Healy, Taylor, Slater and co......which is no doubt why many Australians don't like him.

I thought he was pretty good last night. I particularly liked the time when he reminded Ian Healy (after one of Healy's "Ponting is a god" speeches) that Ponting had narrowly avoided being caught, run out and lbw all in the same innings.

As for a shoulder chip. I think you meant wily didn't you?







Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2009-Jan-17, 05:06 PM
Pete - you call it balance, I call it death riding.

Tony Grieg is the most bias of all as he is constantly looking for ways to put the Aussies down. Surprised he hasn't given himself a heart attack over the last decade with all that teeth gnashing and hand wringing.

You know the feeling Pete?  8-)  :tomatoes:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-17, 05:17 PM
28 years ago, amazing

[ Invalid YouTube link ]
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Jan-17, 05:27 PM
Richie telling it like it is.  8-)
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Jan-17, 06:12 PM
Wot Rot.

It was within in rules, so wot's the problem?

Anyone got a youtube of what Meads did to Catchpole and an NZedd commentator saying that it was disgraceful?
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Jan-17, 06:15 PM
but surely JWH we should aspire to maintain higher standards than a bunch of kiwis.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-17, 06:22 PM
Dave Warner into the squad for Clarke who has succumbed to injury...
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-17, 06:23 PM
Knew that at 6.22AM BT   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-17, 06:29 PM
Well no one posted it on here OL... just saw it on the news, been out gardening most of the bloody day, lol
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-17, 06:33 PM
BT's Garden, those bloody NSW bush fires

Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Jan-17, 06:35 PM
what about the bangas. Had sri lanka at 5-6 and manged to lose.   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Jan-18, 09:38 AM
You have to feel sorry for Warner.  Just not up to this class and proves that the selectors are our main problem emthdown
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Jan-18, 09:44 AM
That ball would have dismissed anyone. Nothing to do with "not up to this class", only his shot selection for that shot could be questioned. 

Six of the eleven Australians today have a surname beginning with H.

Is this a record for a letter of the alphabet?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2009-Jan-18, 09:52 AM
You have to feel sorry for Warner.  Just not up to this class and proves that the selectors are our main problem emthdown

Grats - the kid has smashed plenty of runs in domestic one dayers & 20/20s. One of those innings was against Sth Aus with Shaun Tait bowling.

His innings in the first 20/20 showed he has an eye as good as anyone .... I'll happily take a bloke who can hit Dale Steyn around like he did that night.

Being only 22 it's hard to temper how he plays and the exact nature of how he plays means it isn't always going to come off.
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Jan-18, 10:12 AM
I just reckon that the first night that they didn't know to much about him , but they are a very smart side these South Africans and have soon figured him out.

BTW you cannot seriously talk about Tait and these good bowlers in the same breath.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2009-Jan-18, 10:25 AM
Why not? He's had the South Africans hoping about.

In these type of games where he can be bowled in short spells there isn't many better. Whether he stands up to test cricket is another thing altogether.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Big Wheel on 2009-Jan-18, 10:28 AM
what a DISGRACE, that was the only day i ever wasn't
proud of being a Aussie emthdown emthdown emthdown emthdown emthdown emthdown emthdown emthdown emthdown emthdown emthdown emthdown emthdown
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Jan-18, 10:39 AM
Wily must be spending a  :censored: fortune.   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-18, 12:15 PM
I just reckon that the first night that they didn't know to much about him , but they are a very smart side these South Africans and have soon figured him out.



Astute but not politically correct  :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-18, 12:32 PM
Wily must be spending a  :censored: fortune.   :lol:


Did I miss something?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Bundy on 2009-Jan-18, 12:38 PM
Dont miss the poker game tonoght girls 8-)...oh  :censored: me..wrong  :censored:ing thread.. :censored:ing sorry about that :p
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Jan-18, 12:49 PM
Wily must be spending a  :censored: fortune.   :lol:


Did I miss something?

about 10,000,000 bits of matt hayden memorabilia fire sale on Channel 9.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-18, 01:38 PM
Tait is not being rested is he, surely not ?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Antitab# on 2009-Jan-18, 01:39 PM
Tait is not being rested is he, surely not ?

Injured.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-18, 01:43 PM
Losing Amla the Anchor is a positive for Sth Africa
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-18, 02:03 PM
Thanks Anti-tab, not serious i hope ?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-18, 02:04 PM
What really needs debating at this point in the season is just how much ( OR WHAT ) is a years supply of KFC ?
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-18, 02:09 PM
Was thinking the same thing Author  :/

Probably depends on the size of the winner   :biggrin:

Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Jan-18, 02:11 PM
OL, between you and me , I reckon we could polish of a few buckets of chook over a year.  :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Antitab# on 2009-Jan-18, 02:42 PM
Thanks Anti-tab, not serious i hope ?

Serious
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-18, 03:09 PM
I can not find anything about his injury, can you elaborate please Anti-tab, he was in blistering short course form.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-18, 03:10 PM
There's one little ingredient that can possibly stop SA winning today.

Yours truly has backed them   :biggrin:

Although i'm due for a win after backing them in both 20/20's and Aust in first ODI
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Jan-18, 03:10 PM
I heard the same.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2009-Jan-18, 03:21 PM
What really needs debating at this point in the season is just how much ( OR WHAT ) is a years supply of KFC ?

I've have been wondering what it would be and then thought what size I'd be at the end of the year   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-18, 03:36 PM
McKenzie and Duminy are now doing what Kallis and DeVilliers should have been doing.

Running their first run quickly even it is only a single at least they put pressure on the outfield, whereas the other pair were just ambling through.
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Jan-18, 03:47 PM
Have they called their powerplay yet?
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-18, 03:54 PM
It's a setup to level the series this. Sticks out like dog's balls.
D Hussey's lolly pops should have gone for a zac every ball
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-18, 04:38 PM
Another team chasing succumbs to too many dot balls early and mid innings.
Terrible display with 4 wickets in hand at the end  emthdown
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Jan-18, 04:45 PM
I never usually post after the event, but I admit I backed the visitors.  :biggrin:

Couldn't resist the $3. :sad:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-18, 04:58 PM
Got it in one

There's one little ingredient that can possibly stop SA winning today.

Yours truly has backed them   :biggrin:

Although i'm due for a win after backing them in both 20/20's and Aust in first ODI
Title: Cricket
Post by: twominutewarning on 2009-Jan-18, 05:16 PM
Australia is going alright.

Austarlian XI - (not selected/unfit/rested)

Katich
Jacques
Watson
Clarke
Hodge
Symonds
Ronchi
Johnson
Lee
Clark
Tait

12th man - Krejza
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-18, 05:41 PM
Its not bad is it.
Title: Cricket
Post by: twominutewarning on 2009-Jan-18, 05:56 PM
They would go alright.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-18, 06:20 PM
Only if Lee was replaced   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: twominutewarning on 2009-Jan-18, 07:46 PM
Depends on who we are playing.

India are still scared of Lee when fit.
SA fear Clark.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Peterf on 2009-Jan-19, 07:26 AM
Thought a stitched together Aussie team did pretty well against an opponent who dropped catches and got into a tangle chasing a average score.

Teams seem to have difficulties with the batting power play, still coming to grips with it, I guess. The South Africans left theirs far too late and didn't show sufficient urgency early enough in their run chase - left themselves too much to do too late.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-19, 02:34 PM
The South Africans left theirs far too late and didn't show sufficient urgency early enough in their run chase - left themselves too much to do too late.


They did that in the previous 2 games as well.

Thier middle order is wrong
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-19, 05:06 PM
I'd put Gibbs and Kallis down the order a bit and take the power play once one or both arrive at the crease.
Open with Duminy, he seems to have a cool head who can score runs in even time without being extravagant.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2009-Jan-19, 06:14 PM
The South Africans left theirs far too late and didn't show sufficient urgency early enough in their run chase - left themselves too much to do too late.


They did that in the previous 2 games as well.

Thier middle order is wrong

Come on Wily, we all know the Aussies aren't good enough to win a game, never have been, it's always the opposition who are at fault. Hell they dropped catches at got it wrong chasing an average total  :rolleyes:

Hmm, lets look at the 2 games, Aussies bat 1st both times, totals don't seem enough, opponents drop catches, get the rough end of the umps and botch their run chase.

Difference in game 1 to 2 was an innings at the death to get SA home.

Oh hang on, I was told I was kidding myself the other day  :wacko:
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Jan-20, 02:49 PM
Now here is the best time to back Warner  :biggrin:

Sports bet of the week ;)

[attachimg=#]

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-20, 02:52 PM
Hey Grats, to save me mucking around, how do you post that?
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Jan-20, 03:11 PM
If you can print your screen and save to My Pictures you then do this.[attachimg=#]


[attachimg=#]

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-23, 01:33 PM
At what stage will Warner bring up his double century ?

I say 4.58 off 133 balls.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-23, 01:36 PM
And how many sets of gloves will he go through ?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gammalite on 2009-Jan-23, 03:32 PM
You have to feel sorry for Warner.  Just not up to this class and proves that the selectors are our main problem emthdown

Good call  :p
69 from 60 balls ..... second game.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Hamish Crayfish on 2009-Jan-23, 04:05 PM
Thanks for the hint, Gratlog. I did everything you said. One thing tho, how can I get the red texta off my monitor ?
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Jan-23, 04:11 PM
  :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: coinswell on 2009-Jan-23, 05:35 PM
David Hussey looks way out of his depth.  He was shocking in Hobart and no better here.  He has no idea.

I guess he is a Western Australian who relocated to Victoria which clearly puts him in the lowest quartile.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-23, 05:57 PM
I like when Amla goes when i'm on SA.
Tonight they WILL run down the Aussies who ended up with a mediocre total and also missed some early chances.
BUT i've been wrong before   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Peterf on 2009-Jan-24, 07:52 AM
A new take on the batting power play emerged last night. The South Africans took it earlier than usual and left Ponting with a tough decision: whether to throw Bracken back in the ring then or hold him back for the death.

He threw him in and was left with Hauritz bowling at the end and Morkel licking his chops in anticipation..... :p

This is a great series. As quick as one team gets on top, the other fights back. If the Aussies can win in Adelaide a Perth decider would be a beaut.

Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-24, 08:24 AM
Couldn't agree more pete
Title: Cricket
Post by: Antitab# on 2009-Jan-24, 08:31 AM
David Hussey looks way out of his depth.  He was shocking in Hobart and no better here.  He has no idea.

I guess he is a Western Australian who relocated to Victoria which clearly puts him in the lowest quartile.

I reckon he is suffering (Hopes as well) because they are batting for themselves and not the team. Regardless of the situation they wont go for quick runs because they are petrified about failing and being dropped. Instead they push it round because they think 30 or 40 will keep them in the team.

There is no doubt it was their partnership that turned the game in SA's favour last night.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2009-Jan-24, 09:08 AM
A new take on the batting power play emerged last night. The South Africans took it earlier than usual and left Ponting with a tough decision: whether to throw Bracken back in the ring then or hold him back for the death.

He threw him in and was left with Hauritz bowling at the end and Morkel licking his chops in anticipation..... :p

This is a great series. As quick as one team gets on top, the other fights back. If the Aussies can win in Adelaide a Perth decider would be a beaut.



Pete, I think both teams are trying to get their heads around it, for mine I don't think you can go in with a set plan for it but try and play when the time is right.

I thought Ponting went too early as Marsh was still in but he had to weigh up that Warner was still there, it worked ok imho but it's certainly added a great dynamic to the game.

So far though it has played into the chasing sides hands but that maybe just the way the game has unfolded.

Just on Hauritz though, he bowled darts in the test match  :slaphead: yet actually gave the ball a bit of air last night.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-24, 10:46 AM
I love Mark Taylor's commentary after Morkel was caught in the deep to make it 7 down with 5 runs required of 24 balls.

"Australia need 2 or 3 quick wickets if they're going to win"

Rocket science   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-24, 11:01 AM
I fleetingly entertained the thought that we might get a hattrick  :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-24, 11:14 AM
Has anyone figured out why Tait is in the side yet? You just can't afford to carry a bowler who's obviously not fit enough, can't bat and is hopeless in the field... even if he bowls two unplayable balls a game, is that enough for him to be there?

Our bowling stocks are pretty thin, but why not give Siddle a go or something, it's not like he disgraced himself in the Tests... is he injured or something?
Title: Cricket
Post by: coinswell on 2009-Jan-24, 11:19 AM
I'd be asking those questions about David Hussey and Sean Marsh.

Marsh bats like his old man did and it ain't good enough to win one day matches anymore.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Hamish Crayfish on 2009-Jan-24, 11:21 AM
Nathan Hauritz worries me a bit. Every time I have seen him bowl a wide, he seems to have a smile on his face afterwards. Maybe it's a nervous thing but if I was picked up for it, I would be dirty on myself.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-24, 11:23 AM
??? Sean Marsh has been fantastic - he scored slowly yesterday, but only because Warner was going nuts, I reckon he was just letting him catch his breath before his next assault... once Warner got out he picked up the scoring rate quite quickly. And given his scores in the previous two games he's right up there as one of the success stories of the summer so far.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Hamish Crayfish on 2009-Jan-24, 11:30 AM
Hard to bag Marsh when his ODI batting average is better than Gilly, Punter, Clark and co
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-24, 11:51 AM
I understand coins point re marsh.

He is of the old school and slow but we have to get used to that for a little time.

We've been spoilt with Gilly, Haydos and Mark Waugh of recent times
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jan-24, 11:52 AM
Has anyone figured out why Tait is in the side yet? You just can't afford to carry a bowler who's obviously not fit enough, can't bat and is hopeless in the field... even if he bowls two unplayable balls a game, is that enough for him to be there?



I'v e been watching and shaking my head thinking the same thing for the last few games :wacko:


Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2009-Jan-24, 12:05 PM
I don't think Marsh is that slow, he may get overshadowed when batting with Warner but when did you ever see two batsmen going at it at the same time?

Normally one always just rotates the strike for the other.
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Jan-24, 12:07 PM
BT, how can it be so obvious to us re Tait, but the selectors cannot see it?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Peterf on 2009-Jan-24, 01:36 PM
Never mind, guys, you'll soon have the Kiwis to beat up on, that should put the smiles back on your faces......  :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-24, 08:03 PM
KFC20/20 a good spectacle at moment, a bloke needs 4 TV's in one room, remote can't cope
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Jan-24, 08:57 PM
how is that a wide. it missed the stumpas by an inch.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-24, 09:03 PM
Amazing
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Jan-26, 11:07 AM
I've backed both 1st dismissals to be caught by the wicketkeeper.  Odds of 20-1  :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-26, 01:31 PM
Wonder boy fails again, will be back in club cricket before we know it
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Jan-26, 01:32 PM
How did he go out?
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-26, 01:38 PM
Caught at mid on trying to slog of course
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Jan-26, 01:46 PM
bugger, I wanted him to be caught behind
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-26, 03:28 PM
Australias top 6 are bordering on pathetic.
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Jan-26, 04:02 PM
Question.....are our top 6 one day batters better than our 6 top test batters?
Yeah i know it is a different game,but!!!!! :slaphead:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-26, 04:09 PM
There is no doubt that the batting in both the tests and the one dayers has let the team as whole down incredibly.
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Jan-26, 04:11 PM
What i was getting at is they should play the test 6,surely they are rated our top 6 batsmen. :/ :what:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-26, 04:14 PM
I would tend to agree with that.

Katich was brilliant the other night and is not out of place in 50/50.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-26, 04:31 PM
Yeah, bring Hayden back ;)

Nothing wrong with our batting in the tests Authorized... scored plenty of runs, should have been enough in every game... arguably the same with the first 3 one dayers, today's effort is looking to be the worst effort of the summer so far, but we haven't seen SA bat yet, so who knows.

I'd like to see us chasing a total in the last game though, SA seem to chase pretty well regardless of the total...
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-26, 04:48 PM
We did not score nearly enough nor did we spend enough time at the crease in any test match against South Africa. We may have scored quickly in the first innings but we needed to occupy the crease longer.  As i said right through the test series every one of those wickets was a draw wicket.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-26, 04:53 PM
We should have won just about every test - why on earth would you want to settle for a draw? Face the facts, the bowlers were our weakness, it couldn't have been more obvious... the batsmen did more than enough against a quality, well balanced attack.
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Jan-26, 04:56 PM
Ok,then why aren't the test batsmen playing?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-26, 04:56 PM
I agree bowlers win matches, but  Batsmen draw them and this season our batsmen were not good enough to hold South Africa to a draw. There is no doubt our bowlers were not good enough to win those matches i agree.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Hamish Crayfish on 2009-Jan-26, 05:33 PM
Dunno if it is a patriotic thing, but I just backed the Aussies at $4.

Hope the TV hasn't delayed it  :/

And 2 minutes later they are at $5  :sad:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jan-26, 07:49 PM
On A positive note, channel nine will have time to put on The Big Bang Theory before getting back to the normal programing scedule.   8-)
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-28, 01:18 PM
QLD v WA

Took 3.80 both first wickets being caught in the field
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-28, 01:20 PM
You're getting as desperate as Gratlog for a bet OL   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-28, 01:26 PM
That's hardly desperate BT, I don't post the ones i'd get laughed at  ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-28, 01:40 PM
QLD v WA

Took 3.80 both first wickets being caught in the field

First leg up   emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-28, 05:50 PM
QLD v WA

Took 3.80 both first wickets being caught in the field

First leg up   emthup

WA 0-43 I can feel a different dismissal soon as they're taking quick singles  :/
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-28, 05:55 PM
Bloody bowled  :mad:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-30, 01:22 PM
30-01-2009 12:24   20408412   Single - Australia v South Africa - 5th ODI
Coin Toss - South Africa - $60 Win - Coin Toss (Pending)   $60.00   1.95
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-30, 01:31 PM
You're taking 1.95 on a coin toss?????
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-30, 01:34 PM
You're taking 1.95 on a coin toss?????

Yep , SA are certs, Ponting's won 3 on the trot
And why wait til ANZAC Day?   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-30, 02:11 PM
South Africa
Australia
 South Africa won the toss and elected to bat first
 
  :lol:   :lol:   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Big Wheel on 2009-Jan-30, 02:22 PM
 Nice work mate i noticed you were tipping the coin toss
last night i should of followed you   
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-30, 03:15 PM
Well, looks like Phil Hughes has secured the spot as Aussie opener for the tour of SA:

New South Wales 1st innings   R   M   B   4s   6s   SR
PA Jaques    b Denton     9   15   9   2   0   100.00
PJ Hughes   not out           112   253   215   16   0   52.09
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-30, 03:36 PM
I could make 112 for NSW, providing I occupied the crease for 215 balls that is   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-30, 03:47 PM
You'll be pleased to know he's started to up the pace a little OL, currently 143 from 242.

Nothing wrong with that sort of performance - especially if you have Katich down the other end in the form he's been in lately (which he is now for NSW btw).   emthup

Edit: Out for 151 (off 248)... caught off the bowling of Krejza, just to make the selection puzzle a bit more interesting :)
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-30, 05:38 PM
Got a feeling tonight he'll knock up a good one

30-01-2009 17:06   20416618   Single - Australia v South Africa - 5th ODI
High Bat - Australia - David Warner - $30 Win - High Bat (Pending)   $30.00   5.50   Pending
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-30, 06:41 PM
Slater, Healy, Gilly and Nicholson in the middle with their suits on. They look like they could do a remake of Homicide

(http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2004/09/20/homicide_wideweb__430x303.jpg)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2009-Jan-30, 09:59 PM
I know he's been cleared previously but if Botha isn't chucking I'll give up. His action is terrible  :thumbsd:
Title: Cricket
Post by: manikato1 on 2009-Jan-31, 05:46 PM
Shouldn't allow anyone to bowl with a bent arm.  Don't know why they allow it.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-31, 05:57 PM
Got a feeling tonight he'll knock up a good one

30-01-2009 17:06   20416618   Single - Australia v South Africa - 5th ODI
High Bat - Australia - David Warner - $30 Win - High Bat (Pending)   $30.00   5.50   Pending

What a way to get out, run out at non strikers end by a finger tip and he was cruising  :(
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Jan-31, 06:50 PM
Got a feeling tonight he'll knock up a good one

30-01-2009 17:06   20416618   Single - Australia v South Africa - 5th ODI
High Bat - Australia - David Warner - $30 Win - High Bat (Pending)   $30.00   5.50   Pending

What a way to get out, run out at non strikers end by a finger tip and he was cruising  :(

Word filtered through to the ground that you were set OL... they tried to be as imaginative as possible for you.   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jan-31, 07:29 PM
I backed him to score more than Gibbs (7).
When he was on 5 I was in the car listening and he square cut for 3 just out of reach of Gibbs' (i think) finger tips.
Wouldn't that have been ironic if Gibbs caught him?
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Feb-01, 10:12 AM
Will there be big changes for the Kiwi series

Does anyone care?
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Feb-01, 10:29 AM
Does anyone care?

I think most of us are now gearing up for the footy.  I probably won't even watch this today
Title: Cricket
Post by: Big Wheel on 2009-Feb-01, 10:44 AM
 I cant wait for the Footy to start  go the Bulldogs
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-01, 10:46 AM
HTFU Bulldogs
Title: Cricket
Post by: Big Wheel on 2009-Feb-01, 10:52 AM
Can't agree more  if they don't HTFU  THIS SEASON they will
have to change their name to Bloody Puppies or bloody Bull Frogs
im Spewin they sacked Reni as i reckon this is his year to shine and
will be his best year, even more so now with the Dramas Etc

 Ps sorry sorry for talking footy on the Cricket thread

 PPS  if there is ever any1 that needs to Harden the  :censored: up it has to be
the Aussie Cricket team  fair dinkum Pussys
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Feb-01, 11:02 AM
[attachimg=#]

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Feb-01, 03:17 PM
Once again the bowlers are letting Australia down.   :thumbsd:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-01, 03:21 PM
They've made plenty this summer laying themselves  8-)
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-01, 03:35 PM
As I have said continuously this summer Authorized - bowlers win test matches, batsmen win one dayers :)
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Feb-01, 03:37 PM
Matt, with your Bulldog post I see they have finally let you graduate from crayons.  emthup   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-01, 03:45 PM
Back to cricket, Aussies 4/51, if Mr Cricket doesn't make over 29.5 runs in this situation he never will.
Guess who's on him?  :shy:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-01, 03:55 PM
Back to cricket, Aussies 4/51, if Mr Cricket doesn't make over 29.5 runs in this situation he never will.
Guess who's on him?  :shy:

Maybe he'll run outta pardners
Title: Cricket
Post by: Peterf on 2009-Feb-01, 03:59 PM
Maybe next time Ponting and Clarke will show the Kiwi fielders a little more respect?
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Feb-01, 04:41 PM
Maybe next time we'll show our greats a little more respect.



Warner   wtf
Marsh wtf

We've got what we screamed for
 :sad: :sad: :sad: :tears: :tears: :tears: :tears:
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Feb-01, 04:45 PM
Maybe next time we'll show our greats a little more respect.



Warner   wtf
Marsh wtf

We've got what we screamed for
 :sad: :sad: :sad: :tears: :tears: :tears: :tears:


I'm sorry have we played a test match.  :rolleyes:

I can't remember once caring what happened in one-dayers.

Hughes/Jacques and Katich in tests. All I care about happening.  ;)

When that happens I'll be a happy man that I got what I screamed for and Hayden the post achilles inompetant is long gone.   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-01, 04:46 PM
Even the Australian Cricinfo site seems to have crashed, won't load for me anyway, lol
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-01, 04:48 PM
Back to cricket, Aussies 4/51, if Mr Cricket doesn't make over 29.5 runs in this situation he never will.
Guess who's on him?  :shy:

Maybe he'll run outta pardners

Great cover drive to reach 30  8-)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Feb-01, 04:52 PM
It worken for me Bradly Hadden is out.   :tears:
Title: Cricket
Post by: coinswell on 2009-Feb-01, 05:00 PM
A few Victorian pretenders around this team - they finally got rid of White thankfully.  David Hussey is in the same boat and seems clearly out of his depth at international level - he must go as he has been totally unconvincing.  Wasting so many balls in the middle order for a strike rate in the sixties is totally sub-standard.

I am no way sold on Sean Marsh either.  As Roebuck said in his column today:

"Doubtless it seems NSW players get favoured treatment in the papers and at the selection table but they seldom disappoint".

Katich and Hughes would be better options than both Hussey and Marsh.  Warner is worth persevering with IMHO (even Hayden would be going better).
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-01, 05:05 PM
Vittori bowled 42 dot balls, that's terrible from us, I don't care how well he bowled
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-01, 05:23 PM
A few Victorian pretenders around this team - they finally got rid of White thankfully.  David Hussey is in the same boat and seems clearly out of his depth at international level - he must go as he has been totally unconvincing.  Wasting so many balls in the middle order for a strike rate in the sixties is totally sub-standard.

I am no way sold on Sean Marsh either.  As Roebuck said in his column today:

"Doubtless it seems NSW players get favoured treatment in the papers and at the selection table but they seldom disappoint".

Katich and Hughes would be better options than both Hussey and Marsh.  Warner is worth persevering with IMHO (even Hayden would be going better).

The most overrated Victorian in recent times was Ian Harvey imo
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Feb-01, 05:28 PM
It was a toss off wether i watched the cricket or the Tennis tonight.

Tennis wins hands down now.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-01, 06:04 PM
1.30 NZ seems overs
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2009-Feb-01, 06:21 PM
Australia are playing consistent shit at present, but they'll still give this a real shake tonight imo. Chasing under pressure anit easy, and the Kiwi side aint world beaters.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Feb-01, 06:37 PM
I hope you're right 7's
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-01, 07:52 PM
For anyone who hasn't turned over from the tennis... Kiwi's are shot ducks... 100/1 from  here
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-01, 07:56 PM
I got live scores on screen and turning over between serves
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-01, 08:24 PM
For anyone who hasn't turned over from the tennis... Kiwi's are shot ducks... 100/1 from  here

Still 100's or firmed BT?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Feb-01, 08:39 PM
The are 99s now OL.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-02, 08:40 AM
Well, the Kiwi's were 100's when I posted, but good innings by Ross Taylor - didn't panic, just settled the innings and chipped away - I still thought they were no chance when they needed 6 an over for the last 10 in the context of that game where everyone was struggling to get more than 3-4 for more than a few overs, but they made their shots and scraped it in by the narrowest of margins.

The Aussies sure as hell didn't deserve to win that, so a just result I think :)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Peterf on 2009-Feb-02, 10:48 AM
This would have to be one of the youngest and least experienced Black Cap teams I can remember in a long time.

That plus the loss of class acts like Jacob Oram and Shane Bond mean this NZ team is not a bunch of world beaters, 777s is quite right about that.

But they were still good enough to beat Australia. It was a win they deserved, too, they bowled and fielded brilliantly and although they made the run chase look pretty painful, they got there in the end.

The dismissal of Broom and the involvement of Haddin has caused a bit of a stir here. It is hard to believe that Haddin didn't recognise what really happened, that the ball didn't dislodge the bails, they were knocked off by his gloves.

We all recognise that Australian sportspeople play hard and play to win, nothing wrong with that. But there are times when their ethics are highly questionable. This is one of those occasions.

Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Feb-02, 10:52 AM
you know what peterf I said to my missus Haddin knew what happened and on replay you see him take a few steps and you see him looking at the umpire with some concern on his face. Why would he have that on a bowled?
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-02, 11:01 AM
Ordinaryt by Haddin imo
I wonder if Gilly the walker would have called him back
Title: Cricket
Post by: Big Wheel on 2009-Feb-02, 11:08 AM
what about the Ridiculous question channel nine put forward last night
then backed it up with a bullshit stat

   DO THE SPECTATORS PREFER A LOW SCORING GAME To a HIGH

   The answer according to them was  53% Yes and 47 %    PLEASE

       funny thing is had it of been a high scoring game it bet their stats would
of been the opposite.
Thank God the Tennis was on that's all i can say
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-02, 11:14 AM
Was kinda funny that the umpires couldn't stop yawning, even Ross Taylor almost fell asleep out there, saw him yawn once or twice while he was batting too :)

McCullum was pretty stiff - don't think he could have got a thicker inside edge if he tried, yet was given LBW pretty quick.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-02, 11:23 AM
I still can't get over when Ponting called the power play.
imo take it if or when ya 4 down irrespective of what over you're in.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Big Wheel on 2009-Feb-02, 11:28 AM
  I read once on this forum that some1 was commenting on how
many mistakes dropped catches etc  this Hadden(wicket-Keeper) MAKES and since i read this comment i
have taken notice of his performances
and i must say he is the worst Keeper we have ever had
he is not in the same breath as Marsh,Gilchrist etc.
The bloke is a SHOCKER
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Feb-02, 12:55 PM

and i must say he is the worst Keeper we have ever had
he is not in the same breath as Marsh,Gilchrist etc.
The bloke is a SHOCKER


Totally agree. I would open with him in the bash stuff as well
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-05, 11:15 AM
Batting prodigy Phillip Hughes picked for S Africa tour

PHILLIP Hughes will be on the plane to South Africa and a step closer to filling Matthew Hayden's shoes when Australia's squad for this month's Test tour is announced today.

The 20-year-old has been rewarded for a stellar season in the NSW side having scored 891 runs at 74.25, including four centuries and a highest score of 198.

AUDIO: Peter Lalor on the rise of Phillip Hughes
His selection in the touring squad all but confirms he will become the youngest Australian since Craig McDermott to make his Test debut when the first Test begins in Johannesburg on February 26.

The Australian also understands that Bryce McGain, the 36-year-old Victorian leg-spinner, has also been chosen in the squad.

Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-05, 11:54 AM
That story was written yesterday or this morning OL, so was speculating to some point.

The Team has just been announced now though - Hughes and McGain are there as tipped, but Marcus North has also been added as an extra batsman.

Australia Test squad: Ricky Ponting (capt), Michael Clarke, Phillip Hughes, Simon Katich, Michael Hussey, Andrew McDonald, Brad Haddin (wk), Mitchell Johnson, Peter Siddle, Doug Bollinger, Bryce McGain, Ben Hilfenhaus, Nathan Hauritz, Marcus North.

http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/ausvrsa2008_09/content/story/389083.html
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-05, 11:57 AM
Ponting says they're taking 15, only 14 there  :/
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-05, 12:00 PM
Maybe he still hasn't given up on Symonds then, lol

There was some discussion as to whether both Hughes and Jaques would be named, maybe that led to a bit of confusion?
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2009-Feb-05, 12:09 PM
That story was written yesterday or this morning OL, so was speculating to some point.

The Team has just been announced now though - Hughes and McGain are there as tipped, but Marcus North has also been added as an extra batsman.

Australia Test squad: Ricky Ponting (capt), Michael Clarke, Phillip Hughes, Simon Katich, Michael Hussey, Andrew McDonald, Brad Haddin (wk), Mitchell Johnson, Peter Siddle, Doug Bollinger, Bryce McGain, Ben Hilfenhaus, Nathan Hauritz, Marcus North.

http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/ausvrsa2008_09/content/story/389083.html


Surely one of our worst touring parties for many a year. Please tell me we are not favourites to win this series?   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Antitab# on 2009-Feb-05, 12:10 PM
How could they possibly pick Hauritz is beyond me.

Pity the selectors didnt have the guts to change the captain. Similar to champion batsman before him like Lara and Tendulkar,  Ponting is a dreadful captain.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-05, 12:18 PM
I don't know why they didn't pick Bracken - ok, the way he uses his change of pace etc. means he'd use different tactics than what he's used to in ODI's, but with an attack that isn't just lacking in experience, but hardly has any at all, he should have been one of the first ones picked... I don't think he has any problems with fitness and bowling 30 overs in a day - heck, in their last shield game v WA he bowled 30 overs, 2/48 in their first innings, what the hell is wrong with that???
Title: Cricket
Post by: Jeunes on 2009-Feb-05, 01:23 PM
If I was a South African batsman, i would be licking my lips waiting for the aussie bowlers. Hilfenhaus and Hauritz are jokes at the moment. What is wrong with picking a specialist no 6 rather than an allrounder. This fixation on allrounders is a blight on the team especially if two of the top 5 fails. 
Title: Cricket
Post by: twominutewarning on 2009-Feb-05, 05:39 PM
If you're spinners aren't good enough don't pick them.
Might as well boost the batting up and use Clarke and Katich for a bit of slow stuff.

Saying that,Krejza took wickets in India and should have been selected in front of Hauritz and McGain.

I would suggest moving Ponting to four and playing three openers.
Marsh,Jaques & Katich.Marsh at least has some international experience over Hughes.
then Ponting,Clarke,Mussey,Haddin,Johnson,Bracken,Hilfenhaus,Siddle.
then Symonds,Krejza,Noffke,McDonald.

This pigeonholing of certain players is becoming absurd.


Title: Cricket
Post by: twominutewarning on 2009-Feb-05, 06:26 PM
I left Tait out because he needs to Harden The  :censored:  Up.
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2009-Feb-05, 07:56 PM
I'm glad they had the balls to take Hughes. We have to start blooding a few in some areas, and he's been asking for the role for some time.

I see Qld have made another huge contribution to the national Test squad.

  :lol:

  :lol:

  :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-05, 08:12 PM
I see Qld have made another huge contribution to the national Test squad.

We'll still claim Johnson and even Hauritz, never mind the big conspiracy to rub out Symonds and Hayden ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Feb-05, 08:16 PM
 I see people bemoaning Krezja.

hauritz out bowled him massively last game on a flat track in what was rally a head to head selection trial. That was his big chance and he came up empty


Staggered Bracken isn't there
Title: Cricket
Post by: twominutewarning on 2009-Feb-05, 09:21 PM
All our spinners are shite Wily.
If you had to choose one,Krejza should be given another chance after 8 wickets in a match.

Hughes is worthy of a spot on form but is he ready?
Marsh looks like a test player.
Jaques needs time at the crease.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Jeunes on 2009-Feb-06, 08:06 AM
Simon Katich grabs Michael Clarke by throat over team songArticle from: Font size: Decrease Increase Email article: Email Print article: Print Submit comment: Submit comment By Andrew Webster

February 06, 2009 12:00am

AUSTRALIAN cricket plunged deeper into crisis last night with the revelation that vice-captain Michael Clarke and Simon Katich were embroiled in a physical altercation in the SCG dressingrooms after the Sydney Test last month.

The Daily Telegraph can reveal the pair had to be separated by stunned teammates when Katich grabbed Clarke by the throat during an argument over the singing of the team song.

It is understood Clarke had wanted the song sung early in celebrations so he could leave the rooms to be with family and model girlfriend Lara Bingle. The incident occurred just hours after the side's thrilling 103-run win over South Africa.

Editorial: Time to fight real enemies, boys

Cricket Australia has not taken action against the players and Clarke and Katich yesterday both insisted they had "moved on".

But the confrontation reveals the simmering tension bubbling beneath the surface of the national side in the wake of its Test and one-day series losses to South Africa this summer.

"Yes, we had a disagreement after the Sydney Test," Clarke told The Daily Telegraph yesterday.

"This kind of thing occasionally happens in cricket teams. We didn't see eye to eye on that night, but we have been teammates at NSW and Australia a long time.

Gallery: Lara loves the cricket

"We've spoken since, including catching up the other night at the Allan Border Medal. There's no issue between us. We've all moved on."

Said Katich: "I've spoken to Michael as recently as today and we're both big enough and old enough to have moved on. I'm not fussed about what happened."

Bizarrely, the singing of the team's iconic victory song, Under The Southern Cross I Stand, appears to have been the reason behind the skirmish.

Sources close to the team said Clarke had wanted the official song sung early in the evening, as it was in Adelaide in November when captain Ricky Ponting needed to leave early after victory against New Zealand.

It is customary for the custodian of the song - currently batsman Michael Hussey - to decide when it is sung following play.

Paul Kent: Clarke not up to job he wants so much
One dayer: We'll just go out to play says captain Clarke
First Inglis, now Hughes: Macksville big on talent
 

It is understood the team came off the field at 6pm and Clarke had asked for the team song to be sung by 11pm, so the players could have drinks with family and friends at a venue organised by Clarke. Hussey did not begin the song until near midnight, after the fight broke out.

Clarke will stand in for Ricky Ponting as captain in tonight's one-day international against New Zealand at the MCG. He and Katich will play alongside one another this month in the three-Test tour of South Africa, and Katich said there would be no animosity on tour.

"Michael and I are focused on some tough Test cricket that's coming up for Australia against South Africa in a couple of weeks," he said.

Cricket Australia spokesman Peter Young said no action had been taken and the argument was considered a private matter.

"What happens between these guys is their business," he said. "They've sorted it and moved on."

Source: The Daily Telegraph


Simmo got the boot for going fishing and that was brought out into the public domain but CA seems to have a different twist on fights between team mates especially after a win.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-06, 10:19 AM
Why are the Kiwi's ridiculous odds for this game... they were 3.50 on Betfair earlier this morning when I last checked - surely it's a toss of the coin at best?

The Aussies aren't taking this seriously I don't think... resting Ponting is one thing, but Callum Ferguson and Adam Voges into the side? Neither of them have exactly been setting the world on fire in either Shield or One Day games in the last couple of months - why are they even there?

On top of all that, here's a few stats from CricInfo:

* New Zealand are ahead in the Chappell-Hadlee tally, having won six of the 12 matches, with five wins to Australia and one no-result

* The MCG hasn't been Australia's best venue in recent times - they have won one of their past five ODIs there

* Australia will take such an inexperienced line-up into the match that Haddin is their third highest career scorer and Clarke is their third highest wicket taker
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-06, 10:23 AM
Jump on em BT  ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-06, 10:30 AM
I have OL :)

...well, it's more of a hop than a jump, but I backed them earlier this morning, lol
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Feb-06, 01:29 PM
Warner?
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-06, 01:40 PM
It's amazing how many 2's aren't turned into 3's these days.
Michael Bevan would be looking at 4 on some of them.
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2009-Feb-06, 02:01 PM
Man we suck at Cricket!  emthdown

What times the first at the Valley? 8-)

Warrener now averages 18 @ SR of 80

I would give him till the end of the NZ series though. If those numbers are not up to at least 25/90 then don't take him to SA until he has developed more.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-06, 03:38 PM
Pietersen and Flintoff both go for 1.55m in the IPL auction, Duminy 950k and Tait snatched up by Rajasthan Royals for 375k
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Feb-06, 07:11 PM
Warner?


 :sad:

Wasn't he just wonderful again.

How many pages will the hacks from the papers fill with him tomorrow :mad:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Friar Tuck on 2009-Feb-06, 08:53 PM
Anyone hear how the cricket is going? :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Feb-06, 09:04 PM
Unfortunately we got flogged by 6 wickets.

Hope Burnt Toast won heaps as he backed the Kiwis I think 8-)
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-06, 09:06 PM
Unfortunately we got flogged by 6 wickets.

Hope Burnt Toast won heaps as he backed the Kiwis I think 8-)

I wouldn't call it heaps, but it's put me in front for the week after having some stupid Tennis bets in the South African Open and some dodgy South American tournament a couple of days ago, lol
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Feb-06, 09:13 PM
We were the best fielding side in the world as well.

Even thats gone to shit
Title: Cricket
Post by: Antitab# on 2009-Feb-07, 05:57 AM
The mindset of the Australian cricket team has got me well and truly  :censored: ed. They might be the greatest bunch of mental midgets to ever play.

