Last edited by Hooksey; 28-08-2013 at 02:06 AM.
England are the better test team right now and it's not about hand eye coordination at that level. It plays a part but you don't have to be Bradman, Warne or McGrath to contribute. We're we are weak is in having enough players with the heart to fight hard when the chips are down. The reasons for this are hard to pinpoint. I'm sure T20 and ODIs along with the cash around have played a role but that can't be all of it. I grew up watching Border, Boon and Steve Waugh tough it out for the team. Maybe the younger guys just don't have that reference point.
We are currently playing 7 out of 11 players with under 30 Test matches. You could argue that Harris and Rogers are experienced enough in first class cricket so don't count, but that still leaves 5 players who are finding their feet at the international level. England have 8 players with over 45 Test matches in their best XI. Its great that they are blooding a couple of younger players but they are still probably the weak links in the team because they aren't so consistent. England are a professional, experienced outfit, Australia are trying hard to be but are currently not.
That was a terrible post, and exactly the sort of thing that we pride ourselves on CW of not having much of. I actually fully agree with you that Hooksey's opinion on this issue is complete bollocks and I made that clear before he even posted it, but that's because of the content of his argument and not the team he supports. I have severe doubts over whether he actually watched Day 3 judging by his posts and his false bravado is something that I think will hold Australian cricket back quite a bit in a time of not having the best team in the world. However, CW is not a place where we have our own mini-Ashes, arguing the case for our nation and trying to defeat the 'opposition' posters, so dismissing his opinion as invalid merely because the team he happens to follow lost 3-0 is straight up warmongering. The competition happens out on the field and you'd be a far better contributor if you didn't see the match threads as yet another competition.
Your role as a member here is not to defend or promote your team, but to discuss the events with other serious cricket fans. Treating everyone who happens to follow Australia as if they're the same person, making several posts about "Aussie posters" as if they all share the same opinions and replying to people as they're walking novelty-sized Australian flags will make the forum an awful place. That was Howe's point when he told you that GotSpin and LongHopCassidy were in fact different people, and that's my point again when I'm telling you that Hooksey's post was poor because he was chatting **** and not because his team lost 3-0. He's perfectly entitled to have an opinion on England's tactics and captaincy whether or not the side he supports is winning or not; it's just a shame he decided to use that entitlement to sprout chest-beating rubbish. I think you're better than doing that though.
I feel in spite of this that England were a little out-maneuvered and out-thought at times though (think, plans to Cook/Prior/Trott), and some of the Australian talent on show was arguably a little better than England's at times. But as we've all said, England stepped up when it mattered and ultimately the settled nature of their team was hugely important.
"we use the word Day to describe hours and movements of the earth around the sun" - zorax
The Cricket Web Podcast - episode 23 out now
We're on iTunes - why not give us a review?
That's not to say that England didn't have good tactical moves (Clarke plans as GF said) and moments of brilliance either. They played some superb cricket at times (Bell, Anderson/Swann/Broad) all putting awesome performances in at different points.
Last edited by Hooksey; 28-08-2013 at 05:15 AM.
How is Hooksey's opinion even remotely "chest-beating"? He straight out said the opposition are more talented ffs
Worst apology ever.
Hooksey on debut has been solid.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)