***Official*** Super Series

[Top_Cat]

Nice bowling Nathan Bracken.

Don't 'keepers usually only go up to the stumps for accurate bowlers?

 

[marc71178]

I must say that I find it fairly typical that when Aus supporters raised similar objections to the scheduling before the Ashes tour, we were howled down by all and sundry. Now, when the boot is on the other foot, every excuse under the sun is being trotted out and were expected to accept them as a fact of life.

I don't remember too many comments about the scheduling on here - and I think you'll find it was agreed as being a silly schedule. Mind you, isn't it partly CA's fault, for going for 2 day games etc.?

And I think you could quite easily turn what you said around to the following:

"I must say that I find it fairly typical that when Eng supporters pointed out the horrendous number of injuris during the last Ashes tour, we were howled down by all and sundry. Now, when one Australian was injured, every excuse under the sun is being trotted out and were expected to accept them as a fact of life."

 

[Slow Love™]

Does anybody know the attendance figure for today?

 

[marc71178]

No Lara?!

I'm guessing TEC picked his side on form and suitability for the role, rather than going for marquee names.

 

[marc71178]

Again, they don't have the time to gel as a unit.

If they were going to use the Super Series concept, they should have organised it a long time before they did, to stop other fixtures interfering as they have, so they can have an actual tour.

But the problem is that a tour would take at least a month and a bit out of the winter schedule, time which can ill be afforded with the ICC current 5 year plan.

 

[greg]

Well, the comment I made on that decision was not entirely out of the realm of facetiousness - "if for no other reason then for diplomacy's sake". It was just an acknowledgement of Hair and Murali's history.

But is this orientation on the part of the umpires "in your judgement", or is there some documentation on this (in which case I'll be perfectly happy to cede the point)? For it to be true, it would have to mean that every single LBW given has been referred to the third umpire for "doublechecking". Is this the case?

No it's just my impression. It's certainly how Dar seems to be operating it - if you look at the Martyn dismissal you see he nodded his head before referring it. The fact that he didn't refer the Ponting decision because he thought it was going over the top seems to reinforce that (although this is subject to knowing whether the third umpire is allowed to give advice on height).

 

[marc71178]

Have to agree, when Australia lost and some of the Aussie supporters weren't happy about it (as you would), Marc got on his ego-boosting high horse and accused them from suffering from SLS.

Actually Craig, the only time I ever did that was when they lost that Test in India, because there was a sudden load of people on this forum crying foul about the wicket when Australia collapsed on the last day, yet they'd been perfectly happy about it the previous day when Clarke took his 6-9...

I would never have done it in this series because I fully expected a heavy defeat.

 

[marc71178]

Just sit back and watch the worlds 2nd best team taking on the world no 1 aussies and enjoy,

We've just done that over a whole 5 Test series...

 

[Eclipse]

poor shot by Freddie..

ball moved in off the seam though..

 

[Pratters]

I made this point before - his strike rate is very misleading due to him spending very little time batting outside the first 15 overs

If you take note of the Sehwag;s after 15 over strike rate, compare it with that of Gayle, I dont think Sehwag's would be much lower as he bats the same way mostly while Gayle's could be.

 

[marc71178]

Why don't Australia make Bracken or McGrath the suber sub

Because if they bowl first, they've immediately wasted the sub.

 

[Tim]

Well the ball wasn't anything special..just straight and Flintoff totally missed it.

 

[Pratters]

so how many quality players have there been that have averaged 27 at the top of the order? let alone one that apparently merits a place in the ROW XI

The ROW would bat the 50 overs based on the batting depth so a player with a higher strike rate averaging around 30 would be very useful.

 

[marc71178]

Should have been refered doubt. I think the umpires just forget they have that option. sometimes.

Or maybe there's no doubt in their mind about the call.

 

[tooextracool]

Katich, Clarke and Martyn have all been successful opening and batting in the middle order, as was Lehmann come to think of it i think he opened a couple of times too and did alright

clarke,martyn and katich havent played anywhere near enough ODI cricket at any position to be deemed equally successful at the openers spot.

 

[Eclipse]

Well the ball wasn't anything special..just straight and Flintoff totally missed it.

If it was compleatly straight he wouldn't have missed it.. but yeah nothing special just came in off the seam enough.

 

[Slow Love™]

No it's just my impression. It's certainly how Dar seems to be operating it - if you look at the Martyn dismissal you see he nodded his head before referring it. The fact that he didn't refer the Ponting decision because he thought it was going over the top seems to reinforce that (although this is subject to knowing whether the third umpire is allowed to give advice on height).

Well, I reckon you could be a little more sure if you're going to talk about people completely misinterpreting how the technology is to be used, I think.

Particularly if you're judging it on how Dar "seems to be" operating it, and all the decisions don't necessarily follow the pattern you suggest (as well as the fact that it was a decision by Hair we were discussing). If it turns out to be the case that the umpires are actually doing this, fair enough - I had got the impression that some LBWs had been given without consulting though.

 

[Demolition Man]

I remember thinking that about Samaraweera. Enough said.

Yeah, well i think there is a class gap between Hussey and him IMHO.

 

[Slow Love™]

It's a pity Freddie went when he did, because they were starting to mount a little challenge there.

 

[tooextracool]

Or just maybe he's not performing because:

a. he didnt played any cricket for a month before the tour;

b. he spent a fair proportion of that month on the drink; and

c. the Aussies have actually done some work in the mean-time.

I must say that I find it fairly typical that when Aus supporters raised similar objections to the scheduling before the Ashes tour, we were howled down by all and sundry. Now, when the boot is on the other foot, every excuse under the sun is being trotted out and were expected to accept them as a fact of life.

The fact is that the World X1 would be accutely embarrassed to be dispatched in the way they have been to date.

They are trying but have not been good enough so far.

Is it the end of the world if they continue to lose? Of course not.

Will it be a feather in the cap of the Aussies if they can beat the best that the rest of the world can offer? You better believe it.

And if Flintoff, as you claim, is not putting in 100% but expects to be able to magically regain form in Pakistan, then Eng could be in real trouble over there.

i dont see the relationship between 'not putting 100% in' and 'regaining form'.
and you can call it whatever you want, the fact is that flintoff has underperformed immensely this series. and i dont see how the aussies should be dissapointed with their scheduling during the summer, given that it all played right into their hands and they got way too much practice before the first ashes test began.
and if you think katich and gilchrist have improved as players since then you're obviously deluding yourself.