***Official*** 2nd Test at the Adelaide Oval

[superkingdave]

Yeah he'd definitely made an attempt to keep the sweep shot bottled up so far, which makes it all the more frustrating.

[Blewy]

Originally Posted by FaaipDeOiad

Australian fans don't usually sing at the cricket at all, to be perfectly honest. I really don't care if they do or not, so I don't think it makes them "bad fans", and certainly they weren't quiet for four days. Did you see the ovation Ponting got for his hundred? You can actually support a team without shouting slogans for the whole test and having a 25 drink minimum. Not that there's anything wrong with that, mind.

I thought the "look at the scoreboard" chant as a response to the 340th chorus of "we are the army" for the day was pretty funny really.

I was thinking the exact same thing...

A mate of mine who was at the game yesterday said that they Army sung "we are the army" for 30 minutes continuously... He said as much as he loves the army, they need to get some new material...

[Johnners]

Originally Posted by FaaipDeOiad

Australian fans don't usually sing at the cricket at all, to be perfectly honest. I really don't care if they do or not, so I don't think it makes them "bad fans", and certainly they weren't quiet for four days. Did you see the ovation Ponting got for his hundred? You can actually support a team without shouting slogans for the whole test and having a 25 drink minimum. Not that there's anything wrong with that, mind.

I thought the "look at the scoreboard" chant as a response to the 340th chorus of "we are the army" for the day was pretty funny really.

Haha a chant along the same lines started on the 3rd day at the Gabba as well. When england brought up the 100 the BA group near me started singing "we are the army" which was soon shot down by a few chants regarding the fact that they were 500 behind. Even funnier was that some guy was giving Brett Lee (who was fielding just in front of us) a hard time to which Lee turned around, smiled and put up 5 fingers.

TBH though the best thing i saw from the Fanatics was at 1 stage just after Pietersen got out early that morning, 2 of the Fanatics brought out a huge sign saying "Barmy Army.... Where the Bloody Hell Are Ya?"

[greg]

Originally Posted by Nnanden

I think the comment that most gets me is "Look at Australia where (Shane) Warne had that 100 partnership with (Michael) Clarke (in the first innings). Those runs put the pressure back on to us."

He`s completely missing the point. England`s bowling wasn`t up to getting this pair out. If you have a good bowling attack, you`ll get Warne out and go through the tail. Yet he looks at it like Australia`s batting-depth did it.

Ludicrous.

Even if you avoid laughing, and taking this entire quote at face value, it begs the question: how many times has Ashley Giles scored 43 (Warne's score) in a test match? Come to think of it, how many times has our "Wk/batsman" at number 7 scored 43 in a test match?

[Josh]

Haven't been online since the win, so I just gotta say:

UNBELIEVEABLE!!

England should go home now

[greg]

One thing that hasn't even really been mentioned much is that Australia weren't actually all that 'positive' in playing for the win (despite their talk). It wasn't until the final morning and they "sensed" that England were just trying to bat out time that they really changed their mindset. The period of play the day before when they lost their last 3 wickets was pretty excretable - fifty runs behind but making little effort to do anything but prolong their innings as long as possible - either a quick slog or a declaration would have been far more in keeping with their public statements. They certainly took longer than most of us to recognise the point at which England were very unlikely to have any interest in playing for the win. On Monday evening they were still under the impression that they were playing the England of 2004-5. It wasn't until Tuesday that they realised they were playing the England of 1993-2003.

[Craig]

Originally Posted by Fiery

Good to be back Steds. I appreciate the talent of the Aussie cricketers, most of them are legends of the game but this hugging and kissing and licking must stop. I hate to think what goes on in the dressing room. I bet Pup can hardly walk this morning.

Give this man the Skull.

[Langeveldt]

Originally Posted by BoyBrumby

Man, Fletcher talking industrial grade bullplop there,

"Look at Australia where [Shane] Warne had that 100 partnership with [Michael] Clarke [in the first innings]. Those runs put the pressure back on to us. We think Ashley [Giles] can do that better. That's the reason."

is he seriously trying to suggest that Warne's batting is the reason he's picked ahead of MacGill?!?

Anyway, congratulations to Australia. They showed what a champion team they are &, frighteningly, have obvious areas that can be improved.

I thought our middle order was a shambles; Fred, KP & Jones all played shots that in the circumstances were, at best, injudicious & at worst downright fugging stupid.

Haha, my god, this fellow you've got at the top makes one wonder how they ever won back the ashes..

That guy Warne, he also does a spot of bowling too, takes a few erm, wickets..

[silentstriker]

I am starting to wonder how England won the Ashes too. Warne was right, the man plays favorites.

My best Dunicanism: "Andrew and I have the final say," he confirmed, adding that the mysterious selection committee didn't include David Graveney or any of the home selectors, but instead consisted of a panel of senior players - Andrew Strauss, Paul Collingwood and Jones - who are consulted prior to each Test."

Thats right. Geraint Jones is part of the selection committee. What are the chances he picks Read over himself?

[Fiery]

Originally Posted by Craig

Give this man the Skull.

What's the Skull? (In best Ralph Wiggum impersonation)

[silentstriker]

Originally Posted by Fiery

What's the Skull? (In best Ralph Wiggum impersonation)

It's a satanic ritual we do from time to time. Gotta keep it on the down low though.

[marc71178]

Originally Posted by dontcloseyoureyes

I don't see any exam markers going "I can see he was on the right track, and I can see what he was trying to do, bah, who cares if he got it wrong, lets give him full marks anyway"

Funnily enough in one of my final exams that is the way it is marked - you can get it completely wrong and still be given 100% on the question.

Didn't stop me failing in June though.

[Fiery]

Originally Posted by silentstriker

It's a satanic ritual we do from time to time. Gotta keep it on the down low though.

Right, so is having "The Skull" a good thing?

[silentstriker]

Originally Posted by Fiery

Right, so is having "The Skull" a good thing?

Depends if you're the victi...err the guest of honor.

[Fiery]

Originally Posted by silentstriker

Depends if you're the victi...err the guest of honor.