The Blue Thread

FaaipDeOiad · Sep 12, 2005

I think we need to consider the fact that picking three specialist bowlers might be the right move sometimes. If you look at the last game, Liam and I bowled a bit, and we rotated the two opening seamers and Halsey. That worked well, and doing that gives us extra depth in the batting which is worthwhile, while we still have five bowling options. I think as the season goes on we'll see how the team performs, and if we're struggling to bowl teams out then we'll look for an extra bowler, and if we're struggling for depth with the batting we might rely more on the all-rounders and bring in an extra bat.

I certainly don't think an attack with two of Demeza/Patrick/Collins, Halsey and two of Fuller/Camps/Popat is a weak one at all, it gives us five good bowling options while we still bat deep, and for the time being I think that's the side we should stick with. Once Halsey and Camps are gone, we'll need to re-assess things though, and if we are struggling with the ball we can look for a third seamer or a second spin option when needed.

Nate · Sep 12, 2005

I too was surprised at the lack of Adam-age in our side. Don`t worry mate, I doubt you`ll be out for long.

chaminda_00 · Sep 12, 2005

Man i fell sorry for Blaze, his not even considered as a bowling option. Got to say im glad i got out when i did looking at your over reliance on fast bowlers and all rounders.

FaaipDeOiad · Sep 12, 2005

chaminda_00 said:
Man i fell sorry for Blaze, his not even considered as a bowling option. Got to say im glad i got out when i did looking at your over reliance on fast bowlers and all rounders.

I'm glad we won our opening game, myself.

Travis_Teh · Sep 12, 2005

chaminda_00 said:
Man i fell sorry for Blaze, his not even considered as a bowling option. Got to say im glad i got out when i did looking at your over reliance on fast bowlers and all rounders.

funny that coming from a red player whose team relied on kennett and watt in their second innings to still come up short vs teh colts 8-)

Sarcastic remarks aside, it is a good thing, that we have such depth in our bowling ranks.
Last season I was a rookie and didn't expect to play a single game, and ended up playing 17. As a rookie you shouldn't -expect- to play, you play when you can and play as hard as you can when you can. Currie's time will definetly come.

Travis_Teh · Sep 12, 2005

FaaipDeOiad said:
I think we need to consider the fact that picking three specialist bowlers might be the right move sometimes. If you look at the last game, Liam and I bowled a bit, and we rotated the two opening seamers and Halsey. That worked well, and doing that gives us extra depth in the batting which is worthwhile, while we still have five bowling options. I think as the season goes on we'll see how the team performs, and if we're struggling to bowl teams out then we'll look for an extra bowler, and if we're struggling for depth with the batting we might rely more on the all-rounders and bring in an extra bat.

I certainly don't think an attack with two of Demeza/Patrick/Collins, Halsey and two of Fuller/Camps/Popat is a weak one at all, it gives us five good bowling options while we still bat deep, and for the time being I think that's the side we should stick with. Once Halsey and Camps are gone, we'll need to re-assess things though, and if we are struggling with the ball we can look for a third seamer or a second spin option when needed.

I know what you guys are saying. I'd just like to see a more "orthodox" team

I don't think any team we put out would have a weak bowling line up, i'm more concerned about batting depth .. sure if we bat deep with allrounders we'd have that depth, but how much concentration is taken up from batting and would it make the bowling suffer? etc

Keeping everyone's job in the team simple might be what's best? Top 6 scores runs, bottom 4 gets wicket, man between them all has teh gloves

heeeeheee

Oldschool preference again, that's all. Heck we have the ability, so may aswell use it

chaminda_00 · Sep 12, 2005

Travis_Teh said:
funny that coming from a red player whose team relied on kennett and watt in their second innings to still come up short vs teh colts

Who did we rely on to take wickets in the first innings

Travis_Teh said:
Sarcastic remarks aside, it is a good thing, that we have such depth in our bowling ranks.
Last season I was a rookie and didn't expect to play a single game, and ended up playing 17. As a rookie you shouldn't -expect- to play, you play when you can and play as hard as you can when you can. Currie's time will definetly come.

I doubt too many rookies apart from the ones in the colts side except to play too many games, but you would except to be a option, not just someone they call on when everyone else is out.

Blaze · Sep 12, 2005

I'm not actually a rookie really. I played a couple of games at the end of last season.

Of course I would like to be playing more cricket but am content to wait until the international players go away and put in some good performances then and force my way into the side.

