I think you could make a solid case for Harmison or Hoggard for Kasprowicz, given that Kasprowicz really only has a couple of good series to base his appeal on, which the other two can also claim. It's a close thing there though. Also, Graham Thorpe would certainly replace Michael Clarke. I think the rest of the side would be Australian, though.tooextracool said:
This is definitely a premature statement but on current form I would rather have any England test match seamer than Kaspo. Gillespie looked average today.tooextracool said:
That game was more down to England exploiting their advantage from Australia batting first. The pitch was very good to bat on, but it was moving all over the place to start with - whoever batted first would have been at a pretty severe disadvantage.steds said:
Me too, i had training today. I new trhe result from there. My coach told everyone not to tell him the result so he can see it live [well it would be live] when he got homeaussie said:ahhhhh yes, but has Jon Agnew said to see the aussies beaten so convincingly is a rare privalenge. Too bad for me i didn't get to see the entire thing i was busy with my GF
hahaha, i get what you are saying but come on mate try not to be so vulgarsimmy said:K.. I'm not... and I wouldn't. This infactuation for a man rarely happens (as I am 100% straight I assure you). In fact the only other time this has happened was with Jonny Wilkinson and THAT drop kick with his WRONG foot. Also a legend (and also against Australia).
Now revising after this England win... not happy
i certainly cant see hoggard making it ahead of kaspa, no matter how hard you tell me that hoggard is more than just a 'stock bowler' outside of seam friendly conditions, i wont accept it until i actually see him not get hammered all over the park like he did in australia and in SL.FaaipDeOiad said:
id assume flintoff would be in the side ahead of clarke.FaaipDeOiad said:
really? kaspa has only had 1 poor test series with the ball since return, and even in that one he played a valuable part in the 2nd test.simmy said:
it is 20-20 cricket you know.simmy said:
well we'll see. i personally dont see any reason why this 20-20 result should make a difference though, given that we were probably favorites to win the game before it started.simmy said:
A) if you have a problem with us being the "best side in the world" take it up with hundreds of cricket rating schemes that has us lying far and away best.simmy said:Every Englishmen knew what this team was capable of. Everytime I, or anyone else mentioned anything positive about the side it would be shot down by some smartass comment of how good McGrath or Ponting was or how overrated Flintoff seemed to be.
I now hope that every Aussie has hangs his deflated head in shame! You werent just beaten today... you were raped! In every facet of our great sport: England dominated
You can say that this was a one-off win in a meaningless Twenty20 game but are there any positives to be drawn from the Aus performance? No.
Flintoff.. who much hyped as influential to a victory need not have turned up and by the time Harmison had balled a ball the game was won.
So many times I heard about the Bangladeshi fixtures being pointless and Eng not getting anything out of them... well to be honest... on today's performance the Aus would have struggled to beat them.
An old "codger", who I actually predicted to get a hattrick (wasnt far off) and a debutant skittled the entire batting line-up of the supposed "best side in the world".
The Aussies looked scared... The Ashes are coming home!
