- As featured in The Independent.
"Straight out of England's Bumper Book of Balls ups"
- Mike Selvey on England's first innings collapse at The Gabba
"What is this what is this who is this guy shouting what is this going on in here?" - CP. (re: psxpro)
R.I.P Craigos, you were a champion bloke. One of the best
R.I.P Fardin 'Bob' Qayyumi
Member of the Church of the Holy Glenn McGrath
"How about you do something contstructive in this forum for once and not fill the forum with ****. You offer nothing." - theegyptian.
@ briony: mate if that was a shocker from south africa hate to see what you call it when they lose or don't manage 400
wouldn't paste either sides bowling too much. amla, kallis, clarke are all in all time form, all gave chances nonetheless, hussey a proven performer coming in under no pressure, cowan making a career defining (and both of those last two not chanceless either) hundred.
just because it's fashionable doesn't make it true.
Well Australia didn't deserve to win with their lack of intent. Yea we'll just piss about in our comfort zone and get some not outs, cost ourselves 5-10 overs but our average will go up. Then we'll just do the same when we're bowling, not even try to bowl the overs quicker and just take our time.
I mean seriously why is it so widely accepted that teams do this in Test cricket? If they showed the same lack of intent in ODIs or T20 they'd get dropped and hammered in the press. Test cricket? Perfectly acceptable.
National Scrabble Champion 2009, 8th in 2009 World Championships, gold medal (team) at Causeway, 2011 Masters Champion
Australia’s Darren Lehmann is a ‘blatant loser’ insists Stuart Broad
Countdown Series 57 Champion
King of the Arcade
Reply from mods to my prank bans in public:
Reply from mods to my prank bans in private:
MSN - evil_budgie @ hotmail.co.uk
Test cricket is all about taking your time with the ball and getting it right. Rushing through won't allow you to produce quality, otherwise you'd just bowl David Hussey all day and bowl 150 overs a day... just that they'd be ****. At the end of the day that three extra overs they could have gotten through if they rushed through to your satisfaction wouldn't have made a difference.
The reason Australia or South Africa couldn't win was because a full day was lost. Not because some bowlers took an extra 20 seconds an over.
Last edited by benchmark00; 13-11-2012 at 03:52 AM.
Parmi | #1 draft pick | Jake King is **** | PM me for my list of CW posters you shouldn't talk cricket with in Cricket ChatCome and Paint Turtle
Australia had Lyon and Clarke who could get through overs quickly, it doesn't really diminish the effectiveness at all when Quiney and the other part-timer Hilfenhaus bowled however many overs without ever threatening.
The extra 5-10 overs might have won Australia this game - it probably wouldn't have but it might have meant instead of being 8-1 they were 6-1. It isn't just the fact that they could have taken 4 wickets in those extra overs. But that it would have put more pressure on South Africa earlier in the innings - they were never under serious threat once Amla was reprieved.
+ time's fickle card game ~ with you and i +
get ready for a broken ****in' arm
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)