SA Footy

DOC wrote:

Trader wrote:

gadj1976 wrote:

batmanbegins wrote:It sounds stupid based on those stats but I would pick Crawley over either opener now. He would be well suited to Australian pitches as he plays pace and bounce well, which the other two now do not. You have to remember how hard it is it open in england at the minute with the amount of swing and seam, warner is the best opener in the world and even he was made look silly there.

That's like putting Jack Watts at CHF for Melbourne on debut on Queens birthday weekend. Pointless. What are you achieving by doing that?

I like swimming and t!ts

Random

A few years ago, Jack Watts was involved in a scandal where he sent a number of suspect texts to various women.

In one of them he was chatting with a lady who was unavailable for a pool party, however offered her friend.
Jack asked; "does she have tits.....I love swimming and tits"

Inspired by Jack's Shakespearian command of the written word, Nike released the following campaign:

am Bays wrote:

Lightning McQueen wrote:It's hardly the spinners paradise like it used to be.

I miss that aspect with today's drop-in pitches, years ago we'd have the GABBA to look forward to as it was the first test and would seam, the WACA would provide bounce and carnage, AO would see high scores then it would break up on day 4-5 to create a dour contest and the SCG for a spin off.

Agree with this 100%

it was one of the reasons why I as a SACA member voted against the redevelopment in 2012.

Could see the move to drop in pitches changing all the characteristics of the ground

It's still flat....

batmanbegins wrote:

Trader wrote:

gadj1976 wrote:

batmanbegins wrote:It sounds stupid based on those stats but I would pick Crawley over either opener now. He would be well suited to Australian pitches as he plays pace and bounce well, which the other two now do not. You have to remember how hard it is it open in england at the minute with the amount of swing and seam, warner is the best opener in the world and even he was made look silly there.

That's like putting Jack Watts at CHF for Melbourne on debut on Queens birthday weekend. Pointless. What are you achieving by doing that?

I like swimming and t!ts

How is that even remotely like Jack watts? Crawley has played a dozen tests and made a test double ton. He also looked good in the only warm up game we played and he's only replacing burns who let's be honest just isn't up to it. Crawley has the game to succeed here in Australia.

Unless either is injured - stick fat. He's not making runs at the moment and therefore not knocking the door down. His average is 28. Not exactly anything to get excited about I wouldn't think.

It really depends on whether they want to set him up to fail or succeed. Imagine him facing the first ball of the Boxing Day test in Australia, No bigger stage IMO.

The Bedge wrote:With the Aussies 2-0, I'd like to see Neser given one more game, and rest Starc ahead of the remaining two tests.

Cummins in, Starc out.

I think Harris plays the whole series - if they were going to consider Khawaja for an opening spot, he would've started the series given he was one of the inform bats in the country.

Unfortunately for Hunt and Street there is no red ball cricket at the moment to help push claims, and they're quite young still so cant see them being thrown in the deep end. Would've been good to see England A stick around and play more tour matches against Australia A during the Ashes.

For England you'd think Wood comes in, and I would look at maybe Lawrence as the spinner to spin away from the lefties. Whilst most senior, you'd have to consider Anderson being left out, he just didn't look like his former self in this test.

How Bairstow is watching from the sidelines is beyond me.. and Crawley probably should be added. I'm dropping Pope and Hameed for Bairstow and Crawley

Bairstow is on the sidelines because he is 30 man like the rest of them. Don't know the stats but you'd hazard as guess that he gets bowled fairly often, in fact, too often for a test batsman. I think Wood comes in and I reckon Leach might get another go. Can't have Lawrence, he is seriously ordinary. On current form these idiots will leave out Robinson. One of their big problems is Root as captain. Give it to the Kiwi boofhead because Root is clueless.

regards,

REB

Rik E Boy wrote:

The Bedge wrote:With the Aussies 2-0, I'd like to see Neser given one more game, and rest Starc ahead of the remaining two tests.

Cummins in, Starc out.

I think Harris plays the whole series - if they were going to consider Khawaja for an opening spot, he would've started the series given he was one of the inform bats in the country.

Unfortunately for Hunt and Street there is no red ball cricket at the moment to help push claims, and they're quite young still so cant see them being thrown in the deep end. Would've been good to see England A stick around and play more tour matches against Australia A during the Ashes.

For England you'd think Wood comes in, and I would look at maybe Lawrence as the spinner to spin away from the lefties. Whilst most senior, you'd have to consider Anderson being left out, he just didn't look like his former self in this test.

How Bairstow is watching from the sidelines is beyond me.. and Crawley probably should be added. I'm dropping Pope and Hameed for Bairstow and Crawley

Bairstow is on the sidelines because he is 30 man like the rest of them. Don't know the stats but you'd hazard as guess that he gets bowled fairly often, in fact, too often for a test batsman. I think Wood comes in and I reckon Leach might get another go. Can't have Lawrence, he is seriously ordinary. On current form these idiots will leave out Robinson. One of their big problems is Root as captain. Give it to the Kiwi boofhead because Root is clueless.

regards,

REB

Can't give it to Stokes, he's not a leader. He captained for an hour or so in the 2nd dig and capitulated, 2 overs for 24, too hard when he's generally their 2nd or 3rd best bowler and the same for bowling, add in the fact that they usually go in with one too many bowlers aswell.

