Forums
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
the budha
16 Dec 09 08:32
Joined:
Date Joined: 29 May 08
| Topic/replies: 231 | Blogger: the budha's blog
Would the Kiwis have shown up their bigger brothers the Aussies by chasing down 208 in 44 overs when just a week earlier the Aussies didnt even attempt to chase down 330 in 90 overs against a bowling attack with just one tooth?

Are the Aussies really the gutless team they look?
Pause Switch to Standard View But for the rain...
Show More
Loading...
Report runout December 16, 2009 8:40 AM GMT
The difference was the pitch condition.
Report the budha December 16, 2009 8:42 AM GMT
surely negated by the bowling attacks and the "quality" of the Aussie batsmen?
Report the budha December 16, 2009 9:01 AM GMT
And any pitch on which the Windies can bat 100 overs 2nd innings cant be that bad, or does that require another thread with regards to Aussie bowlers.
Report Deadly Earnest December 16, 2009 9:56 AM GMT
208 in 44 overs a lot easier than 330 from 80 odd overs before you start looking at the pitches and outfields and other conditions.

And if you study cricket long enough you will find teams regularly achieve what would otherwise be great things when opposed to Pakistan.
Report Lix December 16, 2009 9:59 AM GMT
Yeah, pak are hardly the best fighters when their heads go down.

Aus were also 1-0 up in the series. NZ had a free roll at the win .
Report the budha December 16, 2009 10:02 AM GMT
