Good onya Matty :(

[Gumby]

Well, are you guys convinced yet ?

Another first innings failure for our Matty :mad:

GET HIM OFFF !!!!

[craigb]

Geez imagine if we have to follow on to the Bangers. :eek:

Oh the shame of it all. :o :o

We need a big ton from Gilly and for Bing to hang in there with him.

[CameronPotter]

Well, another thing we see is ONCE AGAIN Warnie is completely outplayed by MacGill. Have a look at the games that they both have played in recently - only in one inning in the last year or so has Warne out bowled MacGill...

Hmmm...

Talk about an unlucky cricketer!

[bitingmidge]

Another first innings failure for our Matty :mad:

I happen to know he's under orders to let the lower order have a go. That's why they let Sideshow Bob sit this one out too, you know, give the new kiddies a play in a match that means nought.

Still, he is only averaging 50 something this tour, so I suppose he has to be under some sort of cloud.

P
:rolleyes:

[CameronPotter]

Yeah, he has had a funny tour though hasn't he? It seems to be 100 ot nothing.

Still, I am a bit of a Hayden, so I will forgive his small indiscretions. But I couldn't pass up the opportunity to mention MacGill vs Warne...

[Gumby]

Still, he is only averaging 50 something this tour, so I suppose he has to be under some sort of cloud.

P
:rolleyes:

Yeah of course, he must keep his average up, never mind the team. :cool:

But then again Pete, he is your long lost love child :D :D

[Bodgy]

Yeah, beginning to think Matty is past his use by date. Funny tho he's usually at his best whenn playing the weak sides. All meaningful glares and intimidation.

Time to go, I think. We got a few waiting. Even that little wanna be, posuer M Clarke might be worth another try.

I was very pleased that Langer was padded up and coming in at 11, in the final debouche of the Yarpies. Thought he'd gone wozzer on us. Even in grade cricket, a bit of a knock on the head and the guys back later in the innings, after a fortifying beer or seven. We even had a guy play out the match with a broken arm. I have no time for these mamby pamby sports heros. Soft is kind for some of the girls.

[Gumby]

. Even that little wanna be, posuer M Clarke might be worth another try. .

He was given another try, and failed, again :mad:

[DanP]

Well, another thing we see is ONCE AGAIN Warnie is completely outplayed by MacGill. Have a look at the games that they both have played in recently - only in one inning in the last year or so has Warne out bowled MacGill...

Mate, your memory is a bit shonky. AND, it's a bit hard for Warnie to compete when he's not even on the ground.:confused: :confused: :confused:

Dan

[CameronPotter]

Go ahead Dan. Find the stats. I may be off slightly, but MacGill has by far out bowled Warne in the games they have played together this summer.

As for Warne not being on the ground.
Day 1:
Warne: bowled 22ish overs or something for over 100 runs and no wickets...

MacGill: bowled 20ish overs for about 80 runs and three wickets...

[silentC]

SK Warne 20 overs 112/0
SCG MacGill 33.3 overs 108/ 8

[DanP]

The stats. This summer only.

Melbourne:

SKW: 6/136
SCGMCG: 2/69

Sydney:

SKW: 2/151
SCGMCG: 3/135

Looks like he's "completely outbowled him" to me. Face facts mate. Warne is a better bowler in his sleep than MacGill will ever be. You have to remember that MacGill only ever plays on pitches that suit spinners. Warnie took 40 wickets in Pomgolia on tracks that were deliberately prepared to negate him.

Dan

[CameronPotter]

Thanks Silent. I had actually just come back to fix up my post and it appears you have done it for me!

However, here are the full stats of the games that both MacGill and Warne have played in since 2005:

The order is overs, maidens, runs wickets.

