**Official** Pakistan in Australia Thread

[Mr Casson]

told ya, u spoke too early



..even better, get a 5 - for

Better than what? I said he clearly had no idea how well MacGill bowls at the SCG, evidenced BY that pfeiffer.

 

[Choora]

That's blatantly ***ist and so incorrect.

Why is it incorrect? Can someone please tell me the fastest bowl ever bowled by a women cricketer? if it isn't anywehere near 150 kmp then its very clear that female batters would struggle to face the likes of Lee,Akhter and bond coz these guys are express fast and this is something women cicketers have never come across and won't experiance it even in future.

 

[Choora]

Physical strength is an argument, but that too can be rebutted, as many women can get themselves into a position of strength equal to that of men.

really? if so then from where???

The women may not play the same style of game as the men, but that doesn't mean that the men would beat the woment automatically. They still have to adjust to that style of play. Being able to hit the ball harder and bowl the ball faster does not make you a superior cricketer. Look at Afridi/Powell and Brett Lee.

Being able to bowl a bowl faster is always a plus point when it is combined with skill (example being Akhter, Bond etc) .even Bret lee ( someone who haved fared well at test level) would be too hot to handle by women cricketers.


I ask cricket fans some questions.What do you guys think would be a result of a match played between Aus men cricket team and the Aus women cricket team?

Believe me i have nothing against women and i swear that i would be rooting for aus women team to beat ponting boys but i am sane enough to realise that it can never happen and the match would be a total one-sided affair.

 

[Behlol]

End of the day 292/9.disappointing for Pakistan after a very good start.

 

[Choora]

The worst ranked male tennis player wouldn't stand a chance against Serena Williams, even as she currently is. Power isn't everything. If it were, Philippoussis would win almost every match.

BUt the same Philippoussis would beat women tennis players!

I remember stephen Edberg saying that the top women player would struggle even against the 100th ranked men player.These are facts, one need to understand that power might not be everything BUT it is something that is very crucial.

 

[Choora]

End of the day 292/9.disappointing for Pakistan after a very good start.

PATHETIC ! thats the word i can use to describe them.They lost a very very good chance of putting up a good total against Australia.Salman butt and Akhter would really be frustated. In all the three test match Pakistan at some stage had things at control but lost the opportunity, and i believe that is criminal.

Hats off to Butt for making such a marvellous ton, unfortunately his senior team mates led him down.

 

[Sehwag309]

Better than what? I said he clearly had no idea how well MacGill bowls at the SCG, evidenced BY that pfeiffer.

...my statment was concurrence, I was appreciating his bowling

 

[Mr Casson]

I know, but you still misquoted me.

 

[Crazy Sam]

pakistan will/should be embarrassed by such a poor showing after such a strong start. I knew once we got them 3 down they'd struggle, the top 4 are the only ones who have proven to trouble the aussies.

I thought our bowlers weren't bad but weren't spectacular either - they all did alright. About even I think, I know Macgill got 5 wickets but the pakistanis threw their wickets away (except for butt, rana and ahktar) unbelievably.

I thought Watson was quite good coming on and being economical while the other bowlers were being carted around for runs. He had a few wayward balls but did trouble the batsmen a bit, keeping in mind he's essentially a 'fifth' bowler option. His fielding was certainly a lot better than Lehmann's, which was to be expected. I thought all the bowlers bowled more poor balls than I usually see from them, and it really was poor pakistani play which saw them collapse so spectacularly.

The toss at the SCG is so vital but given Pakistani's relative failure today to hurt the aussies, it'll be interesting to see how we bat. Assuming they're out for around 300 early tomorrow, I reckon the aussies will be looking to bat for 2 days and/or pile on 550-600. If Australia bats last they'll have it very tough.

 

[abe]

Those two inswinging yorkers from McGrath were brilliant!

Mark Taylor must have said the words reverse swing 6 times, then proceeded to say (and show) that the shiny side was facing leg. Isn't reverse swing when the ball goes against what is expected ie the ball swings towards the dull/rough side?

I also hope that Gillespie picks up a few wickets in the second innings, those two dropped catches in his first (?) over were disappointing to see.

 

[Eclipse]

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).

Yes but if they want to pick him primaraly as a batsman he should bat above Gilly..

He is not a number seven batsman.

 

[redbaron]

Those two inswinging yorkers from McGrath were brilliant!

Mark Taylor must have said the words reverse swing 6 times, then proceeded to say (and show) that the shiny side was facing leg. Isn't reverse swing when the ball goes against what is expected ie the ball swings towards the dull/rough side?

I also hope that Gillespie picks up a few wickets in the second innings, those two dropped catches in his first (?) over were disappointing to see.

conventional (ie. normal) swing usually swings away from the shiny surface therefore towards the rough one. Reverse swing is when the opposite happens.

 

[redbaron]

Yes but if they want to pick him primaraly as a batsman he should bat above Gilly..

He is not a number seven batsman.

well he isnt better then gilly either...or any other batsmen in the team for a matter of fact.

 

[Mr Casson]

Yes but if they want to pick him primaraly as a batsman he should bat above Gilly..

He is not a number seven batsman.

No he's not, but if he's the fifth bowler, then he isn't a bowler first and foremost. I agree that he should bat above Gilly, but we haven't seen the Aussies yet so Watson still might get his chance a bit higher.

 

[Mr Casson]

well he isnt better then gilly either...or any other batsmen in the team for a matter of fact.

Ask yourself how many of the Aussies are better batsmen than Gilly and rethink the validity of that comment. Gilly has just has made number seven his spot and I don't see why he should move up.

 

[Eclipse]

well he isnt better then gilly either...or any other batsmen in the team for a matter of fact.

No but he is still a good batsman and his job should be to score runsm something that wont be easy batting at number seven..

I think Gilly plays so well at number seven that why move him ?

 

[benchmark00]

Hello Hello Hellooo... im talking to marc and Mr Mxyzptlk.... doubted macgill?? remember that time yous all argued till yous were blue in the face?? now hasnt that come back to bite you in the proverbial ass... commentators even said today: macgill has bowled very very well in his limited opportunities.... sound familiar guys?? i think you have an apology to make to macgilla gorilla... time to eat humble pie guys...

 

[Josh]

PATHETIC ! thats the word i can use to describe them.They lost a very very good chance of putting up a good total against Australia.Salman butt and Akhter would really be frustated. In all the three test match Pakistan at some stage had things at control but lost the opportunity, and i believe that is criminal.

Hats off to Butt for making such a marvellous ton, unfortunately his senior team mates led him down.

I wholeheartedly agree.

 

[abe]

conventional (ie. normal) swing usually swings away from the shiny surface therefore towards the rough one. Reverse swing is when the opposite happens.

Cool, thanks

In an article on baggygreen, quotes from Hohns seemed to indicate that Watson was there primarily for providing bowling options. Would it really be that tragic if he doesn't bat above Gilchrist? I don't think a player of Gilchrist's talent will be too unsettled by batting at six instead of seven.

 

[Josh]

Watson will bat 7.