symonds_sixes
Club Cricketer
He used to be so good, especially around the 2003 world cup.
England in Australia
- Thread starter andrew_nixon
- Start date
moza1
Club Cricketer
barmyarmy said:I'll take that in the spirit of parody it's intended and comeback with some predictable line about how you're team is full of old men, captained by the worst and most boring captain in Australian history, appealing every ball, constantly whinging, stuffed full of Englishmen (well one!) and arrogant as hell on and off the pitch. Then again I'm an actual member of the Barmy Army and have been on tour with England so I'm allowed to say that
wow, you englishmen really do talk a whole lot of bullcrap.
Oh and about Ponting being the worst captain, why dont you look at his record you foolish pom.
First Australian Captain to lose the Ashes for 20 years is an achievement is it? Against most teams you could stick Rolf Harris in charge and they'd still win the games. All Ponting does is tell people when he wants them to bowl. Warne, McGrath etc decide if they want to bowl and where the fields should be. Ponting has no control over them.moza1 said:
evertonfan
Chairman of Selectors
MUFC1987 said:
Whilst that valid point would shut most people up, I expect someone to state his form with the bat as a reason for his brilliant captaincy, despite run getting having very little to do with captaincy.
:To be fair though, that was the main reason he was made Captain. Because he was first choice in both One Day and Test sides, he was seen as the person to Captain them. It seems the 'He's the best player so he'd make the best captain' reason seems to have been used.
Simbazz
Chairman of Selectors
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2005
- Online Cricket Games Owned
I agree with both Matt and Colin here,
I believe Ponting is so far up his own arse to concentrate on others games, he is a fantastic batsmen. One thing which makes me shiver is when he is said to be "the next Bradman," Nahhhhh!
Bradman played his career on crappy pitches and against some fantastic bowlers, wereas Ponting is facing some great bowlers, he is on very batsmen friendly pitches alot over the year. Im not taking anything away from the guys batting, because to try to play the hook and pull in Australia is a difficult thing to do, getting on top of the ball on a bouncey Australia pitch, for a short arsed guy such as Punter is a great shot, but not that, as soon as he gets to his late 20's dislodging him is like trying to keep Monty on the ground after he has just spun the ball round the corner of a bat.
I think it may be a draw here, but i said that in the last test, so im gunna save mine until i get up tomorrow morning to see what state Australia have done to England, or hopefully it'll be the other way around
I believe Ponting is so far up his own arse to concentrate on others games, he is a fantastic batsmen. One thing which makes me shiver is when he is said to be "the next Bradman," Nahhhhh!
Bradman played his career on crappy pitches and against some fantastic bowlers, wereas Ponting is facing some great bowlers, he is on very batsmen friendly pitches alot over the year. Im not taking anything away from the guys batting, because to try to play the hook and pull in Australia is a difficult thing to do, getting on top of the ball on a bouncey Australia pitch, for a short arsed guy such as Punter is a great shot, but not that, as soon as he gets to his late 20's dislodging him is like trying to keep Monty on the ground after he has just spun the ball round the corner of a bat.
I think it may be a draw here, but i said that in the last test, so im gunna save mine until i get up tomorrow morning to see what state Australia have done to England, or hopefully it'll be the other way around
evertonfan
Chairman of Selectors
As has been the case on pretty much every day this series, the first session is crucial; Australia go to lunch at 200/1 and it's game over England. However, if Australia enter the break with 5 or 6 in the bag for about 160, England are right back in it.
I'm supremely confident of losing this one again though.
I'm supremely confident of losing this one again though.
I don't think it will be a draw. If Australia set England say 450 in 5 sessions, then England know that they have to go for it. Although a draw would keep the series alive, here and now is their best chance to win a test. I'll be dissapointed if Australia bat too long and especially if England let them bat for too long by not bowling well.
Octavius
Club Cricketer
Simbazz said:
While i concur about Ponting not being the next Bradman, i do feel on the basis of consistency over a long period of time there is some merit to the ability of the man.
