*Official* Third Test at the WACA

[Mike5181]

No you haven't

Enough with the idle talk.

 

[Rant0r]

Enough with the idle talk.

I will gladly ignore you and talk about cricket. Begone

 

[Mike5181]

I will gladly ignore you and talk about cricket. Begone

Such a keyboard warrior huh

 

[Burgey]

Spot on: it pissed me no end to see idiots like Gough announcing that we'd win the series 4 - 0. Anyone with more than half a brain knew that we're not as outstanding as some would have us believe. And also that Aus aren't nearly as hopeless as they looked at Adelaide.

And yes, you're dead right about Day 1. Sessions 2 & 3 smacked of us thinking the job was done because it was a similar score to Adelaide.

Don't forget people like TEC, Marcuss, Corrin and Flibbertyjibber either.

Looking forward to catching up with the lads...

 

[GIMH]

Symonds's Test batting record is one of the most misleading things in the last twenty years of cricket. Never have I seen someone have such ridiculous luck while batting - and I'm not being a **** and talking about plays and misses or something subjective like his technique; every single time he made a big score he'd been given multiple lives by the umpire. He's the best advertisement to giving some importance to the infamous FCA.

To his credit, the extreme luck he had early on gave him some confidence and he was actually pretty good under pressure (I actually think his best innings was a 70 odd he made in the West Indies), but his reputation as a Test batsman was IMO significantly enhanced by the way he bowed out or he'd have surely played on and seen his record fall in line with his actual ability.

If someone like Brad Hodge had been given the selector patience and the luck Symonds had, he'd had played 40 Tests and finished with an average of 55.

Alright mate how's the glandular fever? Good to see you back anyway.

 

[Rant0r]

Such a keyboard warrior huh

Wow, I haven't heard that word since urbandictionary came into vogue. Is it just me or do you want to have the last word for no apparent reason ?

 

[Burgey]

I think Watson deserves to be seperated from those guys. I mean today and his recent performances have shown character that you would never thought was possible a few years ago.

Yeah. Roger Federer such a spineless competitor

 

[GIMH]

Don't forget people like TEC, Marcuss, Corrin and Flibbertyjibber either.

Looking forward to catching up with the lads...

Five years of me making dumbass predictions round here and you think I'm going to be embarassed now?

We're still in this one anyhow, and we'll win the series, comfortably, whatever happens in the rest of the game.

Good job I haven't threatened to run anywhere naked if my prediction doesn't come true though, only a high order **** would do that mind you.

 

[morgieb]

Alright mate how's the glandular fever? Good to see you back anyway.

Haha soo good.

 

[Burgey]

Alright mate how's the glandular fever? Good to see you back anyway.

It's funny cos it's true...

 

[Mike5181]

Yeah. Roger Federer such a spineless competitor

Yeah, if you go into the thread that has favourite players from each team. There is a lot of people who consider Watson their favourite from Australia. Go figure. A couple of years ago he was hated so much .

Stuart Broad even got sent to naughty school.

 

[Prince EWS]

It's funny cos it's true...

Haha with Richard on hiatus and thierryhenry only really posting about Vettori these days I'm probably the closest thing we've got. One of the greatest things Richard did for the forum was making me not look so outrageous. Please come back.

 

[Burgey]

Five years of me making dumbass predictions round here and you think I'm going to be embarassed now?

We're still in this one anyhow, and we'll win the series, comfortably, whatever happens in the rest of the game.

Good job I haven't threatened to run anywhere naked if my prediction doesn't come true though, only a high order **** would do that mind you.

England won't win. They're england. Fmd mate they've been as dominant as a side can be for three weeks and they're still finding a way to let us back into it. It's utterly bizarre.

 

[morgieb]

When will Richard come back? This hiatus is long by even his standards.....

 

[Burgey]

That's enough to make a heterosexual man turn.

Not that you'd know

 

[Prince EWS]

Not that you'd know

You don't know the half of it...

 

[GIMH]

England won't win. They're england. Fmd mate they've been as dominant as a side can be for three weeks and they're still finding a way to let us back into it. It's utterly bizarre.

Who could ever imagine a side winning by an innings and then struggling along in the next match.

Only a complete joke side would do that, even more so in an Ashes series!!!

 

[GIMH]

You don't know the half of it...

We will if you tell us

 

[Rant0r]

Who could ever imagine a side winning by an innings and then struggling along in the next match.

Only a complete joke side would do that, even more so in an Ashes series!!!

Any bookmakers around ?

 

[Uppercut]

We're actually disagreeing in two different threads at the moment.

Haha I know, but the other is just opinion .

I think I'm less inclined to believe the Richardism of ODIs and tests being completely unrelated. Sure, his most epic innings had a lot of let-offs, but the fact that he regularly turned games on their head in ODIs too makes me less inclined to think it was all a fluke. Aggressive batsmen always seem luckier because the risk factor of facing a lot of deliveries isn't immediately obvious. If Dravid gets an unplayable ball on 30 you just think "tough luck, good ball" but Symonds might have scored 70 before getting that same jaffa. And besides, a lucky batsmen is sometimes better than a good one .

He also fits a little better with my idea of the role of the number 6 in cricket. Picking your sixth best batsman is an absolutely fine policy, and in the long run would probably work out for the best. But what you really want is contributions from difficult positions and if the bowling was too good for the five best batsman in your country it's usually going to be too good for the sixth best too- I think we saw that with Marcus North. Having someone a bit unorthodox, who offers a completely different challenge to bowlers and can contribute a lot outside of his batting, is often the absolute best-case-scenario option at six. Symonds had a lot of intangibles going for him in that he quite visibly lifted his own team and got under the skin of and demoralised the opposition. Whatever the extent to which you agree with Goughy's assessment of the value of image in cricket, Symonds absolutely embodies what he's talking about, and while obviously it's not necessarily a direct causal effect, there's a ****ing huge disparity in Australia's results with and without Symonds in the past five years, in every format.

It might just be how things have worked out as a result of the timing of their decline, but I associate Symonds with Australia constantly winning, and associate Australia without Symonds with a distinct lack of aggression, no energy in the field, no ruthlessness and no ability whatsoever to turn round a game that's going against them- all of which are features that Symonds embodies to an almost absurd extent.