S.C.G. vs Pakistan
1st Innings
Warne 24 4 84 1
MacGill 22 4 87 5
2nd Innings
Warne 26 2 111 4
MacGill 25 3 83 3

Super Series
1st Innings
Warne 12 3 23 3
MacGill 9.1 0 39 4
2nd Innings
Warne 19 4 48 3
MacGill 15 4 43 5

Bellerive vs W.I.
1st Innings
Warne 11 2 48 0
MacGill 11 3 18 3
2nd Innings
Warne 39 4 112 4
MacGill 26 4 69 2

Adelaide vs W.I.
1st Innings
Warne 19.2 2 77 1
MacGill 18 3 60 2
2nd Innings
Warne 33 9 80 6
MacGill 11 2 42 0

MCG vs S.A.
1st Innings
Warne 21 7 62 2
MacGill 15 3 41 1
2nd Innings
Warne 28 7 74 4
MacGill 16 7 28 1

SCG vs S.A.
1st Innings
Warne 36 5 106 2
MacGill 29 5 102 1
2nd Innings
Warne 11 1 45 0
MacGill 6 1 33 3

Gardens vs Bangladesh
1st Innings
Warne 20 1 112 0
MacGill 33.3 2 108 8


Totals:
Warne
Overs = 299.2
Runs Against = 982
Wickets = 30
Economy = 3.28
Strike Rate = 32.7

MacGill
Overs = 236.4
Runs Against = 753
Wickets = 38
Economy = 3.18
Strike Rate = 19.8

MacGill has taken more wickets than Warne in five out of the seven tests...

These figures debunk a few things said about MacGill vs Warne.
1. MacGill only plays on spin friendly pitches - maybe true, but he still outplays Warne on those.
2. MacGill is expensive - his economy has recently been lower than Warne.

And that is not even considering this little article (which covers more of their careers:
http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/ci/content/story/145090.html

I reckon that little comparison shows pretty clearly who seems to be in the better form... (although I will admit that Warnie is clearly a better batsman).

Any further comments about failing memory? :p Although, I re-read my post, it should have said one test (rather than one inning) and I admit that I was wrong - it was two tests...

[silentC]

Does that make MacGill as good a bowler as Warne? It doesn't, simply because Warne has done his stuff in all conditions and against all opponents (barring, to an extent, India), while MacGill has generally come into the fray only in conditions which suit spin bowling - 40 of his 160 wickets have come in seven matches at Sydney, which generally offers slow bowlers generous assistance. That doesn't detract from MacGill's performances - he has generally delivered whenever the team has needed him to - but unless he proves himself as an all-conditions bowler, he won't be classified among the top spinners in the game. And with Warne still going strong and Australia preferring a three-seamers-one-spinner attack, it seems unlikely that MacGill will get a sustained run in the near future.
Says it all. As long as Warne is playing, MacGill is never going to get enough runs on different courses to prove himself. He has always been in the shadow of Warne and is obviously considered a second choice by the selectors, so how is he ever going to prove he can do it? Let's face it, if you have to choose between MacGill or Warne, who are you going to choose? One is a very good spin bowler with excellent stats. The other is undoubtedly the best spin bowler in the world. And he can bat.

[CameronPotter]

Yeah,

I acknowledge that Warne is more proven and I also acknowledge that he had a great series against England - although I don't know how good the English are at playing spin.

However, I do think that it is a bit tough that MacGill gets the rough end of the pineapple basically because Warnie got there first. I admit that Warne had a lot more control in his younger years than MacGill did (and still does - although MacGill has improved a LOT).

I know that it has happened many times before (where someone has to wait in the wings because one of the greats of the game happens to be born in the same era - but when the figures of when the two play together support the less recognised player it seems a bit strange that the more established player is ALWAYS the go to guy...

As for "undoubtedly" the best spin bowler in the world, I reckon Murali might have a thing or two to say about that. He has also been tested on the various grounds around the world and his stats hold up very well as well. Again, there is an argument that he also MAINLY plays on spin friendly pitches against weaker teams, but he has had to play against Australia, Warne hasn't... Also, there often seems to be the arguments as to why Warne is the best ever and they usually involve, "Yes, but..."

