• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

***Official*** Super Series

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
tooextracool said:
presuming they actually get the ball to swing, in conditions that probably wont help them too. mcgrath and lee dont exactly swing the red ball significantly either.
You might find that conditions do help swing bowling quite a bit. October is extremely early for Australia... the SCG is usually not used for tests until January. And last year, as Bracken's record shows, the SCG helped swing and seam a lot in domestic cricket. I'd say they'll try and prepare a dead flat wicket, but the weather might not allow it.

edit: I should add, the last AFL game at the SCG was just a week ago today, so the pitch will only be being worked on now at the earliest.
 
Last edited:

greg

International Debutant
honestbharani said:
I will be really bothered if the RoW don't win. IT would mean Australia are so much better than the Rest of the Cricketing World and that is not a good situation for the game.
I could add the obvious comment to this... :)
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
greg said:
I could add the obvious comment to this... :)
Well, England have only defeated Australia at home, and without Australia's premier fast bowler. So, as big an achievement as it has been from England, if Australia win this series, it will only show up that the rest of the cricketing world, IMHO, including England, will struggle to defeat them in Australia. And of course, I could add the obvious comment about ODIs here..... :)
 

greg

International Debutant
honestbharani said:
Well, England have only defeated Australia at home, and without Australia's premier fast bowler.
Who won't be around for much longer and whose immediate like for like replacement appears to be Stuart Clark :p

honestbharani said:
So, as big an achievement as it has been from England, if Australia win this series, it will only show up that the rest of the cricketing world, IMHO, including England, will struggle to defeat them in Australia. And of course, I could add the obvious comment about ODIs here..... :)
Well I'm sure we have one Bangladeshi contributor, don't we? ;-)
 

Scaly piscine

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
honestbharani said:
Well, England have only defeated Australia at home, and without Australia's premier fast bowler. So, as big an achievement as it has been from England, if Australia win this series, it will only show up that the rest of the cricketing world, IMHO, including England, will struggle to defeat them in Australia.
Except McGrath played in 3 of the Tests and Australia were one wicket away or a bit of rain away from losing one of those. In this last one Australia would have been hard pushed to have chased over 300. What happens if Rest of the World lose to Australia in the Test but Flintoff hammers them?
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Well, they were still good enough to defeat England 2-1, weren't they, losing to Bangladesh or not? ;)


Anyways, my point is, RoW losing to Australia would be bad for cricket in general because it would mean they were better than some of the (I know that all the best players were not selected) best players of the world put together.


And to SP, Australia would still have been 1-1 in matches that McGrath played in even if the OT test had gone your way and it hadn't rained.
 

Scaly piscine

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
honestbharani said:
Well, they were still good enough to defeat England 2-1, weren't they, losing to Bangladesh or not? ;)


Anyways, my point is, RoW losing to Australia would be bad for cricket in general because it would mean they were better than some of the (I know that all the best players were not selected) best players of the world put together.


And to SP, Australia would still have been 1-1 in matches that McGrath played in even if the OT test had gone your way and it hadn't rained.
England were playing Australia not McGrath. If they'd have needed a win the last game who knows what would have happened.
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Scaly piscine said:
England were playing Australia not McGrath. If they'd have needed a win the last game who knows what would have happened.
The last match was 50-50 as far as I am concerned. Not many sides make 340+ in the 4th innings to win a match but then again, with one vital bowler missing for England and the openers finding form, Australia could have done it. My point is that just because England have defeated Australia in this particular series does not make them the better side straightaway. They still have to beat Australia in Australia to prove that they are indeed better than Australia, just as how Australia needed to defeat Windies in the Windies to prove that they were better than them overall. So, if you are suggesting that just because England have won this series and were the better team 'in this series', they are, as a whole, better than Australia, then you are wrong.
 

JASON

Cricketer Of The Year
This Super Series is really turning out to be a gimme for Australia and an absolute hogwash !!

John Wright the World XI coach when interviewed by a famous NZ Sports Broadcaster called Murray Deaker - said more or less that in his opinion World XI was unlikely to match the Aussies !!

This is the damn coach of the World XI !!

Aussies will come back with a vengeance from their Ashes loss and no one (the ICC or even the World XI coach) wants the Rest of the World players to do anything more than just turning up to the game !! :laugh: :laugh:

So its an absolute waste of time and TV ratings for this will be far far far less than the recent Ashes !!

Its still not too late for the ROW guys to call up Sangakkara or Kumble !! but they won't .
 

Deja moo

International Captain
News is Gibbs might rule himself out. No, the Aussie police dont want him, hes just injured himself.
 

Barney Rubble

International Coach
Jono said:
Inzy may make both the ODI and Test team now.
He shouldn't IMO. Vaughan should make the Test team, and although Inzy is a good candidate for the ODIs, there are others who could do the job just as well or better.
 

Deja moo

International Captain
Barney Rubble said:
He shouldn't IMO. Vaughan should make the Test team, and although Inzy is a good candidate for the ODIs, there are others who could do the job just as well or better.
Unless you're suggesting that Graeme Smith shouldnt be captain, I dont see how Vaughan could make it ahead of Inzy. And who else in One dayers ?
 

Barney Rubble

International Coach
Deja moo said:
Unless you're suggesting that Graeme Smith shouldnt be captain, I dont see how Vaughan could make it ahead of Inzy. And who else in One dayers ?
To be honest with you, I didn't actually bother coming up with an argument as to why Vaughan should play. I'm just English. :p

I do think he's a better captain than Smith, but he's not a better bat (at the moment) than either Smith or Inzy, so they should probably play.

As for the One-Dayers, I think it's a little bit out of order that Trescothick wasn't picked. I know he's another opener, but he's been bashing everyone around for the last year and still gets ignored.
 

Barney Rubble

International Coach
twctopcat said:
Does anyone else think that the test is going to be a walkover?? The ODIs could well follow suit.
Yep, I do. Flintoff and Harmison are going to turn up and say "by the way guys, if you want to know how to dismiss each Aussie batsman.......", and Gilchrist's not showed any signs of solving his Flintoffitis at all yet - they could be very one-sided indeed.
 

greg

International Debutant
Barney Rubble said:
To be honest with you, I didn't actually bother coming up with an argument as to why Vaughan should play. I'm just English. :p

I do think he's a better captain than Smith, but he's not a better bat (at the moment) than either Smith or Inzy, so they should probably play.

As for the One-Dayers, I think it's a little bit out of order that Trescothick wasn't picked. I know he's another opener, but he's been bashing everyone around for the last year and still gets ignored.
Hell it's hardly a surprise. If Strauss can't make an extremely long list for Test player of the year in the ICC awards...
 

Top