Jules - did you see De villier's innings ? 129 off 112 balls ... and him and Kallis made a something like 220 runs off 220 balls ... that's like EA SPorts 'cricket'.
English Cricket/ *The Ashes*!
- Thread starter SummerOnions
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
Did someone call? 😉
[quote author=Judge Jules link=topic=41229.msg1235213#msg1235213 date=1292692820]
Did someone call? 😉
[/quote]
There's two of ya now mate, you can be 'The Judge'.
Did someone call? 😉
[/quote]
There's two of ya now mate, you can be 'The Judge'.
[quote author=LeTallecWiz link=topic=41229.msg1235210#msg1235210 date=1292691940]
Jules - did you see De villier's innings ? 129 off 112 balls ... and him and Kallis made a something like 220 runs off 220 balls ... that's like EA SPorts 'cricket'.
[/quote]
Apart from a little bit of the Perth Test morning session, I didn't get to watch either matches today i'm afraid. Just checked the score after i came home, and posted here. I was not going to waste a perfectly good saturday on watching a team get slaughtered by another. I like a bit of competition, but it seems i was wrong to abandon the game....that's the great thing about Test cricket. Every body gets a second chance. Can India make something out of theirs like Australia did?
That said, i'm a bit surprised by the ease with which SA scored. Unadkat is too young to be capped, but Ishant and Sreesanth are decent pace bowlers who have done reasonably well in tougher conditions. So credit must go to the SA batsmen for taking those bowlers apart.
Jules...sorry for stealing your name.
Jules - did you see De villier's innings ? 129 off 112 balls ... and him and Kallis made a something like 220 runs off 220 balls ... that's like EA SPorts 'cricket'.
[/quote]
Apart from a little bit of the Perth Test morning session, I didn't get to watch either matches today i'm afraid. Just checked the score after i came home, and posted here. I was not going to waste a perfectly good saturday on watching a team get slaughtered by another. I like a bit of competition, but it seems i was wrong to abandon the game....that's the great thing about Test cricket. Every body gets a second chance. Can India make something out of theirs like Australia did?
That said, i'm a bit surprised by the ease with which SA scored. Unadkat is too young to be capped, but Ishant and Sreesanth are decent pace bowlers who have done reasonably well in tougher conditions. So credit must go to the SA batsmen for taking those bowlers apart.
Jules...sorry for stealing your name.
Haha, no probs mate. My real name's actually Julian as it happens but it invariably got shortened to Jules by teammates during my playing days (and to "cnut" by the opposition at times).
Tendulkar with ANOTHER ton ... that's 50 ... Pointing only has 39.
I like that about Indian Cricket. With a near 500 run deficit after the first innings, it would have been easier to give up and accept what was inevitable. After all nearly three days play was left when they started the 2nd innings. They have nearly wipe all that lead and they have done that with an intent of setting a target by scoring near 4 an over.
They are going to lose this. But the fight is there, and i'm happy to see that.
Even for settled batsmen, Steyn was too hot to handle on the post tea session on both days. He played a crucial role by getting Gambhir and Dhoni out, who were both looking set for a big innings. SA will deserve their victory.
Tough luck for Dhoni and team. Zak's injury and losing the toss on the first day kind of hit them hard. But they will take heart from this performance. Their batting is strong enough to handle what SA bowlers have to offer. It has to be, it's got some massive names in there.
If i were Dhoni, i would drop Raina for Pujara. Raina is poor against short pitch bowling, like Hughes, and that affects his confidence in playing the front foot strokes that he uses so well in ODIs. Further Pujara is the long term replacement for Dravid, and Indian team management will do well to bed him in at number 6 while Dravid is still around.
They are going to lose this. But the fight is there, and i'm happy to see that.
Even for settled batsmen, Steyn was too hot to handle on the post tea session on both days. He played a crucial role by getting Gambhir and Dhoni out, who were both looking set for a big innings. SA will deserve their victory.
Tough luck for Dhoni and team. Zak's injury and losing the toss on the first day kind of hit them hard. But they will take heart from this performance. Their batting is strong enough to handle what SA bowlers have to offer. It has to be, it's got some massive names in there.
If i were Dhoni, i would drop Raina for Pujara. Raina is poor against short pitch bowling, like Hughes, and that affects his confidence in playing the front foot strokes that he uses so well in ODIs. Further Pujara is the long term replacement for Dravid, and Indian team management will do well to bed him in at number 6 while Dravid is still around.
Tendulkar -> Legend!
In 2010 he has played 13 matches. Scored 1539 runs at 85.5 runs per innings.
He has the rest of this innings and one more test to get another record. Highest number of runs in a calendar year. The record stands at 1788 runs in 2006 by Yusuf Youhana (who later changed name and religion).
