Franger Cup: South Australia v Victoria

[Footy Smart]

The last Franger game we played in v QL , we all witnessed one of the all time great spells of bowling
Peter George 10 overs 0/18Tonight we replace him with a bowler who averages 100+ with the ball in the Franger Cup

Are you serious Mal?

As stated to me by a redbacks player playing in this game.

George didnt really bowl that well..... Yes his stats say he did but in the context of the game, how well did he bowl?
1. Tas were chasing a small total
2. They didnt have to take any risks
3. George bowled well wide of off stump
4. George didnt look like taking a wicket

When you only have a small score on the board you have to attack the batsman and not bowl selfishly/defensive as George did!

That is why he isnt playing and rightly so

[MAY-Z]

The last Franger game we played in v QL , we all witnessed one of the all time great spells of bowling
Peter George 10 overs 0/18Tonight we replace him with a bowler who averages 100+ with the ball in the Franger Cup

Are you serious Mal?

As stated to me by a redbacks player playing in this game.

George didnt really bowl that well..... Yes his stats say he did but in the context of the game, how well did he bowl?
1. Tas were chasing a small total
2. They didnt have to take any risks
3. George bowled well wide of off stump
4. George didnt look like taking a wicket

When you only have a small score on the board you have to attack the batsman and not bowl selfishly/defensive as George did!

That is why he isnt playing and rightly so

so if george was bowling os badly that night why did manou bowl him staright out. clearly he was bowling well

[bulldogs]

The last Franger game we played in v QL , we all witnessed one of the all time great spells of bowling
Peter George 10 overs 0/18Tonight we replace him with a bowler who averages 100+ with the ball in the Franger Cup

Are you serious Mal?

As stated to me by a redbacks player playing in this game.

George didnt really bowl that well..... Yes his stats say he did but in the context of the game, how well did he bowl?
1. Tas were chasing a small total
2. They didnt have to take any risks
3. George bowled well wide of off stump
4. George didnt look like taking a wicket

When you only have a small score on the board you have to attack the batsman and not bowl selfishly/defensive as George did!

That is why he isnt playing and rightly so

so if george was bowling os badly that night why did manou bowl him staright out. clearly he was bowling well

wouldnt the captain be instructing him how to bowl

[CoverKing]

Footy Smart, that is just one stupid post.

Not sure if you watched it, but clearly anyone who did, he bowled extremely well!!

bowling well wide off Off-Stump also provides scoring opportunities to the batters. Also, he can only bowl to his field, and if anyone is to blame for his great spell of 10 overs 0/18, it would be Manou.

Saying he didnt bowl well, is just stupid. On his economy rate, Tasmania woulda have only made 90 runs. So SA still would have won. Great spell. He must of been out injured

[Footy Smart]

Footy Smart, that is just one stupid post.

Not sure if you watched it, but clearly anyone who did, he bowled extremely well!!

bowling well wide off Off-Stump also provides scoring opportunities to the batters. Also, he can only bowl to his field, and if anyone is to blame for his great spell of 10 overs 0/18, it would be Manou.

Saying he didnt bowl well, is just stupid. On his economy rate, Tasmania woulda have only made 90 runs. So SA still would have won. Great spell. He must of been out injured

Stupid post??? No

They set a ring field to him and the batsmen just let him go cos they werent able to hit the gabs so need to play at it! I wasnt saying he didnt bowl well i said that his performance wasnt all that MAL cranked it up to be and that he deserved to be in the team because of that spell of bowling!!!!

Obvioulsy the batsmen werent going to leave all the balls they did to the other bowlers cos that would be as you say just STUPID! the other bowlers attacked which means they were given balls to score off of, so no chance of them making 90

He isnt injured that is why we isnt playin that and with cosgrove injured they played weeks who can bowl just as well as George and is a handy batsmen. Stupid? No that is the actual reason

[Bum Crack]

Instead of making excuses for all of our losses, why don't we all just accept the fact that we are shit and have been now for a long time .

[Footy Smart]

Instead of making excuses for all of our losses, why don't we all just accept the fact that we are s***t and have been now for a long time .

[mal]

I need to be corrected
George bowled 10 overs 0/16 v QL thats 2 runs less than I thought

Yes I can agree that he could have bowled straighter in that spell and perhaps gambled economy for wickets when the team defended that miserable 184

But where do we draw the line
If TAITand HABERFIELD bowled the same line with similar figures
That would leave QL 0/48 off 30 overs
And if Dan CHRISTAIN did likewise it would be 0/64
That would have left the 5th bowlers with 10 overs to concede less than 121 !!!!

I will say this
IF you have a bowler in 50 over cricket that will concede 16 runs in a spell you will go a very long way towards winning

Its kinda like we face 50 overs and they face about 43 overs


Anyway irrespective of what George should or should not have done, the concern is why drop a 23 year old with that effort

16 off 10 overs is a staggering performance
It would surely be in the top 10 least conceded in this state in all ODI games

Also if Manou sets a 7-2 offside field or a 6-3 offside field where should a bowler be bowling ?

[bloods08]

You also need to remember that match was played at the GABBA (a bowlers paradise). If you saw his 1st match against Tasmania at Adelaide Oval, you can understand why hes not in the side. So not a bad decision imo unlike the Klinger one which still bewilders me.

[mal]

You also need to remember that match was played at the GABBA (a bowlers paradise). If you saw his 1st match against Tasmania at Adelaide Oval, you can understand why hes not in the side. So not a bad decision imo unlike the Klinger one which still bewilders me.

Look what you and Footy Smart are saying does make some sense
However he was smasssshed by Dighton and his mates at Adelaide Oval
If he was dropped after that, then I could half understand
But the young man got 0/16 [still reckon thats very good bowling]
Heez only played a few games, so why drop him know

From what Ive seen he looks a like a guy that is capable of taking a bag of wickets in an innings
Im not sure if his replacement Weeks is capable of that

[smithy]

No wonder so many on this forum rate Hodge. He just loves the Redbacks! Another ton.

regards,

REB

Everyone knows runs at Adelaide Oval don't count towards test selection so Hodge has no chance.