SA Footy

[quote="Password Please"]Andrew McDonald totally useless, drop Carey after one game, where's the ******* faith, Inglis is crap, keeper should have over ruled that first ball of the innings, dropped catches, blah blah blah.
Wouldn't be suprised if Cummins was the under lying influence in Carey being dropped, shit scared that Carey will take over as skipper one day.
Thank god Maxy is back, someone who gives a shit.
Warner might even make a run one day
End of story.[/quote


Warner is the least of our worries

Zappa bowling puss just rolling it out must’ve drank to much of stoinus’bath water

Cummins and hazel wood bowling crap

Another good catch by Warner

3/165

Swear I heard an edge on the last ball of Cummins over

THANK YOU JOEL WILSON

YOU STILL OWE US ABOUT 1000

Armchair expert wrote:THANK YOU JOEL WILSON

YOU STILL OWE US ABOUT 1000

Lol, he just got it back, the Warner LBW is worse than Smith's the other night, wouldn't be hitting a 5th stump but somehow drs has it hitting leg. I think we're nieve if we don't think they manipulate it. At the very least the system is not accurate.

Australia won by 5 wickets
SL 209
Perera 78
Zampa 4/47

Aus 5/215
Inglis 58 (59)
Marsh 52 (51)
Madushanka 3/38

Well done on Inglis for top scoring, not sure his keeping is up to it especially against spin (albeit he hasn't dropped an absolute dolly) but really like him as a batter.

Interesting to see how the Aussies are dealing with the pressure in recent months. First we had the Bairstow dismissal (within the rules and legal) and now we have Starc threatening mankads in the first two overs of a match. I don't mind a mankad if a batsman is deliberately gaining an advantage, have to admit though the Sri Lanka player didn't look like he was doing a whole lot wrong, very borderline. For me it's a bit of a sign the players are feeling a lot pressure, i guess its a better way of going about it than getting the sandpaper out again.

This win addressed many of the issues of the past two months:
Much better fielding effort (led by Warner and Cummins)
Good use of bowling changes.
Cummins and Zampa found some form (though Zampa appears to be struggling with a side muscle issue).
And FINALLY, some input from 5/6/7 in the batting order with Inglis, Stoinis and Maxwell all playing decent roles.

With England's stumble, Oz would be eyeing off the 4th spot. Premature to say we are back in business, but at least our two losses are against 2 of the faves. Pakistan on Thursday is a.must win.

northerner wrote:This win addressed many of the issues of the past two months:
Much better fielding effort (led by Warner and Cummins)
Good use of bowling changes.
Cummins and Zampa found some form (though Zampa appears to be struggling with a side muscle issue).
And FINALLY, some input from 5/6/7 in the batting order with Inglis, Stoinis and Maxwell all playing decent roles.

With England's stumble, Oz would be eyeing off the 4th spot. Premature to say we are back in business, but at least our two losses are against 2 of the faves. Pakistan on Thursday is a.must win.

Listening to the commentators they seem to think 4 wins / 3 loses may scrape you into fourth position, so we might be able to lose one more but would prefer not to obviously.

Thats two games in a row the openers have got off to 100 run partnership......can't keep affording that kind of starts to the opposition.

Each team plays 9 matches WHUFC. 6/3 or if lucky 5/4 with superior NRR is what is required to make semi-finals.

whufc wrote:Well done on Inglis for top scoring, not sure his keeping is up to it especially against spin (albeit he hasn't dropped an absolute dolly) but really like him as a batter.

Interesting to see how the Aussies are dealing with the pressure in recent months. First we had the Bairstow dismissal (within the rules and legal) and now we have Starc threatening mankads in the first two overs of a match. I don't mind a mankad if a batsman is deliberately gaining an advantage, have to admit though the Sri Lanka player didn't look like he was doing a whole lot wrong, very borderline. For me it's a bit of a sign the players are feeling a lot pressure, i guess its a better way of going about it than getting the sandpaper out again.

Once Head is back I'd be tempted to play both Inglis and Carey, Inglis will cost us a match with his keeping. Means Marsh drops down the order, Stoinis goes out, hopefully never to be seen again and Cummins or Hazelwood has to go to make room.
Carey is needed on the spinning deck, would need to get 20ov from Maxwell, Marsh, and Head.Maxwell is our front line spinner atm so it's not a huge risk.
If we get on a deck that isn't going to turn Carey comes out for a quick, Inglis will suffice behind tge stumps on deck that don't turn

Down the Hill wrote:Each team plays 9 matches WHUFC. 6/3 or if lucky 5/4 with superior NRR is what is required to make semi-finals.

Yeah sorry i got the wins wrong. Had heard the commentators mentioning you could lose 3 and should still make it.

Cant see Australia making it on current form but funnier things have happened and you feel teams will ebb and flow over the 9 games with a few upsets brewing as well.

whufc wrote:I don't mind a mankad if a batsman is deliberately gaining an advantage, have to admit though the Sri Lanka player didn't look like he was doing a whole lot wrong, very borderline.

You clearly didn't watch the first over when Starc was stopping in his action to remind Perera to stay in his crease until he releases the ball, Perera was a fair distance out and not looking when Starc was releasing the ball. It is not difficult for a batsmen to keep his bat (or body) grounded inside the popping crease (while backing up) until bowler releases the ball. The second time around Perera was fine but still wasn't looking when Starc was getting into his bowling action.

The Dark Knight wrote:

whufc wrote:I don't mind a mankad if a batsman is deliberately gaining an advantage, have to admit though the Sri Lanka player didn't look like he was doing a whole lot wrong, very borderline.

