England in Australia

Of course we all know the people who are really responsible for this; If our ancestors had sent their convicts to Alaska as opposed to Australia, then the pitches might turn a bit less. :)
 
Shameful use of substitute fielders from England again. I really think if you are playing test match cricket you should be able to bowl without having a rub down before and after the spell. I know most of the players are injury prone, but it is cheating. 2005 might have been getting back at us for what DK Lillee once did, but backing it up with an even more shameful display in 2006 is just ruining your reputation.
 
Hopefully the fly Gary Pratt out campaign will pick up speed, he is well up for it!
 
Oh stop moaning about substitutes will you. There's nothing wrong with it in the rulebook.
 
Last edited:
evertonfan said:
Oh stop moaning about substitutes will you. There's nothing wrong with it in the rulebook.

that's because there's nothing in the rule book saying that the umpires have to follow the players into the change rooms when they are having a pee.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20816611-601,00.html

Cheats.

Although it seems that England's biggest mistake so far is assuming that 2005 tactics are good enough for 2006. I hope they brought a plan B.
 
evertonfan said:
How is it cheating when we are doing something within the laws of the game? :rolleyes:

If you truly believe that they are simply going to the loo then I'd have to consider you daft. They systematically give their bowlers breaks to give them rests before and after spells. Let me provide a couple of examples....

Taken from cricinfo. Day one, end of 32nd over "Plunkett on the field for Harmison. Ponting asked the match officials to keep an eye on substitutes before the match ..." then fast forward to over number 35 - "Harmison back on the field and back into the attack"

End of over number 58 - "Ed Joyce is on the pitch for Matthew Hoggard". Then look who's bowling in the 63rd over, some 2 minutes after returning to the field. My goodness it's one Matthew Hoggard!!

Now how about Freddie, end of over 75 -"New ball due in four overs. Who will take it? Who can bowl straight? And now another substitution as Flintoff chugs off and Joyce comes on ... and Ashley Giles comes into the attack." ...hmmm new ball due. Now who exactly takes that first over with the new ball? Well bugga me, it's Freddie Flintoff.

Now I know the punishment the English bowlers have been copping is enough to make them want to p*ss their pants, but surely not all of them.
 
Last edited:
valvolux said:
If you truly believe that they are simply going to the loo then I'd have to consider you daft. They systematically give their bowlers breaks to give them rests before and after spells. Let me provide a couple of examples....

I don't recall arguing their reasons for going off. You can argue with it all you like, it's within the laws of the game.
 
nightprowler10 said:
Though I'd rather that England dropped Giles for Monty and be done with it (that whole strengthening the tail thing doesn't fly for me), if both were to play, I'd say drop Harmsion. He won't perform unless he plays on a pitch made for him (like Old Trafford). Besides, dropping him from the team might give him something to work towards. We've done the same with Afridi and West Indies with Sarwan.

I really don't agree. Harmison is being expensive but is still good enough at this level to worry the Aussies and take wickets. Anderson is the one who has to go.
 
Harmison needs to concentrate on bowling very fast, because if you are bowling 93+mph, accuracy can be more erratic (obviously not too erratic) as far as length goes.
 
It's simply what Harmison needs to do. Correct the mistakes he currently has with his action. Sky analysed it perfectly on the 2nd day.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top