[Gumby]

If you had to pick one of them to bowl to save your life, it's no contest. Warnie.

That guy has won more tests for Australia than MacGill ever could.

[CameronPotter]

That guy has won more tests for Australia than MacGill ever could.

Unless MacGill was given an even chance... :p

(How is this for hijacking a thread!!)

[silentC]

Murali is a chucker!!!

Yes, Warnie has won more tests for Australia but MacGill hasn't been given the same chances. It's like being a wicket keeper while Gilly is there. You get a run when he's injured or resting and that's it. How do you prove yourself in one match? All they can look at is performance in State matches.

One day Gilly will retire and someone else will have to step up. Same with Warnie. Will he retire in time for MacGill to have a good go at it? They are more or less contemporaries.

[Gumby]

Yes, Warnie has won more tests for Australia but MacGill hasn't been given the same chances. .

Flawed argument. If you follow that logic, maybe I could have won a few tests for Australia too, if only they gave me the chance. :rolleyes:

(although, how you straighten a bendy plasticene arm would be an interesting exercise) :D

[CameronPotter]

Ahhh, but a legal chucker - who you could argue has changed the game even more than Warnie as he forced rule changes! :p

Mind you, if you say that Murali is a chucker, then so is Brett Lee as well as many other bowlers...

I don't reckon that MacGill will get a decent run as they are pretty much contemporaries. Dan Cullen will be the next spinner and the young guy from Qld will be the next unfortunate spinner... :rolleyes:

As you mention with Gilly, Haddin has had a rough run and he has done beautifully in his opportunities. And for that matter, Healy was held onto for a few years extra when Gilly was going mad in state cricket...

[CameronPotter]

Flawed argument. If you follow that logic, maybe I could have won a few tests for Australia too, if only they gave me the chance. :rolleyes:

(although, how you straighten a bendy plasticene arm would be an interesting exercise) :D

Sorry Gumby, but I think you should probably get a state game before you apply to the Australians...:p

As for being flawed logic, not really. Your first comment was "more games that MacGill ever could" and that implies that MacGill couldn't have won those games. All proof indicates that there is a good chance that he could have (whilst not definite proof of course).

[DanP]

I'll cede you the stats, but I wouldn't say he completely outbowled him. I would be interested to see how MacGILL would go on a dead flat track.



I acknowledge that Warne is more proven and I also acknowledge that he had a great series against England - although I don't know how good the English are at playing spin.

MacGill was crap in the lead up games in England which is why he didn't get a run.


However, I do think that it is a bit tough that MacGill gets the rough end of the pineapple basically because Warnie got there first. I admit that Warne had a lot more control in his younger years than MacGill did (and still does - although MacGill has improved a LOT).

MacGILL does not get the rough end of the pineapple. The not so rough end maybe, but not the rough end. Warne is a better bowler and will finish his career with between 800 and 1000 wickets IMO. I don't think MacGILL would have got there. Something we will never know I guess.


As for "undoubtedly" the best spin bowler in the world, I reckon Murali might have a thing or two to say about that. He has also been tested on the various grounds around the world and his stats hold up very well as well. Again, there is an argument that he also MAINLY plays on spin friendly pitches against weaker teams, but he has had to play against Australia, Warne hasn't... Also, there often seems to be the arguments as to why Warne is the best ever and they usually involve, "Yes, but..."


Yes, but...
I've got a few things to say about Murali.

1. He is a chucker.
2. The ICB didn't know what to do with him and the whole "I can't straighten my arm" thing so they changed the rules to suit him.
3. The vast majority of his wickets are on the sub continent where nearly every pitch is a spinners heaven.
4. He is a chucker.
5. He's still not as good as Warne.

Think where Warne would be at now if he didn't have a year off. 800 wickets?

Dan

[silentC]

And he's a chucker....

