(h)not sure if anyone has mentioned it yet (probably has, but i cbf trawling through page after page), but since the dismissal of ed cowan in sydney, australia has made 770 runs for the loss of one wicket.
Has been mentioned about three times already now.Not sure if anyone has mentioned it yet (probably has, but I cbf trawling through page after page), but since the dismissal of Ed Cowan in Sydney, Australia has made 770 runs for the loss of one wicket.
You weren't even first, ****.
Nah ****.You weren't even first, ****.
In the 2005/06 series, ftr.If you've got the Boxing Day Test on tape, can you check out whether the 13th man (who wasn't Matt Gale) got much TV time?
What happened to Siddle btw? Seeing as though you're his life partner I'm assuming you know?Siddlewatch: I know Benchy appreciates it.
142nd all time and now ahead of the Aussie pair of George Giffen and Paul Reiffel. Next up, Mohammad Asif and Pedro Collins.
I wish.What happened to Siddle btw? Seeing as though you're his life partner I'm assuming you know?
What he does by scoring so quickly on tricky wickets is puts the pressure back on the bowlers forcing them to spread the field and reduce the chances of getting a wicket. India just didn't have the quality or cajones to keep the pressure on despite the fact the ball was still seaming and inducing plays and misses. He's going to scare the **** out bowling attacks because if they don't get him early he's going to hurt them badly.It was raised in the commentary, but the question is, how does Warner approach his game from now on? This wasn't a flat wicket, but nevertheless, you can't help but feel that trying to play this aggressively all of the time isn't going to pay dividends in the long term.