It was the way Warne was implying that Starc shouldn't even bother bowling proper line and length because he was always going to go for a few. But this was when he was going at around 2rpo.Warne is an annoying knob but "Starc will bowl boundary balls from time to time" is surely as unexceptional and inoffensive a cricketing opinion as they come
That's because he wasn't making the batsman play a lot of the time. I'd much prefer Starc bowling to a cover drive than harmlessly wide on back of a length, personally.It was the way Warne was implying that Starc shouldn't even bother bowling proper line and length because he was always going to go for a few. But this was when he was going at around 2rpo.
i think people are criticising the timing of the comment given how well starc is bowling more than the logic itself.Warne is an annoying knob but "Starc will bowl boundary balls from time to time" is surely as unexceptional and inoffensive a cricketing opinion as they come
I don't get it. He wasn't saying Starc was useless and shouldn't be playing, he was saying that Starc is never really going to be a line and length control bowler like Hazlewood or indeed Siddle. Which is... true?i think people are criticising the timing of the comment given how well starc is bowling more than the logic itself.
it's a bit like when siddle bowls a maiden one over then goes for 4 first ball of the next and all of a sudden cw is telling him to go back to his bananas and eat a steak.
Stupid question this, but do you lot get the Sky TV pictures and comms?Good analysis from Atherton there. Hopefully Starc bowls around the wicket at Burns, straight into his arm pit.
Yep.Stupid question this, but do you lot get the Sky TV pictures and comms?
And TMS on the radio?Yeah mate we do
I think so yeah. Haven’t really had the radio on much but I think it’s Agnew et al.And TMS on the radio?