We are in the era of 20/20 cricket where teams are better at chasing down totals than ever before and 160 off 20 overs is about a par score.

225 in a 50 over game is an easy chase.

So in a 50 over game thay are 3 down and from the 25th to the 45th over the captain and vice captain meander along and make absolutely no effort to speed up.

I read that Clarke was averaging 15 in 50 over cricket in the last 12 months and Hussey has had a rubbish summer so perhaps they were batting for self preservation but they certainly werent batting to win the match.

If Saim Malik or Hansie Cronje had have batted like that there would be questions as to how fair dinkum they were.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Peterf on 2009-Feb-07, 07:36 AM
It was hard to work out the Aussies' game plan. Maybe they didn't have one?

To meander to an average score while only losing five wickets - what the  :censored: was going on?

The team just seems to be in total disarray. A captain who deserts his post when the side needs him most, scrapping amongst themselves in the dressing room.....

There are some pretty average players in this Australian side. David Hussey and Cameron White don't look to me anywhere near international quality and I am far from convinced about Brad Haddin. Warner is looking like a one innings wonder.

These Kiwis aren't world beaters, but they are a tightly knit team with some real fighters, Elliott has shown he loves a tight situation and Broom is just a tough little scrapper who never backs down.

Prior to this series I put a lazy $10 on the Kiwis to win 5-0, just for a laugh. I got 50-1, am beginning to think I might be in with a chance!

I wonder what the rest of the cricketing world thinks of all this?  :love:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-07, 08:17 AM
All up @ 3.00 per game is 243.00 peterf and they're more than 3.00 per game.
So I guess you took unders
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Feb-07, 11:03 AM
If David Warner gets another game, he should go out there and play his natural game, tell those who have obviously told him to reign himself in to go stick it up their backsides, if ya gonna get dropped get dropped your own way.
Title: Cricket
Post by: MagiC~* on 2009-Feb-07, 11:07 AM
I would like to see him go in at 3 or 4 take some of the pressure off him and allow him to lay his natural game  :/
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2009-Feb-07, 11:39 AM
Pete - I agree there just didn't seem to be a game plan  :what: :what: and while the the pitch played slow there was a distinct lack of urgency or risk taking from the Aussies during their innings  :unsu can't understand why although the Kiwis bowled well.

As for Ponting he didn't 'desert' his post, he was on radio here during the week and came across pretty unhappy with being told to rest  :thumbsd: If ever the Aussie cricket side needed someone to lead from the front it was now, why rest him?

I'm happy for the Warner 'experiment' to continue although he should be under no restrictions which watching his last few digs there seems to be? The talents there, it should be nurtured, not restrained  :thumbsd:
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-07, 11:44 AM
Just like I said yesterday - the Aussie selectors are not taking this series seriously at all... with the hectic touring schedule coming up, it's like they are just going through the motions, getting this out of the way so they can get to SA.

Let's see if there is any more urgency out there tomorrow, but I doubt it.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Peterf on 2009-Feb-07, 01:38 PM
Aaah, so NOW I understand.

The Kiwis are winning because the Aussies aren't really trying......it all makes sense, now. :thumbsd:
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-07, 01:39 PM
You didn't read a word I wrote yesterday did you Pete :)

Not trying is merely one of several factors as to why we lost   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-07, 02:28 PM
Aussies will win 3-2
Title: Cricket
Post by: twominutewarning on 2009-Feb-07, 03:04 PM
What.......tosses?   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Peterf on 2009-Feb-07, 03:20 PM
You didn't read a word I wrote yesterday did you Pete :)

Not trying is merely one of several factors as to why we lost   :lol:

BT, I try not to read anything you write, but occasionally I forget. I had always thought Australian cricketers were a proud bunch and always gave of their best. It's sad to discover that isn't true....... :tears:
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-07, 03:43 PM
Geez Pete, I give 'em a wrap, say it's going to be a close game, highlight that they've had the wood on us since the Chappel/Hadlee trophies started, even put my money on the Kiwi's and all you can do if focus on one point that suits your need for angst ... Good to see that little brother complex of yours is as strong as ever mate ;)

Next thing you'll be telling us is that you can't take the bails off with the gloves, or bowling underarm is a low act ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Peterf on 2009-Feb-07, 04:53 PM
......or that you shouldn't drop the ball, pick it up again and then claim a catch...... :(

You're right, though, it doesn't matter whether the Aussies are trying or not. Who cares?
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-07, 04:58 PM
Aussies will win 3-2
What.......tosses?   :biggrin:

Funny fella
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-07, 04:58 PM
If it makes you feel better Pete - Arrogance is probably a better description than 'not trying'
Title: Cricket
Post by: Peterf on 2009-Feb-07, 06:33 PM
Nah, its not called either "arrogance" or "not trying".

Its just called "losing".    :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-07, 08:14 PM
Ponting is being rushed back into the side for tomorrows game.

If NZ win two of the last three games in this series, they will jump ahead of Aus in the official ICC rankings - 3rd spot is up for grabs :)
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-07, 08:15 PM
We'll win the series 3-2 trust me
Title: Cricket
Post by: Hamish Crayfish on 2009-Feb-07, 08:19 PM
What price will you give me on that?
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-07, 08:21 PM
1.25 NZ
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2009-Feb-08, 09:17 AM
What a mess Australian cricket is now in. I reckon we'll now really struggle through the next two or so yrs as we attempt to rebuild. Greatest problem for mine is the leadership. I don't rate Ponting as either a captain nor leader, and I reckon much of the disunity of the last 18 mths is a result of this. Gilchrist should have been given the role, but that's another story. At 34 and his team on the slide this will be Pontings last yr, he'll get his pants pulled down in SA, lose the Ashes and then play his farewell's at years end. But wait, it can only gets worse, with the ego manic white haired boy of NSW cricket as the pea for the future!! They're kidding, this rebuilding phase will be of both personal and leadership/unity, something Clarke knows nothing of. He's more obsessed with his ego and wouldn't know "team" was about, typified by the fact that he is despised but the majority of his team mates, and has been for the last couple of yrs (and carries an uncomplimentary nickname). Patchy road ahead imo with plenty of bumps.
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Feb-08, 09:41 AM
I don't mind Michael Clarke and also like Rick Ponting but gee our selectors really do need changing.

Hope Warner proves me wrong today, but he is a embarrassment to Aussie cricket :mad:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-08, 12:52 PM
Was anyone up with me this morning to see West Indies win the 1st test v England?
Windies won by an innings and 23 runs after dismissing the Poms for 51   :lol:   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Feb-08, 01:12 PM
What happened to the cricket on Ch 9?
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-08, 01:28 PM
What happened to the cricket on Ch 9?

Good question... is it on in the southern states?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Feb-08, 01:29 PM
Its on here on the Central Coast of NSW.
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Feb-08, 01:32 PM
We aren't getting it now till 2pm
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-08, 01:32 PM
Looks like someone forgot to flick the 'live' switch... we're getting what was on in NSW an hour ago, so obviously the cricket is going to be on an hour delayed up here  emthdown
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Feb-08, 01:34 PM
Its 2.34 now Gratlog.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-08, 01:38 PM
0.26 here   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Feb-08, 01:40 PM
We are on correct time here.

BT, it is better on the ABC radio anyway
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Feb-08, 01:49 PM
The word is that CH 9 are in big big trouble money wise and you can see why.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-08, 02:01 PM
Kerry O'Keefe came out with a cracker on Friday  Michael Clarkes toe

They might select Lara Bingle to replace him, it'll get 15,000 extra to the game and then says when she's setting the field, looks to mid wicket and says 'where the bloody hell are ya'?
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-08, 02:50 PM
Am on Aust 0/128 after 22

Am on Sth Oz v WA who are 9/120 after 37   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Feb-08, 03:02 PM
Shit I forgot that we were delayed up here and clicked on.  :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Fewy on 2009-Feb-08, 03:39 PM
Quote
Am on Aust 0/128 after 22
Love the early crow  :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-08, 03:42 PM
Love the early crow  :biggrin:

16 overs left and they've got a winning total already  ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Feb-08, 03:47 PM
You'd think they would be playing like a 20/20 at this stage.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Feb-08, 04:56 PM
Steve Bucknor is a  :censored: .
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-08, 05:29 PM
yep
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-08, 08:31 PM
Plenty matched on Aussies down to 1.01   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Peterf on 2009-Feb-09, 05:13 PM
Much improved Australian performance, but the Kiwis wouldn't lie down. Even with McCullum injured and Taylor cut off at the knees by a poor umpiring decision they made a real contest of the game.

The Aussies may be able to win the next two, but I wouldn't bet on it.

Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-09, 05:17 PM
I'm on the Aussies to win 3-2 @ $3
Will lay off for the last game after they win tomorrow   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Feb-09, 05:20 PM
They still need to tweak the team a bit but there getting closer to what is needed
Title: Cricket
Post by: Jeunes on 2009-Feb-10, 09:01 AM
What will happen to David Hussey and White if they don't do anything this game? The whole problem with Australia this summer in the tests and ODI's have been the middle order and lack of good bowlers. Hilfenhaus is over rated as he looks like he is the one, the opposition batsmen like the most. Bracken and Johnson need to fire too if we want to win. Luckily  NZ has less depth than us at the moment.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-10, 09:07 AM
Peter Siddle will come into the side today - if he can find his test form, that'll definitely help - only just coming back from injury though, had the one game (I think just the one?) for Vic last week.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Jeunes on 2009-Feb-10, 09:56 AM
Does anyone know when Australia was not the favourite at the start of a game? It must be years as they were still favs for all games in the series against SAF too.
Title: Cricket
Post by: twominutewarning on 2009-Feb-10, 10:02 AM
Bowled well too in that game,Siddle.Took 4 for and was swinging it.

Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-10, 08:36 PM
What really needs debating at this point in the season is just how much ( OR WHAT ) is a years supply of KFC ?

52 x $26 vouchers
Title: Cricket
Post by: grommy5238 on 2009-Feb-10, 08:48 PM
all LBWs should definitely go to hawkeye--then it'll be consistent and accepted by everyone--except maybe Federer
Title: Cricket
Post by: grommy5238 on 2009-Feb-10, 08:50 PM
catches too
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Feb-10, 09:11 PM
Authorized link
What really needs debating at this point in the season is just how much ( OR WHAT ) is a years supply of KFC ?


52 x $26 vouchers

Is that right ?

That would not feed me for a year.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2009-Feb-10, 09:29 PM
all LBWs should definitely go to hawkeye--then it'll be consistent and accepted by everyone--except maybe Federer

Don't agree grommy as Hawkeye basically has every ball hitting when you know there is serious doubt. It only predicts where the ball would go, not what it did like the tennis.

Hawkeye would be the greatest wicket taker ever if allowed  :thumbsd:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Peterf on 2009-Feb-11, 02:14 PM
I've no problem with Hawkeye taking wickets. Anything would be better than continuing the tradition that Australian umpires never give out Aussie batsmen lbw in vital matches.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-11, 02:55 PM
Plenty of out bats have been out LBW this summer when they weren't out.
One in recent memory was last nights survivor Callum Ferguson in game 3.
It evens itself out in the long run.
Besides, Ferguson being given not out last night didn't alter the result of the match, we already had it on toast.
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2009-Feb-11, 03:08 PM
Plenty of out bats have been out LBW this summer when they weren't out.
One in recent memory was last nights survivor Callum Ferguson in game 3.
It evens itself out in the long run.
Besides, Ferguson being given not out last night didn't alter the result of the match, we already had it on toast.

Still one of the all time shocked decisions though.  8-)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2009-Feb-11, 04:25 PM
It was an absolute clanger (hindsight is wonderful when we've replays) but you can reason with why the ump didn't give it considering the two noises.

While on umps, I've always been a fan of Steve Bucknor but two things this series have me puzzled and lead me to believe he has lost it :wacko:

Firstly the docking of the Aussies the other night of two runs for running on the pitch, was extremely harsh on Johnson as I don't reckon he could have got off the pitch any quicker than he did, not sure what he is expected to do. It a strange rule when you consider it is only ever applied to one team in the contest.

The second was the warning of the Kiwis for bouncing the ball before the keeper when returning from the outfield. We all know why teams do it and it's probably not in the spirit of the game but I've never know it to be against the laws of the game  :what: Very strange decision imho
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-11, 04:36 PM
Can't understand they'd want to bounce the ball, the idea is to keep one side as new as possible to achieve swing. Maybe Buknor backed the Kiwis   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2009-Feb-11, 04:48 PM
They don't really care about the swing in ODI OL, more to soften the ball and darken the colour so it's harder to see and comes on alot slower off the pitch.
Title: Cricket
Post by: coinswell on 2009-Feb-11, 05:18 PM
I reckon the kiwis in particular deserve a rap for donating their match fees from the Adelaide game to the bushfire cause.

Well done to them.  All class.   emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-11, 05:21 PM
I wonder how tax returns are prepared.
Would they include what they earnt in income, then show it as a donation in deductables?
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Feb-12, 07:59 PM
Anyone know if we are getting all the cricket in Brisbane tomorrow on TV?

My son would love to see it but we just cannot afford to go.

Hopefully CH 9 will do the right thing.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-12, 08:05 PM
9 covers all internationals involving Austrlaia, what planet are you on?
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Feb-12, 08:12 PM
Are you pissed already?

If it isn't a sell out they don't always televise the game in the city at which it is being played.

You don't know as much as you think you do you rude prick :mad:
Title: Cricket
Post by: manikato1 on 2009-Feb-12, 08:16 PM
Are you pissed already?

If it isn't a sell out they don't always televise the game in the city at which it is being played.

You don't know as much as you think you do you rude prick :mad:

They do in Melbourne at least, probably Sydney as well.  If you live in those two cities, you probably don't care what happens in Brisbane or Adelaide.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-12, 08:18 PM
Qld Roar play the home leg of their semi at Suncorp tomorrow night too... might be a few spare seats at that one I think :)

I'd be surprised if the cricket isn't a sellout gratlog - we should be right.

I thought we have been on a different planet to OL for some time, nice to have it confirmed ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-12, 08:19 PM
They do in Melbourne at least, probably Sydney as well.  If you live in those two cities, you probably don't care what happens in Brisbane or Adelaide.

Exactly   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Feb-12, 08:30 PM
Are you pissed already?

If it isn't a sell out they don't always televise the game in the city at which it is being played.

You don't know as much as you think you do you rude prick :mad:

that was changed a couple years ago grats. all games shown no matter what ticket sales are.
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Feb-12, 08:35 PM
Not true mate.  Cricket Australia were on the radio today saying it was up to Ch 9, then Ch 9 came on and said it was up to CA.

Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-12, 08:44 PM
I think they only changed it for Sydney and Melbourne because they didn't get enough sellouts and never got to see a full game ;)

Arakaan... Ch9 couldn't even make the effort to give us a live telecast of the game in Sydney last weekend.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-12, 08:59 PM
It looks as though it's on live in Brisbane from 1pm - 3.30pm only but the whole lot is available on HD

Here's a link to your tv guide tomorrow

http://ourguide.com.au/WebPages/QLD_Brisbane_20090213.html
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-12, 09:04 PM
Don't pay any attention to the tv guide OL, they don't usually make a decision until they know it's been sold out, often the day of the game. The TV guide also said we'd get the Sydney game live last weekend (as we've got every other game outside of Brisbane live this year), but someone must have stuffed up and forgot to flick the live switch or something because it didn't start until an hour later and we got the whole thing delayed.
Title: Cricket
Post by: monologue on 2009-Feb-12, 09:09 PM
Might end up being a shortened version of the game anyway if weather predictions are true.

50 mls of rain predicted.(so we'll probably get none)
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Feb-12, 09:11 PM
Heard Ponting say that they expected rain and would pick the team accordingly.
Title: Cricket
Post by: monologue on 2009-Feb-12, 09:16 PM
He'll be looking for players with a big "W" along side their names. :rolleyes:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Antitab# on 2009-Feb-13, 05:26 AM
Itys rained all night and still sprinling now and I'm about 15k from the Gabba. 
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-13, 06:22 AM
There is quite a lot of rain around and it doesn't seem to be moving too quickly... will be lucky to get any play. maybe it'll start clearing up about lunch time and they can get a late start or something?
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-13, 06:31 AM
Well by the time your coverage starts it might be in time for start of play   :lol:   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-13, 08:38 AM
Betfair has a market for whether the match will be completed or if it will be abandoned/no result... currently a bit of money there at 2.16 - 2.20 to say that no, there won't be a result... might be worth a little nibble.

Current radar map (rain is moving due south, quite slowly - looks like there is a bit more behind that lot too)... I'd be very surprised if they start on time, even allowing for our delayed coverage ;)

(http://www.bom.gov.au/radar/IDR663.gif?20090212223403)


Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-13, 10:46 AM
A bit of trivia from Cricinfo about today's game...

* The last time the sides were in Brisbane for the decider of a Chappell-Hadlee Series the match was washed out and the trophy was shared

Will history repeat itself... still a very good chance I reckon.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-13, 12:36 PM
The rain is intensifying, the updated forecast has gone from 'cloudy with some showers' at 5am today, to 'Rain periods, heavy at times' for both today and tomorrow at the 11:20am updated forecast .. you can see from the radar pic above that there is heaps on its way... with play scheduled to start in 45 minutes, it's pretty safe to say it won't - not for a couple of hours at the absolute outside, if at all.

Would have been nice to see some play, but I don't like the chances... you can still get 1.35 on betfair for no result, I might lay a bit back when it gets down to 1.01, lol
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-13, 02:53 PM
Looking like there could be a break in the weather on its way... will probably be raining for at least another hour - 6:15 brisbane time is the cutoff for play to start, there's some chance they might get to sneak in a 25 over game, although it wouldn't take much for another shower to come through and skittle things again - still, might be time to lay off some of that no result bet, plenty of action happening on that betfair market in the range of 1.13 - 1.18
Title: Cricket
Post by: jayjones1 on 2009-Feb-13, 04:29 PM
was so looking forward to this game dam(http://c08y1024qmyi129.imageshacknow.info/img/744/r09u0211hlxt/69.gif)(http://c08y1024qmyi129.imageshacknow.info/img/1808/r09u0211hlxt/69.gif)(http://c08y1024qmyi129.imageshacknow.info/img/2773/r09u0211hlxt/69.gif)

Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-13, 06:59 PM
Three times i've flicked over to sky racing and back to cricket to find an ad on and a wicket had fallen  :/
Title: Cricket
Post by: MagiC~* on 2009-Feb-13, 08:09 PM
Haddin seeing the ball like it was a basketball, love the shot he played when he stepped across the wicket and turned the bat around and popped it back over the wicket   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-13, 08:14 PM
Yeah those paddle shots are unreal.
Was quite entetaining stuff once Ferguson got out there with him.
Partnership 98 off 64
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-13, 08:15 PM
Don't know whether we'll get to see the Kiwi's bat... rain is just about on top of the ground again.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Feb-14, 12:49 AM
February 13, 2009

The celebrated baggy green has never looked so blue, writes Andrew Stevenson.

David Hookes, who famously quipped that baggy greens were always handed out with a player's first NSW cap to save on the extra ceremony, would be slogging sixes in his grave. This year they've handed out Australian honours to a player yet to earn his baggy blue and, with this week's elevation of Moises Henriques, 22, to the Twenty20 side, there are now more current Australian representatives in the state squad than there are spots in a cricket team.

No other state comes close. Nor can any past NSW squad - not the great sides of the 1950s and '60s, with Richie Benaud, Alan Davidson, Norm O'Neill, Neil Harvey, Brian Booth, Gordon Rorke, John Martin, or Mark Taylor's modern benchmark team of the mid-90s - match the current weight of representative players, although it is inflated by limited-overs cricket.

Counting 20-year-old opener Phillip Hughes as a certainty for the first Test against South Africa in Johannesburg later this month - and including Henriques, picked in a squad of 13 for the Twenty20 international against New Zealand at the SCG on Sunday - 14 Blues players have won national honours since the end of last summer.

Throw in Jason Krejza, who was forced to move to Tasmania when the door of opportunity slammed in his face in Sydney, and that makes 15.

In some cases, such as the opening Phils, Jaques and Hughes, they're fighting each other for a single spot - to partner NSW captain Simon Katich at the other end of the wicket. The fast-bowling ranks, when injured quicks Brett Lee and Stuart Clark return to edge out Doug Bollinger, are also congested, with Nathan Bracken ensconced in the limited-overs side.

Three times this summer Blues players on the fringe of the NSW camp have got the jump on rivals who were prime movers in their state teams. Left-handed belter David Warner, 22, jumped from the state one-day side into the national gear for Twenty20 and one-day duties and still is yet to play Sheffield Shield for NSW; Nathan Hauritz, 27, was set to carry the drinks for NSW when he was picked for the Australian Test team and now Henriques - overlooked for the past two Shield matches - has been pitchforked from the NSW Second XI into Australian colours.

Despite his trials with the Blues, chairman of selectors Andrew Hilditch has underlined Henriques's name for a spot in this year's World Twenty20.

Imagine if we had a selector from NSW, chuckles Test spinner Kerry O'Keeffe. "I'm sick to death of us having to play Sheffield Shield to get into the Australian team," he said. "Fair dinkum, sick to death that they make you represent NSW with distinction before you get an international cap, and finally we're short-circuiting all that rubbish - we just pick them from the second XI."

Cricket NSW chief executive David Gilbert feels no need to apologise for the selections nor for the string of solid NSW juniors forced to move interstate. Told his Australian numbers had hit 14, Gilbert had to draw breath, conceding the figure "pretty amazing".

NSW was harvesting the rewards of heavy investment to get children playing the game and to find and coach outstanding players, he argued.

"It's very satisfying because I know the money, the resources and the time and the effort that goes into this. It doesn't happen by accident," Gilbert said. "Phil Hughes has been in our program since he was 12 and Moises since he was about 14 and he played all the schoolboy tournaments, then under 17s and under 19s. David Warner is the same. These are satisfying times when you see people graduate."

With Australia struggling to retain their spot at the top of cricket's honour board perhaps the most pertinent question is: How good are they?

In the 1990s, Taylor's troops - including Mark and Steve Waugh, Michael Slater, Michael Bevan and Glenn McGrath - didn't just drive the Blues, they took Australia to the top. Gilbert is confident the current vintage match their efforts.

"I've felt the last 18 months that we've got a group of young players coming through our male program who are comparable to the very, very rich time in our history in the 1980s when the Waugh brothers, Mark Taylor and others emerged," he said, adding 18-year-old quick Josh Hazlewood, leg spinner Steve Smith, 19, and batsmen Usman Khawaja, 22, and Peter Forrest, 23, to the mix. "They're a very exciting group of young players, all coming through at the same time, and I think they are going to go all the way."

O'Keeffe is less sure. "I don't know whether some are there technically. I want to see more of them. I've seen lots of enthusiastic cricket but in terms of genuine technical quality, I remain unconvinced," he said, acknowledging most of what he has seen was short-form cricket.

Former national coach John Buchanan said the bottleneck in the national team had ended and opportunities were arising in state teams - with the Blues stealing a march on other states in promoting young players.

Queensland and Western Australia were now trying to catch up, Buchanan suggested, while Victoria had been "a little bit slow out of the blocks".

"Right across the board we're seeing this influx of new players, at a domestic level and a national level," he noted. "NSW have embarked on a youth policy over the last couple of years which means those players have probably had a little bit of a jump on the other states and the national selectors have seen a little bit more of them."

BAGGY BLUES
2008-09

14 Jaques, Katich, Clarke, Haddin, Clark, Lee, MacGill, Casson, Bracken, Hauritz, Bollinger, Warner, Hughes*, Henriques*.

1884-85

10 in five-Test series, including captain Billy Murdoch. (Numbers high as players boycotted second Test.)

2005-06

9 Bracken, Jaques, Lee, MacGill, McGrath, Clarke, Clark, Haddin, Katich.

1994-95

8 Taylor, Slater, S Waugh,

M Waugh, Bevan, Emery, McGrath, Robertson.

2000-01

8 Lee, MacGill, McGrath, Slater, Waugh, Waugh, Bevan, Bracken.

* Selected but yet to represent.

Source: Colin Clowes, honorary librarian, Cricket NSW
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-14, 07:09 AM
The amount of money being bet on the weather last night was amazing - when NZ started batting and the radar was filling up with rain, a 'no result' on Betfair was still trading between 1.70 - 1.80 and several thousand dollars was being traded on every refresh it seemed. When NZ played through that first reasonably heavy shower that hit, the price went up to around 2.20 and the flow of money slowed down... when the next shower hit and the umpires started to confer, the price dropped quite quickly.

Over the day about $900,000 was matched, spread fairly evenly between about 1.10 and 2.00 - was a really interesting market to watch.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-14, 07:39 AM
Watching betfair markets is better than watching the actual game sometimes.
The Portsmouth/Liverpool EPL game last w/e was a cracker, with both teams and the draw matched for heaps at 1.01.
Liverpool were down 2-1 with 5 minutes left and won 3-2
Title: Cricket
Post by: Peterf on 2009-Feb-14, 07:54 AM
Liverpool was 3-2 after how many overs?    :what:

Returning to the cricket, the Kiwis were robbed. Bloody Brisbane weather.....   :thumbsd:

Still, the series did have some real value for the NZ side. The emergence of both Elliott and Guptill are huge pluses for the future.

Nopt sure what it did for the Aussies, though. Ferguson, perhaps, but not much else.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-14, 08:01 AM
Nopt sure what it did for the Aussies, though. Ferguson, perhaps, but not much else.

Actually Pete, it did quite a lot - batted Haddin into sensational form and also got Mike Hussey out of his form slump... both of those guys are far better prepared to face SA now. David Hussey was starting to get some confidence too - a couple more games would have been nice for him.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Hamish Crayfish on 2009-Feb-14, 08:06 AM
C'mon burnt !
Glen McGrath would have batted himself into form against the Kiwis !
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-14, 08:13 AM
Exactly Hamish, the longer this series could have gone the better ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Hamish Crayfish on 2009-Feb-14, 08:27 AM
Congratulations to the innovative Queenslanders for hiring Elvis the fire bombing helicoptor in Brisbane last night. It was by all reports a sunny day in Brisbane, but the constant showering from Elvis' water buckets (especially at crucial times) appeared to those viewers in New Zealand that it was raining.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Magiciansmask on 2009-Feb-14, 08:31 AM
As a proud aussie, i would just like to thank mother nature for helping us retain the chappell-hadley trophy. we were goneski imo nd thank you again   :noteworthy:   :noteworthy:   :noteworthy:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Peterf on 2009-Feb-14, 09:05 AM
Actually Pete, it did quite a lot - batted Haddin into sensational form and also got Mike Hussey out of his form slump... both of those guys are far better prepared to face SA now. David Hussey was starting to get some confidence too - a couple more games would have been nice for him.

You're right, of course, BT. I was thinking more of the emergence of new blood than anything else.

I don't think the Aussies will have too many batting problems in SA, but, once again, the bowling is likely to struggle. I can't see how that attack can take twenty SA wickets in a test match.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-14, 09:09 AM
Agree completely Pete - we need Siddle to develop quite quickly and Johnson to find some consistency (not to mention pull a quality and consistent spinner out of somewhere) before we're going to be too competitive at test level against SA.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2009-Feb-14, 10:42 AM


Returning to the cricket, the Kiwis were robbed. Bloody Brisbane weather.....   :thumbsd:


Pete - to be honest I don't think anyone deserved to lose the series on a game like that last night.

It's been a good series and would have been a shame to see someone walk away with the series as that game as the decider considering the interuptions.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-14, 10:58 AM
But we did walk away with the series gintara - as the current custodians, Australia retain the trophy with a draw - the Kiwi's need to beat us to take it back over the ditch. :)
Title: Cricket
Post by: titans2007 on 2009-Feb-14, 11:35 AM
need anthor Allan Boarder to rebuild the team
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Feb-14, 11:38 AM
The teams alright titan

We lost to the numer one side in the world in tests and had a good tussle with the 3rd best one day team in the world.


Can't be #1 forever mate
Title: Cricket
Post by: Peterf on 2009-Feb-14, 01:12 PM
But we did walk away with the series gintara - as the current custodians, Australia retain the trophy with a draw - the Kiwi's need to beat us to take it back over the ditch. :)

Absolute rubbish. We Kiwis demand the trrophy be sawed in half so we can take our half home and plant kumara in it.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-20, 09:13 AM
Windies secure the great escape

West Indies' final pair of Fidel Edwards and Daren Powell blocked out the final 36 minutes of a magnificent Test match at the Antigua Recreation Ground, to secure the draw that maintained their 1-0 lead in the series, and revived the momentum that had been squandered in a troubled week both on and off the field. Chasing a nominal target of 503, West Indies battened down the hatches and clung on to the close on 370 for 9, with the light fading fast and 10 men piled around the bat as England's spinner, Graeme Swann, teased and probed for an opening that simply refused to materialise.

http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/wiveng2009/content/current/story/391484.html

Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-25, 09:02 AM
1st test against SA starts tonight... we couldn't beat them here, going to struggle over there you would think.

I'd be happy if we see some further improvement (especially in terms of consistency) with our bowlers.

Phil Hughes makes his debut, as will probably Marcus North - still some debate whether Bryce McGain will play or if incredibly the Aussie selectors will go from dumb to dumber and play TWO all-rounders in North and Andrew McDonald (the pitch is expected to favour swing bowling).

Just in case anyone thinks we have a chance here, how's this for a stat - Mitchell Johnson is our only bowler who has played more than four tests (he's got a massive 18 tests to his name)... should be fun :)
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Feb-25, 09:12 AM
I'm not writing us off
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-25, 09:22 AM
I've got to admit, it is rather strange seeing the Aussies at $4.40 before a match starts :)
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-25, 09:40 AM
I've got to admit, it is rather strange seeing the Aussies at $4.40 before a match starts :)

I've seen the Aussies longer before a match starts.
Just go back to the 80's v West Indies   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-25, 09:58 AM
I've seen the Aussies longer before a match starts.
Just go back to the 80's v West Indies   :lol:

I was only just getting my feet wet betting on horses back then OL... I don't think I ever saw odds offered for a sporting event back then - certainly nothing from the TAB, the Internet wasn't around and I didn't have an SP bookie :)
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-25, 09:59 AM
I was only just getting my feet wet betting on horses back then OL... I don't think I ever saw odds offered for a sporting event back then - certainly nothing from the TAB, the Internet wasn't around and I didn't have an SP bookie :)

ahhhh the good ole days BT  8-)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2009-Feb-25, 10:07 AM
Why are we even considering Andrew McDonald  :what:

I can understand having an allrounder in the side if they are a Symonds or even Watson as both can arguably hold their spot with the bat and are useful with the ball, Both have the ability to turn a match on their own, so why do we flirt with someone who can do neither  :what: :what:

Surely without the availability of the 2 mentioned above  you just pick your best 6 bats, Haddin at 7 and the best 4 bowlers for the conditions.

Gees, even James Hopes should be above him imho.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-25, 10:09 AM
I think North is quietly tipped to get the nod
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-25, 10:21 AM
I think North is quietly tipped to get the nod

If you read my earlier post OL, you'll see they are thinking of playing both North and McDonald and leaving McGain out...
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2009-Feb-25, 10:44 AM
You sure it doesn't start tomorrow night?
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-25, 10:48 AM
You sure it doesn't start tomorrow night?

yeah starts Thursday 26th around 6.30pm
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-25, 10:50 AM
You're right Calgary it does... on the radio this morning they said tonight  :shy:

The Aussies probably need to start a day early anyway   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Feb-25, 03:58 PM
 8-) Glad somebody cleared that up.    :wacko:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Peterf on 2009-Feb-26, 06:31 AM
The Kiwis give the Indians a spanking in the first of two 20/20s. Sehwag hit the first three balls he received for six, but was soon out and the rest of the batting was pretty woeful.

Highlight of the game was an eccentric umpiring display by Evan Watkin, who gave three lbw decisions and didn't get any of them right.

Title: Cricket
Post by: Jeunes on 2009-Feb-26, 07:42 AM
Younis did not get the highest ever score last night too. other than the SAF v Aus test match, there is also the Windies v England match starting tomorrow. Article from tele.

Younus makes 313 as match drawnArticle from: Font size: Decrease Increase Email article: Email Print article: Print Submit comment: Submit comment February 25, 2009 11:39pm

THE first Test between Pakistan and Sri Lanka ended in a draw after some late excitement when the tourists lost quick wickets briefly raising hopes of an unlikely result.

The tourists averted defeat after losing five wickets for just 120 runs, finishing the match with the score of 5-144 in their second innings.

Pakistan captain Younus Khan failed to create history as he fell for 313, 24 runs short of Pakistan's highest Test score of 334 held by Hanif Mohammad, made against the West Indies at Barbados in 1958.

Younus had also set his sights on West Indian Brian Lara's highest Test score of 400. Lara achieved the record against England in Antigua in 2004.

Pakistan achieved their highest Test total of 765-6 declared in reply to Sri Lanka's first innings score of 644-7 declared.

The second and final Test starts in Lahore on March 1.

Brief Scores: Sri Lanka 644-7 decl and 144-5 ; Pakistan 765-6
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-26, 08:25 AM
Those decks cost bowlers their careers.  emthdown
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-26, 08:52 AM
Looks like the selectors have made one sensible decision at least - rather than include two all-rounders, it looks like they are going to opt for an extra fast bowler, which given the weakness and lack of experience in the attack definitely makes more sense (although they are still morons for leaving Bracken at home!).

It's been 3 years since Australia was last in SA... and they must have been long, long years because only 3 members of this current squad survive from that tour :(

Kallis should become the first SA batsman to reach 10,000 test runs, he only needs 12 more to hit that mark.

...and apparently there is a new umpire referral system being trialled in this series, so that could be interesting - not entirely sure how that works?

Australia (likely) 1 Phillip Hughes, 2 Simon Katich, 3 Ricky Ponting (capt), 4 Michael Hussey, 5 Michael Clarke, 6 Marcus North, 7 Brad Haddin (wk), 8 Mitchell Johnson, 9 Peter Siddle, 10 Doug Bollinger, 11 Ben Hilfenhaus, 12 Andrew McDonald.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-26, 08:56 AM
Smith and Ponting get their heads around referrals (http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/rsavaus2009/content/story/392135.html)
Brydon Coverdale in Johannesburg
February 25, 2009

The referral system will be used in South Africa for the first time © Getty Images
 
Australia and South Africa will be given their first taste of the referral system at the Wanderers on Thursday and both captains said they hoped it would at least eliminate the most obvious umpiring errors. Each team has only two incorrect referrals per innings and Graeme Smith said he was resigned to the fact that the reviews could potentially be used up early.

"I'm sure guys are going to make mistakes," Smith said. "It's a new system, you've just got to trust the guys that are out there. Batters have generally got a good feel of what's going on.

"More than anything else it's more there to get the really bad decision out of the game. That's never a bad thing. It will be interesting to see. I think both teams will probably make one or two mistakes but it's more a nice option to have than anything else."

The captains who have already been part of the trials have given the system mixed reviews. Ricky Ponting is still undecided on whether referrals are good for the game but like Smith he was hopeful that it could remove the poorest calls.

"The thing we've got to remember with it is there are still going to be incorrect decisions made," Ponting said. "It's not something that's going to solve every incorrect decision that an umpire might make through the course of the game. But hopefully it will take out the really obvious bad decisions that are being made which are probably the most frustrating ones for players as well."

One man who was on the wrong end of a series of bad calls during the Australian summer was Michael Hussey, who was given caught off his helmet at the MCG and caught off his pad at the Gabba. Ponting said Hussey had already expressed his interest in the system.

"Mike Hussey joked that he would question the decision every time he was given out," Ponting said. "I had to remind him that he bats at No. 4 and the opportunities to refer anything would be used up by then. You have to trust that your players will do the right thing."

The referral system was first trialled internationally on India's tour of Sri Lanka in July-August last year and was also tried out in the two-Test series between New Zealand and West Indies in December. A modification was introduced for the current series between West Indies and England, with the number of referrals per team in each innings reduced from three to two.

The three officials in charge of the South Africa-Australia series are Steve Bucknor, Billy Bowden and Asad Rauf. Like the players, none of the umpires have been part of the previous trials.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-26, 09:01 AM
It's been 3 years since Australia was last in SA... and they must have been long, long years because only 3 members of this current squad survive from that tour :(


Retirements and injury are the main contributors.
Hayden, Langer, Gilchrist, McGrath, Warne, Lee. That's 6 I can think of that probably went 3 years back
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-26, 09:04 AM
1st Test v SA - March 2006 (http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/match/238201.html)
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-26, 11:00 AM
Of that 11, 5 are retired, 3 are injured. The 2 still there are Ponting and Hussey.
Only Symonds hasn't held his spot.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-26, 11:03 AM
How's this?
India v NZ 20/20
Balls bowled: 233
Runs scored: 328
Sixes: 24 = 144 runs

Only 184 runs off the other 209 balls.
Pretty piss poor effort that
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-26, 11:10 AM
Of that 11, 5 are retired, 3 are injured. The 2 still there are Ponting and Hussey.
Only Symonds hasn't held his spot.

Yeah - that's a heck of a lot of experience wiped off the roster in a very short time... it's going to take a few years at least before we recover.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-26, 11:13 AM
Yeah of course BT, but what I was pointing out is that you were saying only 3 survived, making it sound like the others have been dropped.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-26, 11:18 AM
That wasn't my intention OL... was pointing out how inexperienced this team is - especially the bowlers. The Cricinfo site said there were 3 from that tour in this team, but you're right, only two actually played.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-26, 09:35 PM
Welcome to test cricket, Phil Hughes   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-26, 10:04 PM
Looks like heaps of rain imminent, the Draw is $1.65 on Betfair
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Feb-26, 10:22 PM
Appeal Ricky appeal there is no way that bowled you  :censored:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Jeunes on 2009-Feb-27, 09:20 AM
Not a bad effort by Aust after the collapse early on. Turning point was when Smith dropped a sitter off Ponting when Ricky was 40. Even Phil Tufnell could have caught that. Australia will also be dissapointed with the 5 wickets lost as a few of them were to bad shots / judgement. They lost 22 overs yesterday because of bad light so it was a quickish scoring rate for a test match.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Magiciansmask on 2009-Feb-27, 09:22 AM
Not a bad effort by Aust after the collapse early on. Turning point was when Smith dropped a sitter off Ponting when Ricky was 40. Even Phil Tufnell could have caught that. Australia will also be dissapointed with the 5 wickets lost as a few of them were to bad shots / judgement. They lost 22 overs yesterday because of bad light so it was a quickish scoring rate for a test match.


now come on... it wasnt gift wrapped  :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Magiciansmask on 2009-Feb-27, 09:34 AM
[ Invalid YouTube link ]


why would  phil tufnell worry about catching when he can bowl like this    :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-27, 09:41 AM
  :lol:   :lol:   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Jeunes on 2009-Feb-27, 11:13 AM

now come on... it wasnt gift wrapped  :lol:

But it was pretty close to a dolly though. If you were a first slip, you would have dreams of catches like that.

