Who will be McGrath's 500th wicket?

[Kweek]

I was right again (H) Tresco ofcourse!

 

[vic_orthdox]

Ashely giles? Someone has confidence in mcgrath......

I believe that was me

 

[King_Ponting]

I believe that was me

What were u drinking that night? Unless you expected him to be promoted up the order as a night watchman after lee took the first wicket and the fact that there was only going to be another couple of overs

 

[vic_orthdox]

Can you imagine the bragging rights if I got it and no-one else did? And there wasn't the worst logic behind it - he doesn't take wickets all that time (look at the 2nd dig thus far), I thought maybe another bowled would take all the early wickets, and McGrath would come back later and finally get a pole for 500.

 

[Barney Rubble]

Whoever said Pietersen would get 57 was dead right - off 89 balls instead of 54 though.

In the 2nd innings he's 42* off 54 - and the way he's been playing means that Richard's statement about the likelihood of someone making 57 off 54 balls in a Test against the Aussies is a little wide of the mark.

All it would have taken is a couple of edges through the slips instead of dot balls, and a little bit less accuracy from Warne and he would have got there or thereabouts.

 

[marc71178]

In the 2nd innings he's 42* off 54 - and the way he's been playing means that Richard's statement about the likelihood of someone making 57 off 54 balls in a Test against the Aussies is a little wide of the mark.

If it had happened, he'd have provided some reason why it doesn't count.

 

[cpr]

Alright own up, who voted Anderson??

He'd have to play as a specialist batsman for that to happen, as we've all seen his bowling over the winter!!!

I went for Pietersen, almost certainly wrong, but i fancy the top 3 wasting wickets to Gillespie, then Pietersen going all gung ho and McGrath getting him

Looking back on myself....


GILLESPIE???

What the hell was i thinking??

 

[Richard]

I always thought Vaughn would be a candidate. He chops on a lot of the time, and with McGrath bowling with the slope going down from left to right, I belived it would increase the risk of him cutting too close to his body.

And instead he got a daisy-cutter and played down the wrong line, while Bell managed to chop-on.

 

[Richard]

The one you voted for should be italicised.

And in some polls (not this one) they're "public polls" so you can see who chose which answers.
The italicised option is generally easier, though.

 

[vic_orthdox]

And instead he got a daisy-cutter and played down the wrong line, while Bell managed to chop-on.

Chop on? As opposed to being to getting a slight inside edge to a ball that was going to hit the stumps anyway?

 

[Richard]

If it had happened, he'd have provided some reason why it doesn't count.

Nope.

 

[Richard]

Chop on? As opposed to being to getting a slight inside edge to a ball that was going to hit the stumps anyway?

Well, play-on, then.
Either way, it's not clean-bowled, even if it was going to hit anyway.

 

[Richard]

Whoever said Pietersen would get 57 was dead right - off 89 balls instead of 54 though.

In the 2nd innings he's 42* off 54 - and the way he's been playing means that Richard's statement about the likelihood of someone making 57 off 54 balls in a Test against the Aussies is a little wide of the mark.

All it would have taken is a couple of edges through the slips instead of dot balls, and a little bit less accuracy from Warne and he would have got there or thereabouts.

Exactly - and the chances of all that happening, plus another innings similar from Pietersen, are actually extremely slim.