As a great mind once implied, you've got to be prepared to concede eight runs to get a wicket.Suck it England. That's why you don't give a single to Australia's best batsman to get him on strike.
I could understand if Clarke was a tail ender, but he's not. He's a 50+ averaging batsman. All that a single is going to do is get him in form. Sure, bring Broad on, but don't give away a free single.As a great mind once implied, you've got to be prepared to concede eight runs to get a wicket.
As a state player he probably would've been allowed entry to the members' pavilion - so about 10 metres or soHe made a 170, thereby cementing his place for another three years.
Seriously, can anyone imagine that Watson would have been anywhere near the Aussie team if he played like this in 2004 at his age?
Nah, they had a plan to Clarke with Broad coming on early and they wanted to make sure they gave it a go, no problemI could understand if Clarke was a tail ender, but he's not. He's a 50+ averaging batsman. All that a single is going to do is get him in form. Sure, bring Broad on, but don't give away a free single.
One single isn't going to help him find form any more than him avoiding his nemesis for his first 20 deliveries. Clarke's short ball issues tend to only really occur at the start of an innings, so you might as well try and exploit it when you can. The costs of potentially conceding a couple of boundaries and allowing some easy singles don't outweigh the benefits of potentially getting a batsman of Clarke's calibre out.I could understand if Clarke was a tail ender, but he's not. He's a 50+ averaging batsman. All that a single is going to do is get him in form. Sure, bring Broad on, but don't give away a free single.
it's basically developed right over the brisbane areaThey seem to have caught the one shower for a hundred km
Yes I agree, let's shake hands pack up and head for Adelaide with the weather the only winner in this Test. Ah well, let's the Aussies off the hook but there you go.If its gonna rain you could have the decency to do it properly like here and call it a draw
It was utterly shiiteI just don't understand what Rogers was doing. The Watson one, at least you can see what he was trying to do and what Tremlett had done, but Rogers? Jesus