That Tufnell video is a classic.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-27, 11:17 AM
What was the bigger laugh, Smith dropping Ponting or Ponting being bowled?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Jeunes on 2009-Feb-27, 12:00 PM
Ponting's face was the best moment of the test so far other than the screamer from Mckenzie.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-27, 07:34 PM
I wouldn't mind betting Andrew McDonald hasn't got much more time in the baggy green.
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Feb-27, 08:36 PM
One of the most amazing facts about about Australian criket history, in my opinion, is that the first bloke to ever face a ball in a test match, Charles Bannerman, is still the highest scorer by a player playing his first test.

Could North spoil this amazing fact?
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-27, 08:47 PM
To save me looking it up, how many?
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Feb-27, 08:48 PM
165
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Feb-27, 08:51 PM
You should know that, if you know anything about cricket.

Go look it up, if you need to.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-27, 08:53 PM
You should know that, if you know anything about cricket.

Go look it up, if you need to.

(http://quietscheentchen.redsplash.de/blog/uploads/ :censored: .jpg)
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Feb-27, 08:54 PM
I death-rode Wessels as he approached it.

I'll do the same to North once he, hopefully, gets close.
Title: Cricket
Post by: coinswell on 2009-Feb-27, 08:55 PM
Wayne Phillips also went close from memory.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Feb-27, 08:59 PM
I wouldn't mind betting Andrew McDonald hasn't got much more time in the baggy green.


North has paid his dues and hopefully they'll dump McDonald.

Worst shot I've seen for a long time by Hughes as well, he was shitting himself in the big time :sad:
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Feb-27, 09:04 PM
The only wrong thing that Hughes did was to turn his wrists.

He's the real deal, this bloke.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Feb-27, 09:08 PM
The only wrong thing that Hughes did was to turn his wrists.

He's the real deal, this bloke.

Hope you're right. Apart from the wrist thing you could also say the shot wasn't on. It was a wide almost and simply should not have been played 3rd ball first morning of a new series, especially by some raw kid
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Feb-27, 09:13 PM
You're right, he shouldn't have played it.

But, given that he did, had he not tried to play it down, it'd have been four and then....... who knows.......
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-27, 09:15 PM
At least he knows he has at least one more opportunity....maybe
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Feb-27, 09:21 PM
I reckon he committed to the shot, and then half way throught thought "hang on, this is five day cricket. I better turn my wrists on it"........and the rest is history.

Then you have silly  :censored: ers, brought up on take-a-away cricket, say..........."Well, maybe he doesn't have what it takes"

How many did Bradman score in his first innings?
 
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-27, 09:25 PM
How many did Bradman score in his first innings?
 

look it up yaself ya lazy bastard   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Feb-27, 09:28 PM
I don't think he thought about it at all

The poor kids heart was racing and the adrenalin was gushing. It looked like a real nervous flash. Totally overawed by the occasion.

He'll bounce back I'm sure


As sure as the Bunnies winning tomorrow night :)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Magiciansmask on 2009-Feb-27, 09:31 PM
Give the poor kid a break. Scores a duck in first try(wont be his last) nd should be given time to prove himself. Was dismissed by arguably the greatest bowler in the world at this time as well.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Feb-27, 09:33 PM
Give him a break?????


I did, I gave him all the excuses and then said he'll bounce back :wacko:
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Feb-27, 09:35 PM
Old Arsey

It was a rhetorical question.

Anyone who knows anything about cricket knows the answer, right?
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-27, 10:01 PM
Right, Sir!
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-27, 10:20 PM
Congratulations Marcus North on becoming the 18th Australian to score a Test Century on debut   emthup

(http://www.news.com.au/common/imagedata/0,,6499155,00.jpg)
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-27, 11:08 PM
5 bats got over 50
6 bats got less than 10

Total: 466
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Feb-27, 11:29 PM
Aussie Aussie Aussie yoing yong yang
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Feb-27, 11:33 PM
This UL be over by stumps.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Feb-28, 12:40 AM
goooooone
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Feb-28, 06:24 AM
Congratulations Marcus North on becoming the 18th Australian to score a Test Century on debut   emthup

Bit of a moot point - but didn't he debut last week against South Africa A?

Ok... it wasn't a Test, but it was a debut for Australia :)

Edit: OK, I've had my coffee now... before you all correct me, of course this is his test debut.

Hopefully now the selectors will consider Johnson an 'all-rounder' and stop this silly stuff about needing one in the side - although North looks to have cemented his spot as a batsman for a while, hopefully he can fill the spinner 'role' adequately too and another problem will be solved... 12 hours before the game we were told the selectors were going to go for the extra pace bowler instead of McDonald and then they go and pull a swifty before play starts and remind us all of how stupid they are... at least this will make their job a bit easier for them, although that still doesn't guarantee a sensible decision will be made.

Good start by the Aussie bowlers, let's see how they back it up tonight - this is where they've gone missing in recent matches, put in a good day and then not follow it up with another one the next, this is where we need some consistency, fingers crossed.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Feb-28, 07:13 AM
What a great start

can't wait to see the replay of the 3 wickets.
The boks were moving the ball all innings so I hope we did.

Poor Mitch, fancy getting so close, it must be heartbreaking
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Feb-28, 07:54 PM
I thought South Africa had already used their 2 referals ?

One in the field and than Mckenzies ?
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-28, 08:07 PM
2 each innings
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Feb-28, 08:20 PM
Will Australia enforse the follow on ?

I think they should.  8-)
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-28, 08:39 PM
Would it be safe to say Mitch Johnson is going to win MOM honours.
North a close 2nd
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Feb-28, 08:56 PM
I'd give it at this stage to Haddin his Keeping has been first class, he has been the highlight of this match so far.   emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-28, 10:55 PM
I reckon Ponting should enforce the follow-on, because in my opinion he hasn't got a clue when to declare when setting a target.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Feb-28, 10:57 PM
  :lol:

I think in hindsite he made the right choice.

If they bat till midway through the middle session tomorrow, they should lead by 450 runs. Thats more than enough.

How many times did i think that during our summer ?
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Feb-28, 10:59 PM
They'd only need a bit more than 50 overs to run that down   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Mar-01, 06:26 AM
An 'average' day with the bat produces about 300 runs - so if you bat for 4 and a bit sessions, you'd expect to go pretty close to 450 runs... Australia would want to bat up to the end of the middle session tomorrow with a lead over 450 before they declare I would think.

...but I'm still not sold on this tactic of not enforcing the follow on, get stuck into 'em again while their batsman are still rattled - if time enters the equation, at least you'll be able to step up and get a quick fire 100 runs in the last 15 overs if you need that to win... unless the wicket is deteriorating really badly, take time out of the equation.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Mar-01, 08:12 AM
Would I be far off the mark if I say the commentary is rather boring?
Title: Cricket
Post by: manikato1 on 2009-Mar-01, 08:18 AM
...but I'm still not sold on this tactic of not enforcing the follow on, get stuck into 'em again while their batsman are still rattled - if time enters the equation, at least you'll be able to step up and get a quick fire 100 runs in the last 15 overs if you need that to win... unless the wicket is deteriorating really badly, take time out of the equation.

BT, 

I am pretty sure the follow on was brought in to allow teams to win games they had dominated but didn't have enough time left to win without giving the opposition a chance(I.e. declare their second innings leaving the opposition enough time to win).  To go with that, I think that is the only time you should use the follow on, as I think that often enforcing the follow on is the best chance to lose the match.  Bat again, an you will mostly reach a stage where you can't lose.  But then, I would be a fairly conservative captain.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Mar-01, 08:22 AM
BT, 

I am pretty sure the follow on was brought in to allow teams to win games they had dominated but didn't have enough time left to win without giving the opposition a chance(I.e. declare their second innings leaving the opposition enough time to win).  To go with that, I think that is the only time you should use the follow on, as I think that often enforcing the follow on is the best chance to lose the match.   Bat again, an you will mostly reach a stage where you can't lose.  But then, I would be a fairly conservative captain.

Two teams in the history of test cricket have lost after asking the opposing side to follow on  :nowink:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Mar-01, 05:57 PM
Backed Punter to make 50   emthup

And backed SA to win @ $22 It's worth $10 to watch a run-chase
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Mar-01, 06:04 PM
Well fielding sides have been whinging for years about caught behinds not being given out, and now they have the referral, they don't use it   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:
Hughes out twice and still at the crease and SA still have their alloted 2 referrals in the bank  8-)
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Mar-01, 06:59 PM
And backed SA to win @ $22 It's worth $10 to watch a run-chase

looking a chance with this collapse.   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Mar-01, 07:24 PM
How the  :censored: did he catch that.

De Villiers really is remarkable in the slips/gully.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Mar-01, 07:27 PM
Aussies were 1/95 with Punter on 24, I got up and had a piss and jumped in me car to go to Woolies, tuned into 702 and both Ponting and Hussey gone, back in the car after Woolies and Clarke and North both gone.
Got a feed and Hughes gone.
The onlt 2 'wickets' i've seen live in this innings so far, are both of Hughes' not outs
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Mar-01, 07:50 PM
I wish I had a few hundred on at $22 then i'd lay off and have a nice green screen.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Mar-01, 08:15 PM
How come Bucknor hasn't warned Haddin for running on the pitch?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Puntermatt on 2009-Mar-01, 08:56 PM
I'd like to see supporters of the follow on bowl 60-70 overs of fast bowling over 2.5 days and maybe they'd have a different opinion on the required tactivs
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Mar-01, 09:22 PM
It never ceases to amaze me that tail enders slog hit in the air but seldom to a fieldsman, yet higher order bats hit it in the middle straight down fieldsmans throats.  :/

And this is the pair of bunnies that couldn't stay at the wicket to give Mitch Johnson his century  :/
Title: Cricket
Post by: el zoro on 2009-Mar-02, 12:49 AM
For  :censored: sake
Sth Africa into $4 to win the test. Chasing a mammoth total 454 but cruising at 1/120. Memories of the Aust Test series must be haunting them.   
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Mar-02, 12:59 AM
Don't panic EZ, i'm on em @ $22, they'll fold up   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Mar-02, 02:08 AM
Gee I plan things well, tomorrow going to the other halfs place and staying the night, and of course we all know she doesn't have pay TV  :mad: :mad: :mad:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Jeunes on 2009-Mar-02, 07:52 AM
Do the aussies have the firepowere to bowl out the South Africans. The key is Kallis. He is due for a really big one.I wonder how many times Hussey has to fail before he gets the heave ho.

The only good things to come out of this test is that Hughes and North could be long term players in the aussie side in front of Symonds, Watson, McDonald and co.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Mar-02, 07:57 AM
Hughes was woeful Juenes.
Looked totally out of his depth in both innings.

In his 2nd dig he was dropped twice and out twice, but not given. :sweat:

Besides that he simply looked crap
Title: Cricket
Post by: Jeunes on 2009-Mar-02, 08:43 AM
That might be true Wily but at least he scored some runs. It is hard to jump from Sheffield Shield to Test cricket so give him a chance. With jacques yet to score decent runs, Hughes is the only viable option.

I listed a below article from SMH.

Cricket was born in Belgium, says Australian researcher
Email Printer friendly version Normal font Large font March 2, 2009


CRICKET is the quintessentially English pastime - but researchers have found evidence that suggests it is a foreign import.

Experts believe the game was introduced by northern Europeans who settled in England from the 14th century. It may even have been resisted by the local population at first.

And to add insult to England's injury, the evidence of foreign origins was discovered by an academic from Australia.

The claim challenges the traditional theory that the sport evolved from children's games played in England since Anglo-Saxon times.

Paul Campbell, of the Australian National University in Canberra, uncovered a reference to the sport in a 1533 poem, attributed to John Skelton, a popular poet and playwright of the day, in which he links it to immigrants from Flanders, in modern day Belgium, France and the Netherlands.

In The Image Of Ipocrisie Skelton also appears to rail against the Flemish weavers who settled in southern and eastern England from the 14th century, labelling them dismissively as "kings of crekettes".

In what appears to be a call for the weavers to be driven out of England, Skelton writes: "O lorde of Ipocrites/Nowe shut vpp your wickettes/And clape to your clickettes!/A! Farewell, kings of crekettes!"

The poem is the earliest known reference to the sport and adds weight to claims that the weavers brought the game with them and played it on fields close to where they tended their sheep, using shepherd's crooks - or curved sticks - as bats to strike a ball.

It was uncovered by Mr Campbell in a search of historical archives for variations of the early ways in which the word cricket was spelt.

Dr Heiner Gillmeister, of the department of English at the University of Bonn, suggests the term cricket has its roots in the Flemish phrase "met de krik ketsen", or "to chase with a curved stick".

Dr Gillmeister said: "There is something quite ironic about a German and an Australian making discoveries about what is considered to be such an English game, and in reality that game being a foreign import."

Telegraph, London
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Mar-02, 08:53 AM
I'd like to see supporters of the follow on bowl 60-70 overs of fast bowling over 2.5 days and maybe they'd have a different opinion on the required tactivs

Why PM? They're professional athletes - and with five bowlers there are plenty of breaks... teams used to do it all the time (just about without fail) until the Aussies got batted out of a game by India on a flat wicket in the sub-continent... If you're down a bowler or something, then there might be a case for it - but I think it's even more important when you have an inexperienced bowling lineup, give them all the time they need to take the wickets  and your batsman can plan the win from there.

Instead we had a batting collapse and the bowlers are now the ones under pressure to be the ones to win the game.

If bowlers like Merv Hughes, Ian Botham etc. can successfully bowl when forcing a follow-on, I don't see why this current crop have to be wrapped in cotton wool and given a mandatory 6-hour ice-bath break  :thumbsd:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Antitab# on 2009-Mar-02, 09:10 AM
BT has summed it up.

Fast bowlers of yesteryear on a diet of stubbies and smokes could successfully enforse the follow on and bowl for two days straight . surely the highly pampered athletes of today can do likewisw. 

Also the old bowlers had to field all day and werent on and off the field for a shower and a massage between every spell , didnt have drinks at fine leg between every over and use to bowl 100 overs a ay and not the 90 thay cant fit in a day now.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Jeunes on 2009-Mar-02, 10:07 AM
Many countries are gunshy after what happened to Australia in India when Laxman and Dravid turned the test on it's head.  Making a team follow on was a given in most matches before that game. I think now most sides now want to ensure they don't lose by building up a huge target in excess of 400 runs. Make no mistake about it if the aussies wern't bowled out they would have batted long enough to ensure the boks would have been chasing close to 500.

The fast bowlers these days take far too much time to deliver an over. In some cases it is 6-7 mins per over. There is no short run up as some bowlers used to do. All this does is help the batsmen as the pace starts to drop off after the first few balls. Shaun Tait is a classic example of this.   
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2009-Mar-02, 10:34 AM
Hughes was woeful Juenes.
Looked totally out of his depth in both innings.

In his 2nd dig he was dropped twice and out twice, but not given. :sweat:

Besides that he simply looked crap

I might be wrong but I think he has a history of looking crap but just scoring runs. You wouldn't say Shiv Chanderpaul has a classic technique but he has been impossible to get out for about 3 years.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Magiciansmask on 2009-Mar-02, 11:09 AM
Give the kid a break.... he is not an elegant batsman by any means but will make it. Greg Chappell (i think it was him)once said that he would drive to lords to watch Mark Waugh bat... but if Steve Waugh was batting in his background he would close the curtains.
You dont have to be elegant to be a good or even great batsman.

He is only 20 in his first test match facing,arguably, the best bowler in the world 1st up.
Title: Cricket
Post by: manikato1 on 2009-Mar-02, 11:34 AM
Why PM? They're professional athletes - and with five bowlers there are plenty of breaks... teams used to do it all the time (just about without fail) until the Aussies got batted out of a game by India on a flat wicket in the sub-continent... If you're down a bowler or something, then there might be a case for it - but I think it's even more important when you have an inexperienced bowling lineup, give them all the time they need to take the wickets  and your batsman can plan the win from there.

Instead we had a batting collapse and the bowlers are now the ones under pressure to be the ones to win the game.

If bowlers like Merv Hughes, Ian Botham etc. can successfully bowl when forcing a follow-on, I don't see why this current crop have to be wrapped in cotton wool and given a mandatory 6-hour ice-bath break  :thumbsd:

I think there are two other points BT.

1. If you take test cricket from before the mid 90's, you would mostly be enforcing the follow on sometime between lunch and tea on day 4.  In that case, you must enforce the follow on, as to bat again gives the opposition too much time to win the match.  With Australia in particular, the follow on is often being considered late on day 3, where I tend to think unless you have a lead of 300+ then you should bat again.

2. There were often a lot more time between tests in those days, and in Australia at least, often One Dayers as well.  Now, teams tend to have back to back to back tests, which puts more pressure on the bowlers than just bowling for three days straight.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Mar-02, 12:46 PM
Don't worry everyone, i'm telling you all Australia WILL win

I'm on SA @ $22

Simple!
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Mar-02, 01:43 PM
I think there are two other points BT.

1. If you take test cricket from before the mid 90's, you would mostly be enforcing the follow on sometime between lunch and tea on day 4.  In that case, you must enforce the follow on, as to bat again gives the opposition too much time to win the match.  With Australia in particular, the follow on is often being considered late on day 3, where I tend to think unless you have a lead of 300+ then you should bat again.

Sorry, you lost me there - I don't think it was much different back then at all. Here's a link to all Australian test results:

http://stats.cricinfo.com/australia/engine/records/team/match_results_year.html?class=1;id=2;type=team

I've had a look through from about 1988 - 1994 and have found a couple of games where the follow on was done early day 4 (where the opposition was 9 down at the end of day 3), but the vast majority of games that enforced the follow on happened during day 3.

Some of those games did have a rest day after day 3 though - maybe that was enough to recharge big Merv :)
Title: Cricket
Post by: el zoro on 2009-Mar-02, 02:06 PM
I find it ironic that 2 guys are debuting, one 29yo & one 20yo. Why they let some players reach late 20's before a call up is weird as half of their batting life is gone. The positive is the player has vast experience & has that as a launchpad for handling the rise to test cricket BUT then they throw a young inexperienced 20yo to the wolves. Seems like little logic being used by selectors. Hughes has looked awful but I don't blame him for it, the selectors have thrown a raw kid in the deep end & should give themselves an uppercut! :wacko: Think he needs a few seasons of Shield Cricket to get some experience & then come back at 23/24.     
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Mar-02, 02:27 PM
Good to see Wily won't let go.

Of course Wily was singing a different tune when Hayden was given a few lives in Sydney and still couldn't get a decent amount of runs.  ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Jeunes on 2009-Mar-02, 02:34 PM
I find it ironic that 2 guys are debuting, one 29yo & one 20yo. Why they let some players reach late 20's before a call up is weird as half of their batting life is gone. The positive is the player has vast experience & has that as a launchpad for handling the rise to test cricket BUT then they throw a young inexperienced 20yo to the wolves. Seems like little logic being used by selectors. Hughes has looked awful but I don't blame him for it, the selectors have thrown a raw kid in the deep end & should give themselves an uppercut! :wacko: Think he needs a few seasons of Shield Cricket to get some experience & then come back at 23/24.     

I disagree with you el zorro. I think the aussie team in the past have hung on to past glory with old team mates instead of going on form. If you look at the current SAF team, there are blokes who made their debuts almost at the same age as Hughes in Kallis, Smith, De Villiers, Nitini etc while the indian team had a few who made their debut when they were young including Tendulkar at 18 while the Lankans had players like Jayawardene, Sangakarra, Murali who made their debuts in the early 20s too. Yes, there are some players who have never recovered from early failures or pressure but at least they get a taste and if they are good enough they come back.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Mar-02, 02:42 PM
Fair enough to throw youngsters in, but let them develop even if they fail early on.
Dumping them after a test or 2 isn't the solution, all they'll do is pick new ones who may suffer the same fate.
If a player is selected in the first place he obviously has the ability, all they're doing is putting pressure on the next bunch who think they have to perform immediately or they'll get the chop.
Perserverance is a must imo
Title: Cricket
Post by: el zoro on 2009-Mar-02, 02:53 PM
They have always said it's harder to get out of the Australian team than to get into it. Reason being is that they do hold onto players for an extended period. Australia selectors rarely have gone on current form. They stick with players through their slumps & most come out of it. Overall Aust has kept players as we were at top of the tree. We're definitely going through a rebuilding phase, still have some class players & a few emerging. It would be interesting if anyone can find the stats for Aust players age on debuts over the last 30 years.    

Sth Africa have been a dud team for most of the last 15 years & only come good again in the last few years. Mainly with a mix of experience & emerging talent.  
  
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Mar-02, 03:43 PM
Good to see Wily won't let go.

Of course Wily was singing a different tune when Hayden was given a few lives in Sydney and still couldn't get a decent amount of runs.  ;)


Glad my point wasn't lost on you.

Whats good for one is good for the other. You harped on about Hayden being lucky with a LBW call but now you're not prepared to knock a bloke who gets 4 chances in a knock.

A tad hypocritical, mate :o
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Mar-02, 03:52 PM
Leave Phil alone, he's a speed blitz blue   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Mar-02, 03:54 PM
Fair enough to throw youngsters in, but let them develop even if they fail early on.


Why n ot let them develope down the order as well.

I still believe it was madness to throw the kid in against ,possibly, the best team in the world.

The likes of Jone, Blewett were blooded down the order. No reason That Huges could not have batted at 6 or 7 and developed his game
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Mar-02, 04:00 PM

Glad my point wasn't lost on you.

Whats good for one is good for the other. You harped on about Hayden being lucky with a LBW call but now you're not prepared to knock a bloke who gets 4 chances in a knock.

A tad hypocritical, mate :o

good to see you completely missed the point. At least Hughes made 75 when given the chances.

What did Hayden get. 2 lives and still made nothing.   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2009-Mar-02, 04:04 PM
Fair enough to throw youngsters in, but let them develop even if they fail early on.
Dumping them after a test or 2 isn't the solution, all they'll do is pick new ones who may suffer the same fate.
If a player is selected in the first place he obviously has the ability, all they're doing is putting pressure on the next bunch who think they have to perform immediately or they'll get the chop.
Perserverance is a must imo

Andrew McDonald  :what:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Mar-02, 04:05 PM
The only weakness i can see with Phillip Hughes is, he is left handed.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Mar-02, 04:05 PM
Andrew McDonald  :what:

It's different when you have incriminating photos of one of the selectors Gintara   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Mar-02, 04:06 PM
Andrew McDonald  is an outstanding prospect, but he maybe a little overawed by the whole test arena.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Mar-02, 04:07 PM
good to see you completely missed the point. At least Hughes made 75 when given the chances.

What did Hayden get. 2 lives and still made nothing.   :lol:

I think it was 39 actually so 4 chances would have seen him score 78  :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Mar-02, 04:13 PM
nah he was getting tired in his old age. 2 more lives he still wouldn't have made 50.   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Mar-02, 04:53 PM
We'll never  know but I'll be tuned into the IPl to see him, hopefully,  make a fool of those who shunted him
Title: Cricket
Post by: stuey102 on 2009-Mar-02, 04:55 PM
Hows his performance in a 20/20 tournament going to prove anything with regards to how he would have gone in Test cricket.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Mar-02, 05:08 PM
Zackly

Anyway, he didn't get shunted, he made the call to retire
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Mar-02, 05:12 PM
Hows his performance in a 20/20 tournament going to prove anything with regards to how he would have gone in Test cricket.

Well, if he bats badly and doesn't score it'll show he's past it, pretty bloody simple I would have thought.

Rest assured stuey, blokes past it or out of form won't score runs no matter what form of cricket it is
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Mar-02, 10:07 PM
Gotta say watching Peter Siddle bowl has been a pleasure tonight.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Mar-02, 10:33 PM
Please keep playing with a horizontal bat MORNE please.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Mar-03, 06:54 AM
Well done boys 8-) 8-) 8-) 8-)

They all bowled well, even McDonald
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Mar-03, 07:06 AM

Anyone writing off this team after this summer has rocks in their head.

We'll be winning over there next month  emthup



 8-)
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Mar-03, 07:10 AM
Do the brains trust of the Aussie team set their fields via formula or CAN YOU PLEASE OPEN YOUR  :censored: ING EYES :mad:

Credit where it's due.

It's only taken our whole summer but the fields set yesterday to the like of that hoax dumminy were great 8-)
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Mar-03, 09:09 AM
Don't get too carried away Wily, I think we pulled off a bit of an ambush over there this time, I don't think SA will be that flakey in the next game... long way to go yet, we need to win more than one game ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Mar-03, 11:36 AM
There is no reason to believe Australia can not and will not win again.

This test went almost exactly the same as the 3 in Australia, except this time the wicket was not a batsmens paradise and Australia was able to finish them off.

GREAT STUFF.
Title: Cricket
Post by: PoisonPen7 on 2009-Mar-03, 02:32 PM
Reports just coming in of the Sri Lankan Test players being shot in Pakistan (they are currently over there playing a test match atm).

Might be the end of sub-continent cricket for a while.

Title: Cricket
Post by: PoisonPen7 on 2009-Mar-03, 02:34 PM


http://www.zeenews.com/archives/2009-03-03/512050news.html

Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Mar-03, 02:55 PM
So they're 5 down without facing a ball
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Mar-03, 02:55 PM
Wow - that's the end of cricket in Pakistan for the next 10 years.

5 Police dead, and reports say anywhere from 4-8 Sri Lankan cricketers injured, Sangakkara is one of the injured, but that's the only name I've seen mentioned so far.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2009-Mar-03, 02:59 PM
Four Sri Lanka cricketers wounded in Pakistan shooting
Reuters
15:28 AEST Tue Mar 3 2009

Gunmen killed at least four people in an attack on the Sri Lankan cricket team's bus on Tuesday as it drove to a stadium in the Pakistani city of Lahore, according witnesses and cricket officials.

Sri Lankan media, quoting the sports minister, said four players received minor injuries in the attack -- Kumar Sangakkara, Ajantha Mendis, Thilan Samaraweera and Tharanga Paranavithana.

Pakistan television channels news channels said four people were killed.

A witness told Reuters he believed two police commandos were killed along with a regular policeman and a traffic warden. Shopkeeper Ahmed Ali said the two police commandos had been driving behind the team bus when they were hit.

"It was a very heavy firing and I heard at least two explosions at the time," said a Reuters witness who had been on his way to cover the test match between Pakistan and Sri Lanka.

Pakistan only invited the Sri Lanka team to tour after India's team pulled out with security concerns following the militant attacks on the Indian city of Mumbai in November.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Mar-03, 03:01 PM
If you got fox CNN ch 605 is covering it.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Mar-03, 03:04 PM
I couldn't imagine anyone on here not having fox
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Mar-03, 03:08 PM
My first thought if you've been aware of very recent events in Sri Lanks was that the tamil tigers were using pakistan as cover for the attack.

Very interesting to see what comes out.

One player shot in the chest(samaweera?).

 
I couldn't imagine anyone on here not having fox

you didn't have it last night did you.  :p
Title: Cricket
Post by: Magiciansmask on 2009-Mar-03, 03:08 PM
chaminda vaas?
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Mar-03, 03:09 PM
I couldn't imagine anyone on here not having fox

Haven't got it installed at work yet OL - I'm sure most people who work during the day have the same problem ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Mar-03, 03:11 PM
  :lol:   :lol:   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Magiciansmask on 2009-Mar-03, 03:15 PM
Five Pakistani policemen have been killed when masked gunmen fired on the Sri Lanka cricket team's bus in Lahore in an attack that wounded several of the players, the city police chief says.

Pakistan Cricket Board security official Nadeem Iqbal said eight Sri Lankan team members were hurt on Tuesday near the Lahore stadium where they were being driven to play.

Sri Lankan team manager Brendon Kruppu confirmed the incident and said batsman Kumar Sangakkara was among the injured.

Sri Lankan Sports Minister Gamini Lokuge named two injured players as Tharanga Paranavitana and Thilan Samaraweera and said they were taken to hospital in Lahore after the shooting.

Skipper Mahela Jayawardena was slightly wounded in the foot, his father told a local television station after speaking with him by telephone.

The team bus came under fire as the players headed to the Gaddafi stadium for the third day of the second Test against Pakistan.

"We are assessing the situation," Pakistan cricket board chief Ejaz Butt said.

Security concerns have plagued Pakistan for years and some foreign sports teams including from Australia have refused to play in the troubled nation.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Mar-03, 03:19 PM

Skipper Mahela Jayawardena was slightly wounded in the foot, his father told a local television station after speaking with him by telephone.

Copped a yorker
Title: Cricket
Post by: PoisonPen7 on 2009-Mar-03, 03:19 PM
You would have to think Tamil Tigers ara...hard to imagine Muslim extremists having a beef against the Sri Lankans....Aussies and English yes...sri Lankans no.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Mar-03, 03:20 PM
Haven't got it installed at work yet OL - I'm sure most people who work during the day have the same problem ;)

If anyone is on here they should be at home, not at work  :p
Title: Cricket
Post by: Magiciansmask on 2009-Mar-03, 03:20 PM
Copped a yorker


hardly the time larsy  :bash:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Puntermatt on 2009-Mar-03, 03:54 PM
Latest reports say Aussie coach of the SL team, Trevor Bayliss was injured.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Mar-03, 04:44 PM
I'm expecting the news to lead off tonight with it being a terrorist attack against australians. Then a little mention at the end of some others were injured.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Mar-03, 04:49 PM
It wasn't that long ago that the Aussies were bagged out for not going to the dump :mad:


"They love their cricket too much to attack cricketers" was the crap being thrown around at the time :mad:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Mar-03, 04:52 PM
Spot on
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Mar-03, 04:54 PM
I won't do the search to loook for those comments but they were on this thread from what I recall
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Mar-03, 04:56 PM
I won't do the search to loook for those comments but they were on this thread from what I recall

I doubt it. Thread's only 3 months old.   :p
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2009-Mar-03, 05:06 PM
Geoff Lawson was on the BSB a number of times saying the place was safe to go and if the money was right (ala the IPL) they would have gone.

Gee I hope they drag up 'Henry' tomorrow  :thumbsd:
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Mar-03, 05:09 PM
so Wily and Gin could you please inform who is responsible for it?

What if it was the Tamils using pakistan as a cover for there work?

Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Mar-03, 05:20 PM
Geoff Lawson was on the BSB a number of times saying the place was safe to go and if the money was right (ala the IPL) they would have gone.

Gee I hope they drag up 'Henry' tomorrow  :thumbsd:


sadly, it'll be good lsitning
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2009-Mar-03, 05:46 PM
Ara, Tamil's / Hamas / Al qaeda / Taliban / Kalathumpians it doesn't really matter, what it proves is the place wasn't safe  :thumbsd:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Mar-03, 06:01 PM
I doubt if our boys were there, there wouldn't have been any trouble.
It's all a sub-continent thing imo.

I know one thing for sure, the terrorists didn't have their money on a draw, cause it was home n hosed.
Title: Cricket
Post by: byalongneck on 2009-Mar-03, 06:49 PM
On our news they interviewed a NZ.  They have to go there in 9 months.  He said a lot of time to go before then, personally I could not give a shit how much time If I was one of their players I would be saying NO end of story.

Obviously I only see what is on the news, but from that you wonder how many (lets call them idiots because we don't know which group they belong to) get past the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan??

Ban them from world cricket, gees South Africa got banned, were the reasons less or worse (looking for comment on that one)  Then hopefully a cricket loving country will turn on those responsible.  emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Mar-04, 05:55 PM
Geoff Lawson
Today, 4 March 2009, 8 hours ago
Former aussie paceman talks about the situation in Pakistan an insight into the area where the tragedy took place and thoughts on the effect it will have on cricket in future years2KY_1_nF7rUb.mp3

http://www.2ky.com.au/media/podcasts/rssgen.php?pid=1
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Mar-06, 09:32 AM
Some of the stories coming out of Pakistan are quite amazing - unbelievable that things didn't end up a lot worse.

The two Aussie umpires who got caught up in the cross-fire (their mini-bus) was following the Sri Lankan's are pissed that they were essentially left for dead, when the cavalry did arrive, they got the Sri Lankan's out of there but left everyone else. Apparently a grenade was thrown under the Sri Lankan's bus but failed to detonate, someone fired a rocket launcher at the bus, but it narrowly missed... either of those would have increased the casualties significantly.

Allegations also that people knew it was going to happen - for the first two days of the test all buses left for the ground at the same time, but on that day the Pakistan's team bus was delayed leaving by 5 minutes.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Mar-06, 09:44 AM

Allegations also that people knew it was going to happen - for the first two days of the test all buses left for the ground at the same time, but on that day the Pakistan's team bus was delayed leaving by 5 minutes.


Mmmmm

What was the name of their coach that was murdered?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Puntermatt on 2009-Mar-06, 10:02 AM
Bob Woolmer, Wily. The coroner claimed it was natural causes....
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Mar-06, 10:21 AM
Thanks punter.

A tad unnatural I would have thought given that, by all accounts, that blood covered the walls
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Mar-06, 10:26 AM
It was a heart attack wily - not much blood at all from what I can remember ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Jeunes on 2009-Mar-06, 10:34 AM
so Wily and Gin could you please inform who is responsible for it?

What if it was the Tamils using pakistan as a cover for there work?



The Pakistan gov't has come out and said it was the work of insurgents and have ruled out the Indians being involved in the attack. The usual suspects are Al-Quaeda. But the latest is that Chris broad has been attacked in the media by Pakistan for making his suspicions public especially with the reference to the police officer who jumped into the bus to hide the bullets.

BSB had a very good i/v with Simon Taufel regarding the incident. After the attack, they were left alone for a period of time and then when the mini bus reached the grounds, it could not get in. There were reports when the Indians were there last time, they used to have dummy buses, routes etc. This time everything was the same.BSB brought up the allegations regarding the buses and even Taufel confirmed the Pakistan bus left later rather together as normal. The reason why there is extensive footage of the incident is because there is a tv station near the roundabout where the attack happened.

I have listed the response to Broad's allegations by the Pakistan CB president. This is from the SMH website.

Broad's claims 'a big lie,' says Pakistan
Email Printer friendly version Normal font Large font Speaking out ... ICC match referee and former England cricketer Chris Broad.
Photo: AP
Latest related coverage
 
March 6, 2009 - 10:53AM

Pakistan cricket chief Ijaz Butt has accused match official Chris Broad of lying about poor security during the terrorist attack on Sri Lanka's cricket squad on Tuesday.

Former Pakistan captain Javed Miandad also hit back at Broad's suggestions of a conspiracy by claiming there was "a conspiracy against Pakistan cricket", and demanded Broad be "punished".

The accusations against Broad came as Pakistan authorities revealed they had identified the men who ambushed the Sri Lankan team.

"We have identified the people who did the operation," provincial governor Salman Taseer told a news conference in Lahore, the capital of Punjab.

Police have brought in around two dozen people for questioning but no leads have been announced.

"We have a lot of information. We have arrested many people, rounded up some suspects ... but the final investigation will be presented to me tomorrow; till then I am not in a position to say more," said Taseer.

Broad blasted

The strong reactions from Pakistan's cricket hierarchy follow match referee Broad's comments to reporters that television footage of the attack showed "not a sign of a policeman anywhere", leaving him and fellow officials "sitting ducks" when armed men began shooting and throwing grenades at them.

Broad also questioned why the Pakistan team did not leave their hotel at the same time as the Sri Lankan team and the officials.

"That a gentleman of his stature is saying this is unfortunate," Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) chief Butt said.

Butt said the PCB would be complaining to the game's governing body, the International Cricket Council (ICC), about Broad, who was in Lahore for the ill-fated second Test between Pakistan and Sri Lanka.

"It is a big lie that there were no policeman. We will lodge a protest with the ICC," said Butt.

Miandad demanded Broad be punished for speaking out.

“How he can publicly criticise Pakistan’s security arrangements, after having praised them during the ODI series,” Miandad told Associated Press of Pakistan.

"Broad was fully satisfied and he personally appreciated it when I was in charge in Karachi ... it’s a conspiracy against Pakistan cricket."

If Broad was unsatisfied with security arrangements he should have complained in writing to the authorities, rather than going public.

“It’s clear violation of the code of conduct and he (Broad) should be punished,” he said.

“Its time for Pakistan, India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh to get togather and fight it against this conspiracy,” he said.

Broad was travelling in a van behind the Sri Lanka team bus when both vehicles came under fire as they headed towards the Gaddafi stadium for what should have been the third day of the second Test.

The 51-year-old former England batsman escaped unhurt, as did Australian on-field umpires Simon Taufel and Steve Davis, but six policemen and two civilians were killed and Pakistani fourth umpire Ahsan Raza was wounded.

Seven Sri Lankan players and their assistant coach were also hurt.

Broad, addressing a news conference in Britain on Wednesday, slammed Pakistani security forces for apparently abandoning the two vehicles.

"We were promised high-level security and in our hour of need that security vanished."

Butt disputed Broad's account, saying: "A commando jumped over Broad and saved his life. The commando was hurt so if there was no policeman, how come Broad was saved?"

Broad also questioned why the Pakistan team did not leave their hotel at the same time as the Sri Lankan team and the officials.

"I thought maybe they were having five or 10 minutes more in the hotel and would turn up later, but after this happened you start to think: 'Did someone know something and they held the Pakistan bus back?"'

However, Butt rejected any notion of a conspiracy.

"It is wrong to suggest that. The same security procedure was followed. The Pakistan team used to leave at the same time as the Sri Lankan team and other officials, but somehow or the other on that day they got a bit late," he said.

"I hope the blame games stop. I don't want to use bad language but when Broad came for the one-day series (in January) he himself sent back the security officials and we told the ICC this," said the PCB chairman.

"Two security agencies are preparing a report on what happened. If they come up with some blame then we will take responsibility."

Butt said he hoped security measures would be stepped up for visitors in the future.

"We hope next time bullet proof buses are provided to the teams and to make security better, teams must not follow the same travel routine, but come and go to the ground from different routes
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Mar-06, 07:03 PM
matthew who?

go Phillip.  8-)  :noteworthy:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Fewy on 2009-Mar-06, 07:54 PM
He looks like he belongs at this level doesn't he.  :star:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Mar-06, 08:05 PM
Missed the first 40 runs but the kids doing ok

Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Mar-06, 08:16 PM
I'm having a bit of a cry cause i'm not watching, but then I think it could be worse.
I could be in the 1800's and waiting for the ship to sail in with the English newspapers with a days play scores in an ashes match 3 days after it happened.
So it's all good   emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: monologue on 2009-Mar-06, 08:18 PM
T2 SA-Aust Result
Draw $2.45
South Africa $2.60
Australia $3.50
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Mar-06, 09:22 PM
93 then 2 sixes in 2 balls to get the century. Hughes stamps his class on the baggy green.

