Australia A named

[Andre]

Just off topic: Rik, for someone with an IQ purportedly in the 130s your spelling is sh*t.

Isn't it sad that when your arguement is going nowhere you bring up something completely irrelevant.

Back to topic, please.

 

[Mister Wright]

But did any of those previous seasons get him in? No.

As I said, one brilliant season got him in.

There wasn't a spot in those previous seasons.

Let's put it this way:

Ian Healy was the 344th player to play for Australia when he made his debut in 1988/89 since then 43 players have made their debut, the last being Nathan Bracken. Of those 43 players 14 have been batsman (Taylor, Moody, Waugh, Phillips, Martyn, Langer, Slater, Hayden, Bevan, Law, Ponting, Elliot, Lehmann, Katich, Love).

Australia have been the strongest team in the world for the last decade and Taylor, the Waugh Twins, Boon, Border who all played in that period have played over 100 tests. Ponting & Slater are in the 70s Langer in the 60s, Martyn & Hayden in the 40s. So they have all been established players. Moody, Phillips, Bevan, Law, Elliot & Lehmann would struggle to have played 50 tests combined.

So I find it hard in that period of time with those great players that he could have got in the side with his previous strong seasons.

It is all about scoring runs when it matters.

 

[Gaijin-san]

Isn't it sad that when your arguement is going nowhere you bring up something completely irrelevant.

Back to topic, please.

It was a footnote for the end of my post, Andre, hence the 'off topic' part. Footnotes are not indicative of a dead end.

 

[Linda]

Geez, that was 4 pages of absolute crap that was really boring to read. Ho-hum.

Anyway, back on page 1 I think there was something about the Australia A side being young and whatnot. Its funny, because some of the 3-day side players are quite old, and all of the 1-day squad are under 26.
I suppose theres a reason for this, but if they are going to say Australia A are a 'developmental' side, make both of them a developmental side, and stick with it.
But then, there would be no chances for guys like Love and Hussey and so on, so perhaps we need a second XI? Oh, I dunno, its all too HARD!

 

[Gaijin-san]

Big ding for Martin Love. Slight ding for Clarke, back in form it seems and played very well today, could have gone further.

Hussey and Rogers were fantastic. Rogers lived on a wing and a prayer most of his innings, a few boundaries splitting the slips. Played some rippers but.
Didn't see most of Hussey's innings from 30 onward, but he looked solid.

I'm sure Hodge will be looking to go back to Victoria and slam some more runs for them after his less than impressive 1.

 

[age_master]

yeah all the Aussie A players bar Hodge played well, looks as if the number 5 and 6 spots are a contest between Lehmann, Katrich, Clarke and Love - Hussey and Hodge the outsiders.

lots will be on tomorrow for the Aussie A bowlers, 1 of whom is a good chance of playing on boxing day. now that gillespie is ruled out...

 

[Top_Cat]

Geez you guys are hard markers re: Hodge. Whether on 1 or 101, there would barely have been a player alive that would have laid wood on the ball which got him. There's little you can do whether in good form or not when you get a ball like that.

 

[Mister Wright]

Geez you guys are hard markers re: Hodge. Whether on 1 or 101, there would barely have been a player alive that would have laid wood on the ball which got him. There's little you can do whether in good form or not when you get a ball like that.

Some things you can do to not get out to a ball like that:

1) Balance.
2) Move feet.
3) Play down the correct line.
4) Hit the ball.

 

[Gaijin-san]

Exactly, like the other batsmen managed to do. I'm sure it wasn't all cake and fairies for them either.

 

[marc71178]

a good portion of the time you are just playing Devil's Advocate and have no conviction.

And what's wrong with that?

It at least stimulates the topics and means we have a few things going on at once, rather than a frankly boring overhyping of one player.

 

[marc71178]

Exactly, like the other batsmen managed to do. I'm sure it wasn't all cake and fairies for them either.

I very much doubt the Indian reserve bowlers produced a host of superb deliveries.

 

[age_master]

the ball was moving heaps, pathan bowled with alot of swing, was probably the best of the bowlers - Ganguly als obowled quite well. there were a reasonable number of good balls bowled, though not enough pressure was placed consistatly on the batsman.

while hodge got out to a good ball, he still should have been able to block it, he was a little ****y i think after the last innings he played against them. and probably not at the peak of his concentration the right before tea

 

[Linda]

End of day 3 and Hodge is 11* off 47ish balls, and Clarke is 22* of 23ish. I think that kinda says something, dont you?!

Meanwhile, finally Patel did something :rolleyes: (with the bat I mean), and Hussey's run-out was so cool.

 

[Andre]

End of day 3 and Hodge is 11* off 47ish balls, and Clarke is 22* of 23ish. I think that kinda says something, dont you?!

Yeah - that they are both not out.

 

[Top_Cat]

Some things you can do to not get out to a ball like that:

1) Balance.
2) Move feet.
3) Play down the correct line.
4) Hit the ball.

And if you take a look at the ball before it pitched and cut back, he did all of that bar 4. So what's your point?

As for Clarke's score vs Hodge's score, what it says to me is that Hodge came in when the Indian bowlers were on top and had to just survive whereas Clarke came in and played his shots and got away with it. Hodge, seeing that he is the senior partner, unselfishly sacrificed his own shots (and there are many) to ensure that if Clarke DID get out, he'd still be there.

How's that? That and what Andre said is about all that can be inferred from their respective scores. Any inferences on ability are beyond stupid. So NYA.

 

[Eclipse]

Clark just played great shot's with good though it's not like he was chancing his arm or anything.

he looked the best batsman in both innings so far timing everything perfectly and never looking like getting out so far.

 

[Linda]

How's that? That and what Andre said is about all that can be inferred from their respective scores. Any inferences on ability are beyond stupid. So NYA.

I was thinking more along the lines of the fact is shows he can still belt a few around (without risking his wicket) in pressured circumstances. I wasnt comparing him to Hodge.

 

[marc71178]

I was thinking more along the lines of the fact is shows he can still belt a few around (without risking his wicket) in pressured circumstances.

Pressured circumstances?

Since when are those pressured circumstances?

 

[age_master]

Clarke went in @ 3/28 and immediatley put pressure back on the indians by playing shots, not a bad way to play for mine.


prediction for today, in the first half our if clarke or hodge get out Australia A will bat for quite a while, if not they may start going for it and declare at lunch, both looed in pretty good form yesterday, Hodge played a couple of great shots (only 1 went for 4) as did clarke, i get the feeling Hodge will bat just a little more aggressivley today though

 

[Neil Pickup]

watson is a very good fielder is why i think that he will be 12th man, no hes not in the senior ODI team at the moment either.

12th Men: RJG Lockyear (Australia A) and R Dravid (Indians)