Jan 3-7: 5th Test: Australia v England at Sydney

[MUFC1987]

So I'll focus on MacGill in the second spot. For this I'll compare him with Glenn McGrath, arguably one of the great seam bowlers in contemporary cricketing history, especially on Australian pitches.

Arugably? What? He's one of the greatest seam bowlers of all time!

No thanks. AUS version of Panesar in Doherty has already been taken to the cleaners.

Yeah, Panesar with 100 wickets at under 35 against, what? 3 at 100? That's comparable. You clearly are crazy.

 

[Sureshot]

Yes & all those reasons aren't supported by any facts or any sane cricket logic. So whether you or whoever wishes to repeat them again, indeed wont change anything.

Well, anything that goes against your opinion clearly is void of any "sane cricket logic", so it's fairly pointless debating it.

 

[War]

Arugably? What? He's one of the greatest seam bowlers of all time!


Yeah, Panesar with 100 wickets at under 35 against, what? 3 at 100? That's comparable. You clearly are crazy.

The only thing crazy is as it clearly is the case. That by quoting is career average all of you still believe Panesar is still in his good days of IND 2006 - PAK 2007 & have ignorned his obviously decline which turned him into a dud spinner @ test level (like Doherty is currently) from IND 2007 - Cardiff 2009. Which he has clearly not improved on based on his performances in the 2 warm-up games he played in AUS currently.

Panesar would be just as useless @ test level for ENG as any of joke AUS spinners if he plays test again. Its pretty unbelievable ATS that is not abundantly obvious.

As the case stands. If Swann where to ever get injured for a test. ENG also would have top play 4 seamers in Anderson/Broad/Tremlett/Bresnan, since that would be best way to cover for the hole Swann would leave instead of picking a joke spinner like Panesar.

 

[War]

Well, anything that goes against your opinion clearly is void of any "sane cricket logic", so it's fairly pointless debating it.

You don't understand Animator. If the statistics, anecdotes, performances or logic support War's arguments, they aren't substantial enough.

Yep. Planetcricket wouldn't be the same without you two trolling behind me in every thread. Only thing missing to complete the 'troll trinity" is sir Themer.

 

[Themer]

We aren't a trolling trinity. We're the only ones who've been active enough in these threads to argue against your misguided logic and outstanding rudeness. You've actually put people off posting in these threads as its impossible for anyone to post something without being derided if it doesn't fit into your world view.

 

[War]

We aren't a trolling trinity. We're the only ones who've been active enough in these threads to argue against your misguided logic and outstanding rudeness. You've actually put people off posting in these threads as its impossible for anyone to post something without being derided if it doesn't fit into your world view.

. Yes you three are the ONLY ones active. Funny thing is that their is select few on posters on this site who i debate cricket with in private messages instead of in threads, who i'm very cool with. Plus their is always a poster in every thread who agrees with my misguided logic i.e my stance on 4 AUS using 4 quicks:

http://www.planetcricket.org/forums/2011891-post619.html

Some people don't realise Smith played as a specialist spinner verses Pakistan.It doesn't matter anyway cause 4 quicks is our strength plus having a developing spinner in Smith ( who has taken big halls in domestic cricket )should be seen as a bonus.Most of our success in matches against the top4 teams has come without playing a specialist spinner , so why play one?If 4 pacers wont win us games then 3 good ones and ann average spinner wont fear better.I agree with war, lets give 4 quicks plus Smith a long run in the team.

So as usual with you this is nothing more than noise. Plus if Themer for eg never agrees with me. Thats always a good is sign that im on the right track.

Also as i told you before. If you believe i'm so impossible to debate with, put me on your ignore list. But for some reason since i told you that, you STILL people feel compelled to argue with me. You can guaranteed i would never engage any of you in any debate from now, so quite obviously you are trolling me & turing ever other thread in a personal argument.

Anyway back to the cricket...

 

[Themer]

. Yes you three are the ONLY ones active. Funny thing is that their is select few on posters on this site who i debate cricket with in private messages instead of in threads, who i'm very cool with. Plus their is always a poster in every thread who agrees with my misguided logic i.e my stance on 4 AUS using 4 quicks:

"Some people don't realise Smith played as a specialist spinner verses Pakistan.It doesn't matter anyway cause 4 quicks is our strength plus having a developing spinner in Smith ( who has taken big halls in domestic cricket )should be seen as a bonus.Most of our success in matches against the top4 teams has come without playing a specialist spinner , so why play one?If 4 pacers wont win us games then 3 good ones and ann average spinner wont fear better.I agree with war, lets give 4 quicks plus Smith a long run in the team."

And as I've said plenty of times four quicks will only work on seamer friendly conditions. Look how it went in the last match and look at Smith's contribution.

