***Official*** Super Series

[Jono]

I've heard this "Super Series" has been a rig. Your thoughts?

If it was rigged, why would they manipulate it to be a 3-0 thrashing of the World XI? You would have thought they'd have it 1-1 going into the 3rd ODI with a tight finish or something.

In other words, it wasn't rigged.

 

[tooextracool]

Hey TEC here is a great chance for you to make a prediction BEFORE the test match ,rather than saying how bad every player ,and i mean EVERY player in both teams are.
Have a go at it,Give us what your teams will and should be,who will make what in your opinion,the outcome of the test. Then we will be able to disect your predictions and see how close you are to the actual result. Looking back through some of your posts you have said nearly every player in both teams are either overated,useless and not worthy of a test or ODI role or a ludicrus inclusion. So can you please nominate what you see happening in the test and we will look back next week and see how you went. I will be the first to congradulate you if you get anywhere near a correct prediction.
Ps i wish you would have predicted something of the ODI matches but unfortunatly you didnt untill after the teams played,which is a fairly easy thing in hind sight. Look forward to see how you go buddy . Should be pretty simple for someone of such wisdom hahahaha

because im of course a soothsayer, who can predict who will score in every test match and who wont all i can do is tell you who is unlikely to score and who is more likely to score, but even rubbish players have their day and even the very best can fail in any particular test match. the only thing a cricket expert can do is predict in the long run, who will be successful and who wont, and even that is short term considering that sometimes players improve over time.

 

[tooextracool]

I think the fact that he was the leading wicket taker in this series and had a good time of it in Pakistan for Australia A as well indicates that he's starting to improve again post-injury. In the third ODI in particular he really bowled quite decently... he was accurate, he moved the ball around a bit and took four wickets, and he bowled at decent pace and had some decent bouncers. He's certainly far from a test class bowling option, but if he can warrant his position with the bat (which I believe he definately can), he's a good option as a third seamer to allow MacGill into the team.

it might not hurt right now, given that the bowling reserves that australia have are shaun tait, stuart clark and nathan bracken, none of whom are a class above watson anyways. however anyone who thinks watson merits inclusion in the side as a bowling all rounder is seriously deluding himself, because hes not fit to have the world 'bowl' next to his name.

 

[tooextracool]

by stating that Flintoff was garbage at that age is only strengthening the argument against yourself

err what?
flintoff didnt merit a place in the side when he first got picked, almost anyone knows that. whether watson is better than him or not is not relevant, because even anthony mcgrath would be able to claim that he was better than flintoff at 24.

 

[tooextracool]

TEC, both he and Flintoff were originally picked on potential alone.

However, whilst Flintoff might have been garbage at the same age, Watson is a good enough bowler to win 2 MOM awards against a team comprising some of the world's best players and to ave 50 with the bat in fc cricket.

That, my friend, is a rare talent and precisely why Aus selectors have more faith in him than you do.

your point being? none of this changes the fact that at the moment, he cant bowl to save his life. he may well have talent with the bat, and i'll reserve judgement until i see him bat in test match cricket, but with the ball the potential he has is void.

 

[tooextracool]

That's why he got man of the match twice for that very mediocre talent of his....beyond doubt for sure...what a joke

your point is?
ronnie irani once took 5 wickets(which probably included more wicket taking balls too) and scored 50 odd in an ODI against india. should we say that he has plenty of potential with both ball and bat then?

 

[sqwerty]

your point being? none of this changes the fact that at the moment, he cant bowl to save his life. he may well have talent with the bat, and i'll reserve judgement until i see him bat in test match cricket, but with the ball the potential he has is void.

I watched Flintoff bowl 2 years ago and thought the same thing of him. He couldn't even hit the crease, he looked rubbish and he hardly deserved a spot in any test side with bat or ball

I'm no Watson fan and I don't think he looks much at the moment but given the way Flintoff has developed there's no reason why Watson couldn't also.

 

[tooextracool]

I watched Flintoff bowl 2 years ago and thought the same thing of him. He couldn't even hit the crease, he looked rubbish and he hardly deserved a spot in any test side with bat or ball

I'm no Watson fan and I don't think he looks much at the moment but given the way Flintoff has developed there's no reason why Watson couldn't also.

not everyone will turn into a flintoff, and the vast majority of players dont which is what im trying to indicate. and yes flintoff didnt deserve to be called an all rounder 2 years ago,although he was still a better bowler than watson currently is. however he was picked for his batting potential, which hes slowly started to realise since then.

