pasag
RTDAS
Yeah, if Aus lose in SA it'll be a pretty clear SA = 1, Ind = 2If Australia win in SA, there will be no clear #1, but if SA win, they'd be pretty undisputed at the #1 spot, easily, for mine.
Yeah, if Aus lose in SA it'll be a pretty clear SA = 1, Ind = 2If Australia win in SA, there will be no clear #1, but if SA win, they'd be pretty undisputed at the #1 spot, easily, for mine.
So why did they lose out in the T20 World Cup?Compare their preparation for the last CT with their lack thereof for previous editions - it was obvious that they actually targetted that tourney (like a WC) whereas before they hadnt
The first one was Australia's to lose (and they did so very effectively) before Albie went nuts. SA really should have won the second one but got their tactics all wrong regarding the batting powerplay, leaving them with nothing to do but attempt to hit Bracken's inch-perfect yorkers out of the ground. I thought SA were pretty convincing in the last three though.I was responding to a post where Australia apparently has a divine right to win everything.
I watched the series and the first three games were really close, so close that I wrote them off in two and backed them in the game they lost.
And the chances of SA holding onto it for a significant amount of time is slim to noneIf Australia win in SA, there will be no clear #1, but if SA win, they'd be pretty undisputed at the #1 spot, easily, for mine.
They treated like a joke and played like it - read the comments of the players made BEFORE the tourney if you have any doubtsSo why did they lose out in the T20 World Cup?
Don't come up with the silly T20 argument. A T20 WC win would have increased the already high following of that form in Australia, and would convert it to a money spinner for the CA, isn't it? And above all, it was a World Cup, Isn' it?
Don't think any of their first choice players are ordinary, except perhaps Paul Harris.They have one great player (Kallis) and quite a few ordinary ones
Congratulations on missing the point, sir. If you think England have a settled opening pair and a good spinner I can only despair.Nope I wasn't talking about Australia..
McKenzie, Ntini (definitely away from home and arguably anywhere at this stage of his career) and Morkel (again, at this stage of his career) are just average test playersDon't think any of their first choice players are ordinary, except perhaps Paul Harris.
McKenzie's probably going to go out of the team, so i was working on the assumption that Prince would play instead.McKenzie, Ntini (definitely away from home and arguably anywhere at this stage of his career) and Morkel (again, at this stage of his career) are just average test players
The standard of the team is no better than the ones that previous Australian teams pummelled day in/ day out for years - it's just that Oz 2008/2009 is appreciably worse than its predecessors
That's irrelevent. THey'd still be the clear #1s. The length of their stay at that position is a separate issue.And the chances of SA holding onto it for a significant amount of time is slim to none
So by your own mouth the cream of our cricketers got smashed in one day & test cricket by one great player and "quite a few ordinary ones"And the chances of SA holding onto it for a significant amount of time is slim to none
They have one great player (Kallis) and quite a few ordinary ones
Compare this to the recent OZ team or the dominant WI teams - their WORST cricketer was an exceptional test match performer
We're now in a period of much more even competition and the top ranking in all forms is likely to change quite a lot i.e. there is no undisputed No. 1
Despair away mate. Cook & Strauss have been opening consistently since Trescothick left, I would hazard a guess that that puts them in the "settled" catagory.Congratulations on missing the point, sir. If you think England have a settled opening pair and a good spinner I can only despair.
Players weren't taking it seriously. You read the biogs that have come out since, it was regarded as prank cricket by most Aussie topliners until the success of IPL.So why did they lose out in the T20 World Cup?
Don't come up with the silly T20 argument. A T20 WC win would have increased the already high following of that form in Australia, and would convert it to a money spinner for the CA, isn't it? And above all, it was a World Cup, Isn' it?
I tend to disagree. You could argue that the improved performances of some players is reflected by the fact that the Aussies have declined but I think on paper this team looks better than the one that toured three years ago.McKenzie, Ntini (definitely away from home and arguably anywhere at this stage of his career) and Morkel (again, at this stage of his career) are just average test players
The standard of the team is no better than the ones that previous Australian teams pummelled day in/ day out for years - it's just that Oz 2008/2009 is appreciably worse than its predecessors
Cricket is a professional sport. If they didn't take a format seriously reflects badly on their attitude.Players weren't taking it seriously. You read the biogs that have come out since, it was regarded as prank cricket by most Aussie topliners until the success of IPL.
CA had been treating it as a joke, as had the major broadcast partner in Aus, ch 9. It was seen as hit'n'giggle that didn't matter.Cricket is a professional sport. If they didn't take a format seriously reflects badly on their attitude.
How's that anyway contradicting the original point I made? Australia made an error, and didn't apply professionalism when it mattered.CA had been treating it as a joke, as had the major broadcast partner in Aus, ch 9. It was seen as hit'n'giggle that didn't matter.
Australia was hardly alone in that regard. India only won because so many of their senior players chose to sit out, and the young guys who came through - selected for T20 - grabbed their chance with both hands. Australia sent their normal, then somewhat jaded, ODI team who were more interested in the ODI series on India that was coming up. T20 only took off in India as a result of that tournament win. Since the final of that comp, and the IPL, lots of parties inc Australia have started taking of seriously.
Hooray, give the man a cigar!Cricket is a professional sport. If they didn't take a format seriously reflects badly on their attitude.
If it's all about ranking points on a particular day, then Oz is "clearly" No.1 and that totally contradicts your earlier postThat's irrelevent. THey'd still be the clear #1s. The length of their stay at that position is a separate issue.