Ponting not impressed with the English sub fielder that fielded brilliantly +
caused a run out or catches or whatever.
2005 was a bad year then
2007 is a Lockyear now

Did we see Lockys run out

by mal » Tue Nov 20, 2007 12:14 pm
by NFC » Tue Nov 20, 2007 12:15 pm
mal wrote:NFC wrote:Rik E Boy wrote:NFC wrote:Clark getting shown up for the bowlier he really is. Take it to him and he's got nothing.
More bull5hit from the master.
regards,
REB
I can't stand Clark.
Neither can the International batsman he gets out with monotomous regularity.
by NFC » Tue Nov 20, 2007 12:16 pm
mal wrote:**** Ashes 2005
Ponting not impressed with the English sub fielder that fielded brilliantly +
caused a run out or catches or whatever.
2005 was a bad year then
2007 is a Lockyear now![]()
Did we see Lockys run out
by mal » Tue Nov 20, 2007 12:17 pm
NFC wrote:Dogwatcher wrote:why?
As arrogant as they come. Only cares about himself and his massive ego, and this was before he was a 'somebody'. A-grade tool.
by Dogwatcher » Tue Nov 20, 2007 12:18 pm
mal wrote:**** Ashes 2005
Ponting not impressed with the English sub fielder that fielded brilliantly +
caused a run out or catches or whatever.
2005 was a bad year then
2007 is a Lockyear now![]()
Did we see Lockys run out
by NFC » Tue Nov 20, 2007 12:18 pm
mal wrote:NFC wrote:Dogwatcher wrote:why?
As arrogant as they come. Only cares about himself and his massive ego, and this was before he was a 'somebody'. A-grade tool.
Thats no way to talk about Dogwatcher.
I have a lot of time For Doggy his posts are always worth the contributions.
by Dogwatcher » Tue Nov 20, 2007 12:24 pm
by BJ Ernest » Tue Nov 20, 2007 12:29 pm
by mal » Tue Nov 20, 2007 12:30 pm
by rod_rooster » Tue Nov 20, 2007 12:34 pm
mal wrote:NFC leave the jokes to me, your job is to sledge and get the others riled up.
As for Clark, as the summer progresses and the high octane bowlers [BL+MJ] tire
then we will be relying so heavily on Stuart Clark for significant spells.
As I said after the retirements of OOH AAH + WARRRRRNEY
things will be so so different
AU needs a 5th bowler
The 2nd innings injury to ROY further emphasises my point
Hence the investment the selectors rightfully made last season
by blooding ROY + WATTO as allrounders of sorts
by NFC » Tue Nov 20, 2007 12:36 pm
rod_rooster wrote:mal wrote:NFC leave the jokes to me, your job is to sledge and get the others riled up.
As for Clark, as the summer progresses and the high octane bowlers [BL+MJ] tire
then we will be relying so heavily on Stuart Clark for significant spells.
As I said after the retirements of OOH AAH + WARRRRRNEY
things will be so so different
AU needs a 5th bowler
The 2nd innings injury to ROY further emphasises my point
Hence the investment the selectors rightfully made last season
by blooding ROY + WATTO as allrounders of sorts
Yeah, worked out really well with Watto didn't it
by smac » Tue Nov 20, 2007 12:37 pm
by GWW » Tue Nov 20, 2007 12:37 pm
by rod_rooster » Tue Nov 20, 2007 12:37 pm
NFC wrote:rod_rooster wrote:mal wrote:NFC leave the jokes to me, your job is to sledge and get the others riled up.
As for Clark, as the summer progresses and the high octane bowlers [BL+MJ] tire
then we will be relying so heavily on Stuart Clark for significant spells.
As I said after the retirements of OOH AAH + WARRRRRNEY
things will be so so different
AU needs a 5th bowler
The 2nd innings injury to ROY further emphasises my point
Hence the investment the selectors rightfully made last season
by blooding ROY + WATTO as allrounders of sorts
Yeah, worked out really well with Watto didn't it
I think this match proves we NEED Watson.
by rod_rooster » Tue Nov 20, 2007 12:38 pm
smac wrote:Scores gentlemen?
by NFC » Tue Nov 20, 2007 12:39 pm
rod_rooster wrote:How so? We need someone who is a very ordinary bowler even when fit? Perhaps we need more players breaking down? Makes perfect sense
by GWW » Tue Nov 20, 2007 12:40 pm
NFC wrote:rod_rooster wrote:How so? We need someone who is a very ordinary bowler even when fit? Perhaps we need more players breaking down? Makes perfect sense
FC bowling average of 30. ODI bowling average of 31.
Yep, dreadful figures.
by rod_rooster » Tue Nov 20, 2007 12:41 pm
NFC wrote:rod_rooster wrote:How so? We need someone who is a very ordinary bowler even when fit? Perhaps we need more players breaking down? Makes perfect sense
FC bowling average of 30. ODI bowling average of 31.
Yep, dreadful figures.
by NFC » Tue Nov 20, 2007 12:42 pm
GWW wrote:NFC wrote:rod_rooster wrote:How so? We need someone who is a very ordinary bowler even when fit? Perhaps we need more players breaking down? Makes perfect sense
FC bowling average of 30. ODI bowling average of 31.
Yep, dreadful figures.
Whats his injury/breakdown average? Is Symonds going to be dropped to make way for him?
by NFC » Tue Nov 20, 2007 12:42 pm
rod_rooster wrote:NFC wrote:rod_rooster wrote:How so? We need someone who is a very ordinary bowler even when fit? Perhaps we need more players breaking down? Makes perfect sense
FC bowling average of 30. ODI bowling average of 31.
Yep, dreadful figures.
Ah yes, stats tell the whole story. That's right, silly me
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |