***Official*** Sri Lanka in Australia

[Laurrz]

thanks for the review

 

[pup11]

Bailey is bowling really badly atm and as far as i am concerned he doesn't even deserves to be in this side or for that matter he doesn't even deserve to play first-class cricket!
Terry Jenner is one man who should be kept away from the young Aussie spinners because he seems to be ruining their careers , first Cameron white and now Bailey.

 

[JASON]

Weather expected to interrupt Sunday....at Adelaide Oval...

 

[JASON]

First chance to see how Murali gets treated this time around.....

 

[chaminda_00]

Nice to see Jayasuriya, Atapattu, Samarawerra and Vandort score some runs. Interesting to see Muburak get a game ahead of Tharanga. Not a good sign. I reckon that batting line was basically full strenth expect Silva for Muburak. Hopefully Sangakara is ok for the 1st Test.

 

[Nate]

Bailey is bowling really badly atm and as far as i am concerned he doesn't even deserves to be in this side or for that matter he doesn't even deserve to play first-class cricket!
Terry Jenner is one man who should be kept away from the young Aussie spinners because he seems to be ruining their careers , first Cameron white and now Bailey.

On Bailey - he's just so slow through the air. Oh my goodness. Every batsmen seems to have about eight-hundred-years to think about how they'll hit each particular ball for six. He doesn't seem to adjust his speed for different surfaces. Good thing about him and Dan though is that they're both very young.

On Terry Jenner - yeah, the guy's a loser. How much he helped Warne I don't know, but it's given him the rep to ruin every promising turner-of-a-ball in Australia.

 

[sideshowtim]

On Bailey - he's just so slow through the air. Oh my goodness. Every batsmen seems to have about eight-hundred-years to think about how they'll hit each particular ball for six. He doesn't seem to adjust his speed for different surfaces. Good thing about him and Dan though is that they're both very young.

On Terry Jenner - yeah, the guy's a loser. How much he helped Warne I don't know, but it's given him the rep to ruin every promising turner-of-a-ball in Australia.

Exactly. They both have time on their side, and can go a long way to improving their game. Remember, they are playing against quality opposition week in, week out...It'll only be good for their game in the long run.

 

[Nate]

I was at the ground and a few things came to mind;

- Sanath, whilst he batted well, was barely tested. He was cruising in this knock which shows you just how good he still is but also how poor this bowling attack bowled to him. All of his sixes were in roughly the same spot and they generally fed his legside shots. Decent hit out for him but not an indicator of form I reckon.

- Cullen Bailey was spanked by Jayasuriya and the over where he went the journey three times in a row was telling; all in the same spot. Yet he was persevered with. I mean, I understand giving young spinners a go and accepting they might go for a few but geez, when three successive deliveries are lifted into the stands having bowled poorly to that point anyway, it's time for a rest, son.

- Why on Earth was Heal bowled only after 41 overs had gone??? He was the pick today. if the others had bowled well, it may have been understandable but in light of events, he should have bowled earlier.

- Doug Bowled better than his figures suggested. As did Mick Lewis. Mick especially was tough to get away early. Still, that was only due to his accuracy; he was largely unthreatening and don't think he beat the bat. There was one catch dropped off his bowling off Attapatu at gully but that would have been an amazing catch had it been dragged in.

Legend T_C. Very interesting about Sanath, much appreciated.

Did Heal get lucky with the wickets of Sanath and Marvan? It seemed to me Jayasuriya was going the journey with every ball and just happened to choose the wrong one off Heal, and maybe Atapattu aswell. Confirmation?

 

[Richard]

I hate the way Corey keeps popping-up for 1 post. It's borderline torture.

 

[Richard]

What do you mean?

I mean can you remove the runs and wickets against WA? If you can't remove those scored against Bangladesh, you shouldn't be able to remove those against WA either. Or SA for that matter. Or Qld.

If you want to count everything regardless of the standard, why stop only at including Bangladesh?

 

[Richard]

Haha, what a copout, guess McGrath bowled poorly as well when MacGill outperformed him?

Of course they both did. Warne and McGrath are both way, way better than MacGill and if he bowls better than them, clearly they've been quite a bit below their best.

 

[Mister Wright]

I hate the way Corey keeps popping-up for 1 post. It's borderline torture.

What's torture is your 43, 814 posts.

 

[Mister Wright]

Poor showing from a Mod, frankly.

Sorry, forgot to mention that post was in jest.

 

[Richard]

Hmm, I suppose I believe you. I'll withdraw the Rolleyes then.

Given, shall we say, recent discussions within this thread, a comment like that can easily be mistaken though.

 

[Johnners]

Of course they both did. Warne and McGrath are both way, way better than MacGill and if he bowls better than them, clearly they've been quite a bit below their best.

Hahaha, yeah, bowled so horrible he took 10-fer (twice), which of course isn't bowling genuinely well either...despite the fact that you've also out-bowled 2 of the top 3 wickets takers of all time.

Face it, MacGill is a quality bowler, no, he's not Warne or Murali, but he's still ****ing good.

 

[silentstriker]

Of course they both did. Warne and McGrath are both way, way better than MacGill and if he bowls better than them, clearly they've been quite a bit below their best.

It is possible for a lesser player's peak to be higher than a better players best.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Are you unhappy if a day in your life goes by without laying some form of attack on some form of perceived (and pretty well invariably totally incorrectly so) stereotype on my part? There's at least three in that two-line post.

Johnson and Tait to date have had careers of no notable length at either Test or ODI level. I've barely even commented on their prowess at the domestic level. Where did you concoct that one then? Same stupid sort of chain you concocted the notion that I rate Craig White > McGrath?

Well, you said that MacGill was better than Johnson and Tait, but that any "decent" seamer would be better than MacGill. It's not exactly a huge stretch to see the implication that Johnson and Tait aren't "decent", which is ridiculous, so I offered appropriate ridicule. If you don't like it try not to say stupid things.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

It's a fair point.

 

[Richard]

Well, you said that MacGill was better than Johnson and Tait, but that any "decent" seamer would be better than MacGill. It's not exactly a huge stretch to see the implication that Johnson and Tait aren't "decent", which is ridiculous, so I offered appropriate ridicule. If you don't like it try not to say stupid things.

And that's exactly the sort of stupid non-chain of events you used to incorrectly identify (and repeatedly pedal, despite my pointing-out its incorrectness) the "fact" that I rate Craig White > Glenn McGrath.

Currently, MacGill is more deserving of a Test spot than Johnson or Tait. This doesn't mean either Johnson or Tait are likely to end their careers as better bowlers. However, to date both their Test-careers are decidedly mediocre - unsurprising, given that it amounts to 2 Tests for 1 (which he was never, ever intended to play in) and 0 for the other.

 

[Richard]

Hahaha, yeah, bowled so horrible he took 10-fer (twice), which of course isn't bowling genuinely well either...despite the fact that you've also out-bowled 2 of the top 3 wickets takers of all time.

Face it, MacGill is a quality bowler, no, he's not Warne or Murali, but he's still ****ing good.

Where did I say MacGill had never, ever bowled well in a Test? I could out-bowl McGrath and Warne if I had enough chances, so could you or anyone else who knew how to bowl.

All that says is that McGrath and Warne were sub-par that day, because both are capable of bowling better than MacGill is. MacGill, in fact, has rarely bowled especially well. Not never - rarely.