The future of the aussie cricket team.  8-)
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2009-Mar-06, 09:24 PM
I'm having a bit of a cry cause i'm not watching, but then I think it could be worse.
I could be in the 1800's and waiting for the ship to sail in with the English newspapers with a days play scores in an ashes match 3 days after it happened.
So it's all good   emthup

roflmao
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Mar-06, 09:47 PM
They must have had pretty good boats back in the 1800's to get the pommy newspapers over here in three days :)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Mar-06, 11:37 PM
Katich shows the youngster how to score a proper test century.    :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Mar-07, 09:17 AM
They must have had pretty good boats back in the 1800's to get the pommy newspapers over here in three days :)


Very good rowers back in those days   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Mar-07, 09:17 PM
crikey,what is going on over there?
wish i could watch it.
all out 352. :what:
now they are 2 for 0.... :/
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Mar-07, 09:19 PM
And Graham Smith just got his finger smashed   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: monologue on 2009-Mar-07, 09:19 PM
Either the wicket or the players have been "got at" :rolleyes:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Magiciansmask on 2009-Mar-07, 09:21 PM
Either the wicket or the players have been "got at" :rolleyes:


As if the saffrickans would entertain being dishonest on the world cricket stage.... oh wait a minute    :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: ratsack on 2009-Mar-07, 09:22 PM
crikey,what is going on over there?
wish i could watch it.
all out 352. :what:
now they are 2 for 0.... :/
i cant watch it either is that the aussie 2 for 0 or the pommie 2 for 0  :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Mar-07, 09:23 PM
They're 2 down, so the Aussie one   :biggrin:  2/3 now
Title: Cricket
Post by: Wenona on 2009-Mar-07, 09:24 PM
So the last 8 wickets have gone for 26 runs. :wacko:
Title: Cricket
Post by: ratsack on 2009-Mar-07, 09:27 PM
cheers guys gonna get fox shortly but if you all keep this up wont have to  :noteworthy:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Mar-07, 09:27 PM
Fall of wickets1-184 (Hughes, 43.5 ov), 2-208 (Ponting, 51.4 ov), 3-259 (Katich, 67.1 ov), 4-266 (Clarke, 70.1 ov), 5-329 (Hussey, 100.6 ov), 6-348 (North, 104.5 ov), 7-348 (Haddin, 105.3 ov), 8-348 (Johnson, 105.4 ov), 9-352 (Siddle, 107.2 ov), 10-352 (Hilfenhaus, 107.4 ov)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Fewy on 2009-Mar-07, 09:34 PM
What about Johnsons opening spell. :o  emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Mar-07, 09:36 PM
3 down for 6 and smith retired hurt with likely broken finger.

I'm tipping they'll get 46 with a 28 run last wicket stand.   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Mar-07, 09:39 PM
Hope DeVilliers 3 holds up for top score, i'm on it   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Wenona on 2009-Mar-07, 09:40 PM
So after seeing 4/329 we see 9/29 ....... crazy stuff.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Fewy on 2009-Mar-07, 09:40 PM
Oh boy Tommy joins the party, SA in very deep trouble 8-)
Title: Cricket
Post by: ratsack on 2009-Mar-07, 09:52 PM
So after seeing 4/329 we see 9/29 ....... crazy stuff.
come on guys what the  :censored:  is the score :what:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Mar-07, 09:55 PM
Wilys favorite batsmen is coming to South Efricas rescue.
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Mar-07, 09:56 PM
you can get a live score here ratsack...

http://www.smh.com.au/sport/cricket/popup.html
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Mar-07, 10:05 PM
Even better live score and commentary on cricinfo

http://content.cricinfo.com/rsavaus2009/engine/match/350473.html

Title: Cricket
Post by: ratsack on 2009-Mar-07, 10:07 PM
you can get a live score here ratsack...

http://www.smh.com.au/sport/cricket/popup.html
cheers mate other than work computers im a bit of a virgin :shy: great site   :noteworthy:  8-)
too quick for me you blokes ill look at that one now bt 8-)
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Mar-07, 11:06 PM
guess if you can't bowl them then knock 'em out.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Peterf on 2009-Mar-08, 07:36 AM
I'm having a bit of a cry cause i'm not watching, but then I think it could be worse.
I could be in the 1800's and waiting for the ship to sail in with the English newspapers with a days play scores in an ashes match 3 days after it happened.
So it's all good   emthup

Or you could be in NZ where we are getting absolutely nothing of this fascinating series.

Having predicted the Australian bowlers couldn't take twenty SA wickets I am now writing out 100 times:

"Never underestimate Australian cricketers"
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Mar-08, 12:27 PM
Hope I don't put the mock on him , but Tendulkar is looking OK in the one day game on Fox at the moment. Might be good to watch for awhile.
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Mar-08, 07:02 PM
I've said it before and I was called old-fashioned, but I cannot believe that cricket captains can set fields without a third man.

When I captained, I'd make sure we had a keeeper, then send a fast bowler to third man, then thought about the rest of the field placings.

And that's regardless of how the game was poised.
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Mar-08, 07:10 PM
Looking good for the good guys  emthup

BTW did anyone see Tendulkar score his 163 this arvo?  Fantastic stuff.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Mar-09, 08:54 AM
I think I've worked it out - taking recent events in Pakistan into consideration, the Aussies and SA's sent out full teams of body-doubles on day two, and while they may have looked strikingly similar, they couldn't play cricket for quids... the real players came back out yesterday - at least the Aussies did anyway, still debatable if the SA body doubles are still playing.

This has to be one of the weirdest Tests for awhile, and Phil Hughes' inside-out batting style just seems to be confusing them even more :)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Magiciansmask on 2009-Mar-09, 08:57 AM
I think I've worked it out - taking recent events in Pakistan into consideration, the Aussies and SA's sent out full teams of body-doubles on day two, and while they may have looked strikingly similar, they couldn't play cricket for quids... the real players came back out yesterday - at least the Aussies did anyway, still debatable if the SA body doubles are still playing.

This has to be one of the weirdest Tests for awhile, and Phil Hughes' inside-out batting style just seems to be confusing them even more :)

How do u find a body double for Kallis with a head like that   :lol:  
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Mar-09, 01:48 PM
Maybe next time we'll show our greats a little more respect.



Warner   wtf
Marsh wtf

We've got what we screamed for
 :sad: :sad: :sad: :tears: :tears: :tears: :tears:


I've got what I screamed for and am absolutely loving it.  8-)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Mar-09, 06:41 PM
On ya Ricky, what was the point of sending Marcus North out there ?

He sacrificed his average and for what ?
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Mar-09, 07:42 PM
I don't know - with two quick wickets like that it would have been reasonable to assume that there might be something in the wicket for the bowlers again today - good idea to get back out there as quick as possible... even if it becomes a slow hard slog, it's probably one of the best captaincy decisions he's made for a long time  :thumbsup:
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Mar-09, 08:44 PM
Uneuthanased.

Didn't Hughes sacrifice his?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2009-Mar-09, 09:26 PM
Don't you hate being away for work and the room only has Fox 1 & 2  emthdown  :mad:  :bash: :slaphead:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Mar-10, 07:03 AM
It is shaping up to being agreat final day.

South Africa could actually win this, Highly unlikely but no beyond the imagination.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Jeunes on 2009-Mar-10, 08:23 AM
South Afrcia will win if they survive the new ball without losing any wickets and also if Kallis or De Villers scores a big 100. Kallis is due. The Aussies will struggle if they get no early wickets because their 3 main bowlers will tire out especially Big Ben. North is expensive at times while McDonald can be caned if the boks go after a bowler.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Mar-10, 12:13 PM
South Afrcia will win if they survive the new ball without losing any wickets and also if Kallis or De Villers scores a big 100. Kallis is due. The Aussies will struggle if they get no early wickets because their 3 main bowlers will tire out especially Big Ben. North is expensive at times while McDonald can be caned if the boks go after a bowler.

Why didn't you just state the obvious and say South Africa will win if they score enough runs before they run out of wickets   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:

Plenty of IFS there Jeunes
Title: Cricket
Post by: Jeunes on 2009-Mar-10, 12:48 PM
Why didn't you just state the obvious and say South Africa will win if they score enough runs before they run out of wickets    :lol:     :lol:     :lol:  

Plenty of IFS there Jeunes
 :lol:  I know Larsy there a lot of ifs but if I was a betting man (  :lol: ) I would be backing a side only after the first 10 overs today. Then you will know how the land lies.    :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Mar-10, 06:17 PM
Backed Punter to make 50   emthup

And backed SA to win @ $22 It's worth $10 to watch a run-chase

The above was the 1st test

At this stage of the 2nd test Ponting had made that 50 I was after in the 1st and I wasn't on  :mad:
And I haven't backed SAF to run em down this time.

Guess what's going to  :censored: ing happen
Title: Cricket
Post by: twominutewarning on 2009-Mar-10, 06:33 PM
Come on Aussie show us what you got.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Mar-10, 10:38 PM
3 straight.  4 straight into the ashes we'll wipe them. win all summer. a new winning streak record will be had.    :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gammalite on 2009-Mar-10, 11:51 PM
And to think that after the test win in Sydney a few on here where saying it was a bad thing that we won that test becasue it would mask the problems with the Aussie side.
Maybe next summer in Australia we might prepare a pitch that suits our bowlers and not give strong batting lineups concrete roads to bat on  :o
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Mar-10, 11:54 PM
  emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Mar-11, 07:41 AM
As one of the few to predict a series win it is with great pleasure that I get to say" you bloody beauty, Ye Ha" 8-) 8-) 8-) 8-)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Jeunes on 2009-Mar-11, 07:50 AM
What a good win. $4 for the first test win and now $3.5 for the 2nd win. Other than betting in running, I reckon the intial price for aussies would be probably the longest since the tab started to operate on the cricket.

Hussey must be on his last legs if he fails again though. I would be suprised if they take Symonds or Watson in front of McDonald. The other question is do you take Clark and Lee in front of the 3 fast bowlers for the Ashes or do you take Bollinger too. The main issue for the aussies will be choosing batsmen for the middle order and I wonder what Hodge did to be continually overlooked for a return?

The Windies held out the english again so it is a 1-0 series win for them. It is back to normal in cricket again.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Mar-11, 08:14 AM
Hodge or watson have to be considered if Huss fails in the next test
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Mar-11, 08:30 AM
Huss can probably fail for the next decade and still get a run and rightfully so.
Title: Cricket
Post by: coinswell on 2009-Mar-11, 08:31 AM
Excellent work by the Australians - showed great tenacity and sense of purpose in securing the series against the odds.

Winning the toss and batting first in both matches certainly helped.

One of the worst things for SA was IMHO getting Hughes out in the first over at Johannesburg and then having us 3 down for not many.  I think the perceived home advantage reinforced by their early successes and combined with the pre-match publicity made them complacent.

SA was also unlucky to lose Smith again which has been a factor in two of the test victories.

Clearly we are a better side with Hughes at the top of the order in the form he is in and it was the opening partnership in this game that was the difference on the first innings and Hughes' second inning score roughly equated to the winning margin.

If we get Clark back for England our front line pace attack of Johnson, Clark and Siddle would look pretty good.  Whilst not a front line bowler himself Katich as a spinning option is nice to have.  I don't quite know how McDonald fits in to the team either.

Hussey's form is a real concern but North seems to fit in well at 6.  No room for Symonds or Watson IMHO.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Mar-11, 08:32 AM
Huss can probably fail for the next decade and still get a run and rightfully so.


If it was to end his career I would agree but he can go back to shield and regroup ands still play plenty more cricket
Title: Cricket
Post by: monologue on 2009-Mar-11, 09:21 AM
It was a great win  by the Aussies but I still can't get over the wicket change from day 1 to the next.

Good to see some young blood getting a go.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Magiciansmask on 2009-Mar-11, 09:39 AM
Aussie Aussie Aussie--- OI OI OI

Well done Phil Hughes for making the doubters look like knobs
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Mar-19, 10:20 PM
Obviously no interest in the dead rubber.

Wouldn't touch the Aussies with a barge pole, renowned for losing the last test when series wrapped up.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Mar-19, 10:24 PM
Australia will bolt it in.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Mar-20, 01:11 AM
go the Proteas

[attachimg=#]

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Cricket
Post by: manikato1 on 2009-Mar-20, 07:44 AM
Does that mean Australia have batted first in all 6 tests?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Jeunes on 2009-Mar-20, 08:12 AM
I think they won all the tosses too but not sure of that.


Dissapointing effort with the bat. Hussey must be starting to look over his shoulder now. The question is if he fails in the 2nd innings, what happens? Do they stick with him because of loyalty and previous form or do they get rid of him for form players.

The same argument with McDonald, Hilfenhaus and Mcgain. These 3 would be competing with Clark, Lee and to a lesser extent Watson, Symonds and Bollinger. MCdonald is not good enough to be a top class bowler or batsman but he has the ability to be useful when required but is he worth keeping or going for a specialist bowler or batsman. Hilfenhaus has been expensive but they talk about his swing bowling while Clark offers the same and has performed well previously. Lee on the other hand prior to his injury has been struggling for form but in the ashes 05 series showed what he is capable of. Without him, our losses there would have been worse. McGain has been never given a proper chance so would the selectors give a tour to prove himself or go for a youngster who will be around for years.

The pressure will be really on the incumbent quartet in this test to prove they are worthy of a ashes spot. But you have to give credit to the SA bowlers for not giving up after a few decisions went against them plus a a couple of dropped chances. Steyn is probably the best bowler on form at the moment. Prince after reportedly being in a verbal altercation with a couple of his team mates before the match is anxious to prove himself after being bypassed earlier in the series.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Magiciansmask on 2009-Mar-20, 08:18 AM
Think Michael Clarke should also be abit watchful of the young talent. Not the same 'pup' of afew years ago. Michael Where the bloody hell are ya?   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Mar-20, 08:39 AM
Hussey is fine... in the context of the innings he scored quite well - can't be crucified for that.
Title: Cricket
Post by: monologue on 2009-Mar-20, 09:18 AM
"Where the bloody hell are you" could be the call from selectors if Clark doesn't put in soon.

With this test a dead rubber it would have been the perfect opportunity to "rest" both Pointing and Clark.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Mar-20, 09:32 AM
Why is Clarke in trouble? he's been one of our most consistent run scorers all summer... here's his test scores v NZ and SA in Australia since November:

98, 9, 110, 62, 25, 88*, 29, 138, 41

What the bloody hell is wrong with that???
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Mar-20, 11:22 AM
He's doing it wearing Bonds under dacks.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Mar-20, 12:20 PM
"Where the bloody hell are you" could be the call from selectors if Clark doesn't put in soon.

With this test a dead rubber it would have been the perfect opportunity to "rest" both Pointing and Clark.


The curse of the Vice captain has a long history is Aussie cricket
Title: Cricket
Post by: Magiciansmask on 2009-Mar-20, 01:40 PM
Why is Clarke in trouble? he's been one of our most consistent run scorers all summer... here's his test scores v NZ and SA in Australia since November:

98, 9, 110, 62, 25, 88*, 29, 138, 41

What the bloody hell is wrong with that???

i stand corrected... i always miss his good innings   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Mar-21, 12:19 AM
Its a bit of a struggle in the cricket. But Australia should be able to bat out the last 2 days to save the game.   emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Mar-21, 11:59 PM
Sheez these Aussie openers are going about trying to save this test match in interesting fashion.   :sweat:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Friar Tuck on 2009-Mar-22, 06:31 AM
We have given the Curry eating mob a much needed confidence booster for the rest of the series.

The Kiwi bowlers are fearsome but didn't apply themselves in the first test. Be a different story next time. I understand they have been instructed to try and bowl within 3 feet of either side of the wickets this time.

Can't wait. :blush:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Mar-22, 08:57 AM
He's doing it wearing Bonds under dacks.

Nah idk how many of yas play cricket but usually the Bonds undies dont fit the old box too well  :p
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Mar-22, 08:59 AM
Nah idk how many of yas play cricket but usually the Bonds undies dont fit the old box too well  :p

The old Bonds Y fronts did   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Mar-22, 09:18 AM
How many did Hughes get?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Mar-22, 09:20 AM
32.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Mar-22, 09:22 AM
Off 20 balss?????
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Mar-22, 09:23 AM
I think we've found our spinner - at least for the short term... can't understand why they only gave Katich 3 overs at the end of the innings though...
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Mar-22, 09:23 AM
  :lol:   46 balls.

Got out disapointingly to Harris again.
Title: Cricket
Post by: manikato1 on 2009-Mar-22, 11:57 AM
I think we've found our spinner - at least for the short term... can't understand why they only gave Katich 3 overs at the end of the innings though...

I have thought for a while that without a true test class spinner, we could get away with a mixture of Clarke/Symonds/Katich (whomever is playing).

Katich averages 32.75 & Clarke average 37.77 (I will ignore Symonds because I think his time is up).  Those are OK to poor figures for a Test Class spinner, but if we don't have a test class spinner(and we don't) then those averages are more than acceptable for players who also bat.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Mar-22, 12:02 PM
only one issue if they start using Katich extensively. His workload.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Mar-23, 12:30 AM
They'll probably lose a wicket after I post this, but i'm really enjoying the Johnson/McDonald partnership  8-)
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Mar-23, 01:28 AM
Mitchell Johnson hits a 6 to bring up his 100 off 86 balls   :noteworthy:   :noteworthy:   :noteworthy:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Mar-23, 11:28 AM
I fell to sleep during the tea break.   :tears:
Title: Cricket
Post by: el zoro on 2009-Mar-23, 11:40 AM
Great century by Johnson.  :noteworthy:
He must be considered Aus best allrounder now. I say push him up another couple notches in the batting line-up. Give him more time to recouperate between batting & bowling. Johnson averaged 85 batting & took 16 wickets at 25 runs.  emthup
South Africa smashed us in last game & over 6 tests 3-3. Good result for cricket. Watch out Pommies the re-built Aus outfit is quickly becoming a force again, Poms could be in deep trouble again.   :biggrin:  
Title: Cricket
Post by: monologue on 2009-Mar-23, 02:29 PM

Andrew Symonds kicked out of Brisbane bar for being too drunk


March 23, 2009 01:00pm

TROUBLED cricket star Andrew Symonds has landed in more trouble after being asked to leave a Brisbane bar because he was too drunk.
Despite Queensland Cricket this morning saying his rehabilitation was "on track", mX witnessed an intoxicated Symonds being punted by security at the Watt Bar at the Powerhouse in New Farm about 9pm.

Symonds was celebrating with friends, including Bulls captain Chris Simpson and girlfriend Katie Johnson. The group left without incident.

   
The request for the group to leave came after Symonds accidentally broke a glass and was stumbling and calling out boisterously to his friends.

Symonds also had a drink in each hand at one stage during the night.

Symonds, already on a "last chance" warning from Cricket Australia officials over previous alcohol-related misdemeanours.

It is the cricketer's fifth off-field incident since August 2008, when he was infamously sent home from Darwin for missing a team meeting.

He slept through a Queensland training session just three weeks into his comeback, then became embroiled in an incident with a fan at the Normanby Hotel in late November.

In February, he was fined for a six-minute interview with radio station Triple M during which he was under the influence of alcohol.

Symonds has since been having counselling up to three times a week.

A Queensland Cricket spokesman today said Symonds' rehabilitation was ongoing and that he had made progress, and that he was not banned from drinking.

"He's allowed to have a drink and I'm sure the boys were looking after him," he said.

"The boys have had a big season and surely they're allowed to let off some steam."

A Cricket Australia spokesman thanked mX for bringing the incident to his attention, but said only that: "Andrew continues to work through the rehabilitation process."

In November, after being cleared of any wrongdoing over the Normanby incident, Symonds said: "If I make another mistake, it is going to be a pretty ugly ending and I realise that."

Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Mar-23, 03:32 PM
Symonds also had a drink in each hand at one stage during the night.

Nothing like a balanced diet   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Wenona on 2009-Mar-24, 07:57 AM
From Daily Telegraph .....

Counsellor Deidre Anderson - who has worked with the likes of Olympic champions Ian Thorpe and Cathy Freeman - said that Symonds was not banned from alcohol during the rehabilitation process.

"It is important for the media, cricket fans and the general public to understand that this treatment is about management and not restricting him from enjoying his leisure time with friends and family," Anderson said.

"His behaviour during the reported incident is an excellent example of how he is now demonstrating practical alcohol management."



Ain't that a clasiic!  :sad:

I think she meant to say ......

"His behaviour during the reported incident is an excellent example of how he is now demonstrating practical alcoholic management."
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Mar-27, 09:47 PM
after getting hammered last week the kiwi's come back and are dominating the indians in the 2nd test match.

http://content.cricinfo.com/nzvind2009/engine/current/match/386496.html


and the aussies play the saffers in a 20/20 in the early hours of the morning.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Mar-27, 10:03 PM
What a bugger, that means i'll have to stay up all night   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Mar-28, 09:54 PM
stumps day 3 are neihgbours are 267 in front of india who have 9 wickets left to avoid an innings defeat.

Good response after being flogged.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Mar-30, 01:27 PM
India are incredible at being able to bat for incredible lengths of time.

They are by the most brilliant batting side in the world.
Title: Cricket
Post by: twominutewarning on 2009-Apr-03, 07:20 PM
First ODI tonight.

Not real confident given the team selected.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Apr-05, 06:35 PM
First ODI tonight.

Not real confident given the team selected.


well they won the frst easily but looks like carnage in the 2nd.

 5-19 in the 8th over.  :o
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Apr-05, 07:15 PM
6-46



blooody hell
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Apr-10, 02:14 AM
Everytime I watch Australia play an ODI or 20/20 there's a new player or two.
WTF is Brett Geeves??
1-67 off 10 in SAF's 289 i'd suggest he won't cement a spot
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Apr-13, 05:57 PM
Just backed Gibbs to outscore Smith, so expect Gibbs not to make many   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Walter Watermelon on 2009-Apr-13, 06:07 PM
Next thing you will tell us you got $2.02 about it !
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Apr-13, 06:14 PM
Next thing you will tell us you got $2.02 about it !

I'm a better shopper than that, 2.04  ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Walter Watermelon on 2009-Apr-13, 06:23 PM
Just found this on a South African cricket forum

Gibbsey Writes ...
Just found a mug that took up the $2.04 I offered on Betfair that I would outscore Smithy. Money for jam, eh. Don't ya love mug punters
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Apr-13, 06:26 PM
  :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Apr-13, 06:56 PM
Just backed Gibbs to outscore Smith, so expect Gibbs not to make many   :lol:

Went to the shop, came back in and seen they were 1 down with Kallis on strike, and the bloke at the non-strikers end looked a whole lot smaller than Graeme Smith   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:
 :beer:

Market not suspended yet, does that mean it won't be until Gibbs is actually out?
Title: Cricket
Post by: coinswell on 2009-Apr-18, 11:54 AM
David Hussey has been a massive disappointment overall.

He should be dropped and make way for someone else.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Apr-18, 12:02 PM
You can tell the care factor for one day cricket.

How did we go last night ?
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Apr-18, 12:12 PM
You can tell the care factor for one day cricket.

How did we go last night ?

won the dead rubber
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-May-03, 07:49 PM
With Australia leading the Pakis 3-1 in the 5 game ODI series, I thought the Pakis may be a good bet to win the dead rubber @ 2.56  ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: coinswell on 2009-May-03, 08:31 PM
Might be right Larsy.  Will there be a catch like this tonight?

Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-May-03, 08:34 PM
Unreal, hadn't seen that before, when was it, Coins?
Title: Cricket
Post by: coinswell on 2009-May-03, 08:40 PM
February apparently mate - never seen one like it either.  Fantastic effort.   emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-May-03, 08:48 PM
freakish. Was running as soon as he saw the shot was going to be played.  :clap2:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-May-03, 09:51 PM
Is anyone watching the cricket? I'd be suprised if there was more than 50 spectators
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-May-03, 09:54 PM
Is anyone watching the cricket? I'd be suprised if there was more than 50 spectators

at the ground or watching on Fox?   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-May-04, 07:43 AM
at the ground or watching on Fox?   :biggrin:

  :lol:   :lol:   :lol:
With Australia leading the Pakis 3-1 in the 5 game ODI series, I thought the Pakis may be a good bet to win the dead rubber @ 2.56  ;)

 :beer: :beer: :beer:

ODI Series Pakistan v Australia / Match Odds / Pakistan
Back         2.58    60.00    Won    
Title: Cricket
Post by: twominutewarning on 2009-May-08, 09:57 PM
Dean Jones was on acid last night.
Title: Cricket
Post by: twominutewarning on 2009-May-08, 10:56 PM
What a  :censored: ed up twenty20 team. :wacko:

Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-May-20, 11:55 AM
i reckon they made a blue putting that crock Watson in ahead of Symonds. :slaphead:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Jeunes on 2009-May-20, 12:23 PM
The ashes squad is listed below.

I am not sure what Hodge has done to be not picked again. No Mcgill or McGain or Casson. Only one f/t spinner but plenty of part time spinners in Clarke, Hussey, Katich and Hughes.

THE SQUAD

Ricky Ponting, captain
Michael Clarke, vice-captain
Stuart Clark
Brad Haddin
Nathan Hauritz
Ben Hilfenhaus
Phillip Hughes
Michael Hussey
Mitchell Johnson
Simon Katich
Brett Lee
Graham Manou
Andrew McDonald
Marcus North
Peter Siddle
Shane Watson

Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2009-May-20, 02:01 PM
i reckon they made a blue putting that crock Watson in ahead of Symonds. :slaphead:

Symonds international test career is over - would have been a disgrace if they had picked him - on what form?
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-May-20, 03:05 PM
Symonds international test career is over - would have been a disgrace if they had picked him - on what form?

when is Watson on the paddock long enough to show his form? :bleh:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Magiciansmask on 2009-May-20, 04:47 PM
Watson is top class when right imo. He is just injured more than not.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-May-20, 05:14 PM
i reckon they made a blue putting that crock Watson in ahead of Symonds. :slaphead:

They didn't, they put McDonald ahead of him   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Magiciansmask on 2009-May-20, 05:15 PM
They didn't, they put McDonald ahead of him    :lol:  

Ronald?
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-May-21, 03:49 PM
best spinner in the side is Katich. The sooner Ricky figures it out the better.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Magiciansmask on 2009-May-21, 04:12 PM
best spinner in the side is Katich. The sooner Ricky figures it out the better.

Not the coldest beer in the fridge is ricky  ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-May-21, 04:48 PM
Watson will be a star on tour, I have no doubt
Title: Cricket
Post by: Magiciansmask on 2009-May-21, 04:50 PM
Watson will be a star on tour, I have no doubt

Agreed. Underrated and injury prone, but has raw talent
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-May-21, 06:11 PM
Watson will be a star on tour, I have no doubt

 if he gets past day 3,first test i will be shocked. :o :o :o
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-May-21, 06:14 PM
if he gets past day 3,first test i will be shocked. :o :o :o

Day 3 for the myth, you better hope the first 2 days are washed out then shaun.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Jeunes on 2009-May-22, 08:55 AM
Story below regarding Chris Lewis from SMH.

Drug bust the final nail in the coffin for loner Lewis
Email Printer friendly version Normal font Large font May 22, 2009

Conviction for smuggling cocaine in cricket bag a sad chapter in life of an enigmatic character, writes Jamie Pandaram.


Unlucky for some … former England all-rounder was sentenced to 13 years in prison.
Photo: Adrian Murrell

For the next 13 years, Clairmonte Christopher Lewis will bide his time in a jail cell, a small space for a man who at one time had the world at his feet.

The former England all-rounder has been convicted of smuggling $283,000 worth of cocaine into Britain in a cricket bag.

The scam involved packing liquid cocaine into tins of fruit from the Caribbean, where Lewis, 41, and accomplice Chad Kirnon were born, with the intention of burning it to powder form in Britain. It was the plan, instead, which burned when officers stopped the pair at Gatwick Airport in December.

Chris Lewis, with 32 Tests and 53 one-day internationals to his name, was once dubbed "the next Ian Botham" but never quite reached the heights so many observers had predicted for him. A freakish athlete who would show glimpses of impossible brilliance, he frustrated many coaches who questioned his commitment and effort.

Lewis was an individual to the extreme, once posing nude for a women's magazine, spending nearly every day in the gym honing his fat-free physique, studying the Bible and maintaining odd nocturnal habits. He never drank, and hardly ever socialised with teammates, and they thought it particularly strange when arriving home from a big night to find Lewis heading out.

"He'd be starting his night when everyone else had finished. Nobody ever knew where he was going," a former Surrey colleague said. "He hung around with some questionable types."

Lewis also attracted guffawed criticism following some comical incidents. During one series in the Caribbean, Lewis had teammate Devon Malcolm shave his head, but then refused to wear a hat on the field and suffered sunstroke. He also turned up late for an England match claiming he had a flat tyre.

Lewis scored one century and took three five-wicket hauls in Tests, and captured 66 ODI wickets at an average of 29.42. He also played an impressive role in England's march to the 1992 World Cup final.

But his career petered out nine years ago, shortly after he alleged that three of his England teammates had taken money for match-fixing - a charge that was never substantiated.

Kirnon, a 27-year-old former basketball player born in Montserrat, was given the same sentence as Lewis.

The Guardian newspaper reported the case as such: "[Lewis] was carrying a man's handbag and a cricket bag full of cans of fruit and vegetable juice. The five cans held a brownish liquid that smelt of chemicals and turned out to be dissolved cocaine. Evaporating off the liquid would have yielded 3.75kg of pure cocaine.

"Customs officers found traces of cannabis in Lewis's suit carrier and on cigarette papers tucked into a paperback book.

"In his own defence during the trial, Lewis said he had no idea there was cocaine in the cans and he had not known it could be made into a liquid.

"When stopped at Gatwick, both men claimed to be travelling alone, but Kirnon's name was found written on the label of Lewis's bag. The prosecution said numerous other links between the pair proved it was a joint enterprise.

"Kirnon - who had been stopped on the way into St Lucia and found to have $14,000 in cash - was also carrying cocaine. He claimed he bought his three tins of fruit juice at a shop in St Lucia and was bringing them back for his mother. He said he had been asked to check in some bags by Lewis, taking advantage of a facility at a local hotel rather than the airport.

"Lewis said at the trial that Kirnon had asked him to carry five cans because he was worried his luggage was overweight.

"The court heard Lewis and Kirnon had known each other for a few years before planning the St Lucia trip over a game of pool. Since their arrest the two had fallen out, each blaming the other. Lewis claimed that while they were on remand at High Down prison in Surrey awaiting trial, Kirnon suggested he might shoulder the entire blame in return for $202,000. Lewis admitted having smoked cannabis with Kirnon in St Lucia but insisted he had never tried cocaine, less still smuggled it."

James Meikle summed it up in an additional piece in The Guardian: "Lewis was a player about whom descriptions such as promising and multi-talented soon turned to mercurial and enigmatic, and long before the end of his international career, fragile and lacking in confidence.

"He was dogged by injury and had a condition known as Raynaud's phenomenon that affected his circulation.

"After six years as a Test player, an eight-year span in one-day internationals, and first-class appearances for three counties between 1987 and 2000, the sporting verdict would be that he never really did himself full justice.

"Quite another form of justice has ensured that his reputation is sunk for ever."
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Jun-04, 10:01 PM
Andrew Symonds being sent home from 20/20 World Championship after another incident and Ca have torn up his contract.

anyone surprised. I doubt it.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Magiciansmask on 2009-Jun-04, 10:04 PM
Andrew Symonds being sent home from 20/20 World Championship after another incident and Ca have torn up his contract.

anyone surprised. I doubt it.

Waste of talent .... serves the idiot right  :thumbsd:
Title: Cricket
Post by: VoRogue on 2009-Jun-04, 10:06 PM
maybe Cronulla sharks will sign him up, he'd fit in just fine there  :no1: :yes:
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Jun-04, 10:07 PM
does Boonie still hold the record? :beer:
guess it will never be beaten in these days.
Title: Cricket
Post by: InTheKnow on 2009-Jun-05, 03:30 PM
White relishes his chance while Hodge still on outer

Exclusive: Michael Horan

June 05, 2009 11:01am


CAMERON White is excited to be on his way to England to replace Andrew Symonds in the Australian World Twenty20 Cup team

The 25-year-old Victorian captain, a surprise exclusion from the initial 16- man squad took a call on Thursday night to pack and be ready to fly out the next day subject to the International Cricket Council approving Australia's request to make the late change.

"It's all happened so quickly - it's really exciting to get the call up,'' White told the Herald Sun yesterday.

``I was pretty resigned to having missed out and not playing any cricket for a while longer, which has been the way things have gone this year."

The ICC gave the all-clear yesterday and while an excited White flew out on an Emirates jet late yesterday, he won't arrive in time to play in Australia's tournament opener against the West Indies at The Oval today.

White was in the Australian one-day squad in South Africa earlier this year but did not play a match and he then went to the rich India Premier League tournament where he was paid $US500,000 to sit on the bench for six weeks and not play a single game for the Bangalore Royal Challengers.

White arrived home last week already resigned to his exclusion from the World Cup squad.

``I haven't picked up a bat or ball since the last two weeks of the IPL, so if nothing else I'll be fresh,'' White joked.

``But seriously, I've been doing a lot of fitness work, I'm in good shape and I really am very excited about the chance to play some cricket again _ particularly on that stage.''

White is likely to play in Australia's second preliminary round match, against Sri Lanka at Trent Bridge on Monday.

The heavy hitting batsman and leg spinner admitted the events leading to his call-up were obviously not ideal, but that's just simply how it has panned out.

``I don't think anyone likes to see upheaval or drama of this nature, but it really is out of my hands,'' he said.

``All I can do is seize the opportunity, hopefully get a game and do my best to help Australia win the tournament.

``It is a very professional and talented group and I'm sure we can go all the way.''

The Victorian has played seven T20 internationals and has averaged 38.00, with an explosive strike rate of 149.01.

``I do love the English conditions and I'm really looking forward to getting back there,'' said
White, who had been selected to captain Australia A against Pakistan, will now be diverted to England to fill an all-rounders spot.

White has thrived in English condition in the past while playing Country cricket for Somerset in recent years.

Two years ago he struck a then world record 141 not out off 70 balls in a domestic Twenty20 match against Worcestershire, clubbing 14 four and six sixes in an awesome display of power hitting.

In 44 matches at domestic level he averages 33 and has a strike rate of 150.63, making him as dangerous at the crease as the man he is replacing.

But while Victorian cricket has gained from the Symonds' sad episode, Brad Hodge was again overlooked, as the squad has its quota of specialist batsmen.

It is likely White's bowling gained him the nod and although not a wicket taker at international level, he has a record of containing batsmen in the shorter forms of the game.

Australia asked for permission to name a replacement and the International Cricket Council's event technical committee is reported to have now approved White's inclusion.

Cricket Australia spokesman Peter Young said today that media speculation concerning White being the replacement was correct.

"Under the tournament rules we have to get ICC approval to replace a player. We're going through that process at the moment," he told radio 3AW this morning.

Young said Scotland had already set a precedent in replacing a player for bad behaviour.

Title: Cricket
Post by: twominutewarning on 2009-Jun-05, 06:34 PM
White relishes his chance while Hodge still on outer

Exclusive: Michael Horan

June 05, 2009 11:01am


CAMERON White is excited to be on his way to England to replace Andrew Symonds in the Australian World Twenty20 Cup team

The 25-year-old Victorian captain, a surprise exclusion from the initial 16- man squad took a call on Thursday night to pack and be ready to fly out the next day subject to the International Cricket Council approving Australia's request to make the late change.

"It's all happened so quickly - it's really exciting to get the call up,'' White told the Herald Sun yesterday.

``I was pretty resigned to having missed out and not playing any cricket for a while longer, which has been the way things have gone this year."

The ICC gave the all-clear yesterday and while an excited White flew out on an Emirates jet late yesterday, he won't arrive in time to play in Australia's tournament opener against the West Indies at The Oval today.

White was in the Australian one-day squad in South Africa earlier this year but did not play a match and he then went to the rich India Premier League tournament where he was paid $US500,000 to sit on the bench for six weeks and not play a single game for the Bangalore Royal Challengers.

White arrived home last week already resigned to his exclusion from the World Cup squad.

``I haven't picked up a bat or ball since the last two weeks of the IPL, so if nothing else I'll be fresh,'' White joked.

``But seriously, I've been doing a lot of fitness work, I'm in good shape and I really am very excited about the chance to play some cricket again _ particularly on that stage.''

White is likely to play in Australia's second preliminary round match, against Sri Lanka at Trent Bridge on Monday.

The heavy hitting batsman and leg spinner admitted the events leading to his call-up were obviously not ideal, but that's just simply how it has panned out.

``I don't think anyone likes to see upheaval or drama of this nature, but it really is out of my hands,'' he said.

``All I can do is seize the opportunity, hopefully get a game and do my best to help Australia win the tournament.

``It is a very professional and talented group and I'm sure we can go all the way.''

The Victorian has played seven T20 internationals and has averaged 38.00, with an explosive strike rate of 149.01.

``I do love the English conditions and I'm really looking forward to getting back there,'' said
White, who had been selected to captain Australia A against Pakistan, will now be diverted to England to fill an all-rounders spot.

White has thrived in English condition in the past while playing Country cricket for Somerset in recent years.

Two years ago he struck a then world record 141 not out off 70 balls in a domestic Twenty20 match against Worcestershire, clubbing 14 four and six sixes in an awesome display of power hitting.

In 44 matches at domestic level he averages 33 and has a strike rate of 150.63, making him as dangerous at the crease as the man he is replacing.

But while Victorian cricket has gained from the Symonds' sad episode, Brad Hodge was again overlooked, as the squad has its quota of specialist batsmen.

It is likely White's bowling gained him the nod and although not a wicket taker at international level, he has a record of containing batsmen in the shorter forms of the game.

Australia asked for permission to name a replacement and the International Cricket Council's event technical committee is reported to have now approved White's inclusion.

Cricket Australia spokesman Peter Young said today that media speculation concerning White being the replacement was correct.

"Under the tournament rules we have to get ICC approval to replace a player. We're going through that process at the moment," he told radio 3AW this morning.

Young said Scotland had already set a precedent in replacing a player for bad behaviour.



A white elephant?
Title: Cricket
Post by: twominutewarning on 2009-Jun-05, 07:37 PM
Australia cannot win the T20 world cup.

You have been warned.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jun-06, 06:04 AM
Netherlands score last ball win against England   :lol:
Needing 2 runs off final ball to win, the delivery was hit back to bowler Stuart Broad, they ran a single, Broad threw from on his back missed stumps and they got an overthrow to win  :beer: :beer: :beer:

Some very burnt punters out there, I love it

[attachimg=#]

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Cricket
Post by: chalky on 2009-Jun-06, 11:27 PM
Took the, over 1.5 ducks in the match option, didnt take long to collect :beer:

Here's hoping Warner is "on" from here on.

Gotta love T20!
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Jun-07, 01:30 AM
Chris Gayle on absolute fire. Some massive almost unbelievable hits for 6.   :o 8-)
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jun-10, 01:33 AM
Can someone give Brett Lee the arse before he costs us the Ashes.
PLEASE
Title: Cricket
Post by: Nick Rivers on 2009-Jun-10, 02:52 PM
Too right OL.  He tried his guts out in 2005 but wasn't good enough then and he has gone down hill since.

It's not like we're struggling for quicks who can take wickets.  If Clark gets some match fitness he's still the best we've got imo, then you can throw in Johnson, Siddle and Hilf who should all be miles ahead of Bing in the pecking order, not to mention Bollinger, who should have had Lee's spot on the plane, so why are we even taking him?

