I don't think that will save him this time, especially if we need to win in Sydney.Quote:
Originally Posted by fxst
Don't be too hard on Jaques, it was a pretty good ball that got him.
Printable View
I don't think that will save him this time, especially if we need to win in Sydney.Quote:
Originally Posted by fxst
Don't be too hard on Jaques, it was a pretty good ball that got him.
Couldn't you say that about a few others too though??? Sideshow Bob??Quote:
Originally Posted by craigb
P
:D :D
I wouldn't be too hard on Jacques - opener, damp pitch playing a bit funny, early overs, fresh bowlers, new ball. You expect openers to get tagged early on ... as long as they don't make a habit of it. It being his first test wouldn't have helped. But I'm wondering what Langer was thinking at the time.
Hayden. Played a good opener's knock - took the shine off the ball and the dampness out of the pitch, then went on to score a total. Sure, he was slow early on but that is part of the lot of an opener. He certainly lifted the scoring rate later in the day. Bloody good ball that got him out though I suspect he'd be disappointed in not spotting the movement and avoiding the trap.
Ponting. Good knock though he'd be wondering why he got himself out. He deserves his place as first drop batsmen. The decision to bat? I'd have thought it was dodgy but the SA captain said they were going to bat if they won the toss - perhaps they're scared about the pitch lasting.
As for our midfield. Bring back Clark. Please.
Get rid of gollywog - it is still one of cricket's mysteries to me that he is held in such high esteem. Sorry, his mate's love him but I've seen him lose us too many matches.
Lee's pretensions to being an allrounder can be consigned to his cricket bag. Sorry Brett, stick to bowling fast.
Warney should be ashamed of himself for his dismissal as he CAN bat, but I guess he was too busy stressing out the umps and the opposition. Bet he's licking his lips looking at that pitch.
What'd you think of the new umpire? Can we shoot Bowden and have this little bloke do all Billy's matches? Please?
As for the Seth Efricans. I'd like to say they played very well, but to be honest, they only played honest cricket. Nothing special. I guess that means we are no longer the special side we were ... which is strange looking at the names in the line up.
And seeing the idiot ground keeper overwatered the pitch and held up play for half an hour, and seeing it's daylight saving with a blue sky, why wasn't play extended half an hour? Sure, it went over time but that's only because the bowlers couldn't get their overs in quickly enough.
Richard
One reason only - TV. :mad: Why they want to start at 10.30 anyway is a mystery. It's daylight savings time so it's effectively 9.30 anyway. No wonder it needed more time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daddles
That works for me! :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Daddles
I agree that it was a good knock from Ponting but he should have been out on 17.
Yes, Sideshow Bob got a good ball but he also hung his bat out.
I just don't know what it is he's supposed to bring to the Test side? :confused:
Keep him for the hit and giggle.
Which makes Matt a bit of a eat-my-plasticene-hat superhero doesn't it?Quote:
Originally Posted by craigb
:D
Actually the Boxing Day test for me is tuning my new Ukelele :D :D :D.
P.
Pass the sauce will you please Midge? :oQuote:
Originally Posted by bitingmidge
I can see it now - looks a lot like a scene from deliverance :DQuote:
Originally Posted by bitingmidge
Well - Crusty (clown) should go. Ponting's mate or not. Move Clarke into the side and let Hussey open till Langer gets back. Don't know what to do with Jaques though.
But - Crusty must go.
Les:D :D
I felt a bit of sympathy for Jaques. Just imagine first test and it is Boxing Day at the MCG! Talk about being in a high pressure situation where it is all too easy to be distracted. That was a pretty good ball that got him. I am happy to see young players being brought in.
Didn't look like anyone could bat much today but Symonds needs a century in the second innings to save his test career. I think it was Malcolm Conn who wrote today that the side picked itself, he had Bracken in and Symonds out. Basically he was saying what has Symonds done to deserve being there.
Why do we have to have an all rounder? Have to say Symonds has done almost nothing with bat and ball so he doesn't deserve the tag of allrounder. When you consider that we have bowlers who are able to get 30 odd runs why pick an allrounder?
I am very happy to see McGill in the side if ever there was a guy who has been dropped for lesser players on the pretext that others suit the wicket better I just can't work it out. How many times has Warne been the only dangerous bowler? So what is wrong with having another Leggie?
Actually how many times should Boof Lehman have been in the side but wasn't? Just goes to show there is more to being in that side than being able to play cricket
Studley
Further to what Les said what if they keep Jaques in. Drop Symonds bring Clarke or Bracken back and then work out who to drop when Langer is fit again. Possibly let Jaques carry the drinks at that point until he gets his next chance.