[silentC]

Flawed argument. If you follow that logic, maybe I could have won a few tests for Australia too, if only they gave me the chance. :rolleyes:

(although, how you straighten a bendy plasticene arm would be an interesting exercise) :D
Maybe you could have. Did you ever try out for the team? No? Then how do you know :p

[CameronPotter]

Ok. I will also cede the fact that MacGill on a flat track MAY be absolutely brutalised... Although he has pretty good figures on Bellerive which is commonly acknowledged as a batter's paradise.

I also agree that his time in England wasn't up to scratch which is one of the reasons he didn't get a game, but there are many players who play a lot better in the "real thing" than in tour matches - although I don't think that shows a particularly strong character.

As for Murali - I won't argue that he bends his arm, but so do many fast bowlers. I would actually like it handed back to the umpires and if the ICC doesn't like an umpire's call they can remove them from the panel. That way you avoid all of this what angle can they use and instead go with, if you can see it straighten - ping them.

As for Warnie's "break" he came back bowling better than he was when he left. But, he would have picked up a few extra wickets along the way. I will say that Warne is clearly a very special bowler though, if only for his ability to control a viciously spinning delivery - something that was not even considered likely in previous leg spinning history.

Funnily enough, I thought that his one day record was probably the most impressive things about his game - but he gave that up. I am DEFINITELY willing to admit that he is streets ahead of the next spin bowler in that form of the game (although I do like Hoggie, who I also feel is sometimes a little hard done by).

[craigb]

Perhaps we should have a poll. :p

I'm a big fan of Stewies work but Warne is undoubtedly the better bowler.

It's just Stew's misfortune to be on the scene at the same time as Warne.

If Warne hadn't been around then who knows?

Where was Stewie in '93 or '94 when Warne was at the top of his game and basically unplayable by the majority of the worlds best batters?

Mind you, Stewie has a wrong 'un which is more than Warnie can say. :D

[CameronPotter]

Actually, Stewie came late to spin bowling and started off as a reasonably unsuccessful fast bowler... It took him quite a while to get control of his massive rip. However, if Warnie wasn't around making his lack of control look bad, it is also possible that MacGill wouldn't have really worked on control that much... :confused:

[bitingmidge]

But then again Pete, he is your long lost love child :D :D

and he's great to cuddle... :o

P

[CameronPotter]

Plenty of him eh Midge? :p

[ss_11000]

i'm not into stats but i rekon they both have there days and warnie is better on that day. macgill is still a good spinner though.

[CameronPotter]

But who has the most good days?

Also, I think that it is actually the other way around. (Disclaimer: I may well be wrong here) but I think that MacGill has more 5-fors for the number of innings he has played in than Warne, but Warne is more consistent.

This is highlighted by the fact that this last innings is the most expensive innings that Warne has ever bowled (in internationals at least).


FROM S. Rajesh on CricInfo, "never before has he bowled more than ten overs and finished with an economy rate of greater than five."

That is absolutely amazing from a guy who has played so many tests...

[ss_11000]

But who has the most good days?



never really noticed, prbably macgill cos his got pressure on him to perform to try to stay in the team so he steps up to it:confused:

[CameronPotter]

Yeah, I just checked, his frequency of 5-fors is much higher. You can see from the link in my post on the front page... I am beginning to think that I have spent far too much time on this. :o

Cam

[ss_11000]

Yeah, I just checked, his frequency of 5-fors is much higher. You can see from the link in my post on the front page... I am beginning to think that I have spent far too much time on this. :o

Cam

yep, way too much time:p ..................the legnths ppl go to to prove a point:rolleyes: ....keep going:D ;)

[CameronPotter]

Yeah, I am all embarassed now...

Anyway, I am basically just wasting time while I wait for computer programs to finish running...

So if I wasn't doing this I might be bouncing off the walls...

http://www.ubeaut.biz/offwall.gif

[ss_11000]

hey cam, that looks like fun:p :D :eek:

[Gumby]

Mind you, Stewie has a wrong 'un which is more than Warnie can say. :D

With a flipper like Warnie's, who needs a wrong 'un :D

[DanP]

Mind you, Stewie has a wrong 'un which is more than Warnie can say. :D

I must be watching a different Warnie than you. I have seen him (THIS SUMMER) bowl an over with four wrong'uns all of which span more than most offies would.