I've always had a lot of time for the way Lee plays - and often defended him when he came under fire - but there comes a time and his time has passed.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Magiciansmask on 2009-Jun-10, 02:55 PM
Can someone give Brett Lee the arse before he costs us the Ashes.
PLEASE

Agreed. Even a wayward shaun tait is a better option than brett. Mitchell Johnson and Stuart Clarke  :thumbsup:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jun-10, 02:58 PM
It'd be a double barrel catastrohpe if he's selected.
1) He's in the team
2) Someone better isn't
Title: Cricket
Post by: stuey102 on 2009-Jun-10, 03:06 PM
Agreed. Even a wayward shaun tait is a better option than brett. Mitchell Johnson and Stuart Clarke  :thumbsup:

lol Shaun Tait - you must be joking
Title: Cricket
Post by: Magiciansmask on 2009-Jun-10, 03:10 PM
lol Shaun Tait - you must be joking

Well i think i might be by calling him wayward   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Jun-10, 05:33 PM
$3.25 for an England win in the ashes is looking better all the time.
even the $5.50 for a drawn series is tantalizing. i couldn't take Aust' at $1.67.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Jun-10, 05:42 PM
Problem is Australia have such different teams in the 3 forms of the game so theres no real 'team' if ya know what I'm sayin.
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Jun-10, 05:47 PM
Problem is Australia have such different teams in the 3 forms of the game so theres no real 'team' if ya know what I'm sayin.

 except that our batsmen are almost exactly the same.
i just hope P Rogers keeps his pommy form going or we are in big trouble IMO. :/
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Jun-10, 06:14 PM
are you people seriously taking form guides from 20/20.   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Jun-10, 06:15 PM
except that our batsmen are almost exactly the same.
i just hope P Rogers keeps his pommy form going or we are in big trouble IMO. :/

 :what:
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Jun-10, 06:16 PM
well the aust' team is almost exactly the same and they have been playing crap for quite awhile now and not just in 20/20. :whistle:

clarke,ponting,hussey and haddin are hardly inspiring confidence and haven't done so for awhile.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Jun-10, 06:28 PM
England in the last 3 years have beaten 2 countries in a test series.

NZ and the windies. that is it. Lost every other series since 2006.

In the 18 months prior to 2005 ashes england had won 5 series straight and won 14 test from their last 18 with 1 loss.

In the 18 months prior to this series they have won 3 series(2 v NZ and 1 vs windies) and lost 3 series against India, Sth africa and the windies(5 tests couldn't jag a single win)

19 tests for 7 wins and 5 losses.

We are meeting a far worse team in appropriate proportions to any form slump we are having.
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Jun-10, 06:29 PM
IMO you can throw the record book out the window when it comes to the Ashes,as we found out last time we were over there playing for them. :whistle:
Title: Cricket
Post by: stuey102 on 2009-Jun-10, 06:38 PM
well the aust' team is almost exactly the same and they have been playing crap for quite awhile now and not just in 20/20. :whistle:

clarke,ponting,hussey and haddin are hardly inspiring confidence and haven't done so for awhile.

Yep playing crap. Only beat South Africa in South Africa in our last test series.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Jun-10, 06:41 PM
IMO you can throw the record book out the window when it comes to the Ashes,as we found out last time we were over there playing for them. :whistle:

  :lol:  you do realise that was the stats I was posting. Before last ashes in england they were a team who had won 14 of there last 18. A formidable foe. They are nowhere near that this time. And Flintoff the main weapon is now a day to day cripple.

In fact it was only the ignorance of the australian public that made the defeat such a shock.  ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Jun-10, 06:44 PM
Yep playing crap. Only beat South Africa in South Africa in our last test series.

yeah,and got beat on OUR soil by the same team a few weeks before. :what:
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Jun-10, 06:45 PM
yeah,and got beat on OUR soil by the same team a few weeks before. :what:

well it is hard playing 10 vs 11 over 3 tests.  ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jun-10, 06:47 PM
IMO you can throw the record book out the window when it comes to the Ashes,as we found out last time we were over there playing for them. :whistle:

Glenn McGrath trod on a ball in practice, Poms played out of their skin, 2 tests were virtually won on the last ball, one very controversial as we know.
They won't get near us, and as long as their fickle weather doesn't intervene, and we don't play Brett Lee, we'll win the series 5 zip
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Jun-10, 06:49 PM
Glenn McGrath trod on a ball in practice, Poms played out of their skin, 2 tests were virtually won on the last ball, one very controversial as we know.
They won't get near us, and as long as their fickle weather doesn't intervene, and we don't play Brett Lee, we'll win the series 5 zip

True.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Magiciansmask on 2009-Jun-10, 06:56 PM
Glenn McGrath trod on a ball in practice, Poms played out of their skin, 2 tests were virtually won on the last ball, one very controversial as we know.
They won't get near us, and as long as their fickle weather doesn't intervene, and we don't play Brett Lee, we'll win the series 5 zip


Let's hope Lee steps on several balls   :lol:   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jun-10, 07:18 PM

Let's hope Lee steps on several balls   :lol:   :lol:

  :lol:   :lol:   :lol:
Team mates will plant them
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jun-10, 10:07 PM
Trying to work out the Windies v Sri Lanka match, both are in the Super 8's and wondering if it'll be better to finish on top of table or 2nd
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Jun-12, 09:25 PM
The record for teams batting first is amazing. When a team wins the toss and bats, do the odds drastically shorten?
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jun-14, 10:34 AM
The record for teams batting first is amazing. When a team wins the toss and bats, do the odds drastically shorten?

Not drastically, but they do
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jun-14, 10:35 AM
Let's hope Henry's thoughts are recognized

Lawson unloads

BRETT Lee is lucky to be on the Ashes tour and his selection could come back to bite the Australians, according to former Test fast bowler Geoff Lawson.

In a brutal assessment of Lee's form, Lawson said the 32-year-old quick wasn't up to Test standard and would have been dumped from the Australian team if injury hadn't forced him out of the game at the end of last year.

While Australia's selectors have gambled on Lee, who has stood by his goal to take the new ball for the first Ashes Test at Cardiff starting on July 8, Lawson rated the 310-wicket veteran Australia's last-choice bowler on tour.

Lawson said he was stunned that Lee had even made the 16-man touring party. "Leaving Dougy Bollinger out of the squad, you've left out an outstanding left-arm fast bowler, who's in form, for a right-hand guy coming back from injury and you don't know how he's bowling,'' Lawson said.

"It doesn't add up and it might come back to bite them. (Lee) would have been dropped if he hadn't been injured. He hasn't been in form for 18 months, going on two years, so it's an interesting selection to put him in when he's got no form and no match practice.''

Lee has only played Twenty20 cricket since his return a month ago, having broken down with foot and ankle injuries in the Boxing Day Test against South Africa.

He has bowled 40 overs - 268 balls - this year and his longest spell was just 25 deliveries (including an extra) in his return game for Australia against Pakistan on May 7.

At his quickest and best, Lee has been Australia's intimidating spearhead. But he was punished in Australia's failed Twenty20 World Cup campaign this month, taking 3-95 in his eight overs.

"You can't play Twenty20 cricket and expect that it's a testing ground for Test cricket, it's not going to happen,'' Lawson said. "He's underdone."

"He's only been bowling four-over cricket, and not very successfully, since he's come back from his injury. I think he's physically fit, but you've got to be match fit. He's not swinging the ball (and) international batsmen seem to be playing him a lot easier."

"You just look at his figures the last 18 months, they're not overly impressive at all. They're hardly adequate for an international bowler.''

Lee is the only Australian bowler in the squad with Test experience on English soil. But those figures don't enhance his case for selection either. In 18 Test matches against England, Lee averages 40.6 per wicket and has a strike-rate of 63.3, well down on his career numbers of 30.8 and 53.3. Lee's record in England is worse, with an average of 45.44 per wicket and strike-rate of 64.5.

Another former Australian fast bowler Damien Fleming wasn't so quick to write off Lee, but he admitted Twenty20 cricket wasn't the best way to play a bowler back to form.

Fleming said Mitchell Johnson and Peter Siddle deserved to lead the Aussie attack, leaving Lee in a dogfight with Stuart Clark and Ben Hilfenhaus. "Johnson's spells last summer were as hostile as I've seen from an Australian bowler since I don't know when. He was fast and furious,'' Fleming said.

"Siddle's all over you with his competitiveness. At his best, (Lee) probably gets a game but it's all about form here. I don't think his 300 wickets will have that much weight when it comes to selecting the team, it'll be about current form.''

Australia have two four-day warm-up games scheduled before the first Test, against Sussex starting on June 24 and the England Lions starting on July 1.


Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Jun-14, 11:24 AM
Not drastically, but they do

Yeah sorry over exaggerated a little.   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Jun-15, 10:35 PM
Suprised to see England favs against the Windies.  ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Jun-21, 11:14 PM
Pakistan are overs for the final tonight imo.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jun-21, 11:38 PM
I'll wait for the toss, atm Sri Lanka 1.80 Pakis 2.12 on BF
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jun-22, 12:00 AM
Backed the pakis to run em down @ 2.08  :sweat:

Well done Sri Lanka, congrats on winning the 20/20 World Cup  :no1:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jun-22, 09:57 AM
Didn't the game start at around 12.00am our time ?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Jun-22, 11:14 AM
Pakistan really should have done better the way they started their 1st innings.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jun-22, 11:17 AM
Pakistan really should have done better the way they started their 1st innings.

Let me guess Pakistans innings came crashing down when Mendez came on ?

This guy is a true slow bowling maestro.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Jun-22, 11:36 AM
Let me guess Pakistans innings came crashing down when Mendez came on ?

This guy is a true slow bowling maestro.

No Pakistan won mate.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jun-22, 11:56 AM
Pakistan really should have done better the way they started their 1st innings.

Well crikeys ya got me with that one.    :lol:

They started there first inning quite well i take it ?
Did it slow down when Mendez came on ?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jun-22, 11:58 AM
 BAW Mendis 4 0 34 0 8.50

No ya dingaling and its Mendis.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Jun-22, 12:03 PM
Well crikeys ya got me with that one.     :lol:  

They started there first inning quite well i take it ?
Did it slow down when Mendez came on ?


If its Mendis your talking about, he bowled 4 overs and went for 0/34.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Jun-22, 12:04 PM
http://cricket.yahoo.com/postmatch-PakistanvsSri-Lanka_3222

There ya go matty.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jun-22, 12:09 PM
  emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jun-22, 12:11 PM
Pakistan really should have done better the way they started their 1st innings.

I'm still shaking my head, what kind of comment is this?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Jun-22, 12:11 PM
I'm still shaking my head, what kind of comment is this?

I'm basically saying they should have romped em.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Jun-22, 12:18 PM
And they were always overs as I said. They knocked off the champion South African team!
Title: Cricket
Post by: passdoubt on 2009-Jun-22, 07:11 PM
Backed the pakis to run em down @ 2.08  :sweat:

Well done Sri Lanka, congrats on winning the 20/20 World Cup  :no1:

Well done OL, they must have played well for you not to stop them :clap2:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jun-22, 07:13 PM
Well done OL, they must have played well for you not to stop them :clap2:

They were cruising and all of a sudden needed 26 off last 3 overs, but the 19 off the 18th was handy   emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Jun-24, 11:53 AM
if he gets past day 3,first test i will be shocked. :o :o :o

 reported this morning Watson out of 4 day match with a knee problem and they are considering sending for a replacement. :bleh:

i'm not one to say i told you so but,I TOLD YOU SO!!! :whistle: :nowink:

the bloke is a crock,shouldn't have been there in the first place. :thumbsd:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jun-24, 01:19 PM
good call shaun   emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Jun-24, 02:01 PM
i should have run a book on it.  :lol:  :slaphead:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Jun-24, 06:43 PM
How could they even think about replacing Siddle for Lee.  :nowink:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jun-24, 07:29 PM
How could they even think about replacing Siddle for Lee.  :nowink:

I really hope we lose any test that Lee plays in
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Jun-24, 07:32 PM
I really hope we lose any test that Lee plays in

Its the ashes so I want Aus to win regardless, but if it was any other match I'd want them to lose.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jun-24, 07:34 PM
Well if he plays in the first, it will be his last, so we can win 4-1  :beer:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Jun-24, 07:36 PM
Well if he plays in the first, it will be his last, so we can win 4-1  :beer:

  :lol:   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Jun-25, 09:56 PM
Siddle 2/18,  Lee 0/22 so far. :chin:

one less over from Siddle as well....early days admit.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jun-26, 08:17 AM
Lee took 3 for 53 8-)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Jun-26, 07:57 PM
Haurits FFS I have been saying for ages how  :censored: hopeless he is.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Jun-26, 08:06 PM
and I've said it before on this thread. Katich is by far our best spinner.
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Jun-26, 08:31 PM
and I've said it before on this thread. Katich is by far our best spinner.

 agree and Clarke is the next best spinner,even better than his batting.
they should scrap plans to play Hauritz and play another batsmen or quick,they have enough spin options,although having Warnie wouldn't go astray.  :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Jun-26, 08:31 PM
agree and Clarke is the next best spinner,even better than his batting.
they should scrap plans to play Hauritz and play another batsmen or quick,they have enough spin options,although having Warnie wouldn't go astray.   :biggrin:  

Wouldnt go that far.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Nick Rivers on 2009-Jul-01, 06:50 PM
Can someone tell me why Hilfenhaus is not being considered for the first test?   Please tell me it's a minor injury, rather than the selectors thinking Lee's a better option in these conditions (England in particular, but this life more generally).
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jul-01, 07:57 PM
Will get back to you regarding Hilf

Have had a crack at Hughes to top score in Tour match about to start.
Aussies won the toss and elected to bat
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jul-01, 08:01 PM
Can someone tell me why Hilfenhaus is not being considered for the first test?   Please tell me it's a minor injury, rather than the selectors thinking Lee's a better option in these conditions (England in particular, but this life more generally).

BRETT Lee has been given one last chance to revive his Test career before the Ashes, but captain Ricky Ponting last night indicated the veteran paceman was far from certain of playing in the first Test despite his inclusion for the final tour game here.

The decision to rest in-form quick Peter Siddle for the first-class fixture starting today against the England Lions gives the Australians another opportunity to look at Lee, Stuart Clark and off-spinner Nathan Hauritz before the Ashes, with selections still mired in confusion a week before the first Test.

"The spots are still up for grabs, as far as I'm concerned," Ponting said. The omission of Ben Hilfenhaus suggests he has dropped out of contention, but senior pacemen Lee and Clark will be duelling for one spot unless the Australians opt for a four-man pace contingent in Cardiff. With Hauritz also given a chance to redeem himself after taking 1-158 in the tour game against Sussex, the structure of the attack is also still up for debate.

Lee remains the most contentious issue, given he can no longer reach the same speeds at the age of 32 as he did in his prime, and in the previous game he did not strike with the new ball, and bowled too many no-balls.

Asked whether Lee's 310 Test wickets would play a role in his selection prospects, Ponting said: "We've got to look at how he's bowling at the moment, we've got to look at what conditions we're confronted with as well."

The more pressing issue may be Lee's record in England, where his wickets have come at 45 runs apiece. Ponting suggested he did not need to make dramatic adjustments to succeed in English conditions other than rediscover his best attributes — extreme pace and swing.

Ponting said the Australians needed to lift a gear against an England Lions team spearheaded by Steve Harmison and captained by Ian Bell. Shane Watson will miss again, after his plans to bat for the first time since straining a thigh muscle were foiled by rain, giving Marcus North a clear run at the No. 6 spot.

Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jul-01, 08:33 PM
Have had a crack at Hughes to top score in Tour match about to start.
Aussies won the toss and elected to bat

That was short n sweet, out for 7   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Jul-01, 09:30 PM
there seems to be a lot of toing and froing from the aussie camp.
haven't heard of any prob's from the pom's.
if this game doesn't go well the panic button will be pushed.
one blessing is that Watson looks like not playing.
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Jul-01, 11:23 PM
hope this is a good sign for Hussey,really needed at least the score he has so far. :sweat:
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Jul-02, 12:11 AM
5/190 as i write this.....another woeful effort from the top order. :slaphead:
at least Hussey is finally showing something. :chin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jul-02, 01:43 AM
A ton for Mr Cricket   emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: Nick Rivers on 2009-Jul-02, 10:00 AM
Troy Cooley believes the diversity of Australia's fast bowling line-up parallels England's revered attack of four years ago. Cooley's role in guiding England to Ashes glory in 2005 has been well documented, and the bowling coach, who has since joined the Australian staff, is hopeful of reaching similar heights this summer with his country of origin.

England's attack of 2005 has been rated by many as Test cricket's finest fast bowling quartet since the West Indians of the 1980s. The reverse swing of Simon Jones, the conventional swing of Matthew Hoggard, the bounce and seam movement of Steve Harmison and the complete package offered by Andrew Flintoff afforded Australia's quality batting line-up little respite, and set the platform for a famous 2-1 series win.

The Australians have yet to finalise their pace attack for the first Test in Cardiff, but appear to be leaning towards a line-up of Mitchell Johnson, Peter Siddle, Brett Lee and Stuart Clark. All four offer vastly different skill-sets - from the left-arm pace and swing of Johnson to the height, accuracy and seam movement of the right-arm Clark - imbuing Cooley with confidence that his line-up is capable of adapting to all conditions.

Asked whether he noticed similarities in the flexibility of his current attack and that of England four years ago, Cooley was emphatic. "Exactly," he said. "If you get all those fast bowlers putting the ball in the right area, you have got a really good mix, and that's what we are trying to do now. We are working constantly on all that sort of stuff, they are getting up their skills and they are doing pretty well at the moment."

As talented as Australia's pace line-up is, Cooley is under no illusions as to the difficulty of the task ahead this summer. His two most experienced pacemen, Lee and Clark, are returning from surgery and yet to rediscover the rhythm that, barely 12 months ago, saw them rated among the best new-ball combinations in international cricket. Siddle and Ben Hilfenhaus, meanwhile, are just beginning their international careers and have limited experience in English conditions. At least one, and possibly two, of the aforementioned foursome will miss selection in Cardiff, and managing bruised egos could prove as important a coaching assignment as guiding those in the starting XI.

"Of course it's going to be hard," Cooley said. "Everyone wants to play but you can only get eleven out on the park. There is a really good feel in this group, they get on really well together. Sure the ones that miss out will be disappointed, but they will be patting the next one on the back to go out and do the job. They will be working extra hard to try and get in the team if there is an opportunity available.

"For me it's all about getting every bowler up and ready. It's quite exciting to have them all back and … giving the selectors a bit of a hard time in choosing which ones to start on July 8."

The recent spell of hot and dry weather in England has prompted Kevin Pietersen to predict that reverse swing could prove as important a factor this season as it did four years ago. Cooley's work in grooming Jones and Flintoff into an old-ball force was lauded at the time, and the bowling coach is confident his current crop Australian quicks will prove adept at reversing the ball when conditions suit.

"It's not rocket science," he said. "You have to get the seam in the right spot, and if you have got an arm action that does that and you have got the speed and the ball condition, you're laughing. They know that. It's just a matter of them being able to execute that and practice it. They have got the know-how, they have just got to make sure they work it and get the best out of themselves to be able to produce reverse when its available."

Lee, for one, believes Cooley's input has been instrumental in improving Australia's reverse swing capabilities. "It will be a massive weapon for us," Lee said. "I've been watching replays of 2005 and picking Cooley's brain. It's important as a bowler - whether you've played for 10 years or not - to keep experimenting

"In 2005, the ball was swinging back in and we couldn't get the ball swinging as effectively as the England bowlers did. Now we prepare with the brand new ball, and older balls as well. Troy is with us now, and he was instrumental in 2005."


Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Jul-02, 10:48 AM
"It's not rocket science," he said. "You have to get the seam in the right spot, and if you have got an arm action that does that and you have got the speed and the ball condition, you're laughing. They know that. It's just a matter of them being able to execute that and practice it. They have got the know-how, they have just got to make sure they work it and get the best out of themselves to be able to produce reverse when its available."

Lee, for one, believes Cooley's input has been instrumental in improving Australia's reverse swing capabilities. "It will be a massive weapon for us," Lee said. "I've been watching replays of 2005 and picking Cooley's brain. It's important as a bowler - whether you've played for 10 years or not - to keep experimenting

"In 2005, the ball was swinging back in and we couldn't get the ball swinging as effectively as the England bowlers did. Now we prepare with the brand new ball, and older balls as well. Troy is with us now, and he was instrumental in 2005."





Thats what I wanted to hear, finally 8-)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Jul-02, 03:44 PM
Can someone tell me why Hilfenhaus is not being considered for the first test?   Please tell me it's a minor injury, rather than the selectors thinking Lee's a better option in these conditions (England in particular, but this life more generally).


Hilfy can outswing it a mile, good luck to him.
Title: Cricket
Post by: stuey102 on 2009-Jul-02, 03:59 PM

Hilfy can outswing it a mile, good luck to him.


Yep he should be getting a gig for sure.

Title: Cricket
Post by: Nick Rivers on 2009-Jul-02, 04:02 PM
Hilf's made for English conditions.  Lee was twice the bowler four years ago he is now, and the pommie conditions weren't conducive for him to be successful then.  Why would he do well now?  If they go with him though, I hope he bags plenty - or any of the others for that matter - I just can't bear the thought of getting rolled again.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Puntermatt on 2009-Jul-02, 04:42 PM
Lee has done nothing to warrant being picked. He has not improved since averaging 45 against the Poms 4 years ago.

Clark has a good record against Poms and should get third spot if fit.

The reason Hauritz is in consideration is that the ICC have increased the fines for slow over rates as well as increasing the likelihood of the responsible captain being suspended. And we all know about our slow over rates last Summer.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Antitab# on 2009-Jul-02, 04:49 PM

The reason Hauritz is in consideration is that the ICC have increased the fines for slow over rates as well as increasing the likelihood of the responsible captain being suspended. And we all know about our slow over rates last Summer.

If that is correct Ponting shoud be sacked now. If he cant organise himself and his team to bowl an over every 4 minutes he has no right to captain the Australian cricket team  or Moonee Ponds 4ths for that matter.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Jul-02, 04:50 PM
If that is correct Ponting shoud be sacked now. If he cant organise himself and his team to bowl an over every 4 minutes he has no right to captain the Australian cricket team  or Moonee Ponds 4ths for that matter.

Except there is no Moonee Ponds cricket team  :p  :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Nick Rivers on 2009-Jul-02, 05:14 PM
ACB should be telling Punter to do as he wishes  bowlers and over rates and they'll cover the fine.  They've got enough money to pay for hundreds of hangers-on and their spouses to treat the last Ashes tour as some kind of social affair and not the be-all and end-all of sport and life that it is, so surely they can spot him a few grand as he tries to win test matches for us.   And this way we can have the bowling line up common sense dictates - Clark, Siddle, Johnson & Hilf.  Katdog's a better spinner than Hauritz anyway.
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Jul-03, 12:27 AM
our bowlers are getting carted all over the park and still Katich can't get a bowl.
did Katich screw Pontings missus or something. :slaphead: :slaphead: :slaphead: :mad: :mad: :mad: :rant: :rant: :rant:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jul-03, 12:36 AM
did Katich screw Pontings missus or something.

Well he didn't stay with him long last night when he came in   :lol:

Lee a coat of varnish off a hattrick, full in-swinging delivery on middle stump finds and inside edge past leg stump
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jul-03, 02:24 AM
Lee's taken all 5 wickets so far, has actually bowled well, but the problem is it means he'll get selected in the 1st test  :/
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jul-03, 10:24 AM
Lee's taken all 5 wickets so far, has actually bowled well, but the problem is it means he'll get selected in the 1st test  :/

And so he should do to.

Its a shame Hilf did not get abowl on this deck, the ball has certainly been moving around.
Title: Cricket
Post by: InTheKnow on 2009-Jul-06, 12:32 PM
A CRICKET umpire has died after a ball thrown by a fielding player hit him on the head.

Hundreds of fans watched in horror as Alcwyn Jenkins, 72, failed to see the ball hurtling towards the stumps from the boundary, the Daily Mail reports.

The grandfather, a well known umpire in Welsh cricket, collapsed and players tried to resuscitate him.

He was airlifted to hospital but never regained consciousness.

The unnamed Llangennech fielder, whose side were playing home team Swansea on Saturday, is said to be ‘devastated’.

The South Wales Cricket Association division one match was abandoned.

The association’s honorary chairman Neil Hobbs, a friend of Mr Jenkins, said: "Everyone is shocked. It is very, very sad. Alcwyn was a great guy.

"He was well respected and everyone knew him. Umpires do get hit by the ball occasionally, but the chances of a fatality must be less than one in a million. No one can believe it."
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Jul-06, 02:51 PM
geez imagine how the fielder feels. Has to live with that the rest of his life.  :no:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Magiciansmask on 2009-Jul-06, 02:56 PM
geez imagine how the fielder feels. Has to live with that the rest of his life.  :no:

I feel for both the deceased ump and the poor player who,as arakaan said,has to live with this for the rest of his days. Would be the same odds as being killed by lightning i imagine 

:rip:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jul-06, 03:10 PM
What was the go with Ponting declaring Australias 2nd Innings with Marcus North on 191 notout?
The match ended in a draw and was always going to  :what:
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Jul-06, 06:41 PM
Might be a bit of light hearted fun

http://cricketfantasy.foxsports.com.au/

Just hit the auto complete and see how you go.
Title: Cricket
Post by: twominutewarning on 2009-Jul-06, 09:12 PM
What was the go with Ponting declaring Australias 2nd Innings with Marcus North on 191 notout?
The match ended in a draw and was always going to  :what:

Maybe he's a total  :censored:  or North agreed to it at lunch.
I remember him doing the same to Hussey one day before he reached 150.
Title: Cricket
Post by: twominutewarning on 2009-Jul-06, 10:04 PM
Who were the fwits that touted Clarke as the next captain FFS?
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Jul-06, 10:18 PM
 

Lee ruled out of first two Tests

 

Alex Brown and Peter English

 

July 6, 2009

 
Text size: A | A
 
                                                                                 

           
           Brett Lee flies up to his delivery stride, England Lions v Australians, New Road, 2nd day, July 2, 2009
                                                                                                                 
Brett Lee felt discomfort in his chest following his seven wickets against the England Lions in Worcester                    © PA Photos
                   
           
             
Related Links                
Bulletin : North and Hussey impress in draw
                  News : Lee swings into XI for Cardiff
                                                                       
Teams: Australia | England
   

Australia's Ashes preparations have been thrown into disarray with their most senior paceman, Brett Lee, ruled out of the opening two Tests, at Cardiff and Lord's, with a left side strain, Cricinfo has learned.

   

Lee was absent from Australia's training session at Sophia Gardens on Monday after being sent to London for scans, and is understood to be gutted at the news. He was Australia's best bowler in the tour match against England Lions in Worcester, claiming 6 for 76 in the first innings and displaying a mastery of reverse-swing, but it is felt he tried too hard to prove himself in that match, having missed Australia's last four Tests against South Africa.

   

Prior to the injury, Lee seemed certain to partner Mitchell Johnson and Peter Siddle in Australia's pace attack in Cardiff, with Stuart Clark and Nathan Hauritz duelling for the final bowling position, but those plans are now destined for the shredder.

   

"He has a sore left rib, but we won't know the extent of it until the scans are back," an Australian team spokesman said. "We're in a holding pattern until then."

   

Lee, Australia's most senior bowler with 310 wickets from 76 Tests, only recently returned to action after undergoing foot and ankle surgery following the Boxing Day Test against South Africa. The tour matches against Sussex and England Lions were his first outings outside of Twenty20 competition this year, and his display in Worcester last week had prompted many to feel that he was nearing peak form.

   

"I have not trained for 25 weeks to sit on the sidelines," Lee said last week, but it is looking the most likely scenario. If a replacement is required Doug Bollinger, the left-armer from New South Wales, is next in line after touring South Africa earlier in the year and making his Test debut in January.

   

The loss of Lee will prove a withering blow to the tourists' hopes of retaining the Ashes, and prompt a major revision of Australia's selection and planning policies entering the Cardiff Test. If, as was expected, Australia were preparing to enter the match with an all-pace attack, Ben Hilfenhaus would appear the least disruptive option. He combined successfully with Mitchell Johnson and Peter Siddle in South Africa earlier this year, but was unconvincing in the tour match against Sussex.

   

Kevin Pietersen resisted the temptation of indulging in a spot of pre-Ashes schadenfreud by expressing sadness for Lee. "It's a huge, huge loss for Australia," Pietersen said. "Who knows with the Australian team? It could be cat and mouse... [but] it's said for [Lee] if it's true. We keep in touch and are pretty good mates."

   

Michael Clarke, Lee's Australian team-mate, expressed sympathy for his colleague, and still hoped the injury would prove less severe than feared. "Right now we'll just wait and see and hope the scans come back clear," he said. "He's worked really hard over the last 12 months to get back.

   

"I only found out this morning that he was having the scans," Clarke added, "so it came as a bit of a surprise to me. The most important thing is to get Brett as fit as possible."

Title: Cricket
Post by: twominutewarning on 2009-Jul-06, 11:02 PM
I think we'll struggle without Lee.
Hauritz only has one delivery.
Hughes has a short ball weakness.

England probably has a better team than 05 and we are not as strong.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jul-06, 11:03 PM
Lee ruled out of first two Tests

A blessing in disguise  :beer:
Title: Cricket
Post by: twominutewarning on 2009-Jul-06, 11:43 PM
Enus says you're full of shite   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Jul-07, 11:17 AM
I think we'll struggle without Lee.
Hauritz only has one delivery.
Hughes has a short ball weakness.

England probably has a better team than 05 and we are not as strong.


If Australias playing Hauritz I will fair dinkum bet on England.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jul-07, 11:19 AM
If Australias playing Hauritz I will fair dinkum bet on England.

Yep, they can use Katitch and Clarke for similar, if not better results.

They're trying to make a new Shane Warne pop out of the box, but it just aint gunna happen.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Jul-07, 11:25 AM
JOKE.  What odds can I get about England? lol
Title: Cricket
Post by: Nick Rivers on 2009-Jul-07, 04:29 PM
I think we'll struggle without Lee.
Hauritz only has one delivery.
Hughes has a short ball weakness.

England probably has a better team than 05 and we are not as strong.


Should Hilf play, the first two points are null and void, as Hilf is better than Lee (in these conditions certainly).

Hughes may have a problem with the short ball, but if he can tame the quality pace attack of the Saffas, he can handle these muppets.

Poms going better than '05?  You're American, aren't you?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Jul-07, 05:01 PM
Should Hilf play, the first two points are null and void, as Hilf is better than Lee (in these conditions certainly).

Hughes may have a problem with the short ball, but if he can tame the quality pace attack of the Saffas, he can handle these muppets.

Poms going better than '05?  You're American, aren't you?

Mate one thing's for sure - Hauritz does not deserve to be playing.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Antitab# on 2009-Jul-07, 05:07 PM

Hughes may have a problem with the short ball, but if he can tame the quality pace attack of the Saffas, he can handle these muppets.


I think Hughes is more likely to have trouble with the English quicks that he had in South Africa . Broad, Flintoff and Harmison are all big blokes who bowl stump to stump and get high bounce off a good length which Hughes's technique isnt equipped to handle.

Against South Africa he was all right because Steyn skids it through like Lee, Ntini gets wide and relies on angle and Morkel is slower than the Pommy bowlers.

Will be interesting to see how he goes.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Jul-07, 05:09 PM
I think Hughes is more likely to have trouble with the English quicks that he had in South Africa . Broad, Flintoff and Harmison are all big blokes who bowl stump to stump and get high bounce off a good length which Hughes's technique isnt equipped to handle.

Against South Africa he was all right because Steyn skids it through like Lee, Ntini gets wide and relies on angle and Morkel is slower than the Pommy bowlers.

Will be interesting to see how he goes.

Yeah Hughes at 4.50 to be the high scorer in the first innings is definately unders.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Nick Rivers on 2009-Jul-07, 05:16 PM
Won't get any arguments here mate.  

He's meant to be a champion bloke though.  I've got a mate who started bolwing offies for his club side.  Through a contact, he was able to give Hauritz a bell and ask him for advice.  Hauritz asked if he ever found himself in Sydney.  My mate's in a band and they play a fair bit up in Sydney, so the next time he went up there, Hauritz spent three or four hours with him in the nets, answering any questions my mate had.  He was extremely down to earth and couldn't have been more generous with his time.  If only he could bowl a bit better.......  
Title: Cricket
Post by: Nick Rivers on 2009-Jul-07, 05:21 PM
I think Hughes is more likely to have trouble with the English quicks that he had in South Africa . Broad, Flintoff and Harmison are all big blokes who bowl stump to stump and get high bounce off a good length which Hughes's technique isnt equipped to handle.

Against South Africa he was all right because Steyn skids it through like Lee, Ntini gets wide and relies on angle and Morkel is slower than the Pommy bowlers.

Will be interesting to see how he goes.

Not sure how much damage Harmison can do from the sidelines, and regardless of height and angle, I'd back Hughes to handle Broad ok - how can someone who averages 38 be that much of a threat?

Flintoff (if he's on song) on the other hand......
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Jul-07, 05:22 PM
Won't get any arguments here mate. 

He's meant to be a champion bloke though.  I've got a mate who started bolwing offies for his club side.  Through a contact, he was able to give Hauritz a bell and ask him for advice.  Hauritz asked if he ever found himself in Sydney.  My mate's in a band and they play a fair bit up in Sydney, so the next time he went up there, Hauritz spent three or four hours with him in the nets, answering any questions my mate had.  He was extremely down to earth and couldn't have been more generous with his time.  If only he could bowl a bit better....... 

Mate I'm sure hes a gem of a bloke, but thats not the point.

Brett Lee's a gem of a bloke too let me tell ya... A couple of years ago after like the 3rd day of the boxing day test he came out and signed autographs for a hundred odd people and even let me take a photo of him with my son, and he got through everyone. Says somethin about the bloke imo.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Nick Rivers on 2009-Jul-07, 05:27 PM
Agree mate - got a lot of time for both of them - as people.
Title: Cricket
Post by: twominutewarning on 2009-Jul-07, 05:48 PM
Should Hilf play, the first two points are null and void, as Hilf is better than Lee (in these conditions certainly).

Hughes may have a problem with the short ball, but if he can tame the quality pace attack of the Saffas, he can handle these muppets.

Poms going better than '05?  You're American, aren't you?


No.. not American.

Hilf is not better than Lee in any conditions at the moment.
Harmison made Hughes look ordinary.I know he's not playing but the others know where to target him now.
The fact that they've gone for Panesar over Harmison at Cardiff tells us that it's supposed to be a turning wicket which is why the aussies may play Hauritz.
The Poms have a very decent line-up overall.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Nick Rivers on 2009-Jul-07, 05:54 PM
Which is why they got rolled in the Caribbean.  A team capable of beating us just wouldn't have lost there.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Jul-07, 06:00 PM
England in the last 3 years have beaten 2 countries in a test series.

NZ and the windies. that is it. Lost every other series since 2006.

In the 18 months prior to 2005 ashes england had won 5 series straight and won 14 tests from their last 18 with 1 loss.

In the 18 months prior to this series they have won 3 series(2 v NZ and 1 vs windies) and lost 3 series against India, Sth africa and the windies(5 tests couldn't jag a single win)

19 tests for 7 wins and 5 losses.

We are meeting a far worse team in appropriate proportions to any form slump we are having.


 ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Nick Rivers on 2009-Jul-07, 06:17 PM
I was thinking of that post just a minute ago.  Thanks for digging it up Ara   emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Jul-08, 12:46 PM
So are they probably gonna be playin 2nite or not?
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jul-08, 12:54 PM
So are they probably gonna be playin 2nite or not?

The draw's still fav @ 2.46 I guess that means the match may be interrupted now and then  :/
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jul-08, 02:15 PM
You'd crawl through broken glass to get on the draw if ya went by this

[attachimg=#]

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Jul-08, 02:16 PM
Yes but I'm not asking people to look into their cristal balls, all I'm asking is what the weathers like at the moment and how its looking for tonight.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Magiciansmask on 2009-Jul-08, 02:30 PM
Australian fast-bowler Mitchell Johnson's mum has served up a spray to the cricket star's girlfriend.

Vikki Harber, 45, has also hit out at Cricket Australia for favouring player's "bitchy" partners over parents when the Australian team is on tour, according to News Ltd.

Johnson's relationship with his mum has reportedly deteriorated since he began his relationship with RALPH covergirl and Karate champion fiancee Jessica Bratich.

"The last time I actually spoke to him was when the beach cricket was here (and) Dennis Lillee told him he had to ring his mother, so Mitchell rang me that day,", Harber told News Ltd.

"It has been like this since Jess came on the scene.

"Up until he met Jessica we were very close . . . but he hasn't spent a night under my roof since he met Jessica.

"For the wives and the children I think it is great that they support them and send the over there, but who are these girlfriends? They are just girlfriends."

"[Bratich] gets all these trips, she gets flown there, accommodation, food and all of that."

Harber was angry she had not received an offer to go to England but Johnson's father Kevin supported his son taking his partner on tour.

News Ltd reported players were the ones responsible for selecting who joins them on tour.



Time to cut the apron strings i think   :/
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Jul-08, 02:37 PM
but he hasn't spent a night under my roof since he met Jessica

Bloody hell, do you blame him.   Good looking girl is Jessica
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jul-08, 02:41 PM
Maybe mum wants him more than under her roof  :shutup: :stop:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Magiciansmask on 2009-Jul-08, 02:46 PM
Maybe mum wants him more than under her roof  :shutup: :stop:


Likes his "middle" stump ya reckon?    :lol:   :lol:   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Magiciansmask on 2009-Jul-09, 07:08 PM
Mitchell Johnson's mum on ACA. What a whinging whining old scrubber. Let the man have a life and cut the apron strings ffs.   :mad: :mad:
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Jul-09, 08:19 PM
Hope Mitch's mum was happy with that   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Jul-09, 08:22 PM
Just looking at the fantastic pictures coming in tonight and thinking back a bit.

The first game that I noticed much on TV was the tied test in Brisbane on the old B&W TV.

Then I was living in Townsville when colour TV came out and we seen cricket in colour.  It was absolutely amazing to us then.

Now this  emthup   emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Jul-09, 08:53 PM
$3.25 for an England win in the ashes is looking better all the time.
even the $5.50 for a drawn series is tantalizing. i couldn't take Aust' at $1.67.

 wouldn't mind this now. :whistle: :(
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Jul-15, 09:28 PM
And Flintoff the main weapon is now a day to day cripple.

 ;)

http://www.cricinfo.com/england/content/story/414514.html
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jul-17, 12:41 AM
How many batsmen have scored 100 or more first class centuries ?
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jul-17, 12:44 AM
How many batsmen have scored 100 or more first class centuries ?

NFI
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jul-17, 12:44 AM
  :lol:  Well that clears that up, i'll sleep easier.
Title: Cricket
Post by: firezuki on 2009-Jul-17, 04:59 AM
Now you know how OL won "Who Wants To Be A Millionare?"
The question was how did Hauritz get picked for the Ashes tour. 
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Jul-17, 05:32 PM
How many batsmen have scored 100 or more first class centuries ?

