Fair enough, good idea to play it against the Johnsons and Lees, who bowl with a flatter trajectory, but when McGrath was bowling at him he should have put the shot in the locker. He's a more than capable player of the Pull-stroke - a far better idea against McGrath.
This is only a side-issue compared to the already-mentioned large weakness against the away-moving ball, and more than ever against left-arm seamers. It shows up the fact that Loye is not really an opener at all, he's just a converted middle-order batsman. In the English domestic game there are far fewer capable awayswing bowlers than at ODI level, so the flaw can to an extent be got away with.
Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourthcricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006
(Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.
Given you write Gough off as he bowled badly in his last 2 ODIs (Im not disagreeing with the point but the use of a tiny sample size to justify it) then the fact that Loye and Nixon have won in the last 3 ODIs they have played together should have you championing them.
If I only just posted the above post, please wait 5 mins before replying as there will be edits
West Robham Rabid Wolves Caedere lemma quod eat lemma
Carl Bulfin making the team.
Oh, that was 1999? Still struggling to get over it.
I honestly don't believe Loye and Nixon made as much difference as some have made-out, though. We started winning games when Australia weakened due, mainly, to injuries. IMO had Symonds not gone down when he did we'd have had no chance in the CBS finals. And equally, had Aus not treated the game that started our revival as the dead game it was, we'd probably not even have made it there ITFP.
rave down, hit the ground
Proudly supporting pink bat grips
The best FC player in the dev league
189 on debut
And TBH, there have been several surfaces we've played on that have been no different to those we got in Australia. And certainly none of them would have disguised his one glaring weakness - which, in case you noticed, wasn't actually the sweep - that got him into trouble just once.
Maybe he wouldnt have been a success in the World Cup, but it wouldnt have been any worse than it is now, and at least there would have been a threat of a flying start from England. Loye has shown at domestic level that he can be effective, and when he gets going, he is devestating.
And I have not seen any pitches in this world cup that is like your typical Australian pitch.
And I didn't seen many "typical" Australian pitches in the CBS.
Actually, strike that, I did - they were all very flat with little seam, which is about all I've ever seen in a non-WACA Australian pitch. They didn't fit the outdated stereotype, though.
IF Loye had been picked ahead of Strauss I honestly wouldn't have had too many complaints (there was no case for picking him ahead of Joyce at the time; Shaun Tait, not the England selectors, are at fault for his presence at the top of the order) but equally, Loye did very little of note in his 7 games, so he was hardly hard-done-by either.
If Loye were younger I'd certainly hope to see him again, but as it is his time's now surely gone and lamenting that can't really change that too much.
I seriously can't believe this is happening - you're championing a player based on his domestic career, I'm putting him down based on his international. The ultimate roles-reversed.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)