Root is not a great thinker though, has a negative game plan and sets poor fields.

I wouldn't bring the parasite in either, just use Root as the spinner.

I'm with Bedge, bring in Bairstow and Kreepy at the expense of Hameed and the Pontiff, or even Woakes (I think he shows some grit with the bat though so I'd go with my initial two).

I think Broad and Jimmy were tidy enough to keep their spots and Robinson has a future.

Lightning McQueen wrote:Can't give it to Stokes, he's not a leader. He captained for an hour or so in the 2nd dig and capitulated, 2 overs for 24, too hard when he's generally their 2nd or 3rd best bowler and the same for bowling, add in the fact that they usually go in with one too many bowlers aswell.

Root is not a great thinker though, has a negative game plan and sets poor fields.

I wouldn't bring the parasite in either, just use Root as the spinner.

I'm with Bedge, bring in Bairstow and Kreepy at the expense of Hameed and the Pontiff, or even Woakes (I think he shows some grit with the bat though so I'd go with my initial two).

I think Broad and Jimmy were tidy enough to keep their spots and Robinson has a future.

basically agree with this.

You could bring back Michael Brearley, Michael Gatting or Michael Vaughn and it wouldn't make much difference.

Englands problem is their mindset the only intent they show is not to lose and as the best commentator in Australia, I Chappell, says as soon as you take winning off the table you're doomed.

In Brisbane they conceded and put all their eggs on winning in Adelaide (not playing Broad or Anderson) got pantsed, they blinked in Adelaide and didnt play a spinner or Wood and got thrashed (trousers down six of the best, damn good walloping (nods to Blackadder)) again.

They are reactive in on and off the field.

If they tarted being positive they might be in with a shot.

am Bays wrote:

Lightning McQueen wrote:Can't give it to Stokes, he's not a leader. He captained for an hour or so in the 2nd dig and capitulated, 2 overs for 24, too hard when he's generally their 2nd or 3rd best bowler and the same for bowling, add in the fact that they usually go in with one too many bowlers aswell.

Root is not a great thinker though, has a negative game plan and sets poor fields.

I wouldn't bring the parasite in either, just use Root as the spinner.

I'm with Bedge, bring in Bairstow and Kreepy at the expense of Hameed and the Pontiff, or even Woakes (I think he shows some grit with the bat though so I'd go with my initial two).

I think Broad and Jimmy were tidy enough to keep their spots and Robinson has a future.

basically agree with this.

You could bring back Michael Brearley, Michael Gatting or Michael Vaughn and it wouldn't make much difference.

Englands problem is their mindset the only intent they show is not to lose and as the best commentator in Australia, I Chappell, says as soon as you take winning off the table you're doomed.

In Brisbane they conceded and put all their eggs on winning in Adelaide (not playing Broad or Anderson) got pantsed, they blinked in Adelaide and didnt play a spinner or Wood and got thrashed (trousers down six of the best, damn good walloping (nods to Blackadder)) again.

They are reactive in on and off the field.

If they tarted being positive they might be in with a shot.

The short pitched bowling in Adelaide was pitiful, cost them any chance of winning.

I actually thought Stokes captaining was better than Root.

Yes he then bowled 2 overs for 24, however that was after Root was back on and in charge of things.

While Stokes was in charge, the English Bowlers pitched it up, and took wickets. They took 4/10 in that hour, had Smith dropped, and another review he only survived due to umpires call. The 4 fa wasn't cheap tail either (although it included Neser), it was against the Aussie top order.

Root came back on and the Aussies then put on an 80 run stand.

(Haven't checked any of the stats, so take them as rubbery, just posting from memory).

With all that said, don't get me wrong, I am not so naive as to assume the bowling plans, game tactics, etc are purely set by the captain. They would have had heavy involvement from the coaching staff and even Joe himself before he got hit. I guess the point I'm making is while he shouldn't necessarily get praised to the point he changed the entire game himself, equally you can't hold Stokes's captaincy performance against him, it wasn't bad.

Trader wrote:I actually thought Stokes captaining was better than Root.

Yes he then bowled 2 overs for 24, however that was after Root was back on and in charge of things.

While Stokes was in charge, the English Bowlers pitched it up, and took wickets. They took 4/10 in that hour, had Smith dropped, and another review he only survived due to umpires call. The 4 fa wasn't cheap tail either (although it included Neser), it was against the Aussie top order.

Root came back on and the Aussies then put on an 80 run stand.

(Haven't checked any of the stats, so take them as rubbery, just posting from memory).

With all that said, don't get me wrong, I am not so naive as to assume the bowling plans, game tactics, etc are purely set by the captain. They would have had heavy involvement from the coaching staff and even Joe himself before he got hit. I guess the point I'm making is while he shouldn't necessarily get praised to the point he changed the entire game himself, equally you can't hold Stokes's captaincy performance against him, it wasn't bad.