He played some mighty innings away from home in the last two years as well.
If there is a batsman that has enjoyed batsmen's wickets, it is Mohammed Yousuf.
I also think Hussey should not be underrated, it is my contention that both Ponting and Hussey represent two crucial elements of Bradman's game. One can read the game situation and tailor his innings to it and the other has all the shots and balanced timing of a great batsman.
put hussey, ponting and Lara into one man, and then you are getting somewhere closer. That's how good he was.
plympilgrim
International Coach
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2006
- Online Cricket Games Owned
what about his sweeps off warne
Octavius
Club Cricketer
England will come out of this series stronger,with the growth and acceptance of Panesar as their number 1 spin bowler, and the re-emergence of Pietersen. However, i think the sooner Vaughn is back to his top game and able to assume the mantle of Captain, the sooner you will start seeing the best from Flintoff again. I do not underrate Flintoff's ability to lead, but i do believe that the burden of leading the Ashes challenge coupled with his ankle, have left England with a vital cyclinder misfiring.
I think if they stick with Nick Cook he will grow from this experience.
My real concern is that if this becomes, as it looks like it might, a whitewashed series, that Fletcher takes the brunt of the responsibility and not the emerging young talent that the England cricketers have shown.
They are a remarkabley young side, just emerging on the world stage in its hottest cauldron.
I think the selectors who chose Giles and Jones over Panesar and Read (although i doubt Read would have been much better), have to take the full brunt.
I would hate to see young careers ruined because the blame hasnt rested on poor selection policies.
I was flabbergasted when i heard Fletcher saying that he relied on Giles and Geraint Jones for selection advice!
While i respect Jones' ability to lift his side verbally, he has only just hung on to a few catches and has tried to blast his way into form with the bat when a long careful paretnership was the way to go.
He and Giles should go and the young raw talent of Cook, Bell, Mahmood should get a reprieve.
In my opinion Fletcher has burned his bridges and will exit after the world cup.
I think if they stick with Nick Cook he will grow from this experience.
My real concern is that if this becomes, as it looks like it might, a whitewashed series, that Fletcher takes the brunt of the responsibility and not the emerging young talent that the England cricketers have shown.
They are a remarkabley young side, just emerging on the world stage in its hottest cauldron.
I think the selectors who chose Giles and Jones over Panesar and Read (although i doubt Read would have been much better), have to take the full brunt.
I would hate to see young careers ruined because the blame hasnt rested on poor selection policies.
I was flabbergasted when i heard Fletcher saying that he relied on Giles and Geraint Jones for selection advice!
While i respect Jones' ability to lift his side verbally, he has only just hung on to a few catches and has tried to blast his way into form with the bat when a long careful paretnership was the way to go.
He and Giles should go and the young raw talent of Cook, Bell, Mahmood should get a reprieve.
In my opinion Fletcher has burned his bridges and will exit after the world cup.
Ok, it's getting flamy here.
First, the immigrants.
They are English, they have been raised in England, and are as English as anyone else. BUT, the fact that England has so many Asian Descent players (And coincedentally, most of them debut on or just before an Asian tour, I'm not saying it's due to their race, just a huge coincidence...maybe...) is funny. But they are English, having a half parent is very common in England and most former English colonies.
Second, wrong decisions: I agree Australia are aggressive and over-appeal at times, and I am often sick at seeing Warne react when something clearly wasn't out. BUT, wrong decisions are a part of cricket. Tailenders get a lot of bad luck because, well, they are tailenders, and umps don't expect them to bat long and hence feel there is a greater chance it was a batters mistake and edge rather than just beat the bat. Same way top-order or high qulaity bats get away with a few and why partimer get fewere decisions their way. Not fair, I know and agree, but what can we do?
Thirdly, on the swing thing, read this:
http://content-search.cricinfo.com/ci/content/story/258645.html
And this by Cooley himself:
http://content-search.cricinfo.com/ci/content/story/259829.html
Now, regarding Punter the next Bradman.
