I think you chose the wrong target there - the way I read it the straw man is flibberty's, but then he's a yorkie, and I don't think he was mocking you anywayI can do without your moral indignation. He invented a straw man rather than debating what I'd actually posted. By pointing out that he's an experienced poster with a pretentious-sounding title I was merely trying to prick the conscience of one who should be setting a good example, not posting dishonestly. Not too surprised to see you line up behind such tactics as you normally post even more drivel than he does.
Another similarity with Thomson.Yeah, Ed Cowan writes about it in this article from 2011:
I think he's way past kidding himself there.I like Rad but Warnes kidding himself he's as good as Healy with the gloves.
Ha, spot on, you bastard, you.Why do I get the feeling that this all about to grind to a painful halt, before spectacularly imploding?
This is how we thought he would be in 2009 after he tore up SA. Then he tried to be a swing bowler for a few years.Has to be accurate though, the Johnson of 3 years ago versus the one of this series sums it up well.
Yeah, Haddin was also Larry Holmes following Gilly's Ali. Gets the job done and a fine exponent in his own right but how do you follow someone like the Wingnut?I think he's way past kidding himself there.
Haddin's serviceable when on song, but not in the same league.
They're all at it.I think you chose the wrong target there - the way I read it the straw man is flibberty's, but then he's a yorkie, and I don't think he was mocking you anyway
I'll read what I want, ****Read the article I just posted in the Rad thread boi.
Your cataracts disagree ****.I'll read what I want, ****
I was going to post yesterday that I thought Harris appeared to rush the batsman more at times because he moves it around a bit more. Johnson's bouncer certainly gives most players the hurry up though. He's clearly fairly sharp!Yeah, difference between gun speed and what the bloke at the other end is coping with. Johnson bowling 90+ is nothing new at all but he's managing to make it look like 110+ at the moment. Sometimes, ****s just get everything right and they look unplayable; speed, seam, length. Johnson's also doing it easy because he's fit as. If a bloke is bowling 90+ for a couple of overs, you can get through it (well, y'know, not me but someone who can bat....). Someone doing it all day and then he arcs up even more if he takes a wicket at quarter to six, **** that.
I think it depends. The English tail have been targeted with short stuff and it's worked because they're clearly clueless against it. What England were doing bouncing Lyon yesterday so often was a bit of a waste of time however.Okay. I don't think it is. One of the things you always here from commentators is how bowlers should treat tail enders the same as any other player and just bowl top of off etc, particularly when plans to them aren't working. It's a massive thing in this series that the tail has got almost exculsively short stuff when they've got no idea against it and really proves that old rhetoric wrong if not misguided. They are all pretty reasonable batsmen, who are acutally really effective when you bowl to them like normal batters, but they've looked like schoolgirls.
Agreed on Healy being the best Aus keeper ive seen also.Yeah, Haddin was also Larry Holmes following Gilly's Ali. Gets the job done and a fine exponent in his own right but how do you follow someone like the Wingnut?
Gilly also somewhat made people forget what fantastic keeper Healy was in his own right. I reckon he's the best glove man I've seen play for Aus. Would like JBMAC's views on this. I only go back as far as Marsh.