**Official** Australia in Sri Lanka

[Rik]

i definately agree with you,chaminda vaas is highly underated.i also consider him as a true match winner.i think he is the best left arm fast bowler at the moment in the game.what do u think?

Most definately the best Left Armer in International cricket. He's definately superior to Zaheer Khan, Nathan Bracken (by a good thousand country miles), even Mullally who was a superb ODI bowler.

 

[Rik]

Good bowling by Vaas and Clarke.


I must say in my book the winner was Australia. These Aussies are simply the best of the best.

All the people saying that Oz can't play spin must be eating their words, the pitch was horrible when Australia batted, and SL used 6 spinners yet Australia thrashed them hard.

The winner was Sri Lanka and they deserved it, Vaas bowling a superb over to deny Australia. Australia can play spin, although they are nowhere near experts at it. Ponting and Gilchrist had horror tours in India and Clarke's performance in the 1st game (edges his 1st ball from Murali, plays the next one with not much clue, gets out to the 3rd) doesn't really fill you full of hope for the future does it? Also on Clarke, 2 innings: 2 3-ball 0s following on from his VB series performance (or lack of it) and 5 wickets from the Sri Lankan lower order who seemed intent on committing Hari-Kari. Still better than Love and Lehmann?

 

[Gaijin-san]

Why? Because he picks up a few batsmen during the slog?

Actually, no. He only got one batsman who was going for the slog, and that was the one tailender he got out. Check your arguments and/or watch the game next time.

Originally posted by marc71178
Not at all condition-aided...

I don't see everybody taking 5-wicket hauls.

 

[Gaijin-san]

Also on Clarke, 2 innings: 2 3-ball 0s following on from his VB series performance (or lack of it) and 5 wickets from the Sri Lankan lower order who seemed intent on committing Hari-Kari. Still better than Love and Lehmann?

Hara-Kiri, mate. Hara-kiri.

See what I said to Marc. It wasn't a lower order rout like Hogg's.

 

[LankanPrince]

i definately agree with you,chaminda vaas is highly underated.i also consider him as a true match winner.i think he is the best left arm fast bowler at the moment in the game.what do u think?

Currently in the cricketing world there is no competition for Vaas as far as left arm seam/swing bowlers are concerned. He is the most consistent, skilfull, intellgent left arm bowler in the world at the moment. The only other competitor (who is still far off the mark) is Zaheer Khan. He has showed great potential and talent but has lacked consistency and is not as threatening as Vaas. I hope one day Vaas may be able to aspire to the level of Wasim Akram as far as left arm seam/swing bowling is concerned. He may not be the pioneer that Wasim was but he strives to keep on improving himself as a bowler.:P

 

[Neil Pickup]

I must say in my book the winner was Australia. These Aussies are simply the best of the best.

All the people saying that Oz can't play spin must be eating their words, the pitch was horrible when Australia batted, and SL used 6 spinners yet Australia thrashed them hard.

Er, minor point, they lost.

As for Clarke, I saw nothing, CricInfo's version is:

"Sangakkara and Tillakaratne Dilshan then added 24 in 29 balls before the innings lurched into freefall - the last seven wickets fell for 29 courtesy of a rash of ambitious strokes."

and

"Some reckless batting by the middle and lower order against Michael Clarke's innocuous-looking left-arm spin squandered the initiative as the last seven wickets fell for just 29."

 

[marc71178]

So hopefully Chaminda Vaas will now get some more respect (ESPECIALLY FROM MY MAN HALSEY!) as he is proving himself against the worlds best.

He gets respect, but the big problem with him is that he is so inconsistent.

 

[marc71178]

Hara-Kiri, mate. Hara-kiri.

Hari-Kari actually :P

See what I said to Marc. It wasn't a lower order rout like Hogg's.

But it was considerably aided by the batsmen, and as I said before, the conditions.

If he's that good a bowler, how come his record outside Asia is on the very poor side of mediocre?