Never. Bradman played against many a fabulous bowler on terrible pitches AND dominated. he could turn a game on his head when he wanted too. He innovated brilliantly as well, and had no flaw, although he struggled (If you could use that) the most against leggies.
Punter has had Bangla, Zim, India (There bowling ain't too hot bar Bhajji and Jumbo, and Irfan at times), inconsistent pak and Windies, and slow bowlers like Giles. On batting beauties, with helmets and such and shorter boundaries. Probably would have averaged 37 in the Don's time. Good, but not really a legend.
Now, my thoughts on the days play:
1) England batted poorly and lost all their advantage. Seeing Punter and Haydo, and even Monty, KP and Harmy (!) it seemed like a decent track. Poor batting,
2) Monty and Harmy, are they like really good friends? They seem to work quite well together, bowling wise and batting wise. Their communication was very good.
3) Monty no. 11? Nah! No way! I'd have him give me coaching anyday! Did you see those sweeps? And that on-drive, fabulous!
4) Poor bowling to end the day, Langer was a ripper, but apart from Monty at times no one was really threatining.
5) Aussies in charge, England need Monty, Harmy and Freddie to fire.
6) KP was brilliant. In a few years, I'd have him in my all-time XI.
First, the immigrants.
They are English, they have been raised in England, and are as English as anyone else. BUT, the fact that England has so many Asian Descent players (And coincedentally, most of them debut on or just before an Asian tour, I'm not saying it's due to their race, just a huge coincidence...maybe...) is funny. But they are English, having a half parent is very common in England and most former English colonies.
Second, wrong decisions: I agree Australia are aggressive and over-appeal at times, and I am often sick at seeing Warne react when something clearly wasn't out. BUT, wrong decisions are a part of cricket. Tailenders get a lot of bad luck because, well, they are tailenders, and umps don't expect them to bat long and hence feel there is a greater chance it was a batters mistake and edge rather than just beat the bat. Same way top-order or high qulaity bats get away with a few and why partimer get fewere decisions their way. Not fair, I know and agree, but what can we do?
Thirdly, on the swing thing, read this:
http://content-search.cricinfo.com/ci/content/story/258645.html
And this by Cooley himself:
http://content-search.cricinfo.com/ci/content/story/259829.html
Now, regarding Punter the next Bradman.
Never. Bradman played against many a fabulous bowler on terrible pitches AND dominated. he could turn a game on his head when he wanted too. He innovated brilliantly as well, and had no flaw, although he struggled (If you could use that) the most against leggies.
Punter has had Bangla, Zim, India (There bowling ain't too hot bar Bhajji and Jumbo, and Irfan at times), inconsistent pak and Windies, and slow bowlers like Giles. On batting beauties, with helmets and such and shorter boundaries. Probably would have averaged 37 in the Don's time. Good, but not really a legend.
Now, my thoughts on the days play:
1) England batted poorly and lost all their advantage. Seeing Punter and Haydo, and even Monty, KP and Harmy (!) it seemed like a decent track. Poor batting,
2) Monty and Harmy, are they like really good friends? They seem to work quite well together, bowling wise and batting wise. Their communication was very good.
3) Monty no. 11? Nah! No way! I'd have him give me coaching anyday! Did you see those sweeps? And that on-drive, fabulous!
4) Poor bowling to end the day, Langer was a ripper, but apart from Monty at times no one was really threatining.
5) Aussies in charge, England need Monty, Harmy and Freddie to fire.
6) KP was brilliant. In a few years, I'd have him in my all-time XI.
Left_Hander
Chairman of Selectors
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2006
- Online Cricket Games Owned
I didn't think Monty was to bad at batting. Same with Harmison. His footwork was fairly good I didn't see any stupid stuff out there. Admittedly this is the first time I have seen him bat, so this could be a one off but Monty doesn't look that bad as I thought he would after every man and his dog was saying how bad his batting is.
Similar threads
