KiWiNiNjA
International Coach
Nah, it's what all the cool kids are doing.Sitting in a pub and not buying a beer is blasphemy.
Nah, it's what all the cool kids are doing.Sitting in a pub and not buying a beer is blasphemy.
Throwing Ian Bell in at number 4 and then 3 as a youngster was the worst thing we could have done.Am convinced hazsa19 is a troll now. Wonder if he thinks the same about Ian Bell.
That would be fair though because revs are gold for a spinner, moreso than pace for a quick.How soon before knobs start obsessing about revs like they do speed?
"How many revs was that ball?"
Clarke's just not a number 3, Pontings done the job for years, you can understand him moving down the order.The top 3 are all First Class openers. Ponting and Clarke are both experienced.
But not the be all and end all, like speed.That would be fair though because revs are gold for a spinner, moreso than pace for a quick.
Despite the fact Trott is less than one year older than Bell...Throwing Ian Bell in at number 4 and then 3 as a youngster was the worst thing we could have done.
I fully expect Bell to be Englands permanent number 3 for a few years when Trott goes.
Yeah I'd agree with that.40 times a second? Thats sounds ridiculously high. Would have never have thought that.
Hussey at 3? That bloke can barely deal with the moving ball at 6, how do you expect him to survive first upClarke's just not a number 3, Pontings done the job for years, you can understand him moving down the order.
Time for Hussey to step up. Guess he wants to protect that inflated average..
C'mon! It is disgraceful and highly irresponsible for an experienced batsman like Bell to be batting down at 6 while the inexperienced Trott is batting at 3!!!!!Throwing Ian Bell in at number 4 and then 3 as a youngster was the worst thing we could have done.
I fully expect Bell to be Englands permanent number 3 for a few years when Trott goes.
That's not true, actually.Hussey at 3? That bloke can barely deal with the moving ball at 6, how do you expect him to survive first up
I think that's a bit of a stretch, consider Hussey made a career out of opening originally, however it would be ridiculous to move someone like Hussey who has had great success batting at 6 and batting with the tail, whereas you've got Marsh who is a top order player.Hussey at 3? That bloke can barely deal with the moving ball at 6, how do you expect him to survive first up
From what we're told Punter would have been happy to stay at #3 but the selectors made the decision. You might argue that Hussey is shirking responsibility but Clarke bats pretty low for someone who's touted as Australia's best bat. Guess his #4 stats though show he's not cut out to be a top order batsman. Sometimes the line-up is about team balance.Clarke's just not a number 3, Pontings done the job for years, you can understand him moving down the order.
Time for Hussey to step up. Guess he wants to protect that inflated average..
If you consider that it takes about a second for the ball to reach the batsman, it makes sense.40 times a second? Thats sounds ridiculously high. Would have never have thought that.
Key word is originally, the Hussey of today is fairly clueless against anything which moves off the straightI think that's a bit of a stretch, consider Hussey made a career out of opening originally, however it would be ridiculous to move someone like Hussey who has had great success batting at 6 and batting with the tail, whereas you've got Marsh who is a top order player.
Jeez 3/200 is about as good as I'd dare have realistically hoped for at the start of the day.