Where

[Duncan]

i'm from australia...

AUSSIES RULE just in case u didn't know that

good rankings, won world cup 2003, thrashing West Indies and wif a team like this:

Adam Gilchrist - everyone's scared of him, he has a strikerate of 200 in test!

: Matthew Hayden - the freak who can cut, pull and smash 6s

<_< Ricky Ponting - 140 in world cup, 200+ in west indies, one handed 6s!

: Damien Martyn - cut cut cut cut cut block cut cut cut cut block

Darren Lehmann - fat but very very useful, 2 half-centuries in test

:P Andrew Symonds - biggest hitter of the ball ever

Michael Bevan - best batsman eva - strike rate 100, average 60 - mathematician

: Shane Warne - altho considered to be DOPEY, best ripper of the ball and flipper

Brad Hogg - very useful wrong-un and can bat

Andrew Bichel - gr8 bowler and got an aveage of 117 in the world cup (and he's only a bowler)

Jason Gillespie - gr8 bowler and can hit a bit (scored 40 in 20 balls once)

B) Stuart MacGill - can't bat but one of the biggest turners of legspin eva

:P Brett Lee - pace, speed, yorker, bouncer and can hit the ball as well

:huh: Glenn McGrath - dead accurate bowler, annoys batsman and gets 5 wickets!

:blink: Steve Waugh - one of the best batsmen ever, LBW master!


And then u think of other teams who only hav about 3 outstanding players....example:

Sri Lanka - Muttiah Muralitharan, Sanath Jayasuriya, Chaminda Vaas
South Africa - Shaun Pollock
West Indies - Brian Lara
New Zealand - Chris Cairns, Shane Bond
England - basically no one
India - Sachin Tendulkar, Sourav Ganguly

c wat i mean?

 

[andrew_nixon]

England no great players?

May I remind you of Michael Vaughan, the number one ranked batsman in the World, more test centuries and runs than anyone else in 2002.

Or perhaps Jimmy Anderson, the most exciting fast bowling prospect for a long time, who destroyed Pakistan in the World Cup and recently demoslished a Surrey top order made up of test players.

As for Michael Bevan in your list, yes he's good in ODIs but he does nothing in tests.

And in your India list, you put Ganguly, he played just plain awful in the World Cup. He had a good average, yes, but break it down a bit. He averaged more than 200 against the non-test countries, but only about 20 against test playing countries

 

[SHAHZEB 007]

I think someone is a bit upthemselves. England's Michael Vaughn is excelent and South Africa only Pollock??
What about Kallis-best all-rounder in the World.
Gibbs- One of the best opening batsmen in the world??

Maybe it is true what ive heard about Australians being really upthemselves.... :huh:

 

[SHAHZEB 007]

Hey Vineet, where abouts in South Africa are you from?

 

[andrew_nixon]

He didn't say he was from South Africa.

 

[Shoaib Akhtar]

[AUSSIES RULE just in case u didn't know that]

True Aussies r really gr8 but they r other teams which certainly do have the potential.

As for the Ind vs Aus matches in the worldcup I think they were fixed.

How can a team thrash all other teams and offer absolutely no resistance to AUS. That is simply not possible.

As for Eng they r a good side and things would have been different had they played in Zim again politics (this is proved by the involvment of Tony Blair)

New Zealand did manage to offer some resistance to Aus and I think they played ok

Pakistan has plenty of internal conflicts (remember the fight to play football and saw how Akram used to get angry at his own players)

U simply dont get to see plain cricket anymore everyones in for the money.
(Thats why Steve Waugh signed up with MRF)

U want to see good cricket, see the under 19s cricket.

If things go like this ICC may intoduce new rules like FIA in Formula 1 to break the Aussie monopoly and bring in some competition

 

[andrew_nixon]

I don't think the India v Aus match was fixed, I'd say it was just big match nerves, it happened to England in the 92 final, Aus in 96 and Pakistan in 99.

I think the rules we have now are just fine. A team winning lots is good for the game as it forces everyone to raise their standards.

I just hope Australia see sense and don't field a full strength side against Bangladesh later this year, as that would be an embarrassment to the game.

 

[perko]

im from Sri Lanka But im in living in Australia :



lance

 

[perko]

aussies suck! their all losers who on their holiday's goto Shane Warne's Mum's house and do drugs : and we lankan's dont rely on just 3 players. if you knew anything about cricket you would know that. whatever it is the aussies are the worst players in the game. their sore losers, show no sportsmanship at all, all the aussies that i see when i go to the M.C.G are racist and all round gay.


thats just my opinion and the whole Sri Lankan communities opinion. pretty much.



lance

 

[SHAHZEB 007]

SRI LANKA STRIKES BACK!!!!
Right i disagree with you but agree with you as well!

aussies suck!
They are clearly the best in the world way above the rest!!

their sore losers, show no sportsmanship at all, all the aussies that i see when i go to the M.C.G are racist and all round gay.
YOU COULD NOT BE MORE RIGHT!!!! the australian cricketers are arrogant & cocky! They definatly are sore losers (whenthey actualy lose) & during the WC, over here in South Africa, the public who came from Australia disgraced the country!!! They were raceist and crude!!
I still have nothing against Australia

 

[andrew_nixon]

we lankan's dont rely on just 3 players. if you knew anything about cricket you would know that. whatever it is the aussies are the worst players in the game. their sore losers, show no sportsmanship at all, all the aussies that i see when i go to the M.C.G are racist and all round gay.

Sri Lanka doesn't rely on 3 players?

If Vaas and Murali were both unavaialble, Sri Lanka would have no chance.

Aussies are the worst players in the game? That's such a stupid statement it doesn't even deserve a response.

All Aussies are racist? Thats a racist statement for a start.

All Aussies are gay? Well if that were true the Aussies would die out pretty quickly.

Aussies unsportsmanlike? Did you see Gilchrist walk in the World Cup or was it just my imagination?

I'd agree with you on them being sore losers, but everything else you said is basically complete bollocks.

 

[SHAHZEB 007]

i disagree with you.
I firstly did not say all Australians are racist and crude, i said the ones that came to South Africa for the World Cup were!
Also if Australia were without, McGrath, Lee, Gillespie, they would not be so crash hot either

 

[andrew_nixon]

You didn't say that all Aussies who came to the World Cup were racist, you said all Aussies at the MCG were racist.

Either way it's still a genralisation based on a persons race/nationality, therefore it is racism.

If the Aussies were without McGrath, Lee and Gillespie they'd still have Hogg, McGill, Bichel, Gilchrist, Waugh, Lehman, Ponting, etc. All match winners.

Are you going to back up any of your other points?

 

[andrew_nixon]

ah, just realised it was Lance who said Aussies at the MCG were racist. Maritzburg_boy said the ones at the world cup were racist. Both are racist statements of course.

 

[SHAHZEB 007]

Me saying the australians who came to the World cup were raceist is not m raciest. It is me making a statement about a group of foreners(excuse spelling) who were yelling at other teams and calling them stupid blacks/arabs etc!