Manwell Pablo Posted 23 November 2006 Posted 23 November 2006 Day one and I'm already thinking I'll take a draw from the first test.
The People's Hero Posted 23 November 2006 Posted 23 November 2006 Flintoff's delay in taking the new ball was a bit odd. Nice message to send out to your bowlers at the start of a new Test huh?:
Janx Posted 23 November 2006 Posted 23 November 2006 Sorry Fez, I agree with the others Ash is a better choice for this turf... more disturbing is Harmy not bowling after the new ball... is he injured or lacking confidence, either way, we are fecked without his wickets.
The People's Hero Posted 23 November 2006 Posted 23 November 2006 Sorry Fez, I agree with the others Ash is a better choice for this turf... more disturbing is Harmy not bowling after the new ball... is he injured or lacking confidence, either way, we are fecked without his wickets. Spot on. Flintoff delayed taking it. Get the impression he's not that impressed by Harmison in recent times.
lcfc_jme Posted 23 November 2006 Posted 23 November 2006 Spot on. Flintoff delayed taking it. Get the impression he's not that impressed by Harmison in recent times. Nobody is impressed by Harmison in recent times. Since he became the number 1 bowler in the world, his standards dropped and he hasn't been as dangerous or consistent as he should have been. He never really seems to have a good time of things in Australia - his last appearances there were disastrous to say the least. Our bowlers haven't been too great and we could end up having to get after a score upwards of 600... It'll be interesting to see how our batsmen do considering they haven't been on tour down there before.
The People's Hero Posted 23 November 2006 Posted 23 November 2006 One man's 'interesting' is another man's 'hilarious and shameful' I suppose! Harmison is a confidence man. Not throwing him the new ball was a joke.
Janx Posted 23 November 2006 Posted 23 November 2006 Nobody is impressed by Harmison in recent times. Since he became the number 1 bowler in the world, his standards dropped and he hasn't been as dangerous or consistent as he should have been. He never really seems to have a good time of things in Australia - his last appearances there were disastrous to say the least. Our bowlers haven't been too great and we could end up having to get after a score upwards of 600... It'll be interesting to see how our batsmen do considering they haven't been on tour down there before. this is the Ashes, his natural ability WILL come back IF he is backed...always been a bit pricey in turns of runs, but when he gets his spot he is awesome"
lcfc_jme Posted 23 November 2006 Posted 23 November 2006 this is the Ashes, his natural ability WILL come back IF he is backed...always been a bit pricey in turns of runs, but when he gets his spot he is awesome" Which is something he is struggling quite a bit with atm. We could back him and let him bowl 20 or 30 overs in an innings atm, but with his inconsistency we're only likely to get bashed about the park with the benefit being 1 (or 2 if we're lucky) wicket(s). It'd be good for us if we did back him and this gave him the confidence to find his rythm, but I don't see it working like that for us in all honesty
Janx Posted 23 November 2006 Posted 23 November 2006 Which is something he is struggling quite a bit with atm. We could back him and let him bowl 20 or 30 overs in an innings atm, but with his inconsistency we're only likely to get bashed about the park with the benefit being 1 (or 2 if we're lucky) wicket(s). It'd be good for us if we did back him and this gave him the confidence to find his rythm, but I don't see it working like that for us in all honesty erm check the score... we already are!
lcfc_jme Posted 23 November 2006 Posted 23 November 2006 erm check the score... we already are! Yeah I know that !!! But I mean Harmison's overs could start costing 9, 10 or more runs per over if his head goes down and we persist with him. He is good if he's on fire, but if he isn't at top form or close to top form, he can cost you a match in one spell of bowling.
Bert Posted 23 November 2006 Posted 23 November 2006 Sorry Fez, I agree with the others Ash is a better choice for this turf... more disturbing is Harmy not bowling after the new ball... is he injured or lacking confidence, either way, we are fecked without his wickets. I'm taking you didn't see his first ball then?
