Favourite Bunnies

[social]

Well, you've clearly not done...

Back to your normal drivel.

My faith has been restored.

 

[Slats4ever]

why because you say so? if you even watched any of the cricket, you'd realise that he was wayward for most of his spell and was consistently below the level that he raised himself upto during the ashes. much like the rest of the aussies you still have the Ashes hangover, and make the Super Series out to be something that maintains your superiority over England and every other team in the world. Gilchrist was worked out period, and it will take more than 1 innings of an exhibition game to try to prove people that hes no longer his bunny.

Yawn.... I watched a heck of a lot of Ashes... Yawn I went to 3 days of the super test..

which means that everyone else did? The series meant more to Australia than it did to most other players, simple as that.

How would you know. Heck you live in Bangalore. So far away from the Australian cricket team and their thought processes. You just think that cos you want to.

 

[social]

Yawn.... I watched a heck of a lot of Ashes... Yawn I went to 3 days of the super test..



How would you know. Heck you live in Bangalore. So far away from the Australian cricket team and their thought processes. You just think that cos you want to.

Dont worry about him.

You'll quickly learn that he sprouts whatever nonsense pops into his head that appears to support his argument.

 

[symonds]

mc grath > who ever bowls to him

 

[marc71178]

You'll quickly learn that he sprouts whatever nonsense pops into his head that appears to support his argument.

Hello Mr Pot.

 

[social]

Hello Mr Pot.

38596 posts and nothing useful amongst them.

Keep this up and you'll play for Real Madrid.

 

[tooextracool]

Interestingly that Test was Flintoff's 2nd best match figures in his career...

and mcgrath took a 5fer at Old trafford despite bowling as poorly as hes ever done. however the fact is that Flintoff was complete garbage on that first day of the test match and bowler waywardly and took a single wicket, he bowled far better for the rest of the test match despite still not being at his best. unsurprisingly gilchrist scored all of his runs on that first day.

 

[tooextracool]

And you refusal to accept that one of the greatest players ever merely regained form is delusional at best.The fact is that Flintoff was good enough to take advantage of technical problems that crept into Gilchrist's game during the English summer.

they didnt 'creep' into his game during the summer, they were always in his game. question is whether hes learned how to deal with it.

Gilchrist comes home, works on his game, and pummels EVERYBODY during the course of the Super Series.

And has it ever crossed your mind that Flintoff didnt bowl well on the first day because he wasnt allowed to. Balls that were beating the bat in the Ashes suddenly hit the middle. It does happen when your bowling to top quality players, you know.

of course, and thats precisely why he continually bowled balls wide of off stump? oh and by the way, just so you know, Flintoff bowled a whole 3 overs while gilchrist was at the crease on the first day, and i would assume about half those deliveries were bowled to hayden. so gilchrist faced about 9 deliveries off flintoff on the first day(a large part of the bowling was done by murali and vettori), so well done with the pummeling of flintoff all over the park stories. oh and wanna hear something ironic? first over next day, gilchrist goes to guess who?
well done to gilchrist done, he managed to survive about 12 balls against flintoff before getting out to him. clearly hes no longer flintoffs bunny.

Given the illogical and emotional nature of your argument, I can only assume that youre upset because some of your favourite players (no names, no pack drill, Rahul) came up horribly short against Aus again.

oh i dont really care about the super series whatsoever, i'm more than happy having seen England beat your team in the Ashes. As such the only people who cared about that series are the Aussies, largely because they want that series to mean something in their desperation to prove to the world that they still have the best team in the world. unfortunately for you that series means absolutely nothing.

 

[tooextracool]

Dont bring logic into this discussion, Marc. It doesnt sit well with TEC.

He'd prefer to think that Freddie achieved it without trying and whilst allowing his "bunnies" to pummel him to all parts.

do you really wanna talk about logic?
your claim that gilchrist pummelled flintoff during the 12 odd balls that he faced against him in the super series test match defies all logic, especially considering that he got out to him in the end.

 

[tooextracool]

How would you know. Heck you live in Bangalore. So far away from the Australian cricket team and their thought processes. You just think that cos you want to.

and i claimed that australia didnt want to win desperately where exactly? ive questioned how much everyone else wanted to win that game and we've seen several players come out and say that the game didnt matter as much as games for their country...

 

[tooextracool]

do you really wanna talk about logic?
your claim that gilchrist pummelled flintoff during the 12 odd balls that he faced against him in the super series test match defies all logic, especially considering that he got out to him in the end.

just to provide some conclusive evidence to that claim, heres an article that says that flintoff bowled 8 balls to gilchrist on day one.
http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/superseries/content/story/222025.html

 

[Dasa]

do you really wanna talk about logic?
your claim that gilchrist pummelled flintoff during the 12 odd balls that he faced against him in the super series test match defies all logic, especially considering that he got out to him in the end.

Looking at the 'player v player' stats on Cricinfo, Gilchrist faced 10 balls from Flintoff, scoring 5 runs with one 4.

 

[social]

just to provide some conclusive evidence to that claim, heres an article that says that flintoff bowled 8 balls to gilchrist on day one.
http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/superseries/content/story/222025.html

And you'll find 4 score-cards lying around that show Gilchrist producing performances that saw him named man of the series.

 

[marc71178]

And you'll find 4 score-cards lying around that show Gilchrist producing performances that saw him named man of the series.

Which shows he destroyed Flintoff how exactly?

 

[social]

Which shows he destroyed Flintoff how exactly?

Whatever it shows, it certainly doesnt show him to be Flintoff's bunny

 

[tooextracool]

And you'll find 4 score-cards lying around that show Gilchrist producing performances that saw him named man of the series.

jesus how many times do i have to tell you that ODI CRICKET IS NOT THE SAME AS TEST MATCH CRICKET!!!
gilchrist scored a 100 against england in the natwest challenge too, and then got completely worked out during the Ashes. if you look carefully Gilchrist has never succeeded against Flintoff in test match cricket, and if Smith had been smart enough to give Flintoff more balls than 10 against Gilchrist, he would in all likelyhood not have scored anywhere near as many runs in the super series test match.

 

[tooextracool]

Whatever it shows, it certainly doesnt show him to be Flintoff's bunny

if the ashes isnt already conclusive evidence of Gilchrist being Flintoffs bunny.....

 

[social]

jesus how many times do i have to tell you that ODI CRICKET IS NOT THE SAME AS TEST MATCH CRICKET!!!
gilchrist scored a 100 against england in the natwest challenge too, and then got completely worked out during the Ashes. if you look carefully Gilchrist has never succeeded against Flintoff in test match cricket, and if Smith had been smart enough to give Flintoff more balls than 10 against Gilchrist, he would in all likelyhood not have scored anywhere near as many runs in the super series test match.

Oh, I get it. Because you say it, that makes it true.

I'll try to remember that next time you talk crap.

 

[tooextracool]

Oh, I get it. Because you say it, that makes it true.

I'll try to remember that next time you talk crap.

well done in coming with such a logical argument, with such concrete facts. your refusal to accept the fact that gilchrist has been worked out is really bordering on lunacy now.

 

[social]

well done in coming with such a logical argument, with such concrete facts. your refusal to accept the fact that gilchrist has been worked out is really bordering on lunacy now.

Flintoff dismissed Gilchrist in the Ashes by bowling round the wicket, having him bowled, caught in slip or slicing behind point.

So why dont we examine your little theory of how ODIs differ from tests.

3 stumps - check

Gilchrist batting - check

Flintoff bowling to Gilchrist - check

Slips - check (Flintoff bowled first change and Gilchrist opened)

Fieldsmen behind point - check

Theory is crap - check