Nate
You'll Never Walk Alone
Don`t think there`s any maybe about it tbh.Son Of Coco said:It seemed to me Pietersen said 'No' with a fairly pained expression on his face as soon as it went past too...maybe it was a hemorrhoid popping.
Don`t think there`s any maybe about it tbh.Son Of Coco said:It seemed to me Pietersen said 'No' with a fairly pained expression on his face as soon as it went past too...maybe it was a hemorrhoid popping.
and while we're talking about things that only I seem to agree with, KP looks like Kevin Spacey's South African love child.Nnanden said:Don`t think there`s any maybe about it tbh.
Cook played Warne better than expected, but his dismissal was worrying, in that it followed the trend of his dismissals to Kaneria during the summer. He still needs to work on playing spin with soft hands and letting the ball hit bat rather than the other way around. Otherwise i predict more catches for short leg.PhoenixFire said:I was surprised as to how well Collingwood played Warne, and Cook as well. This isn't going to be a 40 wicket series for him.
Like someone has already mentioned, England were always batting for time, rather than runs. The number of runs he scored is irrelevant, the fact is that he batted more balls than anyone else in the England side in either inning. Hence you could say he played the biggest role in saving that test match than any of the others.BingLeeElectric said:Everyone going wayyyyyyyy over the top with the Bell love.
One 50 on a road, in which he should have been given out plumb LBW on about 0, to go with his other duck and everyone's got a hard on for him.
Laughable.
I really cant understand this post. First you credit him for 'counter attacking' Australia, then you call his jump down the pitch to Shane Warne completely idiotic, not to mention that he must have skipped down the wicket to Warne some 10 times before that, and gotten a fair few boundaries in the process. There was nothing wrong with him coming down the pitch, the mistake he did make however was that he continued with the heave, despite the fact that he didnt get to the pitch of the ball and despite the fact that he would have clearly seen that the ball hit the crack.Slow Love™ said:* Collingwood played really well in that second dig. IMO, he's got a bit of steel about him and is a bit underrated as a test cricketer. But that jump down the pitch to Warne was completely idiotic, and was akin to something a South African might do. Didn't invalidate his innings, but as captain, you would have been furious, in spite of the fact that he'd kept the Aussie bowlers out and counter-attacked so well up to that point. Unless of course you yourself were about to go out and play a suicidal pull shot like Flintoff did shortly after.
It didn't hit one.tooextracool said:I really cant understand this post. First you credit him for 'counter attacking' Australia, then you call his jump down the pitch to Shane Warne completely idiotic, not to mention that he must have skipped down the wicket to Warne some 10 times before that, and gotten a fair few boundaries in the process. There was nothing wrong with him coming down the pitch, the mistake he did make however was that he continued with the heave, despite the fact that he didnt get to the pitch of the ball and despite the fact that he would have clearly seen that the ball hit the crack.
Tbf, Gilchrist has appealed for some pretty dubious "nicks" in the past. And I certainly wouldn't put it past Hayden to appeal for something like that.FaaipDeOiad said:I'm not sure if it hit the bat or not, but I'm inclined to believe it did based on Gilchrist's reaction. I can't see him jumping around and appealing that confidently and instinctively in unison with Hayden despite a complete lack of support from the bowler unless he heard or saw something, and he was far closer than the umpire.
I don't see why it's hard to understand. Mainly 'cause "counter-attacking" isn't equivalent in definition to "premeditatively charging down the pitch for an almighty six-hit and getting nowhere near it".tooextracool said:I really cant understand this post. First you credit him for 'counter attacking' Australia, then you call his jump down the pitch to Shane Warne completely idiotic, not to mention that he must have skipped down the wicket to Warne some 10 times before that, and gotten a fair few boundaries in the process. There was nothing wrong with him coming down the pitch, the mistake he did make however was that he continued with the heave, despite the fact that he didnt get to the pitch of the ball and despite the fact that he would have clearly seen that the ball hit the crack.
Given the noise, I would have been doing backflips.shortpitched713 said:Tbf, Gilchrist has appealed for some pretty dubious "nicks" in the past. And I certainly wouldn't put it past Hayden to appeal for something like that.
Geriant Jones gets picked on the basis of his cheating by way of appeals alone.shortpitched713 said:Tbf, Gilchrist has appealed for some pretty dubious "nicks" in the past. And I certainly wouldn't put it past Hayden to appeal for something like that.
Still doesn't stop him from robbing guys on occasion though.BingLeeElectric said:Gilchrist is one of the more fair gentleman left in the game.
Way behind watching Collingwood and Bell do it throughout all of day 1 though.pasag said:Watching Brett Lee block has got to be one of the most irritating things ever.
...not this again.shortpitched713 said:Still doesn't stop him from robbing guys on occasion though.
I don't think you'll get much argument at this stage.NZTailender said:Can see Australia winning this test, tbh.