Name
100's
Innings
100th 100
Season
100th 100
Innings
400+
300+
200+
JB Hobbs 197 1315 1923 821
1 16
EH Hendren 170 1300 1928-29 740
1 22
WR Hammond 167 1005 1935 679
4 36
CP Mead 153 1340 1927 892

13
G Boycott 151 1014 1977 645

10
H Sutcliffe 149 1088 1932 700
1 17
FE Woolley 145 1532 1929 1031
1 9
L Hutton 129 814 1951 619
1 11
GA Gooch 128 988 1992-93 820
1 13
WG Grace 126 1493 1895 1113
3 13
DCS Compton 123 839 1952 552
1 9
TW Graveney 122 1223 1964 940

7
DG Bradman 117 338 1947-48 295 1 6 37
IVA Richards 114 796 1988-89 658
1 10
GA Hick 108 628 1998 574 1 2 11
Zaheer Abbas 108 768 1982-83 658

10
A Sandham 107 1000 1935 871
1 11
MC Cowdrey 107 1130 1973 1035
1 3
TW Hayward 104 1138 1913 1076
1 8
GM Turner 103 792 1982 779
1 10
JH Edrich 103 979 1977 945
1 4
LEG Ames 102 951 1950 915

9
E Tyldesley 102 961 1934 919

7
DL Amiss 102 1139 1986 1081

3

Through extensive counting  of the list that makes the total 24.

anything else?   :biggrin:

Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jul-17, 05:33 PM
Now you know how OL won "Who Wants To Be A Millionare?"
The question was how did Hauritz get picked for the Ashes tour. 

  :lol:   :lol:   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jul-18, 12:26 AM
Thankyou OL.    :thumbsup:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jul-18, 12:28 AM
Thankyou OL.    :thumbsup:

You should be thanking Arakaan, I look nothing like a Tiger
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jul-18, 12:36 AM
Thankyou Arakaan.   :thumbsup:
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Jul-20, 01:40 PM
The first test win by Bangladesh over the West Indies was overlooked during the first Ashes test.

They are fairly well placed to repeat the win in the second test. 
Title: Cricket
Post by: Nick Rivers on 2009-Jul-20, 01:49 PM
Aren't half the Windies players on strike?

At any rate, on one hand it's great for Bangladesh, but on the other, it highlights the biggest problem in world cricket - why the  :censored:, with all the money in the game, is the ICC not pouring truckloads of it in to West Indies cricket?  If cricket dies in the Caribbean, the game will become more or less two dimensional, as the only possible powers will be Aus, SAF, Poms and the Indians.  How boring is that?

As far as I'm concerned, the ICC has to make the WIndies their number one priority.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Jul-20, 02:20 PM
Aren't half the Windies players on strike?

At any rate, on one hand it's great for Bangladesh, but on the other, it highlights the biggest problem in world cricket - why the  :censored:, with all the money in the game, is the ICC not pouring truckloads of it in to West Indies cricket?  If cricket dies in the Caribbean, the game will become more or less two dimensional, as the only possible powers will be Aus, SAF, Poms and the Indians.  How boring is that?

As far as I'm concerned, the ICC has to make the WIndies their number one priority.

I don't see it as all that boring, it means we will see each of those nations out here more often.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Nick Rivers on 2009-Jul-20, 03:00 PM
I think that's pretty short-sighted.  The ICC should be looking to consolidate and increase cricket's popularity all over  the world - don't we want as many top-notch teams as possible?  The sport struggles to establish itself in new markets.  I don't think it can afford to lose the Windies altogether, which is what may very well happen if the infrastructure of the domestic game there is not sorted out soon.  Why would you play in the Red Stripe Cup if you can't make a living out of it?  And it's not like the game is struggling for money.  I think the Windies are the only ones who add any genine colour to the game (and to a much lesser extent, the Pakis and the Sri Lankans).  What's more, they have a proud history in the game, and without them, the game just seems to have a far lesser appeal, globally speaking.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jul-20, 03:03 PM
The problem in the West Indies is the kids grow up with a basketball in their hands these days, whereas yesteryear it was a crickket ball.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Nick Rivers on 2009-Jul-20, 03:20 PM
Basketball's popularity has grown, but it's cricket that's still part of the national psyche (yes, I know the WIndies is not a nation, but you know what I mean).  With a little time and effort from the greats of yesteryear, and a bit of cash from the ICC, cricket should remain the number one sport in the Caribbean, and the WIndies should return to the top echelons of international cricket soon enough.  I just hope the powers that be agree and do something about it.

Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jul-20, 03:22 PM
I'd imagine the introduction of the IPL, and the fat contracts that go with it, would lure kids to choose cricket as a preferred sport in this day and age.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Nick Rivers on 2009-Jul-20, 03:33 PM
But it's only the top ones that get the big bucks.  Everything I've read about the state of cricket in Caribbean at the moment says it's the fact you can't make a living out of the domestic competition which is turning youngsters off playing the game in any serious way.  And it's not like these blokes are being greedy - the Caribbean correspondent on the BBC the other night was saying players barely receive subsistence wages for playing in their equivalent of our Sheffield Shield.   That's a huge committment for SFA in return.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Jul-20, 03:42 PM
But it's only the top ones that get the big bucks.

The idea is to become a top player to make the big bucks, just like tennis and golf for example.
But of course, that's where the ICC have to come in and pour money into the sport to keep it kicking in cash strapped nations.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Nick Rivers on 2009-Jul-20, 03:47 PM
  emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2009-Jul-23, 10:33 PM
If ever one needed an example of what a bloody goose Andrew Symonds is you only had to watch the footy show tonight. Lucky he could play a bit, has no future in the media, no wonder he has to drink, he is a fool.
Title: Cricket
Post by: stuey102 on 2009-Jul-23, 10:35 PM
If ever one needed an example of what a bloody goose Andrew Symonds is you only had to watch the footy show tonight. Lucky he could play a bit, has no future in the media, no wonder he has to drink, he is a fool.

What happened?
Title: Cricket
Post by: chuggers on 2009-Jul-23, 10:40 PM
If ever one needed an example of what a bloody goose Andrew Symonds is you only had to watch the footy show tonight. Lucky he could play a bit, has no future in the media, no wonder he has to drink, he is a fool.


Yes, said the same thing to the Mrs--5 minutes ago

 :sad:
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Jul-23, 10:58 PM
and so who cares?
isn't this topic about CRICKET?
if he can play then all the better for Australia.
who cares if he is no Tracey Grimshaw,then again is that such a bad thing? :bleh: :whistle:
stupid peer pressure/political correctness raising it's ugly head because he is not as smart as you think YOU are on life skills. :baby:

GET REAL! :wacko:

the facts expressed that you'se even WATCH whatever footy show speaks volumes about your opinions and how seriously they should be taken. :bleh:  :lol:   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Aug-12, 11:15 PM
20/20 at 11.30

Sri Lanka v Pakistan, i'm on SL @ 2.06
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2009-Aug-13, 07:25 AM
and so who cares?
isn't this topic about CRICKET?
if he can play then all the better for Australia.
who cares if he is no Tracey Grimshaw,then again is that such a bad thing? :bleh: :whistle:
stupid peer pressure/political correctness raising it's ugly head because he is not as smart as you think YOU are on life skills. :baby:

GET REAL! :wacko:

the facts expressed that you'se even WATCH whatever footy show speaks volumes about your opinions and how seriously they should be taken. :bleh:  :lol:   :lol:

So in your eyes Shaun the guy can do whatever he likes as long as he plays well  :wacko: talk about a twisted way at looking at things

So what happens when he turns up drunk to a game  :whistle: :whistle:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Aug-13, 10:30 AM
So in your eyes Shaun the guy can do whatever he likes as long as he plays well  :wacko: talk about a twisted way at looking at things

So what happens when he turns up drunk to a game  :whistle: :whistle:

Who cares provided he play to the best of his ability.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Aug-28, 07:57 PM
Warner gone for a duck off 5 balls  :nowink:
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Aug-28, 08:31 PM
Who cares provided he play to the best of his ability.

 :clap2: :clap2: :clap2: :whistle: :whistle: :beer: :beer:

ooohhhh, we have to be soooo precious. :bleh: :bleh: :bleh:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Aug-28, 08:39 PM
Warner gone for a duck off 5 balls  :nowink:


The ignorantly maligned waston smashes them around the park whilst the previously named "new Don" Warner fails yet again

When is the other "new Don" going to bat?  :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Aug-28, 08:52 PM
it's NOT TEST CRICKET! :whistle: :whistle: :whistle:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Aug-28, 09:08 PM
Der.....and a few of those whistle thingos  :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Aug-28, 09:11 PM
Watson is not a test cricketers arse...never has been...never will be. :bye:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Aug-28, 09:29 PM
Well, you'll just have to sit back and suffer throught it. he's here to stay :clap2:


How they hell can Clarke be only 16 off 28 in this type of game :sad:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Aug-29, 08:05 AM
Well done watto.

The good form continues in all facets of the game.
68 & a 3 wicket haul

Timely effort with the ball on the back of continued run scoring.

Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Aug-29, 08:58 AM
big performance against.....Scotland. :whistle:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Aug-29, 10:48 AM
Keep death riding him shaun. one day you'll be right  :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Sep-05, 12:27 AM
3/178 after 40, Clarke and Ferguson look set, we should knock up 260
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Sep-05, 01:16 AM
Spot on, 5/260

Wonder what odds I would have got about that?  :chin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Sep-05, 07:15 AM
Poms did well in the end to go close
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Sep-05, 08:03 AM
Great to see Ferguson & Watson cementing positions in the team :clap2:
Title: Cricket
Post by: coinswell on 2009-Sep-05, 10:04 AM
Yeah Ferguson looks to be a real talent.  Hope he kicks on - he could get a chance at test level this season.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Sep-05, 11:23 AM
Poms did well in the end to go close

Did we win despite Wato ?
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Sep-05, 11:26 AM
Watson took a great catch at one stage.

I was watching it and the Poms wanted 10 a over with about 6 overs to go.
 I dozed off  and woke to see we got up by 4 runs   emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Sep-05, 11:28 AM
Watson took a great catch at one stage.

I was watching it and the Poms wanted 10 a over with about 6 overs to go.
 I dozed off  and woke to see we got up by 4 runs    emthup  

Last thing I remember is Brett Lees first over.   :mad:

 8-)
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2009-Sep-05, 11:39 AM
Brett Lee should never play another game for Australia.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Sep-05, 11:41 AM
Brett Lee should never play another game for Australia.

Why, what happened ?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Duke of Astor on 2009-Sep-05, 12:30 PM
Guessing up to old form...no balls and wides?

I tried to watch this game last night but found it unentertaining.
This 50 over comp is in crisis.....give me the 20/20 and Tests anytime.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Sep-05, 05:38 PM
Not exactly sure what's happened, but sadly I think Lee's career may be over..
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2009-Sep-06, 06:01 PM
Why, what happened ?

Usual performance going for 7 an over
Title: Cricket
Post by: ratsack on 2009-Sep-06, 09:16 PM
great innings by watto tonight took me back to the eighties  :rant: lose him no good now never will be
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Sep-07, 11:19 AM

Cover your keyboard Wily...........

 

Watson's the total package

September 7, 2009

He's gone from fringe Test candidate to one of the most important cricketers in the country within a month. Shane Watson opens up to Jamie Pandaram about fear, ambition, and playing second fiddle to Phillip Hughes at NSW.

How is he? … pretty good if shane watson can stay fit, and the australians hope he can.

How is he? … pretty good if Shane Watson can stay fit, and the Australians hope he can.
Photo: AFP

FAIL Shane Watson, it's what you're meant to do. So that our howls of indignation over the dumping of Phillip Hughes after just two Test failures can be justified.

What came next was the ultimate silencer.

One, two, three half-centuries in succession saw the birth of a genuine Test opener in the most extraordinary circumstance.

However, fond reflections ceased for Watson as soon Graeme Swann took Michael Hussey's wicket at The Oval to deliver the Ashes to England, and he has already mapped out a future plan that culminates in him leading the Australian batting card in the return series four years from now.

"Absolutely," Watson fires with unwavering eye-contact.

"There's no doubt there will be a big series in Australia again, to win back the Ashes. But the true test is playing the English in their conditions, in their country, that would be amazing to be able to win an Ashes series here after the heartbreak of losing this series.
"It would be great to get the revenge in 2013."

He seems to have been around an awfully long time but Watson has only played 11 Tests.

That injury-prone tag didn't arise from imagination, 12 major problems in the past six years have harmed his development and reputation, and the man himself thought his Ashes chances were finished.

"My goals were, before I came here, to hopefully get a spot in the team maybe batting at No.6 ... Marcus North was the guy that I was comparing myself to, but he started his Test career with an absolute bang so there was no way I was going to come in instead of him when he'd scored so many runs," Watson says.

"At the start of the tour I had a bit of a niggle as well [thigh muscle tear] so at that stage I thought it was just going to be me being part of the group and helping out as much as I could, and preparing for the one-day series."

Andrew Flintoff may have swung the series with his run-out of Ricky Ponting in the decider, breaking the team's heart, but Watson can be forever grateful that the retired all-rounder troubled Hughes so with the short ball.

Down 1-0 after the Lord's hiding, under enormous pressure, Australian selectors rolled the dice and it came up S.W. Ponting pulled Watson aside in the hotel bar one evening for a coffee, just before the third Test at Edgbaston, and said he was in line to replace 20-year-old Hughes.

This was the same Watson whose only first-class opening experience had been six innings for Queensland, where he averaged 4.67 before quietly slinking back down the order.

"Deep down I knew I was in a really good place, I also had the memories of a couple of years ago when I did open the batting which was very unsuccessful and I hardly scored a run, so I had that in the back of my mind," Watson says.

"Before I went out to bat that afternoon at Edgbaston I was the most nervous I had ever been going out to bat. One because of the occasion, I've always dreamt of playing in an Ashes Test, but also being in a pretty foreign place and the last time I was there it wasn't very successful.

"I was very, very nervous going out and it took a couple of overs of feeling comfortable ... but once I got through that I felt really good out there. I felt confident."

From that match Watson has scored 335 first-class runs at 55.83, including 95 against the Lions in Canterbury.

He is now one of the most valuable players in the Australian system, opening the batting and providing bowling cover in all three forms of the game.

It's impossible to think of another Australian Test opener who shouldered such a workload.

"Someone who can bat like that and can bowl and [has] great hands in the field, has always been important to the Australian squad," says Michael Clarke.

"That's why we've tried really hard to look after him and get him on the park whenever we could.

"I think Watto's as confident as I've ever seen him, in everything - the way he's playing, his body, touch wood there.

"I played a lot of junior cricket with Watto and he's always had the talent and always had the work ethic. It's great to see someone who works so hard finally getting what he deserves."

Now comes the twist. Watson and Simon Katich are set to become one of the very few opening Test pairings that do not open for their state teams.

Watson has just joined NSW, where Katich is captain, but Hughes and Phil Jaques are known to be the preferred openers for the Blues.

NSW hired Watson as a middle-order batsman, and despite replacing Hughes at Test level, he is likely to be kept down the order by the young left-hander in the Sheffield Shield.

"I can't see it as a detriment because I felt I was able to take on the opening opportunity really well, without having really opened at all," Watson says.

"So I know the mindset, my game doesn't change from when I'm opening to when I'm batting No.4 or No.5.

"Of course opening you get a chance to see the ball moving around but it doesn't change my set-up and my plans, so I can't see it being a problem."

With injury after injury in recent years came inevitable doubt, and Watson feared he would never fulfil his promise.

However: "I love cricket too much, that never crossed my mind about giving up, never entered the equation," he says.

"Worse case scenario, I was just going to be playing as a batsman for the rest of my career.

"It's been my childhood dream to get an opportunity to play for my country, it's something that I'm continuing to make the most of and I'm loving every minute of it because I know how quickly it can be taken away from you."

Defying the odds - apparently it's what Shane Watson is meant to do.
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2009-Sep-07, 11:47 AM
Another pretty easy win over night which just stuns me. How did we lose a test series to this rabble?

PS - Can we drop MJ Hussey yet?
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Sep-07, 05:07 PM
[html]<p>Cover your keyboard Wily...........</p>


  :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: twominutewarning on 2009-Sep-07, 07:56 PM
Any thoughts on a 35 over comp?
Halfway between the madness and the boredom.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Sep-07, 07:59 PM
I like the concept of splitting the 50 game in quarters

Bat for 25 then bowl then bat and then bowl.

that means both teams have to bat at night and the conditions apply evenly.
Title: Cricket
Post by: coinswell on 2009-Sep-07, 08:05 PM
Yeah it's not a bad idea - the 50 over game has become very stale I think. 

The power plays add an element of spice but the sheer proliferation of matches has rendered these contests, except for the World Cup and maybe the Champions Trophy, basically meaningless.

The rise of T20 will inevitably mean fewer of these games in the future which ain't no bad thing.

I notice that the domestic English comp is going to 40 overs next year.
Title: Cricket
Post by: twominutewarning on 2009-Sep-07, 08:19 PM
I like the concept of splitting the 50 game in quarters

Bat for 25 then bowl then bat and then bowl.

that means both teams have to bat at night and the conditions apply evenly.


Not a bad idea Wily.
Might even it up a bit if you lose the toss.
Title: Cricket
Post by: twominutewarning on 2009-Sep-07, 08:34 PM
Yeah it's not a bad idea - the 50 over game has become very stale I think. 

The power plays add an element of spice but the sheer proliferation of matches has rendered these contests, except for the World Cup and maybe the Champions Trophy, basically meaningless.

The rise of T20 will inevitably mean fewer of these games in the future which ain't no bad thing.

I notice that the domestic English comp is going to 40 overs next year.

35 overs could work.Maximum 7 overs for 5 bowlers.
Power plays could still be incorporated.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Sep-09, 11:38 PM
Australia will be chasing, England will win.

You Richard Cranium.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Sep-10, 10:48 AM
As I said to Lars before the match last night.. Aus are pretty shit, but England are an absolute joke.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Sep-10, 10:55 AM
You Richard Cranium.

Remember him? an import, I think Freedman may have trained him  :/
Title: Cricket
Post by: stuey102 on 2009-Sep-10, 11:16 AM
Remember him? an import, I think Freedman may have trained him  :/


Was a handy jumper.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Sep-10, 12:05 PM
As I said to Lars before the match last night.. Aus are pretty shit, but England are an absolute joke.

Why are Australia "pretty shit" in relation to what, the McGrath, Warne and Gilchrist era ?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Sep-10, 12:14 PM
Why are Australia "pretty shit" in relation to what, the McGrath, Warne and Gilchrist era ?

Theyre not that good. Wait til you see em play some better mobs in one dayers.
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Sep-11, 04:06 PM
Free 20/20 game in Brisbane this Sunday morning for those nearby who are interested (@ Albion). Lord Mayors XI Brisbane v Sydney, Andrew Symonds v Dave Warner are the headliners.

Should be a good day, 9:30am start, free activities for the kids on the next oval, free parking at Albion Park paceway.
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Sep-11, 04:08 PM
Anyone know much about the West Indies tour this year? 
Apparently they are in big strife and their top players might not tour.

Could be a complete shambles
Title: Cricket
Post by: BurntToast on 2009-Sep-13, 01:26 PM
Free 20/20 game in Brisbane this Sunday morning for those nearby who are interested (@ Albion). Lord Mayors XI Brisbane v Sydney, Andrew Symonds v Dave Warner are the headliners.

Should be a good day, 9:30am start, free activities for the kids on the next oval, free parking at Albion Park paceway.

I didn't get to see too much of the cricket, spent most of the day with the kids on the activities field, but looked like the Brisbane side was winning fairly comfortably. Didn't see Simmo bat, but Warner only lasted about 3 overs and out caught behind. Was a really good day, not much of a crowd which made things nice and easy, heaps of different cricket activities setup for the kids with all the Qld Bulls players rotating around it all helping out... Jimmy Maher was cooking the steak burgers all morning... surprised there weren't more people there.
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Sep-13, 01:34 PM
Seems that the poms will need to trawl the highways and byways looking for more South Africans to sign up for the one dayers.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Sep-16, 01:16 AM
I was half asleep watching the cricket and for a moment, when they displayed the speed of nathan Hauritz's first 4 balls of an over, i thought I was watching the tennis.

62 57 63 64   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: InTheKnow on 2009-Sep-16, 01:24 PM
this is definitley NOT cricket;

A WOMAN has been hit with a cricket bat by a man while walking along a southern metropolitan beach.

The woman was walking adjacent to the Lower Esplanade on Aldinga Beach yesterday when she was approached by the man about 2.45pm.

He attempted to hit the woman over the head with the cricket bat, but the woman defended herself and he struck her hand.

She screamed, and the man ran away.

He is not known to the woman, 43, from the southern suburbs.

The man is described as Caucasian, aged in his early 20s about 167cm tall with a slim build and long blonde curly hair.

He was clean shaven and wearing a blue t-shirt and cap.

The attack follows another assault on a group of women in the southern suburbs this week.

On Sunday four women were walking along Gulfview Rd, Christies Beach about 1.30am when two of them were punched in the face.

They said a man approached them, breaking a 23-year-old Christies Beach woman's jaw, while a Huntfield Heights woman, 32, suffered minor injuries.

That man is described as aged in his 30s, about 179cm tall with a stocky build.

Anyone with information should phone BankSA Crime Stoppers on 1800 333 000.

Title: Cricket
Post by: Clibbo on 2009-Sep-16, 01:26 PM
Did he open'er
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Sep-20, 12:07 PM
Not exactly sure what's happened, but sadly I think Lee's career may be over..

yep topping the most wickets and lowest average for this series list is surely his death knell.  :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Sep-20, 12:09 PM
yep topping the most wickets and lowest average for this series list is surely his death knell.  :lol:

Yup he is doing very well. Great turn around.

Boy I'm happy you aint seein a cent of that $400, nice work Mask.   :lol:  :bleh:
Title: Cricket
Post by: el zoro on 2009-Sep-20, 04:21 PM
Has anyone been watching the one-dayers. I lost interest after the 1st 2, but think I heard they've had 6 or 7 matches & Aus won them all.  :wacko:
Bet Ponting would swap them all for another Ashes test.   :lol:  

Is there a point to these matches? Does Aus one day ranking go up?
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Sep-20, 04:24 PM
Yup he is doing very well. Great turn around.

Boy I'm happy you aint seein a cent of that $400, nice work Mask.   :lol:  :bleh:

It seems your more worried about it than I, but I've heard what your like with parting with $10 so I guess it's just lucky it didn't happen to you or you might've topped yourself by now.   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Sep-20, 04:26 PM
It seems your more worried about it than I, but I've heard what your like with parting with $10 so I guess it's just lucky it didn't happen to you or you might've topped yourself by now.   :biggrin:

Couldn't you just imagine the consequences   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Sep-20, 05:35 PM
It seems your more worried about it than I, but I've heard what your like with parting with $10 so I guess it's just lucky it didn't happen to you or you might've topped yourself by now.   :biggrin:

He told me bout your own pm's re me mate. You cant trust the bloke lol
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Sep-20, 05:38 PM
What where OL said he'll try and get the money off the him and I said I won't be holding my breathe or I'd be dead. Yep you got me.   :biggrin:

In fact I think OL is more worried about getting the $25 he won.   :lol:

Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Sep-20, 05:39 PM
What where OL said he'll try and get the money off the him and I said I won't be holding my breathe or I'd be dead. Yep you got me.   :biggrin:

In fact I think OL is more worried about getting the $25 he won.   :lol:



Nope ;)  And hes sittin on more than $25.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Sep-20, 05:41 PM
Nope ;)  And hes sittin on more than $25.

I'm not talking about his bets with mask and your money. I know all about them.  ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Sep-20, 05:52 PM
In fact I think OL is more worried about getting the $25 he won.

Well I told Msk the other week I want the $400 as I backed both Jarvis Bale and Dashing Corsair in the Nationals finals, they'd have taken me to the lead i'd imagine
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Sep-20, 07:15 PM
I backed the Poms @ 2.62
Please don't ask why cause I don't have a clue.
Maybe the fact that no team has ever won a series 7-0   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Sep-20, 07:16 PM
Great start
Watto gone 2nd ball  :beer:

Poms into 2.06
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Sep-20, 10:22 PM
Poms are livin certs now. $1.30 huge overs.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Sep-21, 01:09 AM
The Poms were 1-129, 2-129, 3-133 now 4-137, still need 40 to win off plenty of balls.
If they lose this, i'll never bet on cricket again.

5-141  :/

ok c'mon Aussies, just laid England 100 @1.12   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Sep-24, 07:04 PM
Took a multi this arvo, 2 x tennis (both lobbed) 1 x NBL (lobbed) into South Africa  :sweat: :sweat: :sweat:

Multi odds are 3.76, can lay Sth Africa @ 1.36 if I wish, but I won't.
Maybe later if they shorten considerably
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Sep-24, 07:54 PM
I reckon South Africa would have shortened up a little more now.  8-)
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Sep-24, 10:23 PM
I reckon South Africa would have shortened up a little more now.  8-)

1.12 now, they blew 4 cents when Smith fell
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Sep-24, 10:33 PM
1.12 now, they blew 4 cents when Smith fell

Well Amla is takin his sweet time but Kallis is strong and looks good. Having said that watch him get out now lol
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Sep-24, 10:35 PM
There's no rush, they're not chasing 434

See that chick in the black bikini?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Sep-24, 11:22 PM
They'd be a bit juicier now ey ;)

I still reckon S.A will win though. If NZ get a couple of wickets soon though its over.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Sep-24, 11:49 PM
Sth Africa need 77 with 6 wkts in hand, still wouldn't take the shorts

[attachimg=#]

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Sep-24, 11:50 PM
Mate, NZ are lookin real nice, if I betted in play I'd be taking those ridiculous overs about them right now.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Sep-24, 11:51 PM
There's been a further 44k matched @ 1.04 since I posted that   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Sep-24, 11:56 PM
There's been a further 44k matched @ 1.04 since I posted that   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:

NZ - home :beer:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Sep-25, 12:48 AM
NZ - home :beer:

And they could not strike, S.A wins. :beer:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Sep-25, 05:27 AM
NZ - home :beer:

Very ordinary post seeing they were never ever going to win
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Sep-25, 11:57 AM
Very ordinary post seeing they were never ever going to win

Well Lars if they were at $75 I wouldnt have said it lol :p
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Sep-26, 05:34 PM
another great innings by Shane Watson.   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: twominutewarning on 2009-Sep-27, 06:13 PM
Watson acts a like sook every time he gets out.

Ian Chappell is really giving me the :crap:'s in this tournament.

Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Sep-27, 06:15 PM
why is this thread still running....there is NO CRICKET being played at the moment??? :what: :what: :what:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Sep-27, 06:36 PM
Now i'm wondering what i'm watching right now.
Was sure it was cricket  :/
Title: Cricket
Post by: twominutewarning on 2009-Sep-27, 06:38 PM
Was Johnson out before he smashed them all over the place?
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Sep-27, 09:47 PM
Guptill needed 9 runs to top score but was bowled with a couple of overs left for 66, next bloke made 18 so there was plenty of time

Fixtures 27 September New Zealand v Sri Lanka / Top New Zealand Batsman / Martin Guptill
Back         5.70    30.00    Lost

Another hard luck story  :nowink:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Sep-28, 10:43 PM
Another duck to Watto... That Nehra seems a good bowler, was all over Watto there and should have even had him in the first over.

Backed India opening pship so all good :beer:

But watch my luck, India's openers wont put on more than 2 runs lol
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Sep-28, 11:28 PM
Another duck to Watto... That Nehra seems a good bowler, was all over Watto there and should have even had him in the first over.


Good thing my description of the first few overs that you didn't even watch was spot on, otherwise those that watched wouldn't know what you were on about   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Sep-28, 11:36 PM
I think Hadden might struggle.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Sep-29, 09:32 AM
Good thing my description of the first few overs that you didn't even watch was spot on, otherwise those that watched wouldn't know what you were on about   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:

Got a live stream bud. :p

Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Sep-30, 05:54 PM
What an awesome spell of bowling from the great Brett Lee, He is in career best form.
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Sep-30, 06:03 PM
Had to wait for Johnson to get the wicket  :clap2:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Sep-30, 06:18 PM
Yes, the West Aussie has improved out of site since settling in Perth.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Sep-30, 08:27 PM
There was lots of money for Aus just before the game I noticed. I have em at $1.60 in my multi but they were into $1.37 at the start. You'd imagine with Pakistan looking at only 200 odd Aus would have shortened right up.. Dont go taking no ridiculous shorts the people, bowling is definitely Pakistan's strength.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Duke of Astor on 2009-Sep-30, 10:48 PM
Pakistan v Aust

The innings by P was insipid,so many defensive blocks........all they have to do is lose,play NZ in a semi, send home their most hated rival (India) and collect all bets layed.

Oz currently 2 wickets down,if they look like losing ,expect P to play even worse.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Duke of Astor on 2009-Oct-01, 01:41 AM
That was exciting.

A by 1 run....a draw would have seen them through.
In the last few overs the P players were laughing their heads off. Ponting was eating his fingers....he looked sick.
When the match was won, A was laughing...P was laughing. Phew....bets can now be collected and India goes home.

Tell you now....Put your money on Pakistan to beat NZ and  win the tournament...Now.
They are morals. The bowlers are full of tricks. The A players just can't read them.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Oct-01, 01:48 AM
I laid Australia for 100 @ 1.02 when they were 4 down  :rant:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Duke of Astor on 2009-Oct-01, 11:05 AM
Have backed Pakistan at 3.00 to win the Championship.

Stealing money....this team, in this other form of cricket, is way ahead. (barring them cheating a result)

They say the pitches are not holding up...the pitch for the final will be a mess....thinking Spinner's delight.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Duke of Astor on 2009-Oct-02, 06:11 PM
Pakistan now $3.25 to win trophy.

Bet now because......
Should Australia go down tonight, expect P to be $2.35 tomorrow morning (before they even play their semi).......[based on 1.55 for Pakistan semi and 1.50 for final (playing England).....ie....1.55x1.50 = 2.325

If Aust win tonight ...the $3.25 is ok.......1.55x2.1(playing Aust)=3.255
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Oct-02, 06:23 PM
I was doing the maths on that myself, Duke
The 3.25 is juicy as like you say if Aussies lose, Pakis firm, but if Aussies win Pakis can still beat them, or you can lay off if you fancy.
Providing of course they beat NZ  :/
Title: Cricket
Post by: Duke of Astor on 2009-Oct-02, 06:43 PM
My thinking is......... the odds available tomorrow morning....when 3 teams left.

P won't drift....but must firm if Aust knocked out.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Duke of Astor on 2009-Oct-02, 08:32 PM
Hope I can explain this clearly. (based on betting Pakistan right now)

Let's talk big amounts....for the sake of clarity.

Say you want to bet $1,000 on Pakistan to beat NZ tomorrow....So can lose 1000 or win 555.

My recommendation...forget this match, instead put the 1,000 on Pakistan to win trophy. Same outlay but with reward.

After Pakistan win....if they do....you're sitting on a profit of 2,250 (instead of 555)  That's when you can lay off....Australia winning tonight would be your worst result....I reckon the shortest odds against Pakistan would be $1.70
Pakistan against England ...laughing...

Whatever way the maths will work for the final .....based on a small loss (at worse) and a much better gain (at worse)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Duke of Astor on 2009-Oct-02, 08:33 PM
This thinking is based solely on wanting to bet Pakistan v NZ tomorrow night.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Duke of Astor on 2009-Oct-03, 02:57 AM
Australia come out to bat......and............guess what arrives.............








A plague of Locusts.....Brendon Julien and Mark Waugh say "this is a first".........the lights are burning bright,the grass is as tempting as a night's sleep with Paris Hilton.....and on comes the locusts....they are huge.....5cm long and well conditioned.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Duke of Astor on 2009-Oct-03, 03:00 AM
They move on....play resumes after 10 mins.....258 to win...50 overs.

Will consult BIBLE....Frogs next?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Duke of Astor on 2009-Oct-03, 03:47 AM
Ponting is in superb form.
Australia 57 runs from 58 balls.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Duke of Astor on 2009-Oct-03, 03:54 AM
Just consulted the BIBLE....after the locusts, "the plague of darkness".....hope somebody throws the switch.

It will be a sign for all of us to re-visit Churches.

In case we want to stay in our homes, is anybody on this forum prepared to give us a sermon?

ITK gives sermons. She's a possibility.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Duke of Astor on 2009-Oct-03, 03:58 AM
Poor England.
They look ordinary against Australia.

Ian Chappell, earlier said (gleefully), "England has never won any form of world championship cricket"
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Oct-03, 06:50 AM
I'd imagine they're happy with the Ashes though
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Oct-03, 09:49 AM
another great innings by Shane Watson.   :lol:


Anything to say?  :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Duke of Astor on 2009-Oct-03, 10:03 AM
Blimey...Pakistan now $3.50 to win trophy....thought odds would reduce with 3 horse field.

Don't get carried away with Oz's win.....England were pathetic.

Title: Cricket
Post by: Duke of Astor on 2009-Oct-03, 10:05 AM
And there should have been another contender for Man of the Match (A vs E)

Onions.....should have been Man of the Match for being the only English bowler to get a wicket.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Duke of Astor on 2009-Oct-04, 12:46 AM
Paki vs NZ

Playing at The Wanderers

Commentator just said......"this is not a happy ground for P....played here 7 times for 1 win. The one win, recently, an unconvincing win over the WI "

These guys at Sportsbetting really have that knowledge...too smart for us.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Oct-04, 02:47 AM
Hope you didn't have too many Rupees on the Pakis, Duke  :/
Title: Cricket
Post by: Duke of Astor on 2009-Oct-04, 01:49 PM
Honestly...$100.....big sports bet for me.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Oct-05, 11:05 PM
Unfortunately not a real contest tonight with New Zealands best out and Brett Lee in Denman, Trusting and So You Think type superlative form.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Oct-05, 11:09 PM
Taylor and Guptill are NZ's best bats.
They're best allrounder Vettori, isn't even playing, Aussies shortened quite considerably when he was ruled out.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Oct-06, 07:34 AM
God that Shane Watson bloke is shithouse. Worst opener to ever play for the country, should be axed, clearly has no skill  :lol:   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Oct-06, 10:50 AM
Just reading in todays paper that Andrew Symonds has said that he won't play for Qld in the Shield this year but will have a hit in the 20/20 if selected.

good move imo.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Oct-06, 08:18 PM
Have backed Pakistan at 3.00 to win the Championship.

Stealing money....this team, in this other form of cricket, is way ahead. (barring them cheating a result)

They say the pitches are not holding up...the pitch for the final will be a mess....thinking Spinner's delight.

It seems there have been match fixing allegation frown at the Pakistani players, the captain in particular.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Duke of Astor on 2009-Oct-06, 08:26 PM
Grats....Andrew is a smartie....The Indian 20/20 is all he needs.
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Oct-11, 12:41 PM
Qld play WA today in the first of the Ford one dayers.

Hope it is fine over there in Perth so the Queensland boys can win fair and square   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Duke of Astor on 2009-Oct-11, 02:44 PM
Yeah...fine enough....lots of cloud....movement guaranteed.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Duke of Astor on 2009-Oct-11, 02:50 PM
Sorry...honestly didn't know it had started...Qld 4 for 68....Foxtel showing
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Oct-11, 03:05 PM
Qld were 2-11 at one stage :sad:
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Oct-11, 03:46 PM
I reckon we (Bulls) are in strife ,  6-104
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Oct-11, 07:22 PM
Sussex tonight should go alright against NSW. :whistle:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Oct-11, 09:47 PM
NSW made 2/130 off their 20 overs, a very ordinary score being realistic

Hughes faced more than half the deliveries, 62 off 64 not out  :nowink:

Thankfully, Henriques got to the crease at 2nd drop, making 51 off 33   emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: stuey102 on 2009-Oct-11, 09:51 PM
Its a decent score on that Pitch.

There is no bounce or pace in it at all.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Oct-11, 10:38 PM
NSW's attack should see them limit Sussex and get away with it, but should be close.
Sussex 2/34 off 7.2 atm
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Oct-11, 10:39 PM
Ol what channel is this on ?
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Oct-11, 11:12 PM
http://www.cricinfo.com/t20champions2009/engine/current/match/416929.html
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Oct-11, 11:28 PM
Sussex tonight should go alright against NSW. :whistle:

If you keep tipping against them, they're sure to lose at some stage   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Oct-12, 05:52 PM

South Australia v Tasmania       South Australia  Head To Head  1.70   
Western Australia v Queensland   Western Australia  Head To Head  1.50   
    Multibet Odds @ 2.55   

Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Oct-13, 10:43 PM
Gee the Vics are in trouble, 2/29 off 7 chasing 118
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Oct-14, 09:19 PM
Gee the Vics are in trouble, 2/29 off 7 chasing 118

Was revealed today that the plan was if they lost as early wicket they were only going to aim for the amount they needed to qualify, and then go for the win. But of course, it was too late, and they didnt lose by much in the end anyway. Could have wone easily. :nowink:
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Oct-18, 05:19 PM
Todays one dayer between Tassie and South Australia is a good game.

SA have turned it around and are now  favorites at the break
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Oct-18, 10:34 PM
 
 DA Warner  c Buttler b Banks  40 (runs) 16 (balls) 6 (fours) 2 (sixes) 250.00 (strike rate)

A quickfire innings   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Oct-18, 11:08 PM
NSW chased down Somerset's 111 in 11.5 overs   emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: InTheKnow on 2009-Oct-19, 09:20 AM
I really Love cricket  :love:

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/photo-gallery/gallery-e6frf94x-1225788026601?page=1 (http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/photo-gallery/gallery-e6frf94x-1225788026601?page=1)

Yum
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Oct-19, 01:47 PM
I like a fun bet on the Ford Ranger Cup.

I've asked for $1.90 for Qld on Wed at BF.  Hopefully some kind soul will match my $5   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Oct-19, 01:52 PM
I like a fun bet on the Ford Ranger Cup.

I've asked for $1.90 for Qld on Wed at BF.  Hopefully some kind soul will match my $5   :biggrin:

Matched   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:
I've always told you i'm a kind soul  :beer:
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Oct-19, 01:53 PM
  :biggrin:   Thank you kind soul
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Oct-21, 10:49 AM
looking forward to winning my $4.50    :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Oct-21, 10:54 AM
  :lol:  hope ya do mate   emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Oct-21, 01:06 PM
SA won the toss and batting first   :sad:
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Oct-21, 02:16 PM
Anyone see that Chris Simpson catch then to get Cosgrove.

Won't see many better
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Oct-21, 08:15 PM
I like a fun bet on the Ford Ranger Cup.

I've asked for $1.90 for Qld on Wed at BF.  Hopefully some kind soul will match my $5   :biggrin:

Get in the queue, Grats  :beer:   :lol:

Fixtures 21 October Queensland v SA / Match Odds / Queensland
Lay         1.90    5.00    Lost    (4.50)
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Oct-21, 08:31 PM
  :biggrin:   emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Oct-22, 12:53 PM
Trying to decide if I'll stick with Qld on Saturday against WA.

The young Bulls looked good yesterday
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Oct-23, 05:39 AM
I like watching these Ford Ranger Cup matches but I reckon they are really even money matters.  I therefore asked my for $2 for Qld on betfair.

      Only for $5 so if anone from WA want to back their team   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Oct-23, 05:47 AM
     Fixtures 24 October / Queensland v WA / Match Odds      Queensland     Lay      536113160      23-Oct-09
06:46         2    5.00    

 :beer:
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Oct-23, 05:56 AM
You aren't from WA   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Oct-23, 06:19 AM
I'll be from wherever you like just to accommodate you  :beer:
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Oct-24, 07:10 AM
WOW

$2,7000,000 for winning a few 20/20 matches.

Good Luck to them.   
Title: Cricket
Post by: coinswell on 2009-Oct-24, 09:48 AM
  emthup

Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Oct-24, 09:52 AM
And it looks so much money with that extra zero included
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Oct-24, 10:32 AM
 :embarrassed:
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Oct-24, 05:51 PM
Anyone else just see Rimmington get a hat trick for Qld ?

