Brett Lee - Protected Species?

[Scallywag]

Looks like Hogg just wanted to get in the papers, first he says "FORMER Australia fast bowler Rodney Hogg says Brett Lee's high full tosses have been deliberate attempts to unsettle batsmen and admits to using the same tactic during his own career." then follows up with "While admitting he didn't see Lee's ball at McCullum, Hogg said it sounded like a deliberate act".

Dont you hate one sided matches which result in stories being made up so there is something to report.

 

[Slow Love™]

http://foxsports.news.com.au/story/0,8659,12408577-23212,00.html

The problem with this is that Hogg is well-known as something of a nut, since the Graeme Yallop days.

I didn't like the look of the Lee/Razzaq incident (and a lot of people didn't), but the McCullum one seems to be blown out of all proportion. What's worst about Hogg's comments is that, although we don't actually know whether Lee's incident was deliberate or not, we all now know that Hogg DID bowl beamers deliberately - which IMO is pretty shameful. It's possible we haven't heard the end of this, and if he happens to cop a bucketing in the press, I think he deserves it.

 

[marc71178]

For another, what he is bowling is the issue

Even when he's talking about changes in his action and when he was injured?

 

[username1234]

iam getting sick of brett lee he's prolly the only player in the world who go's out to try and injure the opposition on purpose. I mean who else bowls about 5 bouncers in an over at tailenders when the games been won. and he's bowled to many full tosses in his career for it to be " accidentle" i mean he's bowled 5 no ball- full tosses over the summer. Plus i can remember numourous other occasions eg his head high full toss at gary kirsten in 2002.

 

[Fiery]

iam getting sick of brett lee he's prolly the only player in the world who go's out to try and injure the opposition on purpose. I mean who else bowls about 5 bouncers in an over at tailenders when the games been won. and he's bowled to many full tosses in his career for it to be " accidentle" i mean he's bowled 5 no ball- full tosses over the summer. Plus i can remember numourous other occasions eg his head high full toss at gary kirsten in 2002.

Good on you for speaking your mind

 

[Pinkline Jones]

Username

Spot on - Lee's bowling attitude leaves a lot to be desired.

 

[Top_Cat]

iam getting sick of brett lee he's prolly the only player in the world who go's out to try and injure the opposition on purpose.

1) Come on; no-one else tries to injure batsmen on purpose? No-one would admit to it, maybe.............

2) Maybe this is a weakness on my part but if I had the physical ability to bowl 150km/h+, I'd be wanting to use it and if that meant hitting or intimidating opposition batsmen, I'd be using it as much within the rules as I could! And I suspect that if most people (except for Richard who seems to have no primal impulses whatsoever) REALLY examined themselves, they'd want to use it too.

 

[Fiery]

1) Come on; no-one else tries to injure batsmen on purpose? No-one would admit to it, maybe.............

2) Maybe this is a weakness on my part but if I had the physical ability to bowl 150km/h+, I'd be wanting to use it and if that meant hitting or intimidating opposition batsmen, I'd be using it as much within the rules as I could! And I suspect that if most people (except for Richard who seems to have no primal impulses whatsoever) REALLY examined themselves, they'd want to use it too.

Yep, it's a weakness on your part. How big and tough it is to bowl a rock hard cricket ball directly towards someone's head at 150+km. I don't see any problem with bouncers to batsman and the occasional one to a tail-ender but repeatedly bowling them at tail-enders
and bowling beamers is just cowardly. But you probably thought Jardine's bodyline theory was fine too.

 

[Ray Hadley]

Yep, it's a weakness on your part. How big and tough it is to bowl a rock hard cricket ball directly towards someone's head at 150+km. I don't see any problem with bouncers to batsman and the occasional one to a tail-ender but repeatedly bowling them at tail-enders
and bowling beamers is just cowardly. But you probably thought Jardine's bodyline theory was fine too.

Thats a pretty similar summary to the one that I explained to my listeners this morning. Unfortunately a few of them don't get it, but I've forgotten more that they'll ever know about cricket.

