SA Footy

Senor Moto Gadili wrote:Travis Head must be scratching his head right now.

He didn’t take his chances either so he can’t complain too much.
I assume he’ll come back in for Wade anyway for the next series.

amber_fluid wrote:

The Bedge wrote:Marsh & P Taylor - 1 innings 4 runs @ 4

Peter who?
Don’t remember that innings.

Marsh is very lucky he batted with 2 greats in Taylor and Booney.

Swampy was a good opener, not great but a good one. Plenty of good starts he gave us in the mid to late 80s.

The Peter Taylor one was on the infamous Pakistan tour of 1988.

After P Taylor got fired to end the innings Border in one of his grumpy fits said "F***en' keep 'em on, your opening...."

whufc wrote:

Senor Moto Gadili wrote:Travis Head must be scratching his head right now.

He shouldn't be, he should look at how frustrating seeing Warner and Harris get out like that and then realise that whats what we watch nine times out of ten when he bats,

My concern is it doesn't seem like others come under the same amount of scrutiny as Head does... guys like Warner, Smith etc can have their ordinary spells but everyone remembers how good they are at their best.

Burns should've stayed in the squad and returned for this test - although out of form, at least he'd been playing cricket unlike Harris & Warner.

Looking at Warners recent history, i dont think it's that great - he went large against an average Pakistan side with his 335no and 154, but the only other recent century was 111* in the second innings against NZ (also against a depleted attack)

December 2017 boxing day test was the most recent century before the 3 above.

The Bedge wrote:

whufc wrote:

Senor Moto Gadili wrote:Travis Head must be scratching his head right now.

He shouldn't be, he should look at how frustrating seeing Warner and Harris get out like that and then realise that whats what we watch nine times out of ten when he bats,

My concern is it doesn't seem like others come under the same amount of scrutiny as Head does... guys like Warner, Smith etc can have their ordinary spells but everyone remembers how good they are at their best.

Burns should've stayed in the squad and returned for this test - although out of form, at least he'd been playing cricket unlike Harris & Warner.

Looking at Warners recent history, i dont think it's that great - he went large against an average Pakistan side with his 335no and 154, but the only other recent century was 111* in the second innings against NZ (also against a depleted attack)

December 2017 boxing day test was the most recent century before the 3 above.

Once Head has played 50 odd tests and made plenty of hundreds I’m sure he’ll be given the same chances as Smith and Warner.
Until then he needs to make some big scores and make runs consistently.

Warner + harris make Wade look like Bradman, lara, tendulkar all in 1

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

Dumb question.

In playing cricket for 30 years I always thought a dead ball was re-bowled....obviously not.

whufc wrote:Dumb question.

In playing cricket for 30 years I always thought a dead ball was re-bowled....obviously not.

I thought it was but with no penalty like a wide or no ball.

whufc wrote:Dumb question.

In playing cricket for 30 years I always thought a dead ball was re-bowled....obviously not.

Dead Ball, in as far as the ball deflected off the batsman, who did not play a genuine shot, nor was taking evasive action. It's a dead ball, in the respect that the batters cannot take a run as a result. No need to be re-bowled.

MT_79 - is that the correct rule interpretation?

whufc wrote:Dumb question.

In playing cricket for 30 years I always thought a dead ball was re-bowled....obviously not.

Close.. it's not technically a dead ball - not offering a shot (including evading) means you're not allowed to score from it. The ball is still valid.

Your dead balls in cricket would've come from instances such as hitting a gap in the matting and shooting through, or bowler pulling out - balls that dont give the batsman a fair opportunity to face.

I think for this purpose also, balls that hit the edge of the pitch and deviate away are "no ball + dead ball" so you get the 1 run but cant profit from additional runs.

Maybe the media speculation in recent weeks should have been on who was going to open with Wade instead of who was going to open with Warner...

The Bedge wrote:

whufc wrote:Dumb question.

In playing cricket for 30 years I always thought a dead ball was re-bowled....obviously not.

Close.. it's not technically a dead ball - not offering a shot (including evading) means you're not allowed to score from it. The ball is still valid.

Your dead balls in cricket would've come from instances such as hitting a gap in the matting and shooting through, or bowler pulling out - balls that dont give the batsman a fair opportunity to face.

I think for this purpose also, balls that hit the edge of the pitch and deviate away are "no ball + dead ball" so you get the 1 run but cant profit from additional runs.

That actually makes a lot of sense now I think it through.

Dutchy wrote:

Bring back Uzzie

Shit shot Smith.
Stop dawdling and get off the ground sook.

tigerpie wrote:Shit shot Smith.
Stop dawdling and get off the ground sook.

What was he waiting for?
I’m with you here.......... get off the ground and sook in the change rooms.

Wow, Rahane should have caught that .... now Saini injured

This might answer some questions
50 Highest Australian test batting averages 20+ innings

1. Bradman....... 99.94

_______________________

2 Labuschagne. 61.96
4 Smith.............. 61.85
17 Warner..... ...48.09
50 Head ............39.75

Of the 49 below The Don , 4 of them have played in this current series

mal wrote:This might answer some questions
50 Highest Australian test batting averages 20+ innings

1. Bradman....... 99.94

_______________________

2 Labuschagne. 61.96
4 Smith.............. 61.85
17 Warner..... ...48.09
50 Head ............39.75

Of the 49 below The Don , 4 of them have played in this current series

If we take the innings qualification out of the equation, Mal:

3 Highest Australian test batting averages:

1. Kurt Patterson 144
2. Albert Trott 103
3. Don Bradman 99.94

Unfortunately the Albatrott is no longer with us, however I'm sure Kurt is willing and able if the selectors give him a call.

Denzel bowling well here for the Indians...

Wade into the 30s .... brain fade coming soon?