LaughingKookaburra wrote:On the above I really liked Hansie Cronje as a player and captain. He was a scapegoat for what went on world wide in that era and into this day do feel for him somewhat. Also rated Alan Donald very highly (Donald in my opinion was heavily involved with match fixing in that 99 WC Semi Final however I strongly suspect).
I've always been told that I look like Pete Sampras and Hansie Cronle, a few years ago there was a flashback game on the the TV during a rain interruption and my son pointed and said "dad, you're on the TV!" He legitimately thought it was me.
I admired his grit and determination and was very disappointed with the findings.
Cronje was a handy test bat at best, but was a decent captain before he was on the take. Only averaged 36 with 6 hundreds in 68 tests. Didn't like the short stuff and his aggressive strokeplay at times was more down to an attitude of hit or be hit. He averaged a very credible 38 in ODI's and we all watched a lot more 50 over cricket back then and sometimes our memories of a batsman's true ability are clouded by the coloured clothes stuff. Michael Bevan probably still makes the greatest ODI Team of all-time but didn't like anything bouncing above his waist hence why he failed as a test bat.
Down the Hill wrote:Cronje was a handy test bat at best, but was a decent captain before he was on the take. Only averaged 36 with 6 hundreds in 68 tests. Didn't like the short stuff and his aggressive strokeplay at times was more down to an attitude of hit or be hit. He averaged a very credible 38 in ODI's and we all watched a lot more 50 over cricket back then and sometimes our memories of a batsman's true ability are clouded by the coloured clothes stuff. Michael Bevan probably still makes the greatest ODI Team of all-time but didn't like anything bouncing above his waist hence why he failed as a test bat.
And struck at 74, put himself and his average ahead of his team many a time, managed to save the day a couple of times and that's what the general public remember.
Down the Hill wrote:Cronje was a handy test bat at best, but was a decent captain before he was on the take. Only averaged 36 with 6 hundreds in 68 tests. Didn't like the short stuff and his aggressive strokeplay at times was more down to an attitude of hit or be hit. He averaged a very credible 38 in ODI's and we all watched a lot more 50 over cricket back then and sometimes our memories of a batsman's true ability are clouded by the coloured clothes stuff. Michael Bevan probably still makes the greatest ODI Team of all-time but didn't like anything bouncing above his waist hence why he failed as a test bat.
And struck at 74, put himself and his average ahead of his team many a time, managed to save the day a couple of times and that's what the general public remember.
I couldn't stand Bevan, the protection of his average was clearly evident and smacks of selfishness...
Though I'm and England fan and I'm sure he hurt us on more than one occassion, bastard.
Computer Crashed wrote:Warner is knob, end of story, agree with you all. I'm sick of him.
Sledge him all you like just don't mention his mum, wife & children.....
I agree with that except when you act like a self righteous flog day in and day out..........you lose any rights you have with sledging. This day was always going to come.......shit I’m surprised no one has mentioned it previously.
Maybe Warner might pull his head in now and shut the **** up for once.
Regardless of what was said, even if it was personal, Warner being restrained as he had to be by team mates was a very ordinary look and we can reasonably assume if he wasn't held back it would have got physical. Shows his mentality.
Show's his maturity. Or lack of. Who on here would seriously get into a physical altercation with someone if they made a comment about your mum or wife / girl friend? Come on we're living in the 21st century. I remember when I was 13 and if someone told me a "Mumma Joke" it was on at lunch time. Now a days it's like who can come up with the funniest "Mumma" joke or something else that's vile and disgusting but makes everyone laugh. I reckon taking the piss out of the opposition is the first way to get their minds of the game. Have a laugh and let it go.
Down the Hill wrote:Cronje was a handy test bat at best, but was a decent captain before he was on the take. Only averaged 36 with 6 hundreds in 68 tests. Didn't like the short stuff and his aggressive strokeplay at times was more down to an attitude of hit or be hit. He averaged a very credible 38 in ODI's and we all watched a lot more 50 over cricket back then and sometimes our memories of a batsman's true ability are clouded by the coloured clothes stuff. Michael Bevan probably still makes the greatest ODI Team of all-time but didn't like anything bouncing above his waist hence why he failed as a test bat.