Can he get 250 runs in two more innings? I hope he does. It would be a terrific achievement at 39.
Here is a list of all his centuries so far. It has come in all shapes and sizes. Aggressive, Composed, Defensive...he is the complete batsman. If anything, his only weakness is the lack of stamina to construct a really big innings like Lara.
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/35320.html?class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=hundreds;runsmin1=100;runsval1=runs;template=results;type=batting;view=match
In 2010 he has played 13 matches. Scored 1539 runs at 85.5 runs per innings.
He has the rest of this innings and one more test to get another record. Highest number of runs in a calendar year. The record stands at 1788 runs in 2006 by Yusuf Youhana (who later changed name and religion).
Can he get 250 runs in two more innings? I hope he does. It would be a terrific achievement at 39.
Here is a list of all his centuries so far. It has come in all shapes and sizes. Aggressive, Composed, Defensive...he is the complete batsman. If anything, his only weakness is the lack of stamina to construct a really big innings like Lara.
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/35320.html?class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=hundreds;runsmin1=100;runsval1=runs;template=results;type=batting;view=match
lol indeed.
To be fair, Ponting has been the more prolific batsmen in 2000s. Tendulkar has scored at a higher average, but played lesser games.
Tendulkar scored 50 international 100s in Nov 2000. Since then, Ponting has 55 international 100s in 380 matches, while Tendulkar has 46 in 281 matches.
There was a time when Tendulkar was suffering from Tennis elbow and loss of form, and it really looked like his career was about to be over (the famous "Endulkar" article), and many thought Ponting had an outside chance of catching Tendulkar, as his peak coincided with Tendukar's worst. But Tendulkar recovered from that quite majestically. I doubt these records will be broken that easily. It won't happen in the next 20 years. That much is certain.
To be fair, Ponting has been the more prolific batsmen in 2000s. Tendulkar has scored at a higher average, but played lesser games.
Tendulkar scored 50 international 100s in Nov 2000. Since then, Ponting has 55 international 100s in 380 matches, while Tendulkar has 46 in 281 matches.
There was a time when Tendulkar was suffering from Tennis elbow and loss of form, and it really looked like his career was about to be over (the famous "Endulkar" article), and many thought Ponting had an outside chance of catching Tendulkar, as his peak coincided with Tendukar's worst. But Tendulkar recovered from that quite majestically. I doubt these records will be broken that easily. It won't happen in the next 20 years. That much is certain.
So, everything moves to the MCG.
I can't see Australia changing their line-up, although there's a bit of talk in the media about Beer coming in for Hilfenhaus. I can see the thinking behind that I suppose as the track at the 'G could be quite different to the WACA - a bit of left-arm orthodox, and then Smith's leg-spin to mix things up a bit.
But still, I'd be shocked if Hilfenhaus was omitted. He belowed excellently over the weekend, and to go against Ponting's love of 4 quicks would be a major surprise.
As for England, well Bell's a certainty to move up the order. Collingwood's the most likely to drop down. I'd even move Bell to 4 ahead of Pietersen, as he looks like he'd handle the newer ball better than KP. Any chance Finn might get a rest? He's taking wickets, but is clearly fatigued and is becoming very expensive.
I can't see Australia changing their line-up, although there's a bit of talk in the media about Beer coming in for Hilfenhaus. I can see the thinking behind that I suppose as the track at the 'G could be quite different to the WACA - a bit of left-arm orthodox, and then Smith's leg-spin to mix things up a bit.
But still, I'd be shocked if Hilfenhaus was omitted. He belowed excellently over the weekend, and to go against Ponting's love of 4 quicks would be a major surprise.
As for England, well Bell's a certainty to move up the order. Collingwood's the most likely to drop down. I'd even move Bell to 4 ahead of Pietersen, as he looks like he'd handle the newer ball better than KP. Any chance Finn might get a rest? He's taking wickets, but is clearly fatigued and is becoming very expensive.
I doubt England would want to go with untested Bresnan or Shahzad. Their bowling has done the job so far, and at Perth it was their batting that let them down. I don't see why England should change anything. They don't have better batsmen than the ones in the team. They don't have better bowlers than the ones in the team. The kookaburra ball does not reverse at all, so there is no point in using Shahzad either. The only argument for a bowling change is to freshen things up and add a bit of surprise factor. But as Australia showed with Doherty, it doesn't always end up a good surprise.
If i were in Ponting's shoes...I would go with 4 quicks as well, but only because the spin option is Beer. But i wouldn't be too devastated if he was brought in for one of Siddle or Hilfenhaus. But this is a decision they HAVE to make, because Sydney is round the corner, and you can't go with 4 pacers at Sydney. That will be ridiculous. I would rather they find out that Beer is not up to scratch in MCG and bring Hauritz back.
