***Official*** 4th Test at the MCG

[Compton]

Bowling one bouncer a dick move

This isn’t some primary school PE class. There’s no medal just for turning up. If you want to score runs in test cricket, then sometimes you need to duck a bouncer.

If you’re **** at ducking bouncers then practice until you’re not. Either that or accept that they’ll try to bounce you out.

 

[Burgey]

If anyone thinks the Poms are copping too much short stuff, wait til India gets here. The standard threat to go home will be twice as loud this time

 

[OverratedSanity]

Inb4 Ishant does a Lord's and bounces out the whole Australian lineup

 

[SteveNZ]

Bowling one bouncer a dick move

This isn’t some primary school PE class. There’s no medal just for turning up. If you want to score runs in test cricket, then sometimes you need to duck a bouncer.

If you’re **** at ducking bouncers then practice until you’re not. Either that or accept that they’ll try to bounce you out.

There's great irony in your avatar. If you don't understand, ask someone.

Cummins reckons bouncers aren't for anything other than getting people out. Does he not back himself to get Jimmy Anderson, he of basically no ability, out in 3 sessions with a huge lead?

Steve Smith doesn't practice his bowling because he chooses to focus on his core skill. Same as Anderson on a vice versa basis.

It was a dick move. No one died though right?

 

[TNT]

There's great irony in your avatar. If you don't understand, ask someone.

Cummins reckons bouncers aren't for anything other than getting people out. Does he not back himself to get Jimmy Anderson, he of basically no ability, out in 3 sessions with a huge lead?

Steve Smith doesn't practice his bowling because he chooses to focus on his core skill. Same as Anderson on a vice versa basis.

It was a dick move. No one died though right?

So because Smith's core skill is not bowling then when he does bowl batsmen should not be allowed to take advantage of it and score lots of runs then. He could choose not to bowl but then Anderson could choose not to bat too.

 

[Compton]

There's great irony in your avatar. If you don't understand, ask someone.

Cummins reckons bouncers aren't for anything other than getting people out. Does he not back himself to get Jimmy Anderson, he of basically no ability, out in 3 sessions with a huge lead?

Steve Smith doesn't practice his bowling because he chooses to focus on his core skill. Same as Anderson on a vice versa basis.

It was a dick move. No one died though right?

Are you suggesting that all short pitched bowling be banned? Because if you’re not then bringing up Phil Hughes was entirely an exercise in moral grandstanding.

Whether he could get him out another way is neither here nor there. He’s chosen a legitimate tactic as he most effective way of getting him out.

The fact that a batsman could potentially score runs with a slog sweep doesn’t mean they’re wrong to wait for a nice short wide one to cut, does it?

I see no relevance in your last paragraph. You appear to be suggesting that Anderson never practices with a bat, which is almost certainly not the case. Even if it were, that’s a choice he’s made. Just like the choice he makes to walk out to the middle with a bat in his hand.

 

[SteveNZ]

I don't have a problem with bouncers. In fact there's a guy from my team called Neil Wagner who bowls them all the time. Doesn't chirp about it pre match, just bowls them to get guys out.

If Stuart Broad gets hit and seriously injured by a bouncer mid innings so be it. Not ideal but is a part of the game. But if Anderson hadve first ball in a Test already decided, I'd wager you there would be a significant amount of vitriol. It was unnecessary, as is a lot of the BS bluster out of the Australian side. But hey it's a culture I get it, I lived and played there. And I think it's moronic and much happier with how my side goes about it.

I just don't think there has to be so much emphasis on the first syllable when it comes to playing for your 'country' in Australia.

 

[Gob]

James Anderson is far more comfortable facing full balls than short balls but they should not use the optimum way to dismiss him because he isn't very good in that regard? what the **** am i reading here

 

[TheJediBrah]

I don't have a problem with bouncers. In fact there's a guy from my team called Neil Wagner who bowls them all the time. Doesn't chirp about it pre match, just bowls them to get guys out.

If Stuart Broad gets hit and seriously injured by a bouncer mid innings so be it. Not ideal but is a part of the game. But if Anderson hadve first ball in a Test already decided, I'd wager you there would be a significant amount of vitriol. It was unnecessary, as is a lot of the BS bluster out of the Australian side. But hey it's a culture I get it, I lived and played there. And I think it's moronic and much happier with how my side goes about it.

