**Official** Pakistan in Australia Thread

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

No women tennis players would lose very badly to their male counter parts as proved when Venus/Serena Williams played a guy around world number 100 and lost if I am not wrong.

And the match in which Billy Jean King won the battle of the ***es, the other player was way past his prime age.

And the Indians would lose very badly to their Bangladeshi counterparts...

One-match judgement? Be serious.

 

[JASON]

No he won't because he's still in the top 4 middle order batsmen.

Considering his age, and his struggle over the last 6-7 tests, he was bound to get dropped after this Test (if he had not scored a fifty atleast in this Test) although others had been clamouring for him to be dropped earlier ! (but now he may have received the axing before another chance to save himself.)

Now that the selectors have dropped him, one gets the uneasy feeling that he may have to fight his way back by putting runs on the board either in the VB series or at domestic level and then rely on others to be not so successful.

 

[Unattainableguy]

Yes, for balance.

They can't play 12 players, so one of the seamers misses out to accomodate MacGill.

Then they're down to 2 seam bowling options, so they have to look at the best way of getting a 3rd one in, and that is with an all-rounder.

Of course, you might have suggested dropping Gilchrist for Watson (or even retaining Kaspa) and giving the gloves to Langer!

Nope, rather drop Langer or Hayden. Lehman can bat and bowl too. But he's been dropped because of his performance in the 2 tests and not because they have to maintain balance. And if it were for balance, why not drop someone like Martyn and still keep a spinner. But that's because he did well in the previous matches and Lehman didn't

 

[Unattainableguy]

Good to see Farhat not playing

 

[Mr Casson]

Nope, rather drop Langer or Hayden. Lehman can bat and bowl too. But he's been dropped because of his performance in the 2 tests and not because they have to maintain balance. And if it were for balance, why not drop someone like Martyn and still keep a spinner. But that's because he did well in the previous matches and Lehman didn't

Lehmann is a back-up spinner, and when you have MacGill as a second spinner already he is obsolete.

 

[Unattainableguy]

He would atleast be another option for them just in case the other spinner isn't doing the job. I know it's pretty rare for a back-up spinner getting the wickets when the main bowler isn't, but still nothing wrong with giving a try. But then again it is useless to go with Lehman since he hasn't done well with the bat

 

[Mr Casson]

He would atleast be another option for them just in case the other spinner isn't doing the job. I know it's pretty rare for a back-up spinner getting the wickets when the main bowler isn't, but still nothing wrong with giving a try. But then again it is useless to go with Lehman since he hasn't done well with the bat

Well they still have a back-up spinner in Clarke. Honestly, how defensive is that thinking? Trying to pick all your players based on how well they can back-up the spin. You pick all your players and back them to do their jobs.

 

[Unattainableguy]

Ooops! Didn't have Clarke in mind lol

 

[Unattainableguy]

50 without losing a wicket

 

[Unattainableguy]

Well they still have a back-up spinner in Clarke. Honestly, how defensive is that thinking? Trying to pick all your players based on how well they can back-up the spin. You pick all your players and back them to do their jobs.

Ooops! Didn't have Clarke in mind lol

I'm trying to increase the number of my posts lol. No, I just think I should say they have Shane Warne too.

Watson hit for six

 

[Mr Casson]

I'm trying to increase the number of my posts lol. No, I just think I should say they have Shane Warne too.

Watson hit for six

Of course they have Shane Warne. This is exactly why they don't need back-up spin, because they have two specialists, which is more than enough as far as spinners go.

 

[Gangster]

Wow, I have no idea what Australia are thinking. Watson and MacGill? Do they not want to win the match?

This match will either be a draw or a Pakistani win. The result depends on Shoaib Akhtar. If he bowls like he can, Pakistan will win. Since Australia are playing with only 3 real bowlers (only 1 of whom has bowled well in the series so far), they can't win, especially not on a placid Sydney wicket. Of course, Pakistan on the other hand have only one real bowler, but of course he is none other than Shoaib Akhtar. Maybe Kaneria can do something, but who knows. Australia would have been better off playing Lee instead of Watson!

 

[Sehwag309]

Wow, I have no idea what Australia are thinking. Watson and MacGill? Do they not want to win the match?

This match will either be a draw or a Pakistani win. The result depends on Shoaib Akhtar. If he bowls like he can, Pakistan will win. Since Australia are playing with only 3 real bowlers (only 1 of whom has bowled well in the series so far), they can't win, especially not on a placid Sydney wicket. Of course, Pakistan on the other hand have only one real bowler, but of course he is none other than Shoaib Akhtar. Maybe Kaneria can do something, but who knows. Australia would have been better off playing Lee instead of Watson!

ur 1st few lines suggest only 1 thing 'TOO EARLY'

 

[Unattainableguy]

I, too, think they should have played either Brett Lee or Michael Kasprovicz. But still don't know; this is the kind of start Pakistan had in the second test

 

[Unattainableguy]

There you go, one out

 

[Sehwag309]

Shane Watson only looks good enuff to star in an American teen movie

 

[Mr Casson]

Wow, I have no idea what Australia are thinking. Watson and MacGill? Do they not want to win the match?

This match will either be a draw or a Pakistani win. The result depends on Shoaib Akhtar. If he bowls like he can, Pakistan will win. Since Australia are playing with only 3 real bowlers (only 1 of whom has bowled well in the series so far), they can't win, especially not on a placid Sydney wicket. Of course, Pakistan on the other hand have only one real bowler, but of course he is none other than Shoaib Akhtar. Maybe Kaneria can do something, but who knows. Australia would have been better off playing Lee instead of Watson!

You clearly have no idea how well MacGill can bowl at the SCG.

 

[parttimer]

Shane Watson only looks good enuff to star in an American teen movie

lol

During his interview for the cricket show today he said something like 'while some of the older guys go out to play golf me and clarke go out shopping together and have coffees'.

 

[Eclipse]

Shane Watson has bowled fairly well i thought..

He is being selected for the wrong reason if they want him to be a bowling allrounder though.

 

[Mr Casson]

Shane Watson has bowled fairly well i thought..

He is being selected for the wrong reason if they want him to be a bowling allrounder though.

I don't think they are selecting him as a bowling all-rounder. Australia have gone in with 4 bowlers like they usually do (not including Watson). He has come in as a replacement for Darren Lehmann, so effectively he is a batsman who is a back-up seamer (fifth bowler).