SA Footy

Can this be compared to AFL tanking..

How can you be tanking when you win by over 100 runs in a one day game.

Sorry, I thought we lost..

2nd ODI - Australia v Sri Lanka

Sri Lanka

2/172 (40.1)

Australia
All Out 170 (46.5)

Adelaide Oval, Adelaide
Sri Lanka won by 8 wickets

The side was similar to the one in game 1 which they won by over 100 runs.

That wasn't full strength and they won easily, so it makes your argument invalid.

GWW wrote:The side was similar to the one in game 1 which they won by over 100 runs.

That wasn't full strength and they won easily, so it makes your argument invalid.

no, quite to the contrary! If they won so well in the first game, why did the same side lose so badly in the 2nd game? Did they deliberately lose/tank?

CENTURION wrote:

GWW wrote:The side was similar to the one in game 1 which they won by over 100 runs.

That wasn't full strength and they won easily, so it makes your argument invalid.

no, quite to the contrary! If they won so well in the first game, why did the same side lose so badly in the 2nd game? Did they deliberately lose/tank?

Just batted VERY poorly.

No, they didn't tank, they were just crap. Young players are often inconsistent. Players aren't going to "tank" when they out are out to impress to get into the side on a long term basis.

If they lost the first game there may be some validity to the argument, but because they were depleted in both games, and won one, lost one, the thread title is not accurate - unless it was to say "Aussies not @ full strength win easily...then... Aussies not at full strength, get thrashed".

CENTURION wrote:

GWW wrote:The side was similar to the one in game 1 which they won by over 100 runs.

That wasn't full strength and they won easily, so it makes your argument invalid.

no, quite to the contrary! If they won so well in the first game, why did the same side lose so badly in the 2nd game? Did they deliberately lose/tank?

Of course, CA dont want dead rubbers
Always found it funny when we had a best of 3 finals series it nearly always went to Game 3

WTF, what a stupid thread. No they didn't tank. It's cricket, sh!t happens, teams get rolled for low scores all the time. We lost, oh well, everyone should be focused on the next game on Friday.

The Dark Knight wrote:WTF, what a stupid thread. No they didn't tank. It's cricket, sh!t happens, teams get rolled for low scores all the time. We lost, oh well, everyone should be focused on the next game on Friday.

Isn't that tanking...?

Shit doesn't happen.

I disagree.

Dog_ger wrote:

The Dark Knight wrote:WTF, what a stupid thread. No they didn't tank. It's cricket, sh!t happens, teams get rolled for low scores all the time. We lost, oh well, everyone should be focused on the next game on Friday.

Isn't that tanking...?

No.

The Dark Knight wrote:

Dog_ger wrote:

The Dark Knight wrote:WTF, It's cricket, sh!t happens, teams get rolled for low scores all the time.

Isn't that tanking...?

No.

Same as AFL..?

Shit happens....

NO IT DOESN'T.

Who's the potential number 1 draft pick in the cricket world at the moment?

Quiney
Khawaja
Bailey
Henriques
Smith
Maxwell
Paine
Hastings
McKay
Doherty
Krejza

Team of hacks

Squids wrote:Quiney
Khawaja
Bailey
Henriques
Smith
Maxwell
Paine
Hastings
McKay
Doherty
Krejza

Team of hacks

I will always argue that Australia will go out and try desperately to win every game they play in and not tank LOL but when we have a team like this, the selectors need to be sacked for there efforts.

how the **** pr why the **** would u tank in cricket?

what benefits do u get?

Johno6 wrote:how the **** pr why the **** would u tank in cricket?

what benefits do u get?

bookies

Johno6 wrote:how the **** pr why the **** would u tank in cricket?

what benefits do u get?

Ask the Paki's

valid points.

whoever batted first on that pitch would've lost.