I'm struggling to think which quick bowler i would drop between Siddle and Hifenhaus. Siddle probabaly. But i'll bring him back for the last test in place of Harris. Mainly because both bowlers are quite fragile and injury prone and it is a risk to rely on them be two third of a quick bowling attack. The risk of injury during the game is too high. Hilfenhaus offers something entirely different compared to the other Aussie quick bowlers as well. I would like Australian think-tank to persist with him.
If i were in Ponting's shoes...I would go with 4 quicks as well, but only because the spin option is Beer. But i wouldn't be too devastated if he was brought in for one of Siddle or Hilfenhaus. But this is a decision they HAVE to make, because Sydney is round the corner, and you can't go with 4 pacers at Sydney. That will be ridiculous. I would rather they find out that Beer is not up to scratch in MCG and bring Hauritz back.
I'm struggling to think which quick bowler i would drop between Siddle and Hifenhaus. Siddle probabaly. But i'll bring him back for the last test in place of Harris. Mainly because both bowlers are quite fragile and injury prone and it is a risk to rely on them be two third of a quick bowling attack. The risk of injury during the game is too high. Hilfenhaus offers something entirely different compared to the other Aussie quick bowlers as well. I would like Australian think-tank to persist with him.
[quote author=kingjulian link=topic=41229.msg1235561#msg1235561 date=1292825517]
I doubt England would want to go with untested Bresnan or Shahzad. Their bowling has done the job so far, and at Perth it was their batting that let them down. I don't see why England should change anything. They don't have better batsmen than the ones in the team. They don't have better bowlers than the ones in the team. The kookaburra ball does not reverse at all, so there is no point in using Shahzad either. The only argument for a bowling change is to freshen things up and add a bit of surprise factor. But as Australia showed with Doherty, it doesn't always end up a good surprise.
I would go with 4 quicks as well, but only because the spin option is Beer. But i wouldn't be too devastated if he was brought in for one of Siddle or Hilfenhaus. But this is a decision they HAVE to make, because Sydney is round the corner, and you can't go with 4 pacers at Sydney. That will be ridiculous. I would rather they find out that Beer is not up to scratch in MCG and bring Hauritz back.
I'm struggling to think which quick bowler i would drop between Siddle and Hifenhaus. Siddle probabaly. But i'll bring him back for the last test in place of Harris. Mainly because both bowlers are quite fragile and injury prone and it is a risk to rely on them be two third of a quick bowling attack. The risk of injury during the game is too high. Hilfenhaus offers something entirely different compared to the other Aussie quick bowlers as well. I would like Australian think-tank to persist with him.
[/quote]
I wasn't suggesting bringing anyone different in, just moving Bell up the order s'all. Which I think they'll do.
And you or I have about as much chance of playing as Nathan Hauritz does.
I doubt England would want to go with untested Bresnan or Shahzad. Their bowling has done the job so far, and at Perth it was their batting that let them down. I don't see why England should change anything. They don't have better batsmen than the ones in the team. They don't have better bowlers than the ones in the team. The kookaburra ball does not reverse at all, so there is no point in using Shahzad either. The only argument for a bowling change is to freshen things up and add a bit of surprise factor. But as Australia showed with Doherty, it doesn't always end up a good surprise.
I would go with 4 quicks as well, but only because the spin option is Beer. But i wouldn't be too devastated if he was brought in for one of Siddle or Hilfenhaus. But this is a decision they HAVE to make, because Sydney is round the corner, and you can't go with 4 pacers at Sydney. That will be ridiculous. I would rather they find out that Beer is not up to scratch in MCG and bring Hauritz back.
I'm struggling to think which quick bowler i would drop between Siddle and Hifenhaus. Siddle probabaly. But i'll bring him back for the last test in place of Harris. Mainly because both bowlers are quite fragile and injury prone and it is a risk to rely on them be two third of a quick bowling attack. The risk of injury during the game is too high. Hilfenhaus offers something entirely different compared to the other Aussie quick bowlers as well. I would like Australian think-tank to persist with him.
[/quote]
I wasn't suggesting bringing anyone different in, just moving Bell up the order s'all. Which I think they'll do.
And you or I have about as much chance of playing as Nathan Hauritz does.
Yeah. Certainly agree that Bell should play higher up. He has been middling everything. Simple switch between 5 and 6 seems logical. Hopefully that will give Collingwood the hint to pull his finger out of his arse. He always excelled in rescue acts and i was a bit disappointed with him at Perth.
Ya Hauritz wouldn't play, but he should. It's ridiculous how they say they want to build a team for the future and then treat players like Hauritz as they have done. North got more of a chance than what Hauritz did. Chopping and changing the players for the number 6 all rounder and spinner position is not going to get them anything. I'm asking them to do it again with Beer, but only because his selection was wrong in the first place. O'Keefe was more deserving to get the call than Beer.
