**Official** Australia in Bangladesh

[honestbharani]

Keep in mind, nobody is saying "Bangladesh only scored runs against Warne because Warne was carrying a sore shoulder". At the very most, it only contributed to Warne bowling below his best, and quite possibly it made no difference at all.

What I am talking about is not whether or not Warne was beaten by Bangladesh because he was injured, but why it is that when a guy who has a well-deserved reputation for being a great competitor goes off the field with a sore shoulder after he's been smashed around, people suggest he's faking it to get out of bowling on a flat pitch. Not only does it not make sense (if he wanted to protect his figures, he wouldn't have bowled at all, and certainly not 20 overs, and he would have stayed on to improve them with wickets), but it's also a completely unsubstantiated attack on Warne's character in an area where he's never put a foot wrong.

If people did the same thing to Murali, half the forum would jump on them, and rightly so, so I don't see why Warne should cop the same from a handful of different people in this thread.

I never said he pretended injury. I hope we have cleared the air on this issue now.

 

[Nate]

He isn't capable of it (atm). Why was he playing such an attacking innings? Was he even watching the match when Hayden & Ponting were batting?

Word on the street is that his golden locks were slightly out of place and he couldn`t concentrate. But he scored a few runs and now he`s back to doing what he loves best.

 

[chaminda_00]

Bangladesh to get some quick wickets tommorrow, but Australia will still win fairly comfortably.

For Australia more question raised rather then answered so far. The five bowlers worked quite well in the 2nd innings, but even now if Australia do lose (unlikely though) it may be down to lack of a extra batsmen.

Hussey done ok at the top of the order, but probably still adds more to side down the order. I wouldn't be surprised if Jaques if given a game in the next Test.

For Bangladesh, they still seem to have a major problem with the 2nd seamer. Shahadat still doesn't look anywhere near Test standard. The batting line up is starting to look better, but still way too incosistent. Ashraful really needs to start looking closer at his shot selection. His played some pathetic shot during this Test Match.

 

[honestbharani]

Are you guys just flat out ignoring the mods for fun or what? This is 100% annoying the hell out of everyone.

Why is discussion about Warne's comments on Bangladesh in the Australia Vs Bangladesh thread wrong?

 

[aussie]

He isn't capable of it (atm). Why was he playing such an attacking innings? Was he even watching the match when Hayden & Ponting were batting?

Really dont know, plus it was close to the end of the day as well.

 

[honestbharani]

Yeah, drop Warney. That guy is crap.

WEll, he should be, if he can only get tailender wickets against Bangladesh.


Seriously, I think it is true that he will not play the next test. I guess the word that should have been used in the original post must have been "rested". But jeez, Sean, you and kazo have been in ultra defensive mode all through this thread. Chill out. Maybe some of us went overboard here, but it is bound to happen when an upset as big as this occurs (yes, even if Australia win, I consider this an upset, because of the fact that Bangladesh actually have a 30% realistic chance of winning this game going into the last day).

 

[honestbharani]

Oh Warney.

Bit worrying to see him grabbing at his shoulder after bowling that big wrong'un, but managed to take three key wickets nonetheless and wrap up the tail. Gillespie has certainly done enough to show he should still be in line for test selection as well, bowled very well all game, and covered for Lee's shortcomings somewhat.

Interesting finish set up now. 300 should be quite managable on this pitch, as it is still good for batting aside from some variable bounce, but Australia will have to play very watchfully, as Gilchrist and Clarke showed in the first innings. It will be a remarkable comeback if Australia win, but credit should go to Bangladesh for their performance, whether they manage to get over the line or not.

There ya go. Isn't it obvious that even tailender wickets can be well thought out and gotten with good bowling? I hope you will remember that the next time people want to discuss "quality of wickets" with regards to a bowler. I am thinking I might start a thread for it.

 

[honestbharani]

The difficult question is where they should put him, I think.

At the moment it's pretty straightforward, as he can bowl with Lee and Clark, but if and when McGrath returns, there's a selection dilemma, since both McGrath and Lee have to be picked. And of course, Australia don't have any test cricket between now and the Ashes in which to give Clark and Gillespie an extended run against one another.