Janx Posted 23 November 2006 Posted 23 November 2006 I'm taking you didn't see his first ball then? smartass! So if we were 1-0 down in the world cup final and you had Rooney on the bench coming back from yet another metatarsal injury, would you put him on, watch him sky rocket a shot then take him off?
The People's Hero Posted 23 November 2006 Posted 23 November 2006 I'm taking you didn't see his first ball then? First ball of the day wasn't it? Not excusing it... just saying you want to be throwing the new ball to your best strike bowler. That's Harmison. No doubt about it. It's not just harming us on the pitch if he's not backed by his captain, it's harming us psychologically and basically handing the upper hand to the Aussies. We're so negative. A Warne or a McGrath wouldn't be treated the same for them. They back their winners... we just want to knock ours down.
Manwell Pablo Posted 23 November 2006 Posted 23 November 2006 smartass! So if we were 1-0 down in the world cup final and you had Rooney on the bench coming back from yet another metatarsal injury, would you put him on, watch him sky rocket a shot then take him off? It was a shocking bowl though. Just watched the highlights Harmison doesn't look all there.
The People's Hero Posted 23 November 2006 Posted 23 November 2006 It was a shocking bowl though. Just watched the highlights Harmison doesn't look all there. Haven't seen the highlights. I think we need to back him through this though. If we don't get him back firing, we may as well come back now.
Bert Posted 23 November 2006 Posted 23 November 2006 smartass! So if we were 1-0 down in the world cup final and you had Rooney on the bench coming back from yet another metatarsal injury, would you put him on, watch him sky rocket a shot then take him off? Did say that?? First ball of the day wasn't it? Not excusing it... just saying you want to be throwing the new ball to your best strike bowler. That's Harmison. No doubt about it. It's not just harming us on the pitch if he's not backed by his captain, it's harming us psychologically and basically handing the upper hand to the Aussies. We're so negative. A Warne or a McGrath wouldn't be treated the same for them. They back their winners... we just want to knock ours down. Yes it was the first ball of the day. I totally agree with you as well.
Janx Posted 23 November 2006 Posted 23 November 2006 First ball of the day wasn't it? Not excusing it... just saying you want to be throwing the new ball to your best strike bowler. That's Harmison. No doubt about it. It's not just harming us on the pitch if he's not backed by his captain, it's harming us psychologically and basically handing the upper hand to the Aussies. We're so negative. A Warne or a McGrath wouldn't be treated the same for them. They back their winners... we just want to knock ours down. Exactly and the other fella last year who had a mare... OK eventually dropped GIllespie but backed him for a long time! Flintoff has possibly fecked Harmys head for good now. Hasnt he?
The People's Hero Posted 23 November 2006 Posted 23 November 2006 Flintoff is a garbage captain and has been since he got given the job. Good cricketer. Interesting character. Rubbish captain.
Finnegan Posted 23 November 2006 Posted 23 November 2006 So. How's it going? 300-and-something for 3 is bad, right?
Manwell Pablo Posted 23 November 2006 Posted 23 November 2006 So. How's it going? 300-and-something for 3 is bad, right? Go away or stop being Welsh.
Finnegan Posted 23 November 2006 Posted 23 November 2006 Go away or stop being Welsh. Slightly more seriously, though. Is it all at like 11pm by our time? I suppose you're limited with when you can play cricket by the light, so they can't really fiddle around with times to make it more accesible to both time zones?
Manwell Pablo Posted 23 November 2006 Posted 23 November 2006 Slightly more seriously, though. Is it all at like 11pm by our time? I suppose you're limited with when you can play cricket by the light, so they can't really fiddle around with times to make it more accesible to both time zones? Yeah it's all over night. bit of a fuker 12 hour time differnces.
Bert Posted 23 November 2006 Posted 23 November 2006 So. How's it going? 300-and-something for 3 is bad, right? You "claim" the ashes is the 2nd most thing you hate after Wimbledon, yet you are on of the leading posters in this thread. hmmm.
Finnegan Posted 23 November 2006 Posted 23 November 2006 It was the only thread anyone was posting in at silly-AM this morning.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.