 

[GotSpin]

Not sure if this has been mentioned but Fridays game scored high tv ratings, hit a peak of 2million when gilly was hitting them around

 

[age_master]

not a bad effort

 

[GotSpin]

Oh yeah forgot to add, Melbourne scored a viewing audience of 750k + and sydney 550k+

Not exact figures but close

 

[marc71178]

I watched Flintoff bowl 2 years ago and thought the same thing of him. He couldn't even hit the crease, he looked rubbish and he hardly deserved a spot in any test side with bat or ball

Which series was this then, because since 2003 SA he's been anything but rubbish, even if vs SA his average was very high.

 

[jlo33692]

because im of course a soothsayer, who can predict who will score in every test match and who wont all i can do is tell you who is unlikely to score and who is more likely to score, but even rubbish players have their day and even the very best can fail in any particular test match. the only thing a cricket expert can do is predict in the long run, who will be successful and who wont, and even that is short term considering that sometimes players improve over time.

Fair enough TEC, Thats a good point.
TEC what is a soothsayer? Is that a form of Fortune teller?

 

[jlo33692]

Thanks for speaking on behalf of the rest of the forum...

I didnt say all,,,I said most,however i didnt count them all but i just thought commonSENSE would have said most would agree, but hey ,to each there own,and not all have common sense do they?

 

[jlo33692]

And your pick seems pretty dull to me mate...Sehwag is totally out of form, i can hardly see him performing these days & with Kallis instead of him, eventhough he doesn't play as an opener, i do expect him performing well than Sehwag in test at any place...and Kallis bowls too which gives the team an option for the 6th bowler. Regarding Inzy, well his inclusion will definately make batting line-up strong, he's know for building vital innings in troublesome situation, so his inclusion will definately ace the batting line-up. And we do want to see a bit more different team than the ODIz, b/c if those ROW carried their ODI performance, then i surely expect Aussies getting them twice in an inning!

I do agree with you on Akhtar though...that's y i said in brackets with his name, if u missed reading it, "his fitness seems skeptical," he can harldy bowl 10 overs in an ODI match, so he perfomig on 6 day test match seems hard. But even Pollock didn't do that well & he doesn't have that much pace...so hard to pick 1 from both.

Yeah but venomous Dull can win you a test mach,sluggish wont.
We can stick some clowns wigs on the dull ones and they wont be dull,but we cant put pace on the slugs?hahahaha
Your point about Sehwag being out for Kallis falls a bit when Kallis and Lara are in worse from than Sehwag, I didnt drop kallis from the side so the bowling option is still there. As the week drws closer to the game though i am warming a bit more towards Inzimans inclusion ,but im saying the team will be a bit slow in the field as about 5 of the players will be punching each other to get to first slip.

Venomous,remember we all dont want a close game,some of us aussies would not mind the ROW team to be bowled out twicw in a day as we are still spitting chips from the ashes defeat hahahaha

We still want to cast our spell over the ROW like a magician lol

 

[jlo33692]

err what?
flintoff didnt merit a place in the side when he first got picked, almost anyone knows that. whether watson is better than him or not is not relevant, because even anthony mcgrath would be able to claim that he was better than flintoff at 24.

TEC would not fred not be playing cricket at a senior level if you were a selector or we followed your line of thought?
When he first started he was bowling pretty poor but the selectors saw in him a class all rounder.
If they had done like you suggest with watson and give him the boot as a bowler .he would never have reached the level he is at now as the worlds best allrounder. Now Watson deserves a chance to do similar,i think that the selectors see in him a future allrounder ,he did not dissapoint them in the ODI and im sure the 12 wickets he took,(more than any other bowler in the series) is showing the selectors that he is on the right track. What more could he do than top the bowling averages and bat as well as he did? Do you not think it would be folley to drop someone who has just done what he did after putting faith in him for all this time? Come on lets give credit where it is due.
PS,what did you think of the drop in wicket at telstra stadium? I heard an indian selector or board member on radio and he was saying they are very interested in the prospect of the drop in wicket,
he said that for so long he thinks the Indian team have been brought up on spinning flat dust bowls which has suited the way they have played and suited how the players have been brought up. But he thinks with this new drop in wickets where you can produce a fast track or a batsmans track or whatever will help Indian cricket when they are travelling away from India.
I think he is on the right track because for as strong as India have been at home over all these years,they have been relativly poor away on the bouncier pitches.He sees a chance to rectify this with the drop in pitch. I think he was meaning for training and practice,but also for the local cricket games so the younger players get a feel for the different wickets and are not just brought up on spin friendly wickets. What do you think?

 

[tooextracool]

Fair enough TEC, Thats a good point.
TEC what is a soothsayer? Is that a form of Fortune teller?

a soothsayer is someone who makes predictions of the future.

