***Official*** Australia in South Africa

[Uppercut]

Originally Posted by Nnanden

Marcus North is one of my favourite players and I think he's the best option at six for Australia, partly because he has useful offies which are very hard to get away. I said 'fantastic'. How is that over-reacting? Regardless of when they came, it proves he has the ability to bowl well.

Not you specifically, and he may well be the best option, just it does very little for his case to play tests that he's a good option when the opposition decide to hit out wildly when setting a target.

[Nnanden]

Originally Posted by Uppercut

Not you specifically, and he may well be the best option, just it does very little for his case to play tests that he's a good option when the opposition decide to hit out wildly when setting a target.

See, I think it helps prove how valuable he is. Australia have struggled this summer in containing the opposition to any degree at all. Playing North gives us an extra option to keep things tight and if South Africa want to smash him round, I just don't think it'll happen.

Understand what you mean though.

[stephen]

Hmmm

Seems a number of our players are coming down with very mild injuries just after milestones.

Still, very happy to see North in some form with the bat and ball.

[Hoggy31]

Johnson to get robbed of a ton by time here.

[pasag]

Originally Posted by dontcloseyoureyes

I'm gunski's.

Not far off

[Hoggy31]

Originally Posted by Hoggy31

Johnson to get robbed of a ton by time here.

or not.

[dontcloseyoureyes]

Originally Posted by stephen

Hmmm

Seems a number of our players are coming down with very mild injuries just after milestones.

Still, very happy to see North in some form with the bat and ball.

They're not being retired hurt, it's just the way the cricinfo displays it.

Sheesh.

[pup11]

I think this game could have pretty much ensured a spot in the XI for North in the first test, 50's in both the innings, and six wickets to go with it, if he doesn't get picked after that, then he should consider himself very unlucky.

All in all, this game proved to be a very good workout for the Aussie boys, almost every batsman made some runs and spent some time out there in the middle, and the bowlers too seemed to have gotten themselves into better rhythm as the game progressed.

Obviously Clarke' availability is still a worry, and has it been revealed why McGain and Siddle didn't bowl in the 2nd innings, because it makes no sense for them not to bowl and get some valuable practice under the belt, unless of course they are struggling with an injury or something

EDIT: Never mind... just read about it.

[pup11]

Originally Posted by dontcloseyoureyes

They're not being retired hurt, it's just the way the cricinfo displays it.

Sheesh.

Haha, people should have worked that out by now, anyways ****info also needs to learn, its "retired out" and not "retired hurt".

[Uppercut]

Originally Posted by pup11

Haha, people should have worked that out by now, anyways ****info also needs to learn, its "retired out" and not "retired hurt".

Is it cricinfo? I thought they were just retiring hurt as opposed to out in order to protect their averages.

[jondavluc]

Originally Posted by pup11

I think this game could have pretty much ensured a spot in the XI for North in the first test, 50's in both the innings, and six wickets to go with it, if he doesn't get picked after that, then he should consider himself very unlucky.

All in all, this game proved to be a very good workout for the Aussie boys, almost every batsman made some runs and spent some time out there in the middle, and the bowlers too seemed to have gotten themselves into better rhythm as the game progressed.

Obviously Clarke' availability is still a worry, and has it been revealed why McGain and Siddle didn't bowl in the 2nd innings, because it makes no sense for them not to bowl and get some valuable practice under the belt, unless of course they are struggling with an injury or something

EDIT: Never mind... just read about it.

Yeah they are sick.

Cricinfo - North boosts Test prospects in draw

[aussie]

I have not seen Marcus North of course. But regardless of this performance do you Australians think he is off-spinners is good enough for him to a decent defensive option in test. Thus allowing the 4 quicks to play?? (Since 3 quicks plus McGain is too risky)

[social]

Originally Posted by Langeveldt

Cotchefstroom

Good to see the truth still hits home

[Nnanden]

Originally Posted by aussie

I have not seen Marcus North of course. But regardless of this performance do you Australians think he is off-spinners is good enough for him to a decent defensive option in test. Thus allowing the 4 quicks to play?? (Since 3 quicks plus McGain is too risky)

Why is McGain too risky?

As much as I personally don't rate McGain, anything other than

Phil Hughes
Simon Katich
Ricky Ponting
Michael Hussey
Michael Clarke
Marcus North
Brad Haddin
Mitchell Johnson
Peter Siddle
Bryce McGain
Doug Bollinger

would be pretty silly imo. Have posted this same line-up since the middle of the summer aswell.

[stephen]

Originally Posted by Nnanden

Why is McGain too risky?

As much as I personally don't rate McGain, anything other than

Phil Hughes
Simon Katich
Ricky Ponting
Michael Hussey
Michael Clarke
Marcus North
Brad Haddin
Mitchell Johnson
Peter Siddle
Bryce McGain
Doug Bollinger

would be pretty silly imo. Have posted this same line-up since the middle of the summer aswell.

Well TBF you normally have Bracken in the lineup.