Mr Mxyzptlk · Sep 12, 2005

I'm not a big fan of the plain "don't change a winning side" mentality. I think that from match to match we shall assess the conditions and the opposition and pick a side accordingly.

Travis_Teh · Sep 12, 2005

Mr Mxyzptlk said:
I'm not a big fan of the plain "don't change a winning side" mentality. I think that from match to match we shall assess the conditions and the opposition and pick a side accordingly.

Agreed.
Different pitch, different day, different opposition = different team

Like, for example, we need to drop Sean because he .... I have no valid reason to drop Sean unfortunately, but he needs to be replaced

dinu23 · Sep 12, 2005

chaminda_00 said:
Man i fell sorry for Blaze, his not even considered as a bowling option. Got to say im glad i got out when i did looking at your over reliance on fast bowlers and all rounders.

we won ur first game, naaa nana naanaa! :tongue:

FaaipDeOiad · Sep 12, 2005

Travis_Teh said:
Agreed.
Different pitch, different day, different opposition = different team

Like, for example, we need to drop Sean because he .... I have no valid reason to drop Sean unfortunately, but he needs to be replaced

Because I make you look like a hack when I keep the ball on the cut section for a whole spell?

And I don't get a first ball duck every time I bat?

Cloete · Sep 12, 2005

To be honest I think we should definitely play Adam.

I guess it depends, but I'd be more in favour of playing Adam more often than an all-rounder.

Also, I don't think we should go in with the mentality that we have to play a seaming all-rounder. I relaly would liek to see Popat in the side, his batting is only about 3 under Liam and Sean's average. And he has a bowling average of 26, which is up there with the rest of the out and out bowlers.

So I definutely think we should try and give Popat and Adam regular game time. Adam should definitely be in th team in place of the extra batsman, if we have 2 all-rounders playing every game having the extra bat (who bats at about 30-35) isn't isn't necessary, just look at Sean's performance. While he probably bowled a few too many overs first innings, as Liam only bolwed 7. He scored 20's in both innings and took 3 for about 19(sorry, this is al off the top of my head) in the 2nd innings.

When Liam goes on international duty, or Sean goes out of form (if he does, let's hpe he foreever stays in majestic form, like the whole blue team

) then we bring in Popat. Who bolsters our bowling a bit and weakens our batting about as much as he strengthens our bowling.

P.S sorry about not putting any of this in the FC team selection e-mail. I didn't check it for a few days because I forgot. Very, very sorry Liam. I'll make sure I check it every couple of days.

Travis_Teh · Sep 13, 2005

FaaipDeOiad said:
Because I make you look like a hack when I keep the ball on the cut section for a whole spell?

And I don't get a first ball duck every time I bat?

I prefer to call it "If I don't know where the hell i'm going to be landing the ball, how can the batsmen expect to know?". Much better than simply being a hack

Plus, I don't get out for a duck -every- time...just most times. I take pride in my total lack of ability in batting.

Adamc · Sep 13, 2005

Great win guys, set up by fantastic batting from Dinu and Sean. Good contributions from all the bowlers, and thanks Sean for sticking with me after that awful first over.

Hopefully these first two games are a sign of good things to come.

FaaipDeOiad · Sep 13, 2005

Great win, definately.

We can put a stop to the selection debates for a while now, since we don't really have any choice, with only 11 players to choose from.

I think we're going to suffer with batting depth a bit, since we're only picking a specialist top 5 now, but as there's nothing we can do about it, it's just some extra pressure on Sudeep and Currie with the bat.

Travis_Teh · Sep 13, 2005

i'll step up with the bat if required .....

dinu23 · Sep 13, 2005

ok guys, lets show the rookies DV leauge isn't a cakewalk on the 15th.

The Baconator · Sep 13, 2005

dinu23 said:
ok guys, lets show the rookies DV leauge isn't a cakewalk on the 15th.

Agreed, and hopefully I won't run myself out this time.

dinu23 · Sep 15, 2005

hard luck Crampton. who's going to replace him?

The Blue Thread

Hall of Fame Member

You'll Never Walk Alone

Hall of Fame Member

Hall of Fame Member

International Regular

International Regular

Hall of Fame Member

Banned

Request Your Custom Title Now!

International Regular

International Debutant

Hall of Fame Member

International Captain

International Regular

Cricketer Of The Year

Hall of Fame Member

International Regular

International Debutant

International Vice-Captain

International Debutant