The reason Ritchie BENAUD was so impressed with SKW was because he had perfected his wrong'un so early in his career. Took BENAUD 8 years to perfect it. (so he says)

Dan

[CameronPotter]

Funny, I had always thought that the wrong 'un was the only weak ball in Warnie's armoury. He had the flipper early on that was lethal, but I thought that the wrong 'un usually didn't really turn much. Instead it was more that he had great control and variation. Mind you, I was pretty young when Warnie started his career...

HOWEVER, he has recently picked up his wrong 'un a lot and I agree that this summer it has been turning significantly.

[craigb]

I must be watching a different Warnie than you. I have seen him (THIS SUMMER) bowl an over with four wrong'uns all of which span more than most offies would.



Can't say I saw that over.

Can't speak for Benaud either but for mine Warne's wrong 'un hasn't turned much in all the years I've watched him.

Most of his dismissals have either been with the big ripping leg break or the one that goes straight on.

He doesn't bowl the flipper much nowadays, basically since his shoulder re-construction.

He is also a master of mind games and a champion manipulator of umpires. :D

I'm going to miss him when he finally retires. :D

[CameronPotter]

LOL...

Warnie's biggest weapon?

The wrong 'un? Nope.
The leg-break? Nope.
The flipper? Nope.

Answer: The dirty look at the umpire! :eek: ;) :p

[Gumby]

LOL...

Warnie's biggest weapon?

The wrong 'un? Nope.
The leg-break? Nope.
The flipper? Nope.

Answer: The dirty look at the umpire! :eek: ;) :p

how about the mobile phone ? :D

[ss_11000]

how about the mobile phone ? :D
and the one cent txt mesages:eek:

[craigb]

how about the mobile phone ? :D

Yeah, great for self inflicted wounds!! :D :D :D

[CameronPotter]

how about the mobile phone ? :D

Yeah, but fellas, some things are just too horrible to contemplate! ;)

[jmk89]

I have held off contributing to this, but it's just got too much for me...

Warney was the best thing since sliced bread when he came on the scene. The first leggie who gave the ball a real rip since Terry Jenner (and yes, I am old enought to have seen TJ in the flesh). And he had variation (unlike Jim Higgs and Trevor Hohns).

But... Shoulder injuries meant that his effectiveness is nowhere near what it used to be. I was at Kensington Oval in Bridgetown in 1999 when MacGill and Warne were both in the team and Lara won the test with one wicket to spare. It was clear then that MacGill was the more penetrative and dangerous bowler, even if his RPO was greater. He just bowled more unplayable balls. Yet S Waugh kept bowling Warne for more and more ineffective overs while MacGill was fielding (not his strong suit - he's a better batsman:D ). Why? Reputation.

Since then, every time there has been a chance to compare the two head to head, MacGill has shown himself to be not only more dangerous, but improving. Warne is not getting better.

I still think that the best attack for Australia is two quicks and the two leggies and force Symonds or Hussey to bowl 10-15 overs and innings of tight medium pace.

But to get backl to the main theme of tonight's symposium.... DROP HAYDEN - HE'S A FLAT TRACK BULLY WHO'S LOST HIS HAND-EYE CO-ORDINATION. Watchig him bat now is like watching the last fights of Ali or Tyson - it makes you feel sad that someone who was so good has become so pitiful.

[silentC]

Just another thing to keep in mind:

Aftab Ahmed c Hayden b MacGill
Enamul Haque jnr c Hayden b MacGill

[Gumby]

Just another thing to keep in mind:

Aftab Ahmed c Hayden b MacGill
Enamul Haque jnr c Hayden b MacGill

Enamul Haque snr was a much better player. Imagine trying to live up to those expectations. :D

I wonder if there'll be a Davis Love IV ?