Thanks for the clarity, I was a bit fuzzy that day.

I think the reason England are 2-0 down , is because this series is being played in Australia
They have a very good pace attack
If Australia had to face Anderson, Broad , Robinson, Stokes in England it would be so much different
Add Woakes into the equation who bowls well in England
Then off course if they have The Joff firing, look out

Given the very same current line ups, arguably we could not win a series in England

Go home Mal, you’re drunk.

England are shit.

England attack 2019: Broad, Anderson Archer, Wood, Woakes, Stokes Overton, Leach

Series 2-2 should have been 3-1 if not for a sh!t review

am Bays wrote:England attack 2019: Broad, Anderson Archer, Wood, Woakes, Stokes Overton, Leach

Series 2-2 should have been 3-1 if not for a sh!t review

Exactly my point
2-2 all in England which will end up better than a possible 1-4 or 0-5 loss in Australia 2021/2022

I forgot to mention Wood another decent bowler

The Bedge wrote:Go home Mal, you’re drunk.

England are shit.

In fairness to Mal the the last test in 2019 in England in which we couldn’t win the series has 8 of the current English team over here.

The 3 they were missing is Archer, Denly and Curran.

Archer is a gun and a lost. Curran has been upgraded over here with Robinson and Hammeed isn’t any worse than Denly.

It’s not a whole lot different to the squad we couldn’t beat over there.

am Bays wrote:

Lightning McQueen wrote:Can't give it to Stokes, he's not a leader. He captained for an hour or so in the 2nd dig and capitulated, 2 overs for 24, too hard when he's generally their 2nd or 3rd best bowler and the same for bowling, add in the fact that they usually go in with one too many bowlers aswell.

Root is not a great thinker though, has a negative game plan and sets poor fields.

I wouldn't bring the parasite in either, just use Root as the spinner.

I'm with Bedge, bring in Bairstow and Kreepy at the expense of Hameed and the Pontiff, or even Woakes (I think he shows some grit with the bat though so I'd go with my initial two).

I think Broad and Jimmy were tidy enough to keep their spots and Robinson has a future.

basically agree with this.

You could bring back Michael Brearley, Michael Gatting or Michael Vaughn and it wouldn't make much difference.

Englands problem is their mindset the only intent they show is not to lose and as the best commentator in Australia, I Chappell, says as soon as you take winning off the table you're doomed.

In Brisbane they conceded and put all their eggs on winning in Adelaide (not playing Broad or Anderson) got pantsed, they blinked in Adelaide and didnt play a spinner or Wood and got thrashed (trousers down six of the best, damn good walloping (nods to Blackadder)) again.

They are reactive in on and off the field.

If they tarted being positive they might be in with a shot.

You honestly don’t believe Chappell is the best commentator

Deadset spends every broadcast whinging about modern cricket and how he was around in the good old days.

Adds no value whatsoever.

Spent most last test saying how bill Lawry once told him bowing around the wicket to left handers never worked. Spent the whole shift critiquing the English about it. when the statistician told him how many wickets broad had around the wicket to lefties his reply was that’s not what bill lawry reckons though.

whufc wrote:It’s not a whole lot different to the squad we couldn’t beat over there.

'Didn't' rather than 'couldn't'.

If anyone other than Paine was captain we'd have won at Headingley and batted first and therefore not lost at The Oval.

am Bays wrote:England attack 2019: Broad, Anderson Archer, Wood, Woakes, Stokes Overton, Leach

Series 2-2 should have been 3-1 if not for a sh!t review

England drew the series 2-2 thanks to some Stokes heroics with the bat, and Archer having a big match in the last test - less to do with their bowling attack.

Broad and Anderson are two years older now, and certainly don't look as potent as they have in previous series.

England have dropped chances, misfielded, bowled junk and their batting has been exposed badly not having Root/Stokes/Malan scoring all their runs.

Take the current series to England, it would be closer due to the conditions but they'd still get pumped.

whufc wrote:It’s not a whole lot different to the squad we couldn’t beat over there.

Our middle order was Wade, Marsh, Paine, Siddle - now its Head, Green, Carey, Starc.

The Bedge wrote:Go home Mal, you’re drunk.

England are shit.

Archer missing is a massive psychological difference on both sides of the fence.

whufc wrote:
You honestly don’t believe Chappell is the best commentator

Deadset spends every broadcast whinging about modern cricket and how he was around in the good old days.

Adds no value whatsoever.

Spent most last test saying how bill Lawry once told him bowing around the wicket to left handers never worked. Spent the whole shift critiquing the English about it. when the statistician told him how many wickets broad had around the wicket to lefties his reply was that’s not what bill lawry reckons though.

Yup which says a lot about the others IMO

I will admit to getting tired about him going on about administrators.

And yeah I heard that Bill Lawry comment I thought he said with a bit levity as if to say oh well Bill may not be right.

Why I think Chappell is the best along with Maxwell and to lesser extent Gilchrist, Lane and Ponting is they make their commentary about the cricket and keep their tone even. They do start yelling and trying to create false tension and drama.

All IMO of course.