 

[age_master]

Hari-Kari actually :P




But it was considerably aided by the batsmen, and as I said before, the conditions.

If he's that good a bowler, how come his record outside Asia is on the very poor side of mediocre?

5 wickets is still 5 wickets - 5 wickets that no one else was taking, its all about bowling to the conditions and the situation of the game, which he apparently did quite well.

 

[age_master]

"I am fine and fit at 95 kilograms," Ranatunga said.

 

[aussiefan]

Bad Luck the aussies lost the race.

But they have showed some thing that they can play spin.

I hope that Sri lanka backfires in its own policy of making spinning
pitches and playing with 6 spinners !!!!

I think Micheal Clark is an over rated player. It is true that he has just come into the arena but he should not be pampered much as he is being done in this forum.

Wish that that aussies bounce back in the series

 

[Jono]

Lol, all my Australian fans today were bragging about how they hit Murali and he got no wickets. They obviously forgot how good a bowler Chaminda Vaas was. Underrated most definitely but it works in his favour when the team dismisses him as a real danger.

 

[Gaijin-san]

Hari-Kari actually :P

Nope. 'Hara' is a Japanese word (albeit slightly rude) for stomach. 'Kiri' is the act of cutting. So 'Hara-Kiri' is the act of cutting one's stomach.

I can speak very good Japanese and I doubt you will challenge me further on this. :P

 

[age_master]

Lol, all my Australian fans today were bragging about how they hit Murali and he got no wickets. They obviously forgot how good a bowler Chaminda Vaas was. Underrated most definitely but it works in his favour when the team dismisses him as a real danger.

being underrated almost always works, if you do the right think - as well demonstrated today by both Clarke and Vaas wit- it just takes the edge off in the batsmans mind i think

 

[Slow Love™]

Lol, all my Australian fans today were bragging about how they hit Murali and he got no wickets.

Wait, you have a fan club? :P

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

being underrated almost always works, if you do the right think - as well demonstrated today by both Clarke and Vaas wit- it just takes the edge off in the batsmans mind i think

So you consider Clarke's bowling under-rated?

 

[tooextracool]

its gonna be a different story for the aussies when murali bowls 100 overs per match. in my opinion many aussie players are weak or havent proven themselves against spin:gilchrist,martyn,symonds and lehmann. it will be a real test to see if they can adapt and pick up muralis new ball(i know its a ****ing chuck)

 

[Jono]

Wait, you have a fan club? :P

LOL! I've said some stupid things without proof reading but that's gotta be right up there.

I meant all my Australian friends

 

[LankanPrince]

He gets respect, but the big problem with him is that he is so inconsistent.

Give it up man he isn't that inconsistent. How many damn matchwinning performances do you want from him before you class him as consistent? According to your criteria a bowler has to take loads of wickets every match and have nice, attractive stats to be consistent. Vaas may not haul in loads of wickets but he is the most consistent SL bowler around, he is usually on the money when even Muralitharan fails. He is also has to put up with flat, lifeless SL pitches. If you want to talk about inconsistent bowlers lets start with some proclaimed English 'greats' cough cough Darren Gough, Andrew Caddick and the biggest one of the all Dominic Cork! I don't see why he is praised so much, he takes 7 wickets in his first game then he does squat for England in his next 8 years. These guys get to bowl on nice, friendly green pitches, have never been vital to Englands success and are pretty much retired anyway! So if you look at it Vaas he can't be that inconsistent.

 

[marc71178]

Give it up man he isn't that inconsistent.

Are you sure?

When he's not on song, he can be very very poor.

How many damn matchwinning performances do you want from him before you class him as consistent?

If he has that many match-winning performances, then he must have one hell of a lot of off days as well to average 30.

That to me is clearly inconsistent.

According to your criteria a bowler has to take loads of wickets every match and have nice, attractive stats?

Far from it, but a bowler who you know what to expect from in terms of performance is in some ways a much better option.