[jmk89]

Just another thing to keep in mind:

Aftab Ahmed c Hayden b MacGill
Enamul Haque jnr c Hayden b MacGill

OK, so he can catch. So can Warne. Put him in at first slip for MacGill.

[silentC]

Not saying it's the only reason to keep him in the side but there are two sides to the game and catches win matches too.

Like when everyone wanted to dump Mark Waugh. OK, he was off form with the bat but he saved a lot of runs and took a lot of catches. You'd have to keep Symonds in the side for the same reason, even if he gets a bloody duck every time he walks out.

[Gumby]

maybe we could all agree on one thing - we shouldn't be playing this stupid, pointless 'test' in the first place. After SA, they should have been straight home for a rest.

I'm tired of the ACB and others sucking the life out of cricket by playing constantly.

[CameronPotter]

Well, I would have said you were right for sure before the result that has happened. Mind you, that might well come from not taking it seriously.

I reckon that there needs to be a second tier test set of nations. Otherwise how can the wannabes get up to the right level?

I would think that the nations in the Second Tier League might be:

Zimbabwe
Bangladesh
Kenya
Canada
Netherlands
Ireland
Scotland
USA
Bermuda

That would make the top tier set have nine teams and the bottom tier set have nine teams. In fact, some of those teams may be too weak and it might be better to replace some with second XI teams from some of the stronger nations.

Then, you could also have some kind of system where there are a set number of teams in tier 1 and a set number of teams in tier 2 and then every four-or-so years, you re-evaluate whether the bottom teams in tier 1 should swap with the top teams in tier 2...

[craigb]

I'm tired of the ACB and others sucking the life out of cricket by playing constantly.

Hear hear. There is far too much cricket played for mine. Australia will have played 16 tests since the beginning of the Ashes by the time they leave Bangladesh. That's in less than 12 months.

Then there are all the pointless one day contests and now, on top of all that, there is this 20/20 rubbish.

The ICC will end up killing the gooose that laid the golden egg I reckon.

[ptc]

What about Bevan ?

[ss_11000]

.

Then there are all the pointless one day contests and now, on top of all that, there is this 20/20 rubbish.



20/20s are good to watch and the players look like they enjoy them.......i agree with you about one dayers, theres too many of them in a series. as for tests, i think 3 to a series is fine but 5 if its something big like the ashes

[CameronPotter]

I would respectfully disagree about that Stirlo. I reckon that 20/20 should be left to state cricket and I would prefer all test series to ideally be 5 tests long (but I do think that the one-day series drag on a bit)...

[silentC]

20/20s are for people with short attention spans. Like Americans.

[ss_11000]

I would respectfully disagree about that Stirlo. I reckon that 20/20 should be left to state cricket )...

whatever...just as long as they show em on tv

[CameronPotter]

Yep. It would be good for state cricket (but don't tell Silent I said that). :p

[outback]

A test series IS five tests, these bloody mini-series are crap. Too much cricket is playes, I like the idea of a tiered system, Stick in Australia A, make it a purely development team, and the Aus public gets to see lotsa cricket ACB gets lots revenue, and MAtty gets to rest his dicky ticker.

[silentC]

Yep. It would be good for state cricket
Yeah, they could open it up to regional teams as well and we could call it World Series Cricket but not let any other country play. And they could have half time entertainment and foot longs and cheerleaders. :p

[CameronPotter]

Sounds great Silent... You have really put a lot of thought into this haven't you? ;) :p

Actually, I will soon be going to the land of World Series Baseball, so I had better start being nice about them. Any hints? :confused: :rolleyes:

[Gumby]

Yeah, they could open it up to regional teams as well and we could call it World Series Cricket but not let any other country play. And they could have half time entertainment and foot longs and cheerleaders. :p

I don't think mentioning foot longs and cheer leaders in the same sentence is a good move silent. :D :D

we have 14 year olds with us now :rolleyes:

(as if)

[CameronPotter]

I don't think mentioning foot longs and cheer leaders in the same sentence is a good move silent. :D :D

we have 14 year olds with us now :rolleyes:

(as if)

Had a bad experience with a cheerleader in the past eh? Came as a surprise when "she" showed you her foot long? Poor ol' Gumby!