You clearly didn't watch the first over when Starc was stopping in his action to remind Perera to stay in his crease until he releases the ball, Perera was a fair distance out and not looking when Starc was releasing the ball. It is not difficult for a batsmen to keep his bat (or body) grounded inside the popping crease (while backing up) until bowler releases the ball. The second time around Perera was fine but still wasn't looking when Starc was getting into his bowling action.

zero issue with Mankad. i am a batsman too, shouldn't even be a controversial take.

The Dark Knight wrote:

whufc wrote:I don't mind a mankad if a batsman is deliberately gaining an advantage, have to admit though the Sri Lanka player didn't look like he was doing a whole lot wrong, very borderline.

You clearly didn't watch the first over when Starc was stopping in his action to remind Perera to stay in his crease until he releases the ball, Perera was a fair distance out and not looking when Starc was releasing the ball. It is not difficult for a batsmen to keep his bat (or body) grounded inside the popping crease (while backing up) until bowler releases the ball. The second time around Perera was fine but still wasn't looking when Starc was getting into his bowling action.

I don't know, looking at the photos on the socials and the replays i reckon if Starc had actually let go of the ball it would have been very touch and go as far as where the batsmen was at the point of release. Keeping in mind the batsmen takes a few steps forward until he realises the bowler hasn't released the ball.

Like i said i don't mind a mankad if a batsmen is trying to get a big advantage. The Mankads i don't like is where the batsmen is only just out of there crease because the bowler in fact didnt let the ball go. Yes the batsmen should be watching the bowlers' arms but we are now getting pretty close to the point bowler are almost trying 'to trick' batsmen into a mankad. Almost like a keeper pretending he didnt take the ball so a batsmen leaves off to run a bye......

IMO he looked about half a stride out of his crease at the point that Starc had completely stopped. IMO that half a stride would have been about the distance the batsmen had crept forward between the ball 'not being released' at Starc coming to a stop. Very very miniscure......

My point was more so that you dont often see bowlers in the mind space of looking for a mankad in the first over of a game and i hardly think the Sri Lankan batsmen was doing much many other batters dont do especially early on in a game with nervous energy etc. Was interesting mind space for Starc to be in and to be honest he bowled like someone who wasnt on his A Game.

whufc wrote:Yes the batsmen should be watching the bowlers' arms but we are now getting pretty close to the point bowler are almost trying 'to trick' batsmen into a mankad. Almost like a keeper pretending he didnt take the ball so a batsmen leaves off to run a bye......

Lol what did I even just read. The difference between those scenarios is that mankadding involves blatant cheating by the batting side, rather than the fielding side.

It's very easy for a batsman to avoid being mankadded.

RB wrote:

whufc wrote:Yes the batsmen should be watching the bowlers' arms but we are now getting pretty close to the point bowler are almost trying 'to trick' batsmen into a mankad. Almost like a keeper pretending he didnt take the ball so a batsmen leaves off to run a bye......

Lol what did I even just read. The difference between those scenarios is that mankadding involves blatant cheating by the batting side, rather than the fielding side.

It's very easy for a batsman to avoid being mankadded.

Exactly, the onus is on the batsman (Perera is this instance) to pay attention to avoid being Mankadded then it would never be an issue in the game.
Perera clearly wasn't paying attention and was being lazy (shown in the photo PP posted and Starc gave him a reminder to keep his bat in his crease until he releases the ball.
Whufc do you remember when Starc did the same to de Bruyn during the MCG test match against South Africa in the most recent summer here? In a post day chat Starc basically said if I have to keep my foot behind the line then the batsmen should be leaving their bat inside the crease until I release the ball and not creeping out, so that's clearly his stance on it. I also remember him talking about it on a podcast too but I can't remember which one.

The Dark Knight wrote:

RB wrote:

whufc wrote:Yes the batsmen should be watching the bowlers' arms but we are now getting pretty close to the point bowler are almost trying 'to trick' batsmen into a mankad. Almost like a keeper pretending he didnt take the ball so a batsmen leaves off to run a bye......

Lol what did I even just read. The difference between those scenarios is that mankadding involves blatant cheating by the batting side, rather than the fielding side.

It's very easy for a batsman to avoid being mankadded.

Exactly, the onus is on the batsman (Perera is this instance) to pay attention to avoid being Mankadded then it would never be an issue in the game.
Perera clearly wasn't paying attention and was being lazy (shown in the photo PP posted and Starc gave him a reminder to keep his bat in his crease until he releases the ball.
Whufc do you remember when Starc did the same to de Bruyn during the MCG test match against South Africa in the most recent summer here? In a post day chat Starc basically said if I have to keep my foot behind the line then the batsmen should be staying in his crease until I release the ball, so that's clearly his stance on it. I also remember him talking about it on a podcast too but I can't remember which one.

Like i said im not a huge fan of the mankad when the batsmen is only out of his crease due to the bowler not letting go of the bowl. I think there is a massive difference between that and one where the batter is out of the crease as the bowler gets into his bowling stride.

My point more whichs seems to be lost is:

I didnt have a big deal with the mankad my point was more about the mindframe that he is actually looking for a mankad in the first over. Glenn McGrath would have said 'you can be half way up the pitch mate, ill nick of your teammate next ball'

It was that close a one it almost seemed a bit pre meditated just like the Bairstow run out was. Are they really sitting in team meetings saying this is how we think we can get this batsmen out.......shit mentality if it is.

Fantastic win by AU
Had to come from behind a couple of times to win the match
Mite make finals on that effort
Most important factor was Zorba taking wickets