Studley
I think we are going to get our &&&& whipped!!!
why are we going to get our '&' symbol's whipped :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by coastie
Richard
This morning, watching the new faster outfield, then Hussey dropped on 27 (so Matt's still the highest GENUINE score :confused: :D :D ), I had no fears.
What we all tend to forget that this is a TEAM game.
Currently Team is spelt P H H, but I suspect that by tea there may be a dash of McG and W in the equation somewhere.
I love it when people think "we" are written off because one or two batsmen have a day off.
We'll see what this arvo brings eh?
P
:D
Watching the morning session, one gains the impression that Hussey would like to be considered for the next match :rolleyes: :D
And who was more nervous when Hussey was on 99? Hussey or McGrath?:p
Richard
Andy, a courageous decision to bat first, backing the strength of his team. Top spot of captaincy that!Quote:
Originally Posted by bitingmidge FIVE DAYS AGO
Matt, a chanceless 65 under extremely difficult conditions:
Sideshow Bob: Threefa, breaking the back and the hearts of the Saffas.
What price on any of them getting picked for the next test?
Still it's only half way there, and only 44 runs ahead, Punter'll probably declare at 800 ahead again.
:rolleyes:
What do the chief selectors have to say??
Cheers,
P
:D :D :D
Sideshow Bob desperately needs runs in the second dig.
If we are one up going to Sydney they'll probably stick with him. If we're one down I'm not so sure. ;)
There's a poll on the ABC web site asking "Should the selectors stick with Symonds"
69% of voters said no. :D
Did Gumby vote twice??Quote:
Originally Posted by craigb
Don't you just love selection by consensus??
Kerry wouldn't have put up with it!
P
:D
have that one again please !Quote:
Originally Posted by bitingmidge
None of the people who voted are the selectors. There are 3 people whose opinion matters. I think they'll stick with him for the next test.Quote:
There's a poll on the ABC web site asking "Should the selectors stick with Symonds"
69% of voters said no. :D
G'day,
Stinking, boring, mind numbing thing - I'd rather run my fingers over my jointer than watch 10 seconds of the rubbish.
Only time it's worth watching is if there's any good looking streakers running across the joint. :D
Got any piccys??Quote:
Originally Posted by Waldo
Al :p
G'day Ozwinner,
Nope, have to tie me down in front of the cricket first.
Just plainly un-Australian.Quote:
Originally Posted by Waldo
G'day Grunt,
At least I'm a brozed Aussie (don't have a 6 pack chest etc, but have remenants of the cold variety in the fridge), by all accounts you don't look like Dingo to me. :D
How much resemblance does this have to you?
http://www.cwo.com/%7Elucumi/aboriginal.jpg
:D
G'day Grunt,
He's got a nose, a mouth etc. just like I do.
:)
Grrrrrrrr.Quote:
Originally Posted by Waldo
You Naughty person you......:cool:
Al :D
G'day,
It's just not cricket. What can I say?
Is he coming in for Symonds in Sydney? :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Grunt
:D
Not FOR Symons.....you just didn't recognise him without the shades and shirt on.
P
:rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Note:
The post above was intended in a humourous manner and was in no way intended to offend any indigenous person, or even Sideshow Bob, whom I think does the best ever self inflicted mick-take anyway, just by turning up, and would probably be proud to be presented in such a manner.
Besides, any resemblance to a person, living or dead is purely coincidental!
Cheers,
P
;)
Looks alot like Waldo to me.Quote:
Besides, any resemblance to a person, living or dead is purely coincidental!
Feel free to rub my face in this in years to come, but for some reason I reckon Symonds is gonna go on to be a great test all rounder. There is something about him that tickles me bits more so than Watson. Mind you we can only afford an all-rounder whilst we have Gilchrist (current form and all), once Haddin comes in for Gilchrist the all rounder will come off quicker than a brides nightie and we will settle back to six straight batsmen. I think Symonds knows this and is tightening up too much in an effort to get a 50 plus average. If he just playes like he does in the Pura Cup (ave 42) then maybe he would get somewhere....
Cheers
THANK-YOU brother Namtrak!!
Another fine eye for an up and coming test player!
P
:D :D
Oh please ! Symonds takes 3 wickets, one of which wasn't out (the LB) and the country goes mad thinking we've unearthed the next Imran Khan! Now just settle down a bit. OK ? He's not the messiah, he's a very naughty boy !;)
Gumby, I hate to break this to you but Nathan Buckley isn't the messiah either.
Quite correct, he is his father. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Grunt
If Buckley is God, what does that make his bosses Eddie Maguire and Mick Malthouse?
:D
Prophets of course.Quote:
Originally Posted by Grunt