Ya Hauritz wouldn't play, but he should. It's ridiculous how they say they want to build a team for the future and then treat players like Hauritz as they have done. North got more of a chance than what Hauritz did. Chopping and changing the players for the number 6 all rounder and spinner position is not going to get them anything. I'm asking them to do it again with Beer, but only because his selection was wrong in the first place. O'Keefe was more deserving to get the call than Beer.
Flower suggesting Finn to be rested, Shazhad likely to come in i'd expect.
Can Shahzad bat? I know Bresnan's quite handy.
[quote author=Marquis link=topic=41229.msg1236601#msg1236601 date=1293015484]
N is level 2 isn't it?
Can't remember where bay19 is, but I'll assume it is looking straight down the wicket.
Oh and to take yet another thread off track. Saw those pics. I can see why Del Santo's troubled you.
[/quote]
Yeah they're both straight down the wicket. Great seats indeed.
The Nicky Dal image is horrific. I can't quite get it out of my head either.
N is level 2 isn't it?
Can't remember where bay19 is, but I'll assume it is looking straight down the wicket.
Oh and to take yet another thread off track. Saw those pics. I can see why Del Santo's troubled you.
[/quote]
Yeah they're both straight down the wicket. Great seats indeed.
The Nicky Dal image is horrific. I can't quite get it out of my head either.
[quote author=Ryan link=topic=41229.msg1236899#msg1236899 date=1293056445]
Yeah they're both straight down the wicket.
[/quote]
So when the batsman pulls away at the last minute, and the umpire starts gesturing towards the crowd behind the bowler's arm, it will be your fault! 😉
Yeah they're both straight down the wicket.
[/quote]
So when the batsman pulls away at the last minute, and the umpire starts gesturing towards the crowd behind the bowler's arm, it will be your fault! 😉
[quote author=Portly link=topic=41229.msg1236962#msg1236962 date=1293063933]
[quote author=Ryan link=topic=41229.msg1236899#msg1236899 date=1293056445]
Yeah they're both straight down the wicket.
[/quote]
So when the batsman pulls away at the last minute, and the umpire starts gesturing towards the crowd behind the bowler's arm, it will be your fault! 😉
[/quote]
Ha, I'll keep my head down.
Seriously though, I'm on Level 2 so I shouldn't be getting in the way.
[quote author=Ryan link=topic=41229.msg1236899#msg1236899 date=1293056445]
Yeah they're both straight down the wicket.
[/quote]
So when the batsman pulls away at the last minute, and the umpire starts gesturing towards the crowd behind the bowler's arm, it will be your fault! 😉
[/quote]
Ha, I'll keep my head down.
Seriously though, I'm on Level 2 so I shouldn't be getting in the way.
Looking down the wicket is by far the best viewpoint. When you are side-on to the wicket you can't see what the ball is doing. I was at Old Trafford on the famous occasion when Warne bowled Gatting with his first ball, and I didn't know how far the ball had turned until I saw it on TV later.
[quote author=Portly link=topic=41229.msg1236984#msg1236984 date=1293066102]
Looking down the wicket is by far the best viewpoint. When you are side-on to the wicket you can't see what the ball is doing. I was at Old Trafford on the famous occasion when Warne bowled Gatting with his first ball, and I didn't know how far the ball had turned until I saw it on TV later.
[/quote]
Side on isn't too bad if the quicks are bowling cos you get a great view at how bloody hard and quick they're pinging it down. i was also stunned the first time I went to the Cricket to se how far back the wicket keeper and the slips stand when the quicks are delivering.
As you say though, behind the line is perfect when the bowlers have got a bit of movement going on. I'll try and take some pics on Sunday and upload them here too if I remember.
Looking down the wicket is by far the best viewpoint. When you are side-on to the wicket you can't see what the ball is doing. I was at Old Trafford on the famous occasion when Warne bowled Gatting with his first ball, and I didn't know how far the ball had turned until I saw it on TV later.
[/quote]
Side on isn't too bad if the quicks are bowling cos you get a great view at how bloody hard and quick they're pinging it down. i was also stunned the first time I went to the Cricket to se how far back the wicket keeper and the slips stand when the quicks are delivering.
As you say though, behind the line is perfect when the bowlers have got a bit of movement going on. I'll try and take some pics on Sunday and upload them here too if I remember.
Ya Show offs...
A bunch of my friends have traveled for this test. I couldn't get the leave next week. It sux...
I would have still preferred to have gone to Durban though. If i got the time off. .
A bunch of my friends have traveled for this test. I couldn't get the leave next week. It sux...
I would have still preferred to have gone to Durban though. If i got the time off. .
