A nuggety 14 maybe.
Anyway, we don't want 700 runs, we want 700 wickets, it's why we picked Doherty isn't it?
Hauritz was never going to take 700 wickets.
Err, why did we pick Doherty?
Oh, that's right, because he is Tasmanian, and was more likely to crawl up Ponting's...
Hauritz was never going to take 700 wickets like Shane Warne did, and that's why we dropped him, we couldn't suffer his more than respectable bowling figures any longer, we don't want statistically one of the better Test spinners in world cricket, we want the best, and it's why we picked Doherty.
Now, if Doherty was bowling to Ponting's "plan", and took 3-306, and Hauritz was bowling to Ponting's "plan" when he got pasted in India...surely it is Ponting's "plan" that is faulty?
In fact, I think Ponting has no "plan" at all, I think he made the whole thing up on the spur of the moment, like his constant field changes alternating between 8 short covers and 7 short midwickets, in the vain hope that such desperately stupid tactics might actually fluke a wicket and make him look less stupid.
And we thought the field settings in Ricky Ponting Slower Ball Cricket 2005/2007 with 8 on the fence in the first over were unrealistic, how wrong we were...
Anyway, we don't want 700 runs, we want 700 wickets, it's why we picked Doherty isn't it?
Hauritz was never going to take 700 wickets.
Err, why did we pick Doherty?
Oh, that's right, because he is Tasmanian, and was more likely to crawl up Ponting's...
Hauritz was never going to take 700 wickets like Shane Warne did, and that's why we dropped him, we couldn't suffer his more than respectable bowling figures any longer, we don't want statistically one of the better Test spinners in world cricket, we want the best, and it's why we picked Doherty.
Now, if Doherty was bowling to Ponting's "plan", and took 3-306, and Hauritz was bowling to Ponting's "plan" when he got pasted in India...surely it is Ponting's "plan" that is faulty?
In fact, I think Ponting has no "plan" at all, I think he made the whole thing up on the spur of the moment, like his constant field changes alternating between 8 short covers and 7 short midwickets, in the vain hope that such desperately stupid tactics might actually fluke a wicket and make him look less stupid.
And we thought the field settings in Ricky Ponting Slower Ball Cricket 2005/2007 with 8 on the fence in the first over were unrealistic, how wrong we were...
Last edited: