Boxing Day Test

[Adelaide Hawk]

Lee gets Strauss 5/90 and a 3 day Test coming up.

[Adelaide Hawk]

Warne bowling to Read brings back memories of Cullinan. If Warnie can get a flipper going, Read is gone.

[am Bays]

Whilst Mahmood is no world beater yet, after less than a year playing test cricket it is unrealistic to think he is going to come in and dominate.

He has bowled well in patches but has lacked the consistancy to do it continuously which is what you expect in young players. He could be a handfull in 2009, remember in 2002-03 Harmison got carted as a young raw quick on his first tour to Australia but he played more cricket, learnt his game and by 2004 and as we saw in 2005 was bowling consistantly well at test level.

Mahmood at 140-145 km/h who hits the seam may surprise us in 2009. Not suggesting he is going to be a gun but he certainly ain't no hack IMHO

[Rik E Boy]

not long now, even with Rudi shoving his finger up his clacker instead of raising it for LBs.

regards,

REB

[Rik E Boy]

What is that about double posts REB??

Whatever do you mean wrinkles?

regards,

REB

[am Bays]

[Rik E Boy]

:oops:

See, the girlies are right, you are quick LOL.

regards,

REB

[Punk Rooster]

& in 1 Test, Read has already made more runs than Jones did in 3...

[Thiele]

Warne Man of the Match. Thought Symonds should of bee Man of the Match with the top score

[mal]

This will be remembered for one mans efforts
Not the 700th Warnnney wicket
Not the Clark 6 wickets
Not the 153 by Hayden
Not the reserection on the chosen one Symonds with 156
But for the return of form of Brett Lee grabbing 4 wickets in the 2nd dig+ 6 all up

The umpiring decisions evened up
Did we see Harmison caught behind of Warne given not out ?
And Bell given out LBW by Rudi [looked less then a lot of others]
Had the count about 5-5 all for decisions, the big diff was Australia
had the ability to take advantage.

A 3 day test costing the industry millions of $$$$$$
Thats prob why the umpires gave so many not outs, maybe they were
instructed to get at least a 4 day test match ?

It matters not whether we get flat tracks like Adelaide or not, Australia win non stop
2006 10 games 10 wins
2006 0 wins 5 draws 5 losses for the West Indies

It matters not about having a 5th bowler.[FOR AT LEAST 1 MORE TEST]
As Freddy Mercury once sang dosent seem to matter at all.

AH thanks you made me look good
I contacted the media about the Bill Frindell minus 6 wickets for Warrrrrrrney
I contacted the media for Warrney being on 997 International wickets as well.
Did we notice Ian Chappell raise both matters on channell 9 late today

I fear for injuries leading to back to back tests.
Hayden + Symonds might miss the next game for 2 reasons with shoulder injuries.
First making 150 each and carrying the batting
Secondly carrying Warrrrrney off the ground !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Seriously great to see LEE back to his best this test, we need him to stand up
from this series onwards.

And Warrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
rrrrrney thank you very very much.

PS Another great batting effort by the English number 6 batsman + captain.

5-0 HERE WE COME

[Snaggletooth Tiger]

Feel sorry for the poor buggers who paid top dollar on e-bay for Day 4 tix!

[Adelaide Hawk]

Seriously great to see LEE back to his best this test, we need him to stand up
from this series onwards.

This will not surprise anyone who has been reading my comments, but I am confident Lee will go on over the next 3-4 years to become one of the great Aussie fast bowlers.

The only Australian bowlers with more wickets than Lee (225) are:
Warne 706
McGrath 557
Lillee 355
McDermott 291
Gillespie 259
Benaud 248
McKenzie 246
Lindwall 228

Pretty good company, and I expect Lee to move into 4th spot with 300 plus wickets. For a quickie that everyone tries to tell me should do better, that's not too bad.

The reasons for me saying all this are that Lee has bowled in the shadow of other great bowlers all his career. He has been virtually a role bowler, with captains, especially Waugh, demanding he just bowl as quickly as possible. He did the job asked of him, and yet people STILL criticised him.

Now Lee will be the spreahead, ably supported by Stuart Clark and whoever fills the positions vacated by McGrath and Warne. I think Lee is quality, and expect him to respond to his new role. Only time will tell.

I still think 225 wickets in 58 Tests is excellent considering McGrath, Warne and Gillespie were snaring most of the wickets in this period.

Finally, I'd like to say once again what a great job the selectors have done. Criticised by all and sundry at various stages, including people such as Dennis Lillee claiming this side was too old, the selectors have once again got it RIGHT. This Australian team is awesome.