Whenever Gillespie does get dropped for good, his lower order stickability will be SORELY SORELY missed by the Aussies. I think he might be the difference between a win and a loss in this test. Would have been interesting if Kasper had played instead. Bangla might have gotten a 200+ run lead.

 

[honestbharani]

Oh come on be fair - they've done incredibly well to even get into this position in the firsat place.

Nothing Bangladeshi from this game can be called pathetic.

Except Ashraful. He needs to learn to bat. And the umpire needs to see that yorkers hitting batsmen in line with legstump will go on to miss legstump.


But seriously, the guy has so much talent and it could have been put to such good use in this match had he kept his wits about him. Him playing well would have resulted in a Bangladesh win, me thinks.

 

[GotSpin]

There ya go. Isn't it obvious that even tailender wickets can be well thought out and gotten with good bowling? I hope you will remember that the next time people want to discuss "quality of wickets" with regards to a bowler. I am thinking I might start a thread for it.

That will be a great thread

 

[SJS]

He still tries to play spin off the back foot too much, not that the Bangladeshi spinners are good enough to exploit that.

You make it sound like a weakness. It is the sign of a good player. What a good spinner (good being the operative word) can and will exploit is a player lunging forward not one who plays back to everything thats even slightly short pitched. That is the ideal way to play spin.

Yes you have to be a good player off the backfoot to do it. But the real difference between what LOOKS LIKE a good player and a REALLY good player is the difference in the quality of their backfoot play.

 

[Dizzy #4]

My tip is for the next batsmen to be Lee, Gillespie, Warne, Clark, MacGill.

nO NO NO, They need a stayer

Gillespie, Lee, Warne, MacGill, Clark

 

[honestbharani]

That will be a great thread

Don't worry. I hope it won't be restricted to Warne Vs Murali. There is just too much talk about wickets, quality wickets etc. We need to discuss the various aspects associated with that. Like I said, Warne getting Rafique in this match, to me, was a result of better bowling and planning than it was when he got STrauss out bowled once in the Ashes.

 

[GotSpin]

Don't worry. I hope it won't be restricted to Warne Vs Murali. There is just too much talk about wickets, quality wickets etc. We need to discuss the various aspects associated with that. Like I said, Warne getting Rafique in this match, to me, was a result of better bowling and planning than it was when he got STrauss out bowled once in the Ashes.

Im sure you intend it to be that away, but it will always end up to be warne vs murali

 

[GotSpin]

nO NO NO, They need a stayer

Gillespie, Lee, Warne, MacGill, Clark

MacGill last if you want a stayer.

 

[honestbharani]

Im sure you intend it to be that away, but it will always end up to be warne vs murali

We can get the mods to issue a warning like they did here. Maybe they can delete posts which go down that route.

 

[Mister Wright]

MacGill last if you want a stayer.

When was the last time Clark was involved in a 200 run patnership?

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

You make it sound like a weakness. It is the sign of a good player. What a good spinner (good being the operative word) can and will exploit is a player lunging forward not one who plays back to everything thats even slightly short pitched. That is the ideal way to play spin.

Yes you have to be a good player off the backfoot to do it. But the real difference between what LOOKS LIKE a good player and a REALLY good player is the difference in the quality of their backfoot play.

I agree with that. I think however that the exception to this is on pitches with severely unpredictable bounce, such as this one. When the ball is regularly staying low, you have to play forward as much as possible to ensure that you cover the variation in bounce. On pitches with true bounce, playing back the way that Martyn and Clarke can opens up far more attacking options without being overly risky.

 

[GotSpin]

When was the last time Clark was involved in a 200 run patnership?

I dont think MacGill's technique of running away to square leg playing a wild horizontal shot will work

 

[SJS]

I agree with that. I think however that the exception to this is on pitches with severely unpredictable bounce, such as this one. When the ball is regularly staying low, you have to play forward as much as possible to ensure that you cover the variation in bounce. On pitches with true bounce, playing back the way that Martyn and Clarke can opens up far more attacking options without being overly risky.

Spot On.