I just don't think there has to be so much emphasis on the first syllable when it comes to playing for your 'country' in Australia.

This massive chip on your shoulder you clearly have about Australia and what you perceive as it's "cricketing culture" seems to be getting in the way of you understanding concepts

 

[Adders]

You Aussies are ****ed......after England's first innings in Adelaide you were all spewing about the amount short stuff to the English tail. Now that (for whatever ever reason) this has become a "thing" look at you defending the tactics. **** off allready.

 

[Compton]

You Aussies are ****ed......after England's first innings in Adelaide you were all spewing about the amount short stuff to the English tail. Now that (for whatever ever reason) this has become a "thing" look at you defending the tactics. **** off allready.

Very different contexts.

Moaning about it not being the right tactic in the circumstances and defending its legitimacy as a tactic generally are in no way mutually exclusive.

 

[Compton]

Plus cricket fans being fickle as **** is nothing new.

 

[Spark]

You Aussies are ****ed......after England's first innings in Adelaide you were all spewing about the amount short stuff to the English tail. Now that (for whatever ever reason) this has become a "thing" look at you defending the tactics. **** off allready.

Hold on, we were mad about that because it was stupid cricket, not because it was unsporting. Ridiculous comparison.

Whether it's a good tactic is completely separate to whether it's a legitimate tactic.

 

[Spark]

Anyway, I'm glad we've decided that the best way to change Test cricket is to bring back the "first ball is a freebie" rule from U9s. Great stuff guys.

 

[Adders]

Hold on, we were mad about that because it was stupid cricket, not because it was unsporting. Ridiculous comparison.

Whether it's a good tactic is completely separate to whether it's a legitimate tactic.

OK, that is a 100% good point......and I'll wear it.

But between Adelaide when you thought it a **** tactic and Perth now you are talking about it being a legitimate tactic....what has changed apart from some off field talk?

 

[Spark]

OK, that is a 100% good point......and I'll wear it.

But between Adelaide when you thought it a **** tactic and Perth now you are talking about it being a legitimate tactic....what has changed apart from some off field talk?

It was a legitimate tactic there too? In the same way that bowling Steve Smith full tosses is a legitimate tactic. It just might not be advisable, but it doesn't make you a evil **** pissing on Phil Hughes's grave or whatever SteveNZ is insinuating here.

Like I said, I wouldn't do it (just york them ffs) and I think the bouncers are overdone. But that's a question of repeated bouncers, many times an over, over after over. To call a single solitary bouncer unsporting is ridiculous, and to complain about it being on the first ball even moreso. I wasn't aware that Test cricket allowed for practice balls.

 

[Gnske]

Hold on, we were mad about that because it was stupid cricket, not because it was unsporting. Ridiculous comparison.

Whether it's a good tactic is completely separate to whether it's a legitimate tactic.

I completely missed that passage of play getting pissed, but were people more cranky because it was **** bowling or because intimidation bowling seemed to be prevailing over genuine wicket-taking? Or both interlinked?

I wouldn't want to comment on the results of such bowling over the years that I've been watching, but it's often been very frustrating watching Aus do the latter on many an occasion, which often devolves into the former.

 

[Spikey]

(you people can stop now)

 

[TheJediBrah]

You Aussies are ****ed......after England's first innings in Adelaide you were all spewing about the amount short stuff to the English tail. Now that (for whatever ever reason) this has become a "thing" look at you defending the tactics. **** off allready.

Do you never actually stop to think before you post that maybe you don't know what you're talking about and should probably think harder before you do?

It would save you a lot of embarrassment and reduce the amount of needlessly offensive and rude comments

 

[Spark]

I completely missed that passage of play getting pissed, but were people more cranky because it was **** bowling or because intimidation bowling seemed to be prevailing over genuine wicket-taking? Or both interlinked?

I wouldn't want to comment on the results of such bowling over the years that I've been watching, but it's often been very frustrating watching Aus do the latter on many an occasion, which often devolves into the former.

Yeah it was when they were bowling short garbage to Overton and Woakes and letting them put that partnership together. Obviously it wasn't decisive, but it definitely made all the timing re: when we'd have to bat at night and the amount of bowling we'd already had to do very difficult. It was a really poor passage of play.