[mighty_tiger_79]

BRETT 'SPRINKLER' LEE

well I thought it was a batting paradise because ANDREW SYMONDS and Hayden both got to 150, but I had to re-think that opinion when LEE ended up with figures of 4- and a total of 6 for the match, it was a BOWLING MINEFIELD and the batsmen had NO CHANCE

[mighty_tiger_79]

BRETT LEE'S action is also very questionable, if he was playing for another country he would be called the same as murali!!!!!!!!!!!!

he has a 2 part action and throws it down at the batsmen

[mal]

AH time will tell with Brett hope your right.
His average per wicket is too high for a great bowler
He will pass Lindwall + Benaud soon not because he is a better bowler,
but because they play more test matches these days.
You have a great point about Gillespie/Warrrney/Oooh ahh /Clark
pinching wickets of him but that should equate to a lower ave for Lee per wicket.
Despite those bowlers pinching wickets a bloke like Clark manages
wickets at a cost of 19 over 12 months in 10 tests[Why didnt Lee ??]

With 2-3 very good years he can get that 32 average[ok for good bowlers]
down to 27-29 which is for very good bowlers[where he should be]
20-25 is for Champion bowlers[which he will never be]

You are confident about the next few years for Lee I am not as confident

MT79 behave yourself

[mal]

BRETT LEE'S action is also very questionable, if he was playing for another country he would be called the same as murali!!!!!!!!!!!!

he has a 2 part action and throws it down at the batsmen

Brave post but when they cleared Murali'chuck'eran that means no other
bowler in the history of the game can ever get called again.

Imagine Ernie Jones turning in his grave[the first Aussie to be called for chucking over 100 years ago and a NA footballer as well]

[Adelaide Hawk]

BRETT LEE'S action is also very questionable, if he was playing for another country he would be called the same as murali!!!!!!!!!!!!

he has a 2 part action and throws it down at the batsmen

Brave post but when they cleared Murali'chuck'eran that means no other
bowler in the history of the game can ever get called again.

Imagine Ernie Jones turning in his grave[the first Aussie to be called for chucking over 100 years ago and a NA footballer as well]

The guy I feel sorry for is Ian Meckiff. He has had to sit back and watch Murali pinging away to a world record after his own career was destroyed ... and Meckiff's action was far less dubious than Murali's.

[Adelaide Hawk]

AH time will tell with Brett hope your right.
His average per wicket is too high for a great bowler
He will pass Lindwall + Benaud soon not because he is a better bowler,
but because they play more test matches these days.

Mal, you need to do a little more research I think. I've left a post in the Brett Lee thread with some facts and figures. Here are some more ....

Would you call bowlers such as Lawson, McKenzie, McDermott, Hughes & Thomson top class fast bowlers? I think you would, because they were. Here are the averages:

Lawson 180 @ 30.56
McKenzie 246 @ 29.79
McDermott 291 @ 28.63
Hughes 212 @ 28.38
Thomson 200 @ 28.01

Whilst it's interesting to note Lee's average is higher at 31.07, the others played at a time when wides and no-balls were not credited to their bowling. Their averages would be a lot closer to Lee's had this been the case.

As for Lee playing more Tests than Benaud and Lindwall, look again .....

Benaud 248 wickets, 63 Tests at an average of 3.93 wickets per Test
Lindwall 228 wickets, 61 Tests, average 3.73 wickets per Test
Lee 225 wickets, 58 Tests, average 3.88 wickets per Test.

Not a lot of difference there, I think you would have to agree. Added to this, Benaud and Lindwall for a large part of their careers were spearhead bowlers whereas Lee has been support to McGrath, Gillespie, Warne, etc.

Like it or not, Lee's career compares favourably with some of the greats of the game.

[mal]

Stop it AH your making me look stupid.
You cheated you looked at the record books.

My only defence is that the other listed bowlers played against better opposition.
But then again if wides and no balls were not added Lee would be about 29-30 ave.

[Adelaide Hawk]

Stop it AH your making me look stupid.
You cheated you looked at the record books.

My only defence is that the other listed bowlers played against better opposition.
But then again if wides and no balls were not added Lee would be about 29-30 ave.

And Lee doesn't bowl on uncovered wickets like some of them did, and he also bowls to batsmen with headgear, etc. Tougher for bowlers these days. Unfortunately we've seen McGrath and Warne and think every other bowler has to be at that standard .. which of course is impossible.