 

[War]

And as I've said plenty of times four quicks will only work on seamer friendly conditions. Look how it went in the last match and look at Smith's contribution.

Really?. So you are saying its impossible for any 4-man pace attack to take wickets on a flat pitch, especially if those group of bowlers can reverse swing the ball, which usually occures on flat pitches?.

Plus AUS 4 quicks bowlers recovered quite well at the MCG, given the lack of help they got. After the 1st day in which everything went wrong.

They recovered took 10 for 355 with one batsman scoring 167 & it could have been even better if Johnson did not have that no-ball vs Prior when he only on one. Thats a would have been a recovery of 10 for 270 odd. Which is very commendable for a typical MCG pitch.

But of course as you have already stated, thats insignificant to you. Since as you have unequivically stated on this forum already. Once AUS had played a spinner @ the MCG, ENG would have never made 500:


http://www.planetcricket.org/forums/2015700-post179.html

How Ponting isn't banned is beyond me, disgusting behaviour which has pretty much marred what is now almost certain to be his final series.

Think this game pretty much ends the four seamers idea as the massive flaws have been shown that if it isn't a seamers pitch you're going to bowl your quicks into the ground or have to rely on joke half time spinners to bowl 21 overs going for 3.95 runs.

http://www.planetcricket.org/forums/2015710-post180.html

SMH. Yes because without a doubt if AUS had played any one of Hauritz/O'Keefe/Doherty/Holland, ENG would haev been bowled out already.

http://www.planetcricket.org/forums/2015712-post181.html

That being my point entirely.

With reasoning like that, you have the nerve to tell me my reasoning of cricket matters is miguided.

 

[Themer]

LOL.

If you can't work out the last quote was sarcasm then I'm not going to bother continuing.

 

[ZoraxDoom]

War, that post was so full of that no smiley could ever cover it.




----------

We aren't a trolling trinity. We're the only ones who've been active enough in these threads to argue against your misguided logic and outstanding rudeness. You've actually put people off posting in these threads as its impossible for anyone to post something without being derided if it doesn't fit into your world view.

I love how he classified a Global Mod and two posters with over 20K posts between them as a Trolling Trinity. Says quite a bit doesn't it.

 

[pcfan123]

Panesar would walk into the Aussie side, they'd be so lucky to find a spinner who'll take 130 odd wickets at under 35.

Their last spinner averaged over 100

 

[War]

LOL.

If you can't work out the last quote was sarcasm then I'm not going to bother continuing.

Yes i did & i was mocking your sarcasm. So now thats been cleared up. I ask the question again:

Really?. So you are saying its impossible for any 4-man pace attack to take wickets on a flat pitch, especially if those group of bowlers can reverse swing the ball, which usually occures on flat pitches?.

----------

Panesar would walk into the Aussie side, they'd be so lucky to find a spinner who'll take 130 odd wickets at under 35.

Their last spinner averaged over 100

Panesar would not walk into the AUS side. Thats highly incorrect assertion & highly disrespectful towards the AUS team.

I dont understand how its now abundantly obvious that Panesar regression which made him poor test bowler from IND 07 - Cardiff 2009 (which was seen in warm-up games of this tour). Clearly makes him just as much as dud spinner as any of the useless tweakers than AUS have. Which is a non turning - one paced left-arm spinner, who has no ability to be a holding spinenr - nor a wicket taking threat on wearing wickets againts solid test battting line-ups.

Its almost as if you people have forgotten his horrendous decline & still believe Panesar is in his IND 2006 - PAK 07 glory days. Which is very perplexing.

Panesar shouldn't even be in the ENG test squad, given he has not improved at all.

 

[pcfan123]

Panesar also has better batting technique than Hughes or Smith

 

[Cricketman]

So Ponting is out of the test with a "broken finger"...

My bet is that the captain will be the keeper, Brad Haddin. That is if they want a semi long term choice, if not clearly Mike Hussey.

 

[War]

Okay now that Ponting is out. I'll have a go at the possible best combination IMO.

Watson
Hughes/Katich - If Katman is fit. Hughes should miss out
Khawaja
Clarke
D Hussey
M Hussey
Haddin
Johnson
Siddle
Bollinger
Copeland/Hilfenhaus

They key here is getting that top 6 strong, which is of course easier said that done. I supported D Hussey playing before & after Smith clearly showing he isn't the finished article ATS in the two test he has played, he really has to go. D Hussey is one the best top 6 options AUS have, regardless of age. You could still get 1-2 good years out of him.

Come AUS next test assignmet in mid 2011 in SRI & SA. Ponting would be in @ # 4, with Clarke & M Hussey/Ferguson/Dussey bringing up the rear (who knows how much longer M Hussey has in him).

Haddin to captain also.

Of course i dont expect such a team to plcked however & ENG chases of winning 3-1 win be increased greatly.