WA finished with 224 but might be some storm tonight up here
Title: Cricket
Post by: The-Kid on 2009-Oct-24, 05:56 PM
Good Day for the Caboolture Old Boys.

1st "Bossy" wins a Cox Plate, Then "Rimmo" gets a hat-trick  :no1: :clap2:

Cheers

The-Kid
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Oct-24, 09:35 PM
I like watching these Ford Ranger Cup matches but I reckon they are really even money matters.  I therefore asked my for $2 for Qld on betfair.

      Only for $5 so if anone from WA want to back their team   :biggrin:

    Fixtures 24 October / Queensland v WA / Match Odds      Queensland     Lay      536113160      23-Oct-09
06:46         2    5.00    

 :beer:

I reckon Grats is breaking out in a cold sweat about now, QLD need 49 off 36 with 6 wickets in hand.

But don't panic too much mate, as it's all fun remember  ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Oct-24, 10:03 PM
Well done, Grats, that's twice in a week you've got me  :beer:
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2009-Oct-24, 10:26 PM
Well done, Grats, that's twice in a week you've got me  :beer:

You can have 4/1 on my nag in the last at Warnambool tomorrow if your keen OL   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Oct-25, 05:55 AM
This young Qld side are going well but I think they play Victoria next. :sweat:
Title: Cricket
Post by: final command on 2009-Oct-25, 01:11 PM
who is this Holland kid in australian team for one dayers in India? never heard of him
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Oct-25, 01:15 PM
Wonder what his nicname is  :chin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Oct-25, 01:37 PM
Great stuff by Watson

 :fishing:
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2009-Oct-25, 03:55 PM
Why doesn't Bracken get a game anymore?

Surely one of our unluckier cricketers.
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Oct-25, 04:05 PM
He's injured, isn't he?
Title: Cricket
Post by: final command on 2009-Oct-25, 04:09 PM
bracken has knee injury will be back mid december
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2009-Oct-25, 04:12 PM
bracken has knee injury will be back mid december

  emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Oct-25, 04:15 PM
Why doesn't Bracken get a game anymore?

Surely one of our unluckier cricketers.

He played the 7 match ODI series v England, I wouldn't have called that not getting a game anymore  :/
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2009-Oct-25, 04:16 PM
He played the 7 match ODI series v England, I wouldn't have called that not getting a game anymore  :/

  :lol:  Didn't watch any of those
Title: Cricket
Post by: coinswell on 2009-Oct-25, 09:23 PM
Atrocious bowling from Watson.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Oct-25, 09:24 PM
1.25mil matched on Australia @ 1.01   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Oct-25, 09:31 PM
Lucky bastards
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Oct-26, 08:45 AM
did i see Watson get out LBW on the news? :whistle: :slaphead: :baby: :baby: :baby:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Oct-28, 07:14 PM
Have backed India tonight. Off to a fair start, they should do well.  :sweat:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Oct-28, 07:19 PM
As soon as I post that, Tendulkar goes :nowink:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Oct-28, 07:46 PM
And if India were 4-47 when ya posted, ya would have told us ya backed Australia   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Oct-28, 07:51 PM
It was 3 fkn overs, they were on par (a run a ball).. I mean ffs..
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Oct-28, 08:38 PM
Why do the cricket commentators have those type of microphones?
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Oct-28, 08:50 PM
No idea, always think the same
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Oct-28, 09:06 PM
Can Australia chase down 375 at night ?
Title: Cricket
Post by: chuggers on 2009-Oct-28, 09:28 PM
No---anyone what a $50 quaddie   ??

 :beer:
Title: Cricket
Post by: chuggers on 2009-Oct-28, 09:47 PM
Bump
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Oct-28, 09:51 PM
Chuggs, get on Cameron White to top score  ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Oct-28, 10:32 PM
Watson's a gun all rounder.   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Oct-31, 07:03 PM
Forget the Melbourne Cup peoples the cricket is on and Australia is kicking butt.

They won the toss and chose to bat.    emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Oct-31, 07:08 PM
Just noticed the great man Rickational Pontaitional is opening the batting.   :beer:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Nov-06, 08:00 AM
Geez, I don't know how some of you blokes rate Watson so highly, he's crap. :bleh:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Nov-06, 08:19 AM
Geez, I don't know how some of you blokes rate Watson so highly, he's crap. :bleh:

When an old man scores 175, 93 is na in.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Nov-06, 08:25 AM
  :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Nov-07, 05:24 PM
Can the Vics get up tonight?

I think they can but the Tigers did get a lot more that I thought they would.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Nov-15, 09:50 AM
NSW have got to be living certs today against Tasmania. Have thrown a heap on em.   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Nov-15, 10:14 AM
What odds did you get Mark?

I just took $1.40 on BF for a interest
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Nov-15, 05:30 PM
What odds did you get Mark?

I just took $1.40 on BF for a interest

$1.47 last night. Cannot believe it though mate..
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Nov-15, 06:00 PM
NSW have got to be living certs today against Tasmania. Have thrown a heap on em.   :biggrin:

  :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Nov-15, 08:32 PM
 :lol:

Yeah I defended you, but your in no position to be laughing at anyone in here for any reason at the moment buddy. And you get a kick out of someone backing losers now do ya?  ;)

Besides did ya see the teams? I'm certain you would have thought the same thing.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Nov-15, 09:40 PM
Yeah I defended you, but your in no position to be laughing at anyone in here for any reason at the moment buddy. And you get a kick out of someone backing losers now do ya?  ;)

Besides did ya see the teams? I'm certain you would have thought the same thing.

Mark, it's in jest.
You should know the reason  :yes:

Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Nov-16, 07:54 PM
[attachimg=#]




Big Bird is still big  :biggrin:

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2009-Nov-19, 03:49 PM
AAP

Australia have dumped paceman Stuart Clark and recalled fiery left-armer Doug Bollinger for next week's first Test against West Indies in Brisbane.

Selection boss Andrew Hilditch announced the 12-man squad at a news conference at the SCG on Thursday and denied age was an issue with Clark, who at 34 is six years older than his NSW team-mate Bollinger.

Bollinger, whose only Test was against South Africa at the SCG 10 months ago, has been in good form with nine wickets at 19.33 in Australia's one-day international series in India which was completed earlier this month.

Hilditch said the selection panel would monitor Clark's form in the Sheffield Shield competition but admitted every decision taken over the next 12 months was part of the build-up towards the 2010-11 Ashes series in Australia.

Bollinger's inclusion for Clark is the only change to the 12-man squad from Australia's last Test against England at The Oval in August.

"Stuart is extremely unlucky to miss selection but we have been very impressed with Doug's form in the recent ODI series in India and feel he deserves this opportunity in the Australian squad," Hilditch said on Thursday.

"Losing the Ashes was obviously extremely disappointing but the nucleus of the side performed very well individually.

"We're confident this young side will continue to develop as we move into this exciting Test series at home but also continue to prepare for an Ashes series, which is now only 12 months away."

Young opener Phillip Hughes, who was dropped after two Tests of the 2009 Ashes series and replaced at the top of the order by all-rounder Shane Watson, has failed to force his way back into the side.

Hilditch said he expected Watson to get through 10 or 15 overs of medium pace per day at Test level and open the batting. Spinner Nathan Hauritz was expected to play at the Gabba, Hilditch added, leaving Bollinger as the likely 12th man.

Asked if Clark's age was a factor, Hilditch said: "No. It's an assessment of Doug at the moment.

"We think he's bowling really, really well.

"He was very impressive when he got an opportunity in Dubai in the one-day series there and then went to India and really came away as one of the key bowlers of that series.

"We just think it's the right time to give him a chance."

Clark has an impressive record of 94 wickets at 23.86 but struggled on the Ashes tour, taking four wickets at 44.00 in two Tests.

Australian squad: Simon Katich, Shane Watson, Ricky Ponting (capt), Michael Clarke, Mike Hussey, Marcus North, Brad Haddin, Mitchell Johnson, Peter Siddle, Nathan Hauritz, Ben Hilfenhaus, Doug Bollinger.



The only question will be what day Australia win the first test, will it be day 3 or 4?

Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Nov-19, 05:34 PM
Good to see Hughes not in the team. I doubt he'll ever get a look in.

His mate Jaques would be in front of him I would guess, especially if Huss fails this test
Title: Cricket
Post by: coinswell on 2009-Nov-19, 06:47 PM
Good to see Hughes not in the team. I doubt he'll ever get a look in.


A fairly churlish comment I reckon to make about a 21 year old. 

He has proven he can perform at this level against the best fast bowler in the world on his own decks.  His form lately hasn't been great which if your name is Phil Hughes (as opposed to say Shane Watson) it is actually taken into account.  Great players can be dropped and come back - Ponting being a good case in point.   

People pump up Watson's tyres on the strength of ODI form against attacks of variable if not dubious quality mostly bowling for containment and not dismissals.  And getting wickets in ODIs is a different kettle of fish to test cricket - anyone with even a modicum of knowledge about cricket knows that.

Watson's flawed technique and his lack of concentration will not be adequately tested against a 3rd WI line up.  However, on the off chance he does not cash in or if he breaks down he should be dispensed with post haste.



Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Nov-19, 06:57 PM
If I wander out to the Gabba next week , I had better make it in the first three days maybe.

Hope I'm wrong and WI go better than most expect
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Nov-19, 07:05 PM
I've got a multi going into Aus to win the first test (which is the last leg) but I'm upset Gayle has to go home. He is a great character and a fantastic player to watch - very exciting.  Real shame.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Nov-19, 07:13 PM


Watson's flawed technique



It's not as bad as hughes  :lol: You are kidding are you not?


Hughes has the worst technique of any opening batsman that I have ever seen.

he's a middle order tonker at best
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Nov-19, 07:54 PM
Good to see Hughes not in the team. I doubt he'll ever get a look in.

I'll take that bet. You let me know the odds and total you'll take.   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: coinswell on 2009-Nov-19, 08:24 PM
Hughes has the worst technique of any opening batsman that I have ever seen.


Ya need to get out more woddy old son!   ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Nov-19, 10:44 PM
The test will go into the final session on the final day with The West Indies wrapping it up 40 minutes before stumps.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Nov-20, 04:02 PM
The test will go into the final session on the final day with The West Indies wrapping it up 40 minutes before stumps.

Not sure about that, however I think Aus are massive unders now at $1.26..
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2009-Nov-20, 04:08 PM
Not sure about that, however I think Aus are massive unders now at $1.26..

Good odds if you can get one of those Draw = money back deals.

No way the WIndies can win
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2009-Nov-20, 04:15 PM
Not sure about that, however I think Aus are massive unders now at $1.26..
 

Mate, that's actually way overs. $1.04 is about there right price.

And the only way there would be a draw is if we had a cyclone for 5 days.
Title: Cricket
Post by: coinswell on 2009-Nov-20, 09:19 PM
SMH Poll Should Hughes be in the test team?

Yes - 64% (that includes my votes and WODs)
No - 36%

Arguably the most astute cricket writer around, Peter Roebuck (it's either Gideon or him) says he was prematurely dropped in today's paper.

Showed his class by making a stylish 79 today.

Bring him back!
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Nov-20, 09:48 PM
Put in a YES vote from me
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Nov-21, 05:35 AM
And the only way there would be a draw is if we had a cyclone for 5 days

I think the weather bureau has forecast showers for the Test
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Nov-21, 07:16 AM
I think the weather bureau has forecast showers for the Test

Yeah it will be raining Windies Wickets
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Nov-21, 08:03 AM
Nothing like sitting at the cricket on the first day of the first test no matter who is playing.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Nov-21, 10:41 AM
SMH Poll Should Hughes be in the test team?

Yes - 64% (that includes my votes and WODs)
No - 36%

Arguably the most astute cricket writer around, Peter Roebuck (it's either Gideon or him) says he was prematurely dropped in today's paper.

Showed his class by making a stylish 79 today.

Bring him back!


He may have been  prematurely dropped and he was certainly prematurely selected.

Good on him for scoring a few yesterday but he still looked crap.  He'll make a very good number #5 or #6 one day
Title: Cricket
Post by: coinswell on 2009-Nov-21, 12:31 PM
Nothing like sitting at the cricket on the first day of the first test no matter who is playing.

  emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2009-Nov-22, 06:46 PM
Despite his personality there was no bigger travesty in Australian sport than Shane Warne not captaining his country.
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Nov-22, 06:56 PM
McGrath re Warner's dismissal

  :noteworthy:   :noteworthy:   :noteworthy:   :noteworthy:
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Nov-22, 06:59 PM
After 5 overs, an upset on the cards here.
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2009-Nov-22, 07:07 PM
Great man on!
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Nov-22, 07:09 PM
This is the kind of sporting event which shouldn't be allowed to legally gamble on
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Nov-22, 07:14 PM
This is the kind of sporting event which shouldn't be allowed to legally gamble on

I agree, but I reckon your punting on it.  lol
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Nov-22, 07:15 PM
I agree, but I reckon your punting on it.  lol

Only illegally  :)

Betting match sticks with a mate on next wicket to fall  :yes:
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Nov-22, 07:17 PM
This is the kind of sporting event which shouldn't be allowed to legally gamble on

You know what I think: Sport's not for betting on.

If you're implying the fix is in, I reckon they're fair dinkum.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Nov-22, 07:18 PM
Am not suggesting it's fixed, i'm saying seriousness should be an issue when it comes to what to gamble on legally.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Nov-22, 07:19 PM
Despite his personality there was no bigger travesty in Australian sport than Shane Warne not captaining his country.

Being confirmed tonight
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Nov-22, 07:21 PM
McGrath re Warner's dismissal

  :noteworthy:   :noteworthy:   :noteworthy:   :noteworthy:


Warner :mad:

The hype merchants and their followers declared this blopke the next Bradman.


FOR  :censored:  SAKE :mad:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Nov-22, 07:24 PM
God, cricket Australia mis manged the retirement of our greats.

Anyone with half a brain in that joint should be putting a contract on the table for warney right now.

T20 captain would be the smartest cricketing and marketing move of 200 years
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Nov-22, 07:27 PM

Warner :mad:

The hype merchants and their followers declared this blopke the next Bradman.


FOR  :censored:  SAKE :mad:

Did you hear what McGrath said prior to his dismissal?
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2009-Nov-22, 07:29 PM
God, cricket Australia mis manged the retirement of our greats.

Anyone with half a brain in that joint should be putting a contract on the table for warney right now.

T20 captain would be the smartest cricketing and marketing move of 200 years

Could sign Pigeon up while they're at it too
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2009-Nov-22, 07:39 PM
On a hatrick now too next over  :whistle:
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Nov-22, 07:54 PM
McGrath has bowled a shitload of overs, and has taken a bagfull of wickets in his career, but he's never done better than he's done tonight.
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2009-Nov-22, 07:57 PM
McGrath has bowled a shitload of overs, and has taken a bagfull of wickets in his career, but he's never done better than he's done tonight.

Now watch Tait open the bowling and go for 0/20 off his first two   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Nov-22, 08:00 PM
Did you hear what McGrath said prior to his dismissal?

I missed it mate, what did he say?
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Nov-22, 08:06 PM
That last over looked like a straight sets tennis victory 61 61 64
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Nov-22, 08:08 PM
Aus cannot lose this now.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Nov-22, 08:08 PM
George Bailey is a star.
Title: Cricket
Post by: coinswell on 2009-Nov-22, 08:10 PM
This is a great fixture - fantastic to see McGrath, Warne, Gilchrist etc. 

Clarke IMHO should not be in the T20 side, let alone captain.

Lacks the improvisation required for this game.

Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Nov-22, 08:12 PM
I missed it mate, what did he say?

He said something to the effect of "I'll bring it across him and have you catch him".
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Nov-22, 08:38 PM
Crikeys if Hayden hits too many more like that, wily ole dog will be calling for Watson head.
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2009-Nov-22, 08:40 PM
That last over looked like a straight sets tennis victory 61 61 64

Poor Rimmington had NFI what to bowl - shows the difference between your stock standard player and the champs   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Nov-22, 08:42 PM
Poor Rimmington had NFI what to bowl - shows the difference between your stock standard player and the champs   :lol:

No not necessarily, could well be just experience.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Nov-22, 08:44 PM
Crikeys if Hayden hits too many more like that, wily ole dog will be calling for Watson head.

I notice he has gone offline. Well it is hard to type one handed.   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2009-Nov-22, 08:48 PM
I notice he has gone offline. Well it is hard to type one handed.    :biggrin:  

  :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2009-Nov-22, 08:52 PM
Is it just me or does Clarke seem a bit of a pretentious s**t
Title: Cricket
Post by: coinswell on 2009-Nov-22, 08:57 PM
I notice he has gone offline. Well it is hard to type one handed.    :biggrin:  

 :clap2:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Nov-22, 09:13 PM
Regarding the Michael Clarke 'catch'

Haydos! Do you think he caught it or not?

Hayden - I don't really care to be honest  :/

And they're gambling on this  :nowink:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Nov-22, 09:19 PM
Regarding the Michael Clarke 'catch'

Haydos! Do you think he caught it or not?

Hayden - I don't really care to be honest  :/

And they're gambling on this  :nowink:

they're youre gambin on this.  lol

Look Aus were always going to win this really, they are a team who have something to play for, smething to gain. Not just for every single individual, but as a team.  However yes Lars that's the thing, that's why I didnt bet, given the circumstances ya never know.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Nov-22, 09:36 PM
[/s] youre gambin on this.

 :nowink:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Nov-22, 10:05 PM
Is it just me or does Clarke seem a bit of a pretentious s**t

The dog whistle was pissing me off, but other than that I like him.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Nov-23, 06:29 AM
Crikeys if Hayden hits too many more like that, wily ole dog will be calling for Watson head.





  :lol:   :lol:   :lol:

Seriously, it does show that they can manage the retirement of our greats a lot better.

All of those guys last night should still be playing for their country.
Atleast at T20 level and somthing should be put in place so they play shield as well

Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2009-Nov-23, 11:11 AM




   :lol:     :lol:     :lol:  

Seriously, it does show that they can manage the retirement of our greats a lot better.

All of those guys last night should still be playing for their country.
Atleast at T20 level and somthing should be put in place so they play shield as well



Calm down - Hayden slogged it and hit about 2 out of the middle.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Puntermatt on 2009-Nov-23, 01:02 PM
Pretty handy efforts from Haydos, Warnie, Pigeon and Gilly with none of them touching a bat or ball in the last four months. Class is permanent.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Nov-23, 04:12 PM
Class is permanent.



 8-)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Nov-25, 07:45 PM
Current market for Windies series top runs scorer:
 
Shivnarine Chanderpaul   
3.25        
 Ramnaresh Sarwan   
3.50        
 Chris Gayle   
4.50        
 Dwayne Bravo   
7.00        
 Adrian Barath   
7.50        
 Brendan Nash   
7.50        

With Sarwan unlikely to play, back Shiv now. Surely gotta shorten up if he misses the first test.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Nov-25, 07:46 PM
The East Africans are kicking our butts.
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2009-Nov-26, 09:57 AM
What time Watson to be dismissed?   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2009-Nov-26, 10:10 AM
What time Watson to be dismissed?    :lol:  


9 minutes - pathetic shot  emthdown
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Nov-26, 10:22 AM
Silly decision to shoulder arms but who would have expected such a shite decision from the ump.

Side on view clearly showed the ball sailing well over the stump.
watson was a meter infront of the crease when the ball hit the roll.

Anyone with cricketing nous knows it's going over the top


Oh well
Title: Cricket
Post by: stuey102 on 2009-Nov-26, 10:23 AM
He obviously thought he was out as he didnt bother to challenge it.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Nov-26, 10:24 AM
I never said he was smart

Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2009-Nov-26, 12:53 PM
Ponting not be given out dead plumb in front LBW was worse  emthdown
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Nov-26, 03:50 PM
Watson out LBW....well there's a surprise. :baby: :baby: :slaphead: :slaphead:
if Hughes has a short ball problem,what do you call Watson has with not knowing what to do with that stick in his hand?
never been a test players ar&ehole and never will be. :bleh: :bleh: :chair:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Nov-26, 04:38 PM
We saw how good Hughes looked against WA the other day.

Pathetic

He gets his chance tomorrow to make his claim
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Nov-26, 04:44 PM
Hope North makes a score here
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Nov-26, 09:10 PM
regardless of what Hughes does tomorrow or the rest of the summer,Watson is not a test players ar&ehole,end of section,he has no idea of playing a LBW ball which is crucial for an opening batsmen.
Hilditch should follow him out the door.....goose. :baby:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Nov-27, 06:57 AM
If you don't rate watson you better start wishing for someone to step up or he wont be replaced.

It may be Chris Rogers, he seems to be in reasonable form.

jacques and hughes are the only other alternatives and so far have shot themselves in the foot
Title: Cricket
Post by: Puntermatt on 2009-Nov-27, 08:40 AM
Apparently, this bloke was speaking to seven Sydney 1st Grade openers at a party recently and all, and I mean all of them said that Jacques was the best opener in Australia, bar none.

The knock against Jacques however is that he is a terrible fieldsman and has personality issues.

M
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Nov-27, 09:20 AM
I doubt Watson would have got the opening gig if we were playing a more formidable test side.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Nov-27, 11:51 AM
If the West Indies held their catches they'd be right in this game.

This series is going to gloss over some glaring deficiencies we have on the selection panel.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Nov-27, 02:23 PM
It may be Chris Rogers, he seems to be in reasonable form.

too bad he isn't as pretty as Watson huh.  ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Nov-27, 09:06 PM
Wily

Watson ain't a legitimate opening batsman.

He needs to prove that he's a fair dinkum wicket-taking bowler to be a pea for the test team.

He ain't that.

Let's hope he becomes one.

But I doubt it.

Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Nov-28, 07:46 AM
Wily

Watson ain't a legitimate opening batsman.


I've always agreed with that.
#4 to 6 is his true spot


The problem is that there is no alternative to him at the moment. Especially after he filled in at the Ashes and despite what some claim, he did perform
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Nov-28, 07:58 AM
Forget whether he's an opener or not, the thing is who, facing their 7th ball on the first morning of a test match, pads up to a ball that is relatively online?
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Nov-28, 09:08 AM
Been happening for 100 years lars, you haven't been paying attention.

the difference is that this time an umpire actually decided to make and example of it.
A brain exposion but as a former opening bowler.

GOD IT'S GOOD TO SEE  :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Nov-28, 03:41 PM
been a great little knock by Barath and only 19. hope he gets the ton.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Nov-28, 03:51 PM
well done lad. ton on debut.  8-)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2009-Nov-28, 03:52 PM

The problem is that there is no alternative to him at the moment. Especially after he filled in at the Ashes and despite what some claim, he did perform

Most quality openers should (will) convert at least 1 in 3 'starts' ............ he didn't do that in the Ashes and his whole inclusion in the team in that spot throws the balance of the side out.
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Nov-28, 04:02 PM
Good to see the kid get a good round of applause for his effort.
Title: Cricket
Post by: grommy5238 on 2009-Nov-28, 04:14 PM
this is what watson is like

my son was in nightclub wnen watson turned up

after half hour watson said 'why arent the chicks hanging around me?'

'Why, because you're an australian cricketer?' asked my son

' No, because i'm good looking was his reply"

says a lot about him!
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Nov-28, 04:27 PM
this is what watson is like

my son was in nightclub wnen watson turned up

after half hour watson said 'why arent the chicks hanging around me?'

'Why, because you're an australian cricketer?' asked my son

' No, because i'm good looking was his reply"

says a lot about him!

Really ?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Nov-28, 04:28 PM
I get two days off and the bloody cricket will not go into a 4th day.

Sack the bloody lot of them.
Title: Cricket
Post by: grommy5238 on 2009-Nov-28, 04:40 PM
vcery true!
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Nov-28, 04:50 PM
Wise move going on Thursday.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Nov-28, 06:27 PM
I not the "new Bradman" Dave Warner got a duck today batting at number 7  :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Nov-28, 06:58 PM
I not the "new Bradman" Dave Warner got a duck today batting at number 7  :lol:

I guess you only know that as you went to see if you could slag off hughes. Must be annoying on a pitch that has seen 25 wickets fall in under two days that you couldn't.  :whistle:  ;)

Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Nov-28, 07:38 PM
I'm versatile ara

I can slag off warner and hughes, have done equallyever since their hype machines went into overdrive  :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Nov-28, 07:58 PM
I'm versatile ara

I can slag off warner and hughes, have done equallyever since their hype machines went into overdrive  :biggrin:

says the man riding home the most overhyped hack of the last 10 years.   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Nov-28, 08:02 PM
Wily
You should make your assessments on players' abilities by their deeds rather than what the media states.

I've noticed over the years that media stuff clouds your judgement of sportspersons and horses.

Sometimes you're right, but mostly you make a goose of youself.

imvho

 
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Nov-28, 08:58 PM
Wily
You should make your assessments on players' abilities by their deeds



I do, that's why i have never rated hughes or Warner.

As for the way some folks well into the hype about those 2, that's to their embarrassment


As for your other stuff, any examples or just tossing grenades  :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Nov-29, 07:41 AM
No Wily, you read a positive assessment of a player, and immediately adopt the reverse position. And not in the role of a devil's advocate, because after a while they come clean.

Thinking Super. Thinking Alinghi

Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Nov-29, 09:05 AM
No Wily, you read a positive assessment of a player, and immediately adopt the reverse position. And not in the role of a devil's advocate, because after a while they come clean.

Thinking Super. Thinking Alinghi




Given that Super was well retired before these forums, he hardly came "clean"


If you don't agree with me that Super was a great horse, that's your prerogative. His record over many seasons proves he was .


My old girlfriend Alinghi?
Champion 3yo filly of her year, what a stellar 3yo season she had. She dominated her "bunch" as well as only a few other 3yo fillies have


As for adopting a reverse position after reading hype

Given the crap served up by the media in this country, it's quite a legitimate stance to take what they write with a grain of salt. The sickening gushing over Warner for the month after he flogged a few sixes in one game was classic, mindless guff for the nufff nuffs to latch onto to.
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Nov-29, 09:28 AM
I'll withdraw the Super comment.

I thought you were a Super sceptic.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Nov-29, 09:37 AM

I thought you were a Super sceptic.


I'm a victim of superannuation policy.

I'm one of those poor bastards who got caught with the introduction of it and won't have enough when I retire but probably won't get a pension either :clap2:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Wenona on 2009-Nov-29, 11:36 AM
Unbeaten 50 & 5-57, Hauri was a bit stiff for the M.O.M I reckon.

Title: Cricket
Post by: mky80 on 2009-Nov-29, 03:44 PM
I was sitting close the the players dressing rooms, and could see Gayle sitting with his pads still on about 1.5 - 2 hrs after he was out  :wavecry:

He must have thought the aussies were going to give the WI a third innings to get past their total!

Was a great innings by Barath...looks a great prospect for the Windies and the only batsman to show some heart (along with Dowlin in the first innings).  The crowd gave Barath a wonderful reception when he brought up his ton and again on his dismissal.  Very appreciative crowd. 

Bravo's ego got the better of him against Hussey.  I could see what the plan was as soon as Punter tossed him the ball...the old sucker punch on an egomaniac.  I think it cost Ponting a lot fewer runs than he would have budgeted in getting his man for.

Ohh and Sulieman Benn is a BIG UNIT  :wub:  apparently some of the aussies had trouble picking up his spinners as they were coming from above the sight-screen.  Still unsure how he manages to dig out yorkers when he is batting...think he uses two bats glued end on end!  He has a cracking pull shot...sounds so crisp off the bat.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Duke of Astor on 2009-Nov-29, 05:14 PM
Question...when buying TEST Tickets....do most buy for the 5 days.
























Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Nov-29, 05:16 PM
Its just not cricket.     :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Duke of Astor on 2009-Nov-29, 05:18 PM

I'm a victim of superannuation policy.

I'm one of those poor bastards who got caught with the introduction of it and won't have enough when I retire but probably won't get a pension either :clap2:

Wily.....search.....Malaysia my second home.................or consider Bali.....Many Aussies opting for that lifestyle...cheap and grand.
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Nov-29, 05:42 PM
god...playing the Worst Indies (to borrow a phrase) means Watson stays. :slaphead: :slaphead: :slaphead:
Title: Cricket
Post by: sobig on 2009-Nov-29, 06:15 PM
Question...when buying TEST Tickets....do most buy for the 5 days.

I would doubt that anyone would purchase tickets for the fifth day of a test in advance these days

Anyone who does certainly has too much money
























Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Nov-29, 07:02 PM
Anyone see highlights or lowlights from the WACCA today?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Nov-29, 07:04 PM
Western Aust v NSW at Perth - Nov 27-29
NSW won by 8 wkts
Title: Cricket
Post by: manikato1 on 2009-Nov-29, 07:13 PM
Question...when buying TEST Tickets....do most buy for the 5 days.


It used to be assumed that most did, however once pre purchased tickets became commonplace it became clear that most spectators attend only one day of a test.

Sobig is sort of right, except for "5 Day" tickets, most Tests don't sell 5th day tickets until the day.  If you do buy a 5 day ticket and the game only goes for 3, you get a refund for the 2 days you don't get.  At least that's what happens at the MCG.
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2009-Nov-29, 07:26 PM
Any one still think the $1.26 the Aussies for the first test was unders and not overs, or that it'd be a stroll in the park a few days short of 5?    :lol:  


Unfortunately the WI have some very poor leadership, plenty of inexperience and are shockingly lazy. A terrible combination. It's going to take many many yrs for it to be turned around.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Nov-29, 07:32 PM
Better value than that right now is one the one dayer between SA and ENG. Eng are all over them and there is about $1.40 + on offer at the moment which is a steal. Free money. should be $1.10.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Nov-29, 07:33 PM
Better value than that right now is one the one dayer between SA and ENG. Eng are all over them and there is about $1.40 + on offer at the moment which is a steal. Free money. should be $1.10.

and Boucher's just gone out, too bad $1.40 will be all gone.  lol
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Nov-29, 07:41 PM
$1.22 now and I dont know that I've ever seen a bigger $1.22 certainty in my life..
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Dec-04, 10:16 AM
I love watching Chris Gayle bat, almost as much as I did Haynes and Greenidge   emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Dec-04, 10:45 AM
  :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Dec-04, 10:48 AM
What's so funny?

Go Dougie  :beer:
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Dec-04, 03:35 PM
Watson continuing to show his "skill" level...not!  :lol:   :lol:   :lol:
i said before the fourth test in the Ashes that Siddle shouldn't be playing for aust' either and have seen nothing since to change my opinion....brain dead!!! :baby: :baby:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-04, 06:35 PM
  :lol:   :lol:   :lol:


2 vital wickets from watson.

Windies would have scored 400 if he didn't tak'em  :biggrin:


You posted a tad tooooo early shawnie  :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Dec-05, 04:41 PM
Watson must have read shaun's post as he's been nothing short of sensational since   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-05, 05:26 PM
Shauns like those liberal voters.

He'll never change his mind, even if Howard or Abbott shot his mother.  :lol:


Great to see watto get amongst it yet again, the kid can play 8-)

From his past 14 digs since opening in the test series he has scored in the 2 forms of the game for an
40
34
51
53
62
96n.o
49
93
49
41
105 n.o
136n.o


Thats an average of 69 :clap2: :clap2: :clap2:

Stunning results, in any clear thinking mans brain 8-)
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2009-Dec-05, 05:31 PM
If you think he is a fair dinkim test opener you are deluded Wily.  :rolleyes: He goes ok, but he's batting against X graders (as is most of his form). A test opener he aint.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Dec-05, 05:51 PM
Shauns like those liberal voters.

He'll never change his mind, even if Howard or Abbott shot his mother.  :lol:


Great to see watto get amongst it yet again, the kid can play 8-)

From his past 14 digs since opening in the test series he has scored in the 2 forms of the game for an
40
34
51
53
62
96n.o
49
93
49
41
105 n.o
136n.o


Thats an average of 69 :clap2: :clap2: :clap2:

Stunning results, in any clear thinking mans brain 8-)

You know whats funny about that post. The fact that people using the same tactic to show how crap Hayden was going were told by Wily they were clueless looking at recent results only.   :lol:  
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Dec-05, 05:58 PM
hmmm Wily, posting dodgy stats is a new trick even for you.  ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Dec-05, 06:08 PM
From his past 14 digs since opening in the test series he has scored in the 2 forms of the game for an

he opened in the test series on the 30/7/09. we will take this as the starting date as wily included the test digs from this date in his analysis and lets look at the figures without the creative accounting.  ;)

since then he has 7 test innings for a total of 336 including today's 96 n.o. for 6 outs(ave. 56). (note I've been very kind by including nearly a 3rd of his runs from today and the n.o. to boost his average)  ;)

he has had 19 one day innings for 742 runs and 17 dismissals(ave 43.64)

those are his real statistics in the 2 forms of the game since opening in the test series.  ;)

average 69 huh. but be an interesting new form of maths that one.  :whistle:
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Dec-05, 06:14 PM
Stunning results, in any clear thinking mans brain 8-)

I agree your results are stunning.   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Dec-05, 06:45 PM
 :lol:   :lol:   :lol:


2 vital wickets from watson.

Windies would have scored 400 if he didn't tak'em  :biggrin:


You posted a tad tooooo early shawnie  :lol:

"windies would have scored 400 if he didn't"...well they did!!!!  :lol:   :lol:   :lol:
what was that about going off too early????  :lol:   :lol:   :lol:
Watsons innings means nothing against this line up!!!
Siddle wouldn't be in my park team!!!!
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Dec-05, 06:50 PM
Watson, great work, however ya must say that he has been on the end of a lot of the loose ones.. I watched the whole innings and Watson got a few 4's from edges and loose ones. Still batted very well though.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-06, 07:36 AM
If you think he is a fair dinkim test opener you are deluded Wily.  :rolleyes: He goes ok, but he's batting against X graders (as is most of his form). A test opener he aint.


If he isn't a test opener, 7's, then he's doing a bloody good job is he not?

Imagine how well he'll go when he slots to to # 5 where he really belongs :clap2:


The NSW brigade have their nose out of joint because the puppet, hughes, was dumped. They need to attack someone
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2009-Dec-06, 07:55 AM
The way Hughes has been treated is disgraceful. The use of Watson as an opener just highlights how poorly the development of the next generation of players is currently being managed.

Watson has a test average of approx 30, the majority of which has been made against the B graders. He is regularly caught out for his inability to play a quality straight ball, or seaming line and length ball, and this is against B grade opposition, little alone what will happen if he is retained in this role against the top 2 or 3 sides in the world.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Dec-06, 09:35 AM

If he isn't a test opener, 7's, then he's doing a bloody good job is he not?

Imagine how well he'll go when he slots to to # 5 where he really belongs :clap2:


The NSW brigade have their nose out of joint because the puppet, hughes, was dumped. They need to attack someone

So Wily what do you have to say about your Statistics? Any reason you bullshitted?
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Dec-06, 10:02 AM
  :lol:   :lol:   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2009-Dec-06, 10:02 AM
Watson, great work, however ya must say that he has been on the end of a lot of the loose ones.. I watched the whole innings and Watson got a few 4's from edges and loose ones. Still batted very well though.

Get off the fence Mark, did he bat well or was he lucky?

Cause your having plenty each way at the moment  :chin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Dec-06, 10:09 AM
As I said, he batted well, struck the ball very cleanly even in putting away those cheap ones, and played some very good shots in his innings. All I'm saying is that he got a lot more easy runs than Kat is it that hard to fkn understand?  :wacko:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Dec-06, 10:13 AM
Under the circumstances, that was probably one of the worst shots in the history of the game, in any form  :yes:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Dec-06, 10:25 AM
My condolences to wily, his Sunday is ruined and Christmas is probably beyond repair.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Puntermatt on 2009-Dec-06, 10:56 AM
I see the turncoat cochroach Watson failed again.

After a decade of magnificent service from Haydos averaging 50.73 and a century every 6 innings, how can Australia persist with the cochroach, Watson?

Watson has failed to score a century from 19 innings and averages a measly 26.75.

Somebody call Rogers or Jacques post haste!!

Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Dec-06, 11:41 AM
I want to see an umpire punch the air when they are vindicated.    emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2009-Dec-06, 11:46 AM
I see the turncoat cochroach Watson failed again.


AB? Thommo?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Dec-06, 05:42 PM
Aus are gone for mine. Cannot possibly win the test match.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Dec-06, 05:46 PM
Australia will re-group over night and rip through them in the morning wrapping up the inning by tea and the match by lunch on Tuesday.
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Dec-06, 06:48 PM
Wily

What's your assessment of Michael Clarke as a test batsman?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Dec-07, 10:10 AM
Thats a real bad referal Ricky, real bad.

I was certain Haddin was bluffing.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Dec-07, 10:54 AM
We are ripping through them now, should be over by tea.   8-)
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Dec-07, 03:11 PM
Auth ya dreamin. An Aus win should be about 30-1 atm (Im not sure what it actually is), Windies $6 and draw about $1.10.  Well that would be my market  :biggrin:

Aus have absolutely no hope gettin these runs on the last day pitch.  :yes:
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2009-Dec-07, 03:24 PM
Auth ya dreamin. An Aus win should be about 30-1 atm (Im not sure what it actually is), Windies $6 and draw about $1.10.  Well that would be my market   :biggrin:  

Aus have absolutely no hope gettin these runs on the last day pitch.  :yes:
.

They would have every hope of getting them - this is a road - the problem is they won't be allowed too. Windies will bat them out of the game.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Dec-07, 03:25 PM
.

They would have every hope of getting them - this is a road - the problem is they won't be allowed too. Windies will bat them out of the game.

Exactly..  :huh:
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2009-Dec-07, 03:26 PM
Exactly..  :huh:

Your post implied the reason they wouldn't get them was the state of the pitch.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Dec-07, 03:30 PM
Your post implied the reason they wouldn't get them was the state of the pitch.

One of the reasons.. As well as the fact that they'll have to get 300-350 odd in about two and a half sessions of play, which I thought would be understood, I mean the Windies gonna declare now are they??  :no:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Dec-07, 04:12 PM
Hey who has noticed this, I just realised the other day..  Channel 9 dont sell anymore of their worthless overpriced memorabilia anymore do they? Well if they do they certainly dont advertise it during the cricket do they.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Dec-07, 04:22 PM
They probably realise no-one would want to buy a cricket bat signed by the current crop   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-07, 08:00 PM
My condolences to wily, his Sunday is ruined and Christmas is probably beyond repair.


Thankfully, I was at a BBQ and on the syrup  :lol:   :lol:

Brain explosion under pressure.

Thankfully he scored a very good 96 the day before, top score I believe,  so i don't really give a toss  :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-07, 08:02 PM
Wily

What's your assessment of Michael Clarke as a test batsman?


Geoff, I think he immensely talented and his record speaks for itself.

IF you're looking for me to  be critical i do believe he is like a lot of the current team and is vulnerable early in his innings
Title: Cricket
Post by: coinswell on 2009-Dec-07, 08:11 PM
Brain explosion under pressure.

In stark contrast to the way Phil Hughes got to his first test ton, and against a better team.

Says a bit about Watson's temperament I think.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-07, 08:13 PM
Young Phil got dropped 5 times on his way to the worst ton I have ever seen.