 

[tooextracool]

TEC would not fred not be playing cricket at a senior level if you were a selector or we followed your line of thought?
When he first started he was bowling pretty poor but the selectors saw in him a class all rounder.

they did indeed, then not long after they decided to drop him from the side. flintoff only ever deserved a place in the test side after 2003, and thats only because he showed a significant improvement with the bat, his bowling was still rubbish.

If they had done like you suggest with watson and give him the boot as a bowler .he would never have reached the level he is at now as the worlds best allrounder. Now Watson deserves a chance to do similar,i think that the selectors see in him a future allrounder ,he did not dissapoint them in the ODI and im sure the 12 wickets he took,(more than any other bowler in the series) is showing the selectors that he is on the right track. What more could he do than top the bowling averages and bat as well as he did? Do you not think it would be folley to drop someone who has just done what he did after putting faith in him for all this time? Come on lets give credit where it is due.
PS,what did you think of the drop in wicket at telstra stadium? I heard an indian selector or board member on radio and he was saying they are very interested in the prospect of the drop in wicket,
he said that for so long he thinks the Indian team have been brought up on spinning flat dust bowls which has suited the way they have played and suited how the players have been brought up. But he thinks with this new drop in wickets where you can produce a fast track or a batsmans track or whatever will help Indian cricket when they are travelling away from India.
I think he is on the right track because for as strong as India have been at home over all these years,they have been relativly poor away on the bouncier pitches.He sees a chance to rectify this with the drop in pitch. I think he was meaning for training and practice,but also for the local cricket games so the younger players get a feel for the different wickets and are not just brought up on spin friendly wickets. What do you think?

no i havent said that he doesnt deserve a place in the ODI side now. i do of course find it amusing that he was picked in the test side as a 'bowling all rounder' ahead of kasparowicz who was bowling at his best at the time, which is about as stupid as any decision the australian selectors have made. my point is that watson cannot bowl, and it would be sheer folly for him to be classified as an 'all rounder' or for him to be considered the next big thing.

 

[sqwerty]

they did indeed, then not long after they decided to drop him from the side. flintoff only ever deserved a place in the test side after 2003, and thats only because he showed a significant improvement with the bat, his bowling was still rubbish.



no i havent said that he doesnt deserve a place in the ODI side now. i do of course find it amusing that he was picked in the test side as a 'bowling all rounder' ahead of kasparowicz who was bowling at his best at the time, which is about as stupid as any decision the australian selectors have made. my point is that watson cannot bowl, and it would be sheer folly for him to be classified as an 'all rounder' or for him to be considered the next big thing.

I can't work out if you're taking the p!ss or not.
You keep agreeing that Flintoff couldn't bowl when he started out....what's the difference with Watson? Once again I can't see anything great about Watson but I'm happy to be proven wrong.

One thing I'll say about Watson's bowling though is that his action and run up are far better than Flintoff's ever was. I laughed the first time I watched Flintoff charge in and then put the brakes on and tippy toe to the crease.....looked like he lost his runup every time. Watson's remodelled action looks pretty good. I can't see why he cant improve. Accuracy shouldn't be a problem with that action compared to say Tait - all he has to do is work on moving the ball a bit and he'll be handy.

He can easily match Freddie in the batting department if he keeps going but who needs a batting allrounder?.......I'll be interested to see if his bowling develops. You say it can't....I guess we'll see

 

[tooextracool]

I can't work out if you're taking the p!ss or not.
You keep agreeing that Flintoff couldn't bowl when he started out....what's the difference with Watson? Once again I can't see anything great about Watson but I'm happy to be proven wrong.

i do not enjoy these comparisons between watson and flintoff. flintoff was rubbish when he started off yes, but that does not mean that every jack and jill who cant bowl to save his life will be a flintoff simply because he too is rubbish at the same age.

One thing I'll say about Watson's bowling though is that his action and run up are far better than Flintoff's ever was. I laughed the first time I watched Flintoff charge in and then put the brakes on and tippy toe to the crease.....looked like he lost his runup every time. Watson's remodelled action looks pretty good. I can't see why he cant improve. Accuracy shouldn't be a problem with that action compared to say Tait - all he has to do is work on moving the ball a bit and he'll be handy.

he looks good? his action maybe better than flintoffs was back in 2001, but his accuracy is worse, and he cant seem to do anything with the ball other than move it off the seam.

He can easily match Freddie in the batting department if he keeps going but who needs a batting allrounder?.......

because hes proven himself so much in either form of the game that we can make this conclusion? he finally plays one good innings with the bat and now hes capable of being as good a batsman as freddie.

I'll be interested to see if his bowling develops. You say it can't....I guess we'll see

please point out to me where i said that his bowling 'cant develop'?
my point is that his bowling is non existent right now, not that it will continue to remain like that.