And struck at 74, put himself and his average ahead of his team many a time, managed to save the day a couple of times and that's what the general public remember.
I disagree, he played a role batting at 5 or 6 that saw one end held together while the tail added valuable runs at times.
His skill wasn't just on display when we chased down runs late, he often held an end up ( going at 74 ) while valuable runs were added at the other end when we batted first allowing us to build a total to bowl at.
Down the Hill wrote:Cronje was a handy test bat at best, but was a decent captain before he was on the take. Only averaged 36 with 6 hundreds in 68 tests. Didn't like the short stuff and his aggressive strokeplay at times was more down to an attitude of hit or be hit. He averaged a very credible 38 in ODI's and we all watched a lot more 50 over cricket back then and sometimes our memories of a batsman's true ability are clouded by the coloured clothes stuff. Michael Bevan probably still makes the greatest ODI Team of all-time but didn't like anything bouncing above his waist hence why he failed as a test bat.
And struck at 74, put himself and his average ahead of his team many a time, managed to save the day a couple of times and that's what the general public remember.
I disagree, he played a role batting at 5 or 6 that saw one end held together while the tail added valuable runs at times.
His skill wasn't just on display when we chased down runs late, he often held an end up ( going at 74 ) while valuable runs were added at the other end when we batted first allowing us to build a total to bowl at.
Me, I think he's a little harshly judged.
Agree.
I reckon he also had to protect the tail a fair bit as well. He didn't have the luxury of blokes like Cummins and Starc coming in at 8 and 9. The guys I remember then were the likes of Warne, Gillespie (good tail batsmen in tests not so much ODI) Kasprowichz, Andy Bichel who didn't offer a whole lot with the bat. 5/190-200 could easily have been 220-230 all out.
Down the Hill wrote:Cronje was a handy test bat at best, but was a decent captain before he was on the take. Only averaged 36 with 6 hundreds in 68 tests. Didn't like the short stuff and his aggressive strokeplay at times was more down to an attitude of hit or be hit. He averaged a very credible 38 in ODI's and we all watched a lot more 50 over cricket back then and sometimes our memories of a batsman's true ability are clouded by the coloured clothes stuff. Michael Bevan probably still makes the greatest ODI Team of all-time but didn't like anything bouncing above his waist hence why he failed as a test bat.
And struck at 74, put himself and his average ahead of his team many a time, managed to save the day a couple of times and that's what the general public remember.
I disagree, he played a role batting at 5 or 6 that saw one end held together while the tail added valuable runs at times.
His skill wasn't just on display when we chased down runs late, he often held an end up ( going at 74 ) while valuable runs were added at the other end when we batted first allowing us to build a total to bowl at.
My take on warner v dekock... Warners over-reaction was unhinged and out of proportion. DeKock lied about what was said and backed away from his role. Both got what they deserved.
Otis Gibson is spot on when he talks of "where is the line?" According to warners logic.. calling someone an effen sook aint personal but dont mention the missus... some one else mt think part a is personal and pt b is fine.
Reminds me a great Eddie Brandis (Zimbabwe) sledge to Pidge. PIDGE... Why are you so fat Eddie? BRANDIS... Cos everytime I make love with ur missus she gives me a cookie.
All of the Aussie fielders ensuing laughter added to Pidges discomforture...
northerner wrote:My take on warner v dekock... Warners over-reaction was unhinged and out of proportion. DeKock lied about what was said and backed away from his role. Both got what they deserved.
Otis Gibson is spot on when he talks of "where is the line?" According to warners logic.. calling someone an effen sook aint personal but dont mention the missus... some one else mt think part a is personal and pt b is fine.
Reminds me a great Eddie Brandis (Zimbabwe) sledge to Pidge. PIDGE... Why are you so fat Eddie? BRANDIS... Cos everytime I make love with ur missus she gives me a cookie.
All of the Aussie fielders ensuing laughter added to Pidges discomforture...
Interesting decision to drop him after the one match but understandable. Says alot when it's his last series, playing test matches are earnt not giving, doesn't matter who it is.
Jim05 wrote:Lol. Warner hits a 4 through point so Faf pulls first slip and sends him to deep point. And the very next ball is duly nicked through the vacant slip