...Lucky it isn't your birthday or I would have to be nice to you!!:p

[Gumby]

Had a bad experience with a cheerleader in the past eh?

Certainly did, the worst experience of all. I married her. :rolleyes:

When she lead the cheers, the whole stadium shook :eek:

[CameronPotter]

http://www.ubeaut.biz/chuckle2.gifhttp://www.ubeaut.biz/chuckle2.gifhttp://www.ubeaut.biz/chuckle2.gif

Gumby, Gumby, Gumby...

Try before you buy... ;)

[Gumby]

http://www.ubeaut.biz/chuckle2.gifhttp://www.ubeaut.biz/chuckle2.gifhttp://www.ubeaut.biz/chuckle2.gif

Gumby, Gumby, Gumby...

Try before you buy... ;)

no comment :rolleyes:

But seriously, when I had to help underpin the grandstand, it sparked my interest in building. :D

[CameronPotter]

Well something good came from it then! :D

[ss_11000]

I don't think mentioning foot longs and cheer leaders in the same sentence is a good move silent. :D :D

we have 14 year olds with us now :rolleyes:

(as if)

thanx for looking out for me uncle gumby:p http://www.ubeaut.biz/thumbupwink.gifbut i hear worse at skool:eek:

[Gumby]

thanx for looking out for me uncle gumby:p but i hear worse at skool:eek:

Listen to some advice from your Uncle Gumby then, just pay attention in class, you seem to be struggling in the spelling dept. :D

(I think I've hijacked my own thread? :( )

[ss_11000]

(I think I've hijacked my own thread? :( )

yep but others were first...it ws hijacked from hayden to warne vs macgill to something to something to this

[Gumby]

Seen the score in Bangla ?

Ponting 169 not out, and the men who lost us the Ashes, Clarke and Martin, both failed AGAIN ... bye bye idiots. We'll pick a batsman next time.

94 to go with 4 wickets left tomorrow

[Bodgy]

Seen the score in Bangla ?

Ponting 169 not out, and the men who lost us the Ashes, Clarke and Martin, both failed AGAIN ... bye bye idiots. We'll pick a batsman next time.

94 to go with 4 wickets left tomorrow

Gumby, try and be a bit more accurate will yah? You had me going into cardiac arrest.

Correctly, we are DOWN 4 wickets and Ponting (and Hayden) are on 72. NOT 4 wickets left and Ponting on 169.

Australia 212 for 4 at stumps

Incidentally, the selectors lost us the ashes (only temporary tho)

[Gumby]

Gumby, try and be a bit more accurate will yah? You had me going into cardiac arrest.

Correctly, we are DOWN 4 wickets and Ponting (and Hayden) are on 72. NOT 4 wickets left and Ponting on 169.

Australia 212 for 4 at stumps

Incidentally, the selectors lost us the ashes (only temporary tho)

ooops :o I just caught the back end of it and I thought he got to that score pretty fast :o :o sorry

but martin and Clarke are still useless

[Bodgy]

ooops :o I just caught the back end of it and I thought he got to that score pretty fast :o :o sorry

but martin and Clarke are still useless

Seems that way, at least Martin has contributed in the past. Clarke's just a wanna be wanker.

[outback]

Wottabout poor old Jacques, poor bastard suffers from over success at his first attempt and got sent to Coventry. I bet he could put a post or two in the pet peeves thread. The poor bugger could replace both MArtin and Clarke, although I do have little time for Clarke, he's young and enthusiastic, OK, arrogant, that doesn't hurt at his age.

[Gumby]

Wottabout poor old Jacques, poor bastard suffers from over success at his first attempt and got sent to Coventry. I bet he could put a post or two in the pet peeves thread. The poor bugger could replace both MArtin and Clarke, although I do have little time for Clarke, he's young and enthusiastic, OK, arrogant, that doesn't hurt at his age.