Anyways, he's yesterdays fish and chips wrapping
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Dec-07, 09:59 PM
Better value than that right now is one the one dayer between SA and ENG. Eng are all over them and there is about $1.40 + on offer at the moment which is a steal. Free money. should be $1.10.

Yes and the $1.60 about the draw at the moment is just as big a certainty.  I've even backed it and I very rarely make the effort to ring up on the phone.  ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Dec-07, 10:10 PM
Yes and the $1.60 about the draw at the moment is just as big a certainty.  I've even backed it and I very rarely make the effort to ring up on the phone.  ;)

The draw between SA and ENG?
Title: Cricket
Post by: coinswell on 2009-Dec-08, 07:01 AM
Young Phil got dropped 5 times on his way to the worst ton I have ever seen.


5 times?  Are you sure?

In terms of test cricket you mustn't have Matthew Hayden's debut test ton - against the WI at Adelaide - surely one of the flukiest, excruciating and most unconvincing tons in test history.  He was 'fish and chip wrapping' not long after but seemed to come back okay.  He also rates Hughes.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Dec-08, 09:51 AM
The draw between SA and ENG?

Aus WI  :p  :slaphead:
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2009-Dec-08, 10:45 AM
330 get in 81 overs, 4 an over. Getable, but a 5th day wicket. I think I heard something just over 300 is the best last innings test chase here.

But with quality test openers like Watson it should be a walk in the park.   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Dec-08, 10:46 AM
Going to be a good day no matter what
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Dec-08, 10:50 AM
Draw still a livin cert.   :beer:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Dec-08, 11:07 AM
All they need to do is treat it like a one dayer.

Problem is, they don't have their one day squad   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Dec-08, 11:11 AM
Kat has got no idea facing Benn.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Dec-08, 11:19 AM
Kat has got no idea facing Benn.

But it was the guy from the other end who got him.. Thing is, Katich is having to do all the hitting coz Watto is not.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Dec-08, 12:59 PM
That makes it difficult.

I'd send in Mitchel Johnson
Title: Cricket
Post by: mky80 on 2009-Dec-08, 01:30 PM
But it was the guy from the other end who got him.. Thing is, Katich is having to do all the hitting coz Watto is not.

IMHO Watson has been designated to bat all day so the others can bat around him (especially after Katich got out).  They would want to keep wickets in hand until they are into the final session and see where they are at.  No use both Batsmen going the tonk to get the target.  Thats when we are at risk of outright loss.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Dec-08, 03:35 PM
So many people happy to back the draw atm @ 1.06
It may well be a draw, but i've seen better things at odds much longer than that
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2009-Dec-08, 03:36 PM
Agreed - but will be a shizen performance by us if we get bowled out.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Dec-08, 03:44 PM
5 wickets in hand, min 24 overs to come, draw currently 1.16, they can have that on their own  :yes:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-08, 03:47 PM
5 times?  Are you sure?

In terms of test cricket you mustn't have Matthew Hayden's debut test ton - against the WI at Adelaide - surely one of the flukiest, excruciating and most unconvincing tons in test history.  He was 'fish and chip wrapping' not long after but seemed to come back okay.  He also rates Hughes.

Yes I agree and yes he was dumped not long after.

p[personally the "technical deficiencies" that hayden was labelled for were massively less than those of Hughes....as an opening bat.
\

Hayden was always scoring shield runs and worked on his game to get back.

Hughes has shown none of that thus far.

Hope I'm wrong one day about him but I doubt it.

in the meantime, for those to sledge Watson because they think Hughes was hard done by is nonsense.

He has done a bloody good job and excelled in a position that isn't natural to him 8-)
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-08, 03:51 PM
Wily

What's your assessment of Michael Clarke as a test batsman?


geoff, any feedback old mate?
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Dec-08, 03:55 PM
He has done a bloody good job and excelled in a position that isn't natural to him 8-)

I musn't understand the meaning of excelled.   :biggrin:

Then again I didn't understand how you came about your "stats" about watson the other day either.  ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-08, 04:02 PM
Sorry, ara but if you can't rate the blokes contributiion this test, your a nut case.


96 & 48 and a few wickets is excelling unless you demand he performs line the Don
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Dec-08, 04:14 PM
Since when has the performance over one single test the way to judge a players excelling.  :wacko:

He is a very average bat and an average bowler. The fact that he can do both means nothing to me. He drags down the team, and is clearly the so overrated it isn't funny. It is sad.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Dec-08, 04:18 PM
Sorry, ara but if you can't rate the blokes contributiion this test, your a nut case.


96 & 48 and a few wickets is excelling unless you demand he performs line the Don

The problem is, he did not finish either job.

The way is open for him to drop down to number 6, with Hussey being dropped and Chris Rogers coming into open. Clark should come in for an injured Siddle.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-08, 04:21 PM
Since when has the performance over one single test the way to judge a players excelling.  :wacko:

He is a very average bat and an average bowler. The fact that he can do both means nothing to me. He drags down the team, and is clearly the so overrated it isn't funny. It is sad.


What have been his scores since taking over the opening spot?
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Dec-08, 04:29 PM

What have been his scores since taking over the opening spot?

as I posted previously the truth

he opened in the test series on the 30/7/09. we will take this as the starting date as wily included the test digs from this date in his analysis and lets look at the figures without the creative accounting.  ;)

since then he has 7 test innings for a total of 336 including today's 96 n.o. for 6 outs(ave. 56). (note I've been very kind by including nearly a 3rd of his runs from today and the n.o. to boost his average)  ;)

he has had 19 one day innings for 742 runs and 17 dismissals(ave 43.64)

those are his real statistics in the 2 forms of the game since opening in the test series.  ;)

average 69 huh. but be an interesting new form of maths that one.  :whistle:

now lets update it

since then he has 8 test innings for a total of 387 (ave. 48)



oh and I asked before Wily how did you come up with these figures?

Shauns like those liberal voters.

He'll never change his mind, even if Howard or Abbott shot his mother.  :lol:


Great to see watto get amongst it yet again, the kid can play 8-)

From his past 14 digs since opening in the test series he has scored in the 2 forms of the game for an
40
34
51
53
62
96n.o
49
93
49
41
105 n.o
136n.o


Thats an average of 69 :clap2: :clap2: :clap2:

Stunning results, in any clear thinking mans brain 8-)

I found it funny how you included several scores in and around the 3 straight O.D.I ducks but not them and even negleted the Gabba Duck.  :whistle:

all I know is when someone "manufactures" false evidence to support there position it says more than anything else can.  ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Dec-08, 04:34 PM
Hear,Hear...if the bloke HAS to be in the team and i'm far from convinced (no "Test skills") then put him at 6 where he doesn't matter.
Siddle should be dropped, injured or not! :bleh:

lets not forget who they are playing...a team who has won 3 tests from their last 30 something and we got beat by the poms who we were expected to give a pasting to...you only had to read the Ashes posts for that assumption.  :lol:
this is a sad lot of aussie cricketers.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-08, 04:44 PM
It's pretty simple ara.

Count how many knocks I posted. the total is 12. I listed them from his past 14 digs going back to his 105 not out against the poms in the one dayer


How far do you want to go back with him.

I went as far as when he started to "put it together"


You you said his average is 48 in tests now, what the  :censored:  is wrong with that :wacko:

Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Dec-08, 05:16 PM
no wonder they have only won 3 tests since 2001/3 , i would have grinded the aussies out to the end. :nowink:
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Dec-08, 05:51 PM
It's pretty simple ara.

Count how many knocks I posted. the total is 12. I listed them from his past 14 digs going back to his 105 not out against the poms in the one dayer


you'd think it be simple wouldn't yah. past 14 digs huh. ;)

OK Watsons past 14 digs by date up to the 96 n.o you included are

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   
85 20/09/2009 ENG Riverside Ground c G Swann b J Anderson 0 1755 37.34 4   80.91  
86 26/09/2009 WIN New Wanderers Stad b K Roach 0 1755 36.56 1   80.88  
87 28/09/2009 IND Supersport Park c Harbhajan Singh b A Nehra 0 1755 35.82 7   80.62  
88 30/09/2009 PAK Supersport Park c Kamran Akmal b Umar Gul 24 1779 35.58 22   80.90  
89 2/10/2009 ENG Supersport Park not out *136 1915 38.30 132   82.15  
90 5/10/2009 NZL Supersport Park not out *105 2020 40.40 129   82.11  
91 25/10/2009 IND Reliance Stadium lbw b A Nehra 5 2025 39.71 6   82.12  
92 28/10/2009 IND Vidarbha Cricket Gr c S Tendulkar b I Sharma 19 2044 39.31 26   82.02  
93 31/10/2009 IND Feroz Shah Kotla st M Dhoni b Yuvraj Singh 41 2085 39.34 59   81.73  
94 2/11/2009 IND Punjab Cricket Stad c M Dhoni b Harbhajan Singh 49 2134 39.52 52   81.98  
95 5/11/2009 IND RajivGandhi Internat c R Jadeja b Harbhajan Singh 93 2227 40.49 89   82.73  
96 8/11/2009 IND Nehru Stad (Guwahat) c V Sehwag b Harbhajan Singh 49 2276 40.64 49   83.04  
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 
12 26/11/2009 WIN Brisbane Cricket Gr 1st lbw b J Taylor 0 497 26.16 7   47.06  
        2nd   DNB 497 26.16 0   47.06  
13 04/12/2009 WIN Adelaide Oval 1st b S Benn 96 593 29.65 148   49.25

nice to see they matchup with

40    :chin:
34   :chin:
51     :chin:
53    :chin:
62    :chin:
96n.o     emthup
49     emthup
93      emthup
49      emthup
41      emthup
105 n.o     emthup
136n.o      emthup

So those first 5 are in his past 14 digs despite happening to be in fact 22-26 innings ago.  You guys can guess as to the performance in the 14 innings of the last 26 that weren't in Wily's magical 12.  ;)

As I said Wily when someone "manufactures" false evidence to support there position it says more than anything else can.   ;)



Title: Cricket
Post by: coinswell on 2009-Dec-08, 06:07 PM
Watson has yet to show he play a long test innings in difficult circumstances.

At present, I reckon he is the classic 'nearly' man.  I hope he improves but he gee he has had a saloon passage.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-08, 06:20 PM
Ara,  we were originally talking tests were we not?

I Included all of his tests because thats what we were talking about mate, test cricket.

I then added the one dayers since he came good in that knock against the poms. 136 N.Ol

Be pedantic and nitpick if you wish. :wacko:


Is your dislike of him the fact that he's been hyped for so long and didn't deliver or is he too pretty for you?  :biggrin:

Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Dec-08, 06:32 PM
Draw still a livin cert.   :beer:

Ho ho ho merry Christmas (:p Triples).. lol
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-08, 06:35 PM
At present, I reckon he is the classic 'nearly' man.  I hope he improves but he gee he has had a saloon passage.


Thats one way of putting it coins.

they certainly identified him early and injury took it's toll.

Some seem to blame him for that. I prefer to think that he kept digging in and coming back. true guts, many have walked away from that stuff in the past 8-)

As to the saloon passage, correct again and once again rubbing noses in it. He did get his position by default. hughes was exposed, hayden was shunted out, Jaques got uinjured and Rogers didn't take advantage as well.

By default, yes but doing a bloody good job in an unsuitable position

Not a recognised opener, yes. just like justin Langer wasn't but he certainl proved himself
Title: Cricket
Post by: coinswell on 2009-Dec-08, 06:53 PM
Woddy - I am done with Watson v. Hughes thing mate - time to move on for me anyhow (maybe I won't be able to help myself next time Watson stuffs up   :biggrin:  ....but here's hoping)

I didn't see any of it today - it seemed like Hussey struggled as he did in the first innings?
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Dec-08, 06:56 PM
Hussey is the one who needs the tap on the shoulder to allow Watson to move down the order.
Hussey is just being greedy...he has no idea these days...he was lucky to score what he did today. :bleh:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Dec-08, 06:59 PM
I agree, Huss doesnt look like getting a big score.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Dec-08, 07:05 PM
Ara,  we were originally talking tests were we not?

I Included all of his tests because thats what we were talking about mate, test cricket.

I then added the one dayers since he came good in that knock against the poms. 136 N.Ol

Be pedantic and nitpick if you wish. :wacko:


Is your dislike of him the fact that he's been hyped for so long and didn't deliver or is he too pretty for you?  :biggrin:

I dislike him because he is shit, made of cotton wool and should never have played a test.

averages 26 with the bat and 36 with the ball. says it all.  ;)

and no your statement was clear. both forms of the game and his last 14 innings. The reason you wanted both was to squeeze in the 2 centuries somewhere. there is no nitpicking, you just were desparate to come up with a stat to suit you and it was complete bullshit.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-08, 07:19 PM
It does say it all  :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-08, 07:21 PM
I dislike him because he is shit, made of cotton wool and should never have played a test.

averages 26 with the bat a


Perhaps it does

After 22 test Steve waugh was only averaging 26 ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-08, 07:23 PM
Woddy - I am done with Watson v. Hughes thing mate - time to move on for me anyhow (maybe I won't be able to help myself next time Watson stuffs up   :biggrin:  ....but here's hoping)

I didn't see any of it today - it seemed like Hussey struggled as he did in the first innings?


I agree mate 8-)


Huss did struggle. I think a home test in Perth and he may be moved aside unless he scores big.

North is also under a bit of pressure but I fail to see where the next in line is coming from
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Dec-08, 07:30 PM
North is also under a bit of pressure but I fail to see where the next in line is coming from

and that says it all. North under pressure.   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:

So desparate to make the crap watsons case mr 26 avg and no centuries from 13 tests that you think a bloke averaging 48 with 3 centuries from 9 tests who got 79 in brisbane is under pressure.

you are 100% delusional.  :wacko:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-08, 07:46 PM
Oh deary me ara, watto has really got you rattled.

take it up with the commentators from the ABC who were of the view about North.

Personally I don't think he should be but we've seen the impact that the media have on some peoples opinions ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Dec-08, 07:49 PM
Oh deary me ara, watto has really got you rattled.

take it up with the commentators from the ABC who were of the view about North.

Personally I don't think he should be but we've seen the impact that the media have on some peoples opinions ;)
indeed you get told watsons the best allrounder in the world and you believe it.  ;)

  :lol:   :lol:   :lol:  ABC commentators. Which overseas tossers do they have on this year.
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Dec-08, 07:51 PM
when is ch9 going to get rid of that Slater...i have to turn the tv down when he is on.
even Chappell told him to basically shut-up yesterday... :bleh: :bleh: :bleh:
he is a goose of the first order.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-08, 07:52 PM
indeed you get told watsons the best allrounder in the world and you believe it.  ;)


Na, don't believe it

the media have done nothing but dump on the bloke an pull the strings of people like you


Keep bagging the bloke, he's here to stay.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-08, 07:52 PM
when is ch9 going to get rid of that Slater...i have to turn the tv down when he is on.
even Chappell told him to basically shut-up yesterday... :bleh: :bleh: :bleh:
he is a goose of the first order.


I like Slats.

Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Dec-08, 07:53 PM
of course you would...  :lol:   :lol:  :slaphead: :slaphead:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-08, 07:53 PM
  :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Dec-08, 07:57 PM

Na, don't believe it

the media have done nothing but dump on the bloke an pull the strings of people like you


Keep bagging the bloke, he's here to stay.


Of course he'll stay. Just like in the NFL when a team drafts a dud at number 1 they keep playing and playing hoping desparetely they'll get proven right. Watson was the first in the allrounder draft and will always be a dud.  ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-08, 08:06 PM
So ara, tell me what would be the team that you would select next test
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Dec-08, 08:10 PM
Slats is fine, the whole channel nine commentary team is outstanding.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Dec-08, 08:23 PM
simple.

the best test bowler in the country comes back in Clark.

watson goes.

Johnson who averages more than watson, who has more 50's and has more centuries and a better bowling average plays where an all rounder should at 7.  ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-08, 08:28 PM
Come on mate, you can do better than that.

list them from 1 to 11 ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Dec-08, 08:31 PM
Come on mate, you can do better than that.

list them from 1 to 11 ;)

Is it really that hard to figure out.  :wacko:

Hussey opens, Clark at 10 or 11. everyone else below 4 moves up 1. not hard.

Windies wouldn't get past 300 with clark in the team pestering the impatient lot.  ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-08, 08:34 PM

Hussey opens,



 :chin:

Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Dec-08, 08:35 PM
what a century, a half century and a 40 odd in his last 3 tests innings tells me he's way out of form.  ;)

The bloke who is struggling has achieved more in those 3 innings than watson has.   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:

oh and averages 55 in 8 goes when opening in tests.  :whistle:
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Dec-08, 08:38 PM
Slats is a goose.
Boycott told him so 2 series ago in the Ashes commentary and Chappell told him as much yesterday.
i have not listened to the Big Sports Breakfast for 1 minute since the day before he was appointed and won't again till he is gone. :bleh: :bleh: :bleh: :bleh:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Dec-08, 08:40 PM
Slats is a goose.
Boycott told him so 2 series ago in the Ashes commentary and Chappell told him as much yesterday.
i have not listened to the Big Sports Breakfast for 1 minute since the day before he was appointed and won't again till he is gone. :bleh: :bleh: :bleh: :bleh:

Is there history here that might be clouding your judgement ?
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-08, 08:40 PM
what a century, a half century and a 40 odd in his last 3 tests innings tells me he's way out of form.  ;)



Guess not

Just like a 96,48,40,34,51,53,62 from 7 digs doesn't tell me a blokes hopless either  :lol:

especially batting out of position
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Dec-08, 08:42 PM
Ara

Hussey is struggling.

He's been as scratchy as all get out.

I'm not saying that he should be dropped: yet.

But he needs to relinquish the title of Mr Cricket.
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Dec-08, 08:43 PM
i wouldn't know him from a bar of soap but was glad when Boycott told him to shut up which was what i was screaming at the screen...my first initiation to his 'commentary'..... :shutup: :wacko:
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Dec-08, 08:49 PM
Slater's okay.

The only two I can't really cop are Taylor and Healy.

But then I remember Stackpole and Walker, so I grin and bear those two.


Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-08, 08:50 PM
Geoff, why were you asking me about Clarke?
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Dec-08, 08:51 PM

Guess not

Just like a 96,48,40,34,51,53,62 from 7 digs doesn't tell me a blokes hopless either  :lol:

especially batting out of position

what are those 7 digs. once again selective leaving out of low innings. Do you want to see video of how he got out at the Gabba shouldering arms, or the slog on Sunday.

What's really funny I could imagine how you would be foaming at the mouth if you saw Hughes get out in the manner of those two wickets.  ;)
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Dec-08, 08:52 PM
Ara

Hussey is struggling.

He's been as scratchy as all get out.

I'm not saying that he should be dropped: yet.

But he needs to relinquish the title of Mr Cricket.


and yet is still 5x the batsmen watson will ever be.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-08, 08:57 PM

Guess not

Just like a 96,48,40,34,51,53,62 from 8  :lol: digs doesn't tell me a blokes hopless either  :lol:

especially batting out of position


Big difference  :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Dec-08, 08:59 PM
Hussey to open yes best suggestion yet. He started out as an opener in the aus test team lets not forget, did very well too. He plays exactly as an opener, all controlled strokes, doesnt need to go big and can hit safe boundaries etc.

Give it a try I say.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Dec-08, 09:02 PM
Wily, exactly what are those innings. there not his last 8 tests innings, not his last 8 O.D.I's nor his last 8 innings.  ;)

why continually manufacture stuff Wily?  funny how this never gets answered.  :whistle:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-08, 09:05 PM
Well, you tell me ara.

What have been watsons last 8 test digs?
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Dec-08, 09:10 PM
ok apologies wily, It didn't have todays innings in there yet. I had the 5 v nz still at his 8th innings.

Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-08, 09:12 PM
ok apologies wily, It didn't have todays innings in there yet. I had the 5 v nz still at his 8th innings.




Thats alright mate, you'll catch up one day :p
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Dec-08, 09:12 PM
but please do address how you can so easily gloss over two absolutely disgraceful losses of his wicket in 3 innings when you were all over Hughes when he did similar. pathetic double standards there.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Dec-08, 09:13 PM

Thats alright mate, you'll catch up one day :p

please your he averages 69 post was one of the worst manipulation of figures ever seen on any forum. so desparate.
Title: Cricket
Post by: coinswell on 2009-Dec-08, 09:13 PM

I agree mate 8-)


Huss did struggle. I think a home test in Perth and he may be moved aside unless he scores big.

North is also under a bit of pressure but I fail to see where the next in line is coming from

Yeah in the first innings Hussey could not basically get the ball off the square and his scoring rate was very ordinary.  To me he is a shadow of his former self.  On the other hand Pup and Haddin seem to be getting better all the time.  I've said it before and I'll say it again Clarke should be batting at 4, regardless of whether Hussey is in the side or not.  Maybe move Hussey to 6 and North up to 5 - I don't think the need to mix up lefties and righties should prevail over the proper balance of the side especially if they persevere with Watson as opener, rather than down the order.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Dec-08, 09:14 PM
so Wily on his last 8 or 9 tests would you drop hussey?
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-08, 09:18 PM
Mate, you might disagree but Watson looks like a batsman. Yes he stuffs up but I put that down to nerves and pressurising himself

yes he did get his front foot in the wrong spot a few times and got out LBW.

overall he has most of the classical cricket shots in his bag. He drives beauifully

It a heap better than watching a bloke opening who plays everything off the backfoot and tries to smash most balls square of the wicket.

crickets been around for a bloody long time and I can't think of one player who has succeeded by playing shots the way Hughes does.

The game will find him out. Watsons problem with the full ball getting him LB can be easily solved
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-08, 09:22 PM
so Wily on his last 8 or 9 tests would you drop hussey?


Personally, no I wouldn't but the time will come where they have to move him on for the good of the team. he's certainly not the player he was 2 years ago

At the moment there is no one to replace him now that Hodge has pulled the pin so he deserves his spot.

He did look awful & scratchy today I thought
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-08, 09:35 PM
please your he averages 69 post was one of the worst manipulation of figures ever seen on any forum. so desparate.

To be honest with you, it was a mistake.

I had in my mind that he started opening against the poms.  His test runs since then have been 389 or 8 dismissals

I quickly looked at the Howstat site and saw the one day game against the poms where he scored that great 136no.

I thought it was on the ashes tour and moved forward from then. I was wrong, that was the champions trophy



Since that game he has opened in 8 ODI's for 497  for 6 dismissals


That's a joint total of  886 for 14 dismissals. Average 63
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Dec-09, 07:11 AM
Geoff, why were you asking me about Clarke?

Just wondered what you thought of him.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Dec-09, 12:13 PM
The big problem with Watson, he thinks he's bigger than the game itself.

He came out after on overnight 96no and thought it was a matter of swiping one through mid-wicket to bring up his ton.

He's too proud to grab 4 singles
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Dec-09, 12:27 PM
I'm thinking the bubble might burst for Qld in the Ford ranger Cup today.

Gee they have been going well.

In saying that , I have risked them and backed the Blues.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-09, 12:39 PM
The big problem with Watson, he thinks he's bigger than the game itself.

He came out after on overnight 96no and thought it was a matter of swiping one through mid-wicket to bring up his ton.

He's too proud to grab 4 singles


FFS, lars :wacko:


he came out and got a rank long hop that every batsman in the world would have tried to smash to the boundary. His sin was that he missed the bloody thing


Bigger than the game,  nice quantum leap,   :wacko:




I made note the other day about how we've turned into a spiteful country. Classic example
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2009-Dec-09, 12:52 PM



I made note the other day about how we've turned into a spiteful country. Classic example

  :lol:

Classic quote from the man who lays in to P.Hughes at every opportunity.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-09, 12:54 PM
 :lol:

Classic quote from the man who lays in to P.Hughes at every opportunity.


I've never questioned the kids integrity, just his technique

theres a massive difference.

Surprised you can't see that
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Dec-09, 12:57 PM
Wily

Maaaate, I don't know why these blokes are arguing with you about your assessment of a cricketer's ability.

You convinced me years ago.

Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-09, 01:02 PM
  :lol:


I commented on Stevie the other day.

I was half expecting you to chime in. :p
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Dec-09, 01:24 PM
I saw it.

And thought to myself " Will I or won't I?"

and then I remembered what my old granddaddy told me. "JohnWesleyHarding, remember this, as it will save you a lot of time on internet forums, there is none so blind as he who will not see.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-09, 04:24 PM
Geoff, there are some similarities between the 2.

both very hyped and both being "project" players becasue of their allround ability.

Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Dec-09, 08:07 PM
Which two are we talking of here, Wily.

Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Dec-10, 06:16 AM
I'm thinking the bubble might burst for Qld in the Ford ranger Cup today.

Gee they have been going well.

In saying that , I have risked them and backed the Blues.

Good result   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-10, 06:45 AM
Which two are we talking of here, Wily.




Your man & Watto

Not being a smart arse but does 13,5,8,0,11,74,1,1,0,12*2*,39*6,0,28, 71 ring a bell or 10 test average of 20.85?
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Dec-11, 12:24 AM
Meet Kirsty Perrin - cricket's biggest loser

KIRSTY Perrin is a one-in-a-billion cricketer, and it's not because she can bat like Don Bradman or spin like Shane Warne.

Her speciality is the coin toss or, more precisely, losing the coin toss.

In a record unlikely to be broken unless another cricketer inherits her bad luck, the Raby 16-year-old has lost 30 straight tosses since early 2008. The odds of such a run are worse than 1,000,000,000-1 - 20 times more than winning Powerball.

But the only ones who are cashing in are her opposing skippers in the Campbelltown junior comp. "It's frustrating and funny at the same time," Kirsty said.

"I've tried everything - going with my gut instinct, going against it. I've switched between heads and tails, used different coins. The lot. Nothing works. I just always seem to lose."

Kirsty gets another chance to break the spell when her Magpies team takes the field tomorrow. "It's got to the point where a whole heap of people will stand around just to watch the toss."

Title: Cricket
Post by: Puntermatt on 2009-Dec-14, 12:28 PM
Great game underway at the Gabba where Qld have bowled NSW out for 184 after conceding 451 in the first innings. Jacques and  Hughes lost a chance to press their claims for national selection failing for 17 and 3 respectively. Already Qld are 1/116 of 21 overs chasing 168 with plenty of time left!!!!
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Dec-14, 01:00 PM
Great fight back .  emthup
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2009-Dec-14, 01:35 PM
Who really cares given the Vics chased down 380 to win on the last day yesterday!   :noteworthy:
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Dec-15, 07:22 PM
Very interesting choice by the selectors on who they've brought in to cover Hauritz.

TBH he is a just batting all-rounder who bowls very mediocre spin. In fact it is a stunning choice(averages 75 with the ball at state level from 9 games :o) but it helps me understand how watson keeps getting picked.    :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: stuey102 on 2009-Dec-15, 07:23 PM
Krejza should be in over him if they are after a spinner.

But the fact Smith plays for NSW gives Krazy no hope.
Title: Cricket
Post by: coinswell on 2009-Dec-15, 07:28 PM
But the fact Smith plays for NSW gives Krazy no hope.

Yeah - playing for NSW gives you a tremendous advantage - just ask Phil Hughes and Stuart Clark.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Dec-15, 07:29 PM
no Krezja average at the WACA is terryfying.

took 1 for more than 200 in his only test there. took 0/140+ there last week for tas v WA.
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Dec-15, 08:01 PM
i hope Siddle has played his last game for aust'.
good luck to his replacement....please bowl 'reasonably' well and give Hilditch(goose) no reason to ever pick Siddle again.
Title: Cricket
Post by: stuey102 on 2009-Dec-15, 08:05 PM
Tassie havent even played at the WACA this year  :what:


Steve Smith took a combined 0/156 off 25 in his last Shield Game and bowled 8 wicketless overs in the NSW Shield game at the WACA this year. Hardly a glowing endorsment for his selection.

I think they should play four fast bowlers and play Geeves, but if they are going to play a spinner I cant understand not playing Krazy.

His bowling is alot better now than it was when he last played for Australia. He has alot more variation and doesnt leak as many runs.
Title: Cricket
Post by: sobig on 2009-Dec-15, 08:22 PM
Those figures against WA last week were at Bellerive.

From the publicity in the WA press this week it does not appear a spinner would be favoured at the WACA tomorrow
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Dec-15, 08:22 PM
I'd play 4 quicks at the WACA any day of the week.
Part-timers Clarke and/or Katich will be no more expensive than a specialist spinner.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Dec-15, 08:24 PM
Kemar Roach - I have a huge opinion of this bloke.. The spruik form the media worries me though I thought he was a little sneaky I only noticed lol
Aussie batters - watch out. He's fast and boy he does not give the batsmen a thing.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Dec-15, 08:27 PM
Those figures against WA last week were at Bellerive.

ah, thought they were at the WACA. Sorry.

I'm just intrigue as to why smith was called up. Don't think he would've been on anyone's radar. 
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Dec-15, 08:30 PM
Wouldn't it be delightfully delicious should the twelfth man, one who is charged with the carrying of drinks and bats and attending to the other various needs of the players participating in the game, be one whose name is Jeeves?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Dec-15, 11:19 PM
i hope Siddle has played his last game for aust'.
 :rant:
good luck to his replacement....please bowl 'reasonably' well and give Hilditch(goose) no reason to ever pick Siddle again.

I am offended by this post, what can be done about it ?
Title: Cricket
Post by: Gintara on 2009-Dec-16, 06:21 AM
I'd play 4 quicks at the WACA any day of the week.


15 years ago, yes OL but recent WACA pitches have fallen apart and played very 'slow'

The curator has been in the media this week talking up that he thinks he's got the pitch back to the days of fast and bouncy  :/
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-16, 07:40 AM
The selection of Smith sums up the selectors thoughts on the other spinners
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2009-Dec-16, 07:50 AM
I like Smith as a cricketer but as a front liner Test spinner he will be about as effective as Cameron White.  emthdown
Title: Cricket
Post by: Antitab# on 2009-Dec-16, 07:51 AM
The current selectors love blokes who can do 2 things. Haddin cant keep but is in for his batting. Watson wouldnt be in the team if he didnt bowl, Marcus North initially got his chance because he could bowl and now McKay &  Smith.

Personally I would like to see Krezja get an extended go, because he can bowl wicket taking balls. Its easier to teach him to bowl a bit tighter than to teach the other nuff nuffs how to get wickets.

Also think Katich should bowl more. He has taken 6 wickets in an innings in test cricket and is vastly underused by the mental midget who tosses the coin.
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-16, 09:05 AM
The current selectors love blokes who can do 2 things.


Goes way beyond the current selectors. As far back as 1985, that has been a policy.

I remember a bloke who averaged 25 with the bat and 35 with the ball who kept getting picked and eventually became our Captain

Some may be able to go back further than that even
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Dec-16, 09:10 AM
You really are a  :censored: wit, Wily, you really are.

I've concluded that there is no hope for you. :(
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2009-Dec-16, 09:12 AM
Australia money for jam in this test (Mark, $1.38 good things is not unders!!   :biggrin: ).

WI's have lost another couple of front line players for this, if Gale doesn't fire they don't, and any sort of speed and bounce on this track will find them out very quickly. $1.38 is like picking up shells, pity we can't get set for a 4th day result. I'll have a slice of the Australians leading on the first innings by between 101 and 200 at $3.25 thanks very much.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Dec-16, 09:40 AM
pity we can't get set for a 4th day result.

Here ya go

[attachimg=#]

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2009-Dec-16, 09:42 AM
Can back both Day 4 Session 2 and 3 and make a tidy profit  :yes:
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Dec-16, 12:08 PM
1st Method of Dismissal - Australia - 1st Innings Caught Wicketkeeper  1st Method of Dismissal W

Dead set cert this.

Hang on, it could be Watson LBW  :chin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Dec-16, 03:41 PM
Gid rid of the bugger.

He is destined to never get 100.
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2009-Dec-16, 05:45 PM
Australia money for jam in this test (Mark, $1.38 good things is not unders!!    :biggrin:  ).

WI's have lost another couple of front line players for this, if Gale doesn't fire they don't, and any sort of speed and bounce on this track will find them out very quickly. $1.38 is like picking up shells, pity we can't get set for a 4th day result. I'll have a slice of the Australians leading on the first innings by between 101 and 200 at $3.25 thanks very much.


Maybe 201 to 300 will be the first innings lead.  :sad:
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Dec-16, 08:41 PM
1st Method of Dismissal - Australia - 1st Innings Caught Wicketkeeper  1st Method of Dismissal W

Dead set cert this.



Finally got one of these up. Paid $4.25

Might start a system where I double up on the Windies next .  Get on.   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Dec-16, 08:47 PM
Well done, if I was on, Gayle would've held that catch when Watson was on 7  :yes:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-16, 08:57 PM
You really are a  :censored: wit, Wily, you really are.

I've concluded that there is no hope for you. :(


Geez geoff

I didn't bag the bloke I was stating that theres a precedence for selectors picking allrounders on a hunch and sticking with them long term. Even through their lean trots early in their careers

FACT

Whats wrong with that :wacko:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-16, 09:00 PM
AND, need I say.

Hats off to Watto for yet another sterling effort in a developing role
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Dec-16, 09:34 PM
AND, need I say.

Hats off to Watto for yet another sterling effort in a developing role

yes amaizing what an early life can get you when they drop sitters in the early overs.   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Dec-16, 09:38 PM
yes amaizing what an early life can get you when they drop sitters in the early overs.   :biggrin:

Not to mention an inside edge that still has me  :censored: ed how it missed leg stump  :rolleyes:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-17, 07:54 AM
  :lol:


I understand how your feeling fellas
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Dec-17, 03:57 PM
Unbelievable how cursed Aus are with making centuries this series..
Title: Cricket
Post by: calgary on 2009-Dec-17, 04:09 PM
Highest score by Australia with a century maker.
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Dec-17, 04:12 PM
 :lol:
I understand how your feeling fellas

At least his first century could've been held in the same derision as you hold Hughes' one. But alas Watson is still to shit to actually get one even when helped.   :biggrin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Dec-17, 05:39 PM
having fun watching this. Gayle counter attacking. Amaizing knock all ready, a chance at the fastest ton? :clap2:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Dec-17, 06:04 PM
I love watching Chris Gayle bat, almost as much as I did Haynes and Greenidge   emthup

 :lol:

Is it still funny, Grats?
Title: Cricket
Post by: gratlog on 2009-Dec-17, 06:07 PM
Drinking early tonite OL   :lol:

Got me  :censored: ed what you are on about.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Dec-17, 06:12 PM
That is bloody well six and out in my backyard.   :clap2:
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Dec-17, 06:20 PM
That is bloody well six and out in my backyard.   :clap2:

needed Darrell Eastlake to call that 6.

Bravo Mr Gayle. Fantastic Ton. Fifth fastest of all time.    :noteworthy:   :noteworthy:   :noteworthy:  :clap2:  :clap2: :clap2:
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Dec-17, 06:22 PM
and how often it happens. the release of getting to the ton, leads to lack of concentration and loss of the wicket.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Dec-17, 07:52 PM
Drinking early tonite OL   :lol:

Got me  :censored: ed what you are on about.

Go back to the actual posts, you laughed at me when I made that comment.

By the way, I don't drink alcohol apart from 2 or 3 schooners on a Friday arvo
Title: Cricket
Post by: Max Manewer on 2009-Dec-17, 08:00 PM
and how often it happens. the release of getting to the ton, leads to lack of concentration and loss of the wicket.

That's what 'gets' me about cricketers, the obsessive fixation with the 'ton' or some other arbitrary milestone. I'd love to see the stats on dismissals between 95 and 105. Someone should tell the dopey bastards that if humans had 4 fingers per hand, 64 would be the magic number.  :confused1:
Title: Cricket
Post by: Max Manewer on 2009-Dec-17, 08:04 PM
Don't think Bradman had the complaint, he was a machine that ignored such silliness, but I reckon the vast majority fall into the trap.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Dec-17, 08:43 PM
Will Ricky enforce the follow on ?
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Dec-17, 09:05 PM
The way it's going, Ricky and co will be chasing Windies 1st innings lead
Title: Cricket
Post by: Mark on 2009-Dec-17, 09:10 PM
Regardless we're lookin at another draw imo.. What odds about it at the moment?
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Dec-17, 09:12 PM
Betfair

Aus 2.06
WI 17
Draw 1.98
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2009-Dec-18, 06:58 AM
I'll have a slice of the Australians leading on the first innings by between 101 and 200 at $3.25 thanks very much.


Bugger the draw. Want the WI's rolled for somewhere between 320 - 419. Dam chace of that I reckon to.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Dec-18, 08:22 AM
Windies top score on betfair

Gayle (102) 1.70
Sarwan (42no) 3.90
Nash 20.00
Bravo 17.00
Any other 8.40

Title: Cricket
Post by: Tevez17 on 2009-Dec-18, 11:47 AM
Hope they Don't ban Benn he makes it alot more interesting, Fair enough he should eb fined a bit more because he was involved in both instances but a ban is over the top in my opinion.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Dec-18, 11:49 AM
It would have gone nowhere had Haddin not got involved, it would have just gone down as a racing incident.
Title: Cricket
Post by: Authorized on 2009-Dec-18, 12:40 PM
I ask again, will our great leader enforce the follow on ?
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Dec-18, 03:54 PM
I'll have a slice of the Australians leading on the first innings by between 101 and 200 at $3.25 thanks very much.

 :sweat:

1 wicket in hand, 10 runs to get
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2009-Dec-18, 04:00 PM
 :rant:


 :mad:


 :stop:
Title: Cricket
Post by: shaun on 2009-Dec-18, 06:27 PM
what?....Watson out LBW....no??? :nowink: :nowink: :nowink:  :lol:   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Dec-18, 06:37 PM
What a  :censored: wit Watson is for challenging that.

And so is Clarke for not saying " If you haven't hit it, mate, tuck the bat under your arm and piss off."

For mine, the batting partners haven't been assertive enough with these challenges.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Dec-18, 06:41 PM
Maybe Clarke thought it was missing leg  :/
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Dec-18, 06:47 PM
He has to know is was missing.

If it's close, the decision won't be overturned.

I reckon it's a "I must support my mate thing", whereas in reality they are doing their side no favours.

They have to stop pissing these challenges up against the wall?
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Dec-18, 07:16 PM
Ponting fielded but can't bat before the bowlers. I'm sorry that's weak.
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Dec-18, 07:16 PM
Someone should tell Ponting about Rick McCosker.
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Dec-18, 07:17 PM
Ya got in before me ara
Title: Cricket
Post by: triple7 on 2009-Dec-18, 07:22 PM
Piss weak. He couldn't spell leadership.
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Dec-18, 07:22 PM
Regardless we're lookin at another draw imo.. What odds about it at the moment?

Another great prediction after 2 days play   :lol:
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-18, 07:54 PM
Oh deary me   :wavecry:
Title: Cricket
Post by: arakaan on 2009-Dec-18, 07:55 PM
14 wickets for 160 odd in 2 sessions.  :chin:
Title: Cricket
Post by: OldLarsy on 2009-Dec-18, 07:59 PM
The pitch has more cracks than Tiger's women combined, Aussies are certs
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-18, 08:03 PM
Some bloody good bowling as well, don't forget that :clap2:
Title: Cricket
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2009-Dec-18, 08:05 PM
That's true.

What did you think of your golden boy's challenge?
Title: Cricket
Post by: wily ole dog on 2009-Dec-18, 08:16 PM