Lee is surrounded by sycophants and unfortunately doesn't get it either.

 

[Pinkline Jones]

Lee is just a drinks waitering bowlo ball legend in his own mirror kissing lunchtime.

 

[Scallywag]

This is fantastic, not only has Lee scared the pants off the NZ coach and players but the whole country sems to packing their daks.

It is great to see a fast bowler have such a devastating effect on the opposition, we have them flogged before the game starts.

 

[Fiery]

This is fantastic, not only has Lee scared the pants off the NZ coach and players but the whole country sems to packing their daks.

It is great to see a fast bowler have such a devastating effect on the opposition, we have them flogged before the game starts.

Lee hasn't scared anyone. Just ****ed them off.
Still ending each post with your customary despite the lack of any humour I see Scallywag. Do you laugh after everything you say in normal conversation? How annoying.

 

[Scallywag]

Lee hasn't scared anyone. Just ****ed them off.
Still ending each post with your customary despite the lack of any humour I see Scallywag. Do you laugh after everything you say in normal conversation? How annoying.

No you are scared that he might hurt one of your players, you are sh*tting yourselves.

 

[Fiery]

No you are scared that he might hurt one of your players, you are sh*tting yourselves.

If you say so Scallywag

 

[Top_Cat]

Yep, it's a weakness on your part. How big and tough it is to bowl a rock hard cricket ball directly towards someone's head at 150+km. I don't see any problem with bouncers to batsman and the occasional one to a tail-ender but repeatedly bowling them at tail-enders
and bowling beamers is just cowardly. But you probably thought Jardine's bodyline theory was fine too.

You didn't honestly believe I meant bowling beamers did you? Since I'm sure you're not a moron, I'll say this; you're nothing but an antagonist. I've read my post again and there's nothing to suggest that what you're saying is what I'd do.

Oye, forget it. I've made it pretty clear where I stand yet you're still trying your hardest to paint me in the above light so there's no point no saying anything more.

 

[Fiery]

You didn't honestly believe I meant bowling beamers did you? Since I'm sure you're not a moron, I'll say this; you're nothing but an antagonist. I've read my post again and there's nothing to suggest that what you're saying is what I'd do.

Oye, forget it. I've made it pretty clear where I stand yet you're still trying your hardest to paint me in the above light so there's no point no saying anything more.

" if I had the physical ability to bowl 150km/h+, I'd be wanting to use it and if that meant hitting or intimidating opposition batsmen, I'd be using it as much within the rules as I could! "

It was something about that sentence I think. We were talking about beamers. I wasn't trying to antagonise you. My apologies if I misinterpreted you.

 

[Top_Cat]

" if I had the physical ability to bowl 150km/h+, I'd be wanting to use it and if that meant hitting or intimidating opposition batsmen, I'd be using it as much within the rules as I could! "

It was something about that sentence I think. We were talking about beamers. I wasn't trying to antagonise you. My apologies if I misinterpreted you.

Allow me to highlight the following;

if I had the physical ability to bowl 150km/h+, I'd be wanting to use it and if that meant hitting or intimidating opposition batsmen, I'd be using it as much within the rules as I could!

No worries, man. Misinterpretations are a part of life but more so on the net.

Y'know, I reckon we'd get along like an absolute house on fire in person.

 

[Cassn]

Bing's innocent

 

[Fiery]

Allow me to highlight the following;

if I had the physical ability to bowl 150km/h+, I'd be wanting to use it and if that meant hitting or intimidating opposition batsmen, I'd be using it as much within the rules as I could!

No worries, man. Misinterpretations are a part of life but more so on the net.

Y'know, I reckon we'd get along like an absolute house on fire in person.

We probably would ya know.

 

[marc71178]

Yep, it's a weakness on your part. How big and tough it is to bowl a rock hard cricket ball directly towards someone's head at 150+km.

How tough is it to distinguish between a person's head and their midriff?