Brad Hodge in - Jimmy Maher out

[marc71178]

Stop. Being. Petty.

I think you get my point there is no need for this to go any fether.

No I don't get your point - you compared some current non-Internationals with Bradman - and shock horror they're Australian, I'd never have guessed you'd do that.

Comparing Bradman to ANY Test regular at the moment is pushing it a bit (only 2 fit to be mentioned in the same breath as him IMO), but a couple of flat track bullies?

 

[Mister Wright]

I doubt there was any intention to compare them with Bradman, rather the stats. If a player is averaging close to a hundred during a season the term 'Bradmanesque' is often used, and the same is often done if a player has a string of good scores.

 

[Eclipse]

I doubt there was any intention to compare them with Bradman, rather the stats. If a player is averaging close to a hundred during a season the term 'Bradmanesque' is often used, and the same is often done if a player has a string of good scores.

Exactly Why in the hell would you seriously think I was compairing them to Bradman as a cricketers. Are you Insane??

I would have though anyone with a string of commonsense could have worked that one out.

Maybe In future I will word things diffrently just so you can understand them if you like.

 

[Richard]

And you'd be right, except I didn't say I was talking about ODIs. Guess again.

Aussies are pretty good at sidestepping the issue where Lee is concerned.

 

[age_master]

well hes the best wicket taker in the world, i dont think there is any need for side stepping....test SR of 51.7 pretty good.

lets check out some of those fantastic English SR's shall we...

Giles - 96
Flintoff - 101
Anderson 52, but just 7 games there
Caddick - 57
White - 67.1
Dawson - 101
Hoggard - 61


yeah 51.7 is pretty poor

 

[luckyeddie]

well hes the best wicket taker in the world, i dont think there is any need for side stepping....test SR of 51.7 pretty good.

lets check out some of those fantastic English SR's shall we...

Giles - 96
Flintoff - 101
Anderson 52, but just 7 games there
Caddick - 57
White - 67.1
Dawson - 101
Hoggard - 61


yeah 51.7 is pretty poor

Yet funnily enough, Brett's strike rate AGAINST England is a Giles-like 72.4.

How do you like THAT figure, A_M? You should have quit while you were ahead:P

 

[Neil Pickup]

Brett Lee 1999-2000
7 Tests - 42 Wickets - Ave 16.07 - Econ 2.95 - SR 32.69

Brett Lee 2001-2003
28 Tests - 89 Wickets - Ave 36.52 - Econ 3.61 - SR 60.70

Not pretty, are they?

 

[marc71178]

well hes the best wicket taker in the world

You what?!

He's not even the best wicket taker in his own side!

 

[Rik]

Maybe In future I will word things diffrently just so you can understand them if you like.

Good start...

Why didn't you think of that a year ago so we could all catch the drift too?

 

[Rik]

well hes the best wicket taker in the world, i dont think there is any need for side stepping....test SR of 51.7 pretty good.

lets check out some of those fantastic English SR's shall we...

Giles - 96
Flintoff - 101
Anderson 52, but just 7 games there
Caddick - 57
White - 67.1
Dawson - 101
Hoggard - 61


yeah 51.7 is pretty poor

Best wicket taker in the world? Mulari takes twice the number of wickets Lee does per game on average...

White doesn't bowl again, Caddick's retired, and since when did Giles become part of this? We all know he's rubbish...

As Neil pointed out, Lee's been on a downward slope for a very long time, which seems to be evening out now, at an average of everything but 30...

Yes, what an amazing bowler.:rolleyes:

 

[Eclipse]

Why didn't you think of that a year ago so we could all catch the drift too?

Speak for yourself Rik your not the most well spoken amoungst us.

 

[Rik]

Speak for yourself Rik your not the most well spoken amoungst us.

And so you are the ideal person to state this "common" view?

 

[Eclipse]

And so you are the ideal person to state this "common" view?

Maybe not but are you the ideal person to state this "common" view?

"Why didn't you think of that a year ago so we could all catch the drift too? "

I if you can say somthing like that then so can I.

 

[Richard]

well hes the best wicket taker in the world, i dont think there is any need for side stepping....test SR of 51.7 pretty good.

Brett Lee 1999-2000
7 Tests - 42 Wickets - Ave 16.07 - Econ 2.95 - SR 32.69

Brett Lee 2001-2003
28 Tests - 89 Wickets - Ave 36.52 - Econ 3.61 - SR 60.70

Not pretty, are they?

Thank you, Neil - I repeat:

Aussies are pretty good at sidestepping the issue where Lee is concerned.

This is precisely what I am talking about.

 

[Rik]

Maybe not but are you the ideal person to state this "common" view?

"Why didn't you think of that a year ago so we could all catch the drift too? "

I if you can say somthing like that then so can I.

And the point of that was?

 

[Eclipse]

And the point of that was?

If you dont have a go at me I wont say anything about you make sense??

 

[Rik]

If you dont have a go at me I wont say anything about you make sense??

Awww but you just made sense. You dissapoint me

 

[Hoggy]

Another 50* for Bunkie.

249 @ 124.50.

8D

 

[Warne is god]

I come from Victoria but i don't think Hodge should come in FOR MAHER , i'm not saying he shouldn't come in but Maher can keep wicket, which allows Gilly to have a rest which has him in prime form and fitness for the finals.

 

[Top_Cat]

Guys, COOL IT. If you 'win' an argument on the internet, you'll be the most popular person at your victory parade of one - you. Let's show a little maturity here, especially considering you're a couple of long-time posters.

I've personally been a big fan of Hodge for quite some time (ever since I saw him play U/19's) and he looks classy. Like Test-quality classy.

Unfortunately, as soon as the selectors are quoted in the paper as saying "Wow, Brad's hitting the ball well", his game falls to pieces. It's happened almost every time he's seriously been looked at by the Aussie selectors. He has a great start to the season and then averages less then 30 for the rest of it.

Mike Hussey suffers from the same thing This is probably why they haven't been looked at as serious propects for a while now; when the pressure is off them, they are world-beaters. When it's on, they're mediocre. That ain't exactly good enough to play Test cricket, regardless of the obvious raw talent.