Jacques is out of his depth at test level and the selectors know it.

So is Clarke.

[craigb]

We may be four down but Haydo's is out (controversial run-out by the third ump).

It's the Punter and Gilly show for now.

[Gumby]

We may be four down but Haydo's is out (controversial run-out by the third ump).

It's the Punter and Gilly show for now.

That run out decision was woeful. He has to give the batsman the benefit of the doubt and it looked like the bat hit the crease at exactly the same time as the ball hit the stumps. Not out !

[outback]

Jacques is out of his depth at test level and the selectors know it.

So is Clarke.


May I respectfully suggest that you have been in the sun too much and your head has gone soggy. Jacques will undoubtably make an impression when he finally makes the test team. Clarke, well I think, he has the ability, but he hasn't really looked like producing it any where near regularly enough.

If Gilly fires, we'll have the runs in the first few overs, if we lose a few quick wickets, the bangers may be celebrating.

[CameronPotter]

Gumby,

I haven't seen the replay, but the bat has to cross the line (not touch it) before the bails are removed.

That being said, it sounds like a pretty dodgy decision from what I have heard though. Poor 'ol Mat eh? :D

Cam

[Gumby]

Gumby,

I haven't seen the replay, but the bat has to cross the line (not touch it) before the bails are removed.

That being said, it sounds like a pretty dodgy decision from what I have heard though. Poor 'ol Mat eh? :D

Cam

I know that Cam but the question is when where the bails off. The pictures from all angles only go in frames and in the last one, his bat was on the line and the ball was hitting the stumps. The next frame showed the bails off and the bat past the line. Too close to be given out in my view. The commentators thought so too.

Poor Matt, too slow. :D and it's the second innings so he was trying to make up for his first innings failure as usual. Got to keep that average up eh ?


May I respectfully suggest that you have been in the sun too much and your head has gone soggy. Jacques will undoubtably make an impression when he finally makes the test team.

No, I think the sun is shining your way actually.:D :D Phil made the side and failed. Never looked like getting a score.

[CameronPotter]

No problem Gumby.

I just thought I would clarify - as I said, I haven't seen the replays at all. :(

It sounds like a pretty clear not out though from what you say.

Cam

[bitingmidge]

That run out decision was woeful. He has to give the batsman the benefit of the doubt and it looked like the bat hit the crease at exactly the same time as the ball hit the stumps. Not out !
Can it be that Gumby is wearing down?

I can remember a time when any decision that went against the WWF's own Matt Hayden was a good one!

Cheers,

P
;)

[Gumby]

No , I'm not wearing down Pete, just stating facts as usual :D

I see the boys pulled it out of the fire thanks to Ponting (again).

Now. GET THEM HOME !!!!!!

[bitingmidge]

There was never any fire. I continue to hold my well-voiced theory that the only way to give the lower order guys some real experience, is to fake the odd top end collapse, and let the bowlers do as they wish for an innings.

As for Ponting;

Well there was a time it would have been described as a Captain's knock, but of course that's a term that's reserved for "proper, capable captains" who deserve to be there isn't it?

On the other hand, if Warne ever makes it to the top, "Captain's knock" could very well come to have an entirely different connotation!

cheers,

P
:D :D :D

[Gumby]

the only way to give the lower order guys some real experience, is to fake the odd top end collapse,

Matty is good at faking it then ;) and they've been faking middle order collapses for years !

If 6/93 chasing over 400 is not a fire, remind me not to come over for BBQ sausages at your place.:D :D

[craigb]

I reckon that it just shows how buggered they are.

I mean, nearly being knocked off by the Bangers :eek: (and if it was for cap'n Punter it would have happened :( ).

I know they are well paid, but you don't use an LN chisel to open a paint tin do you?

[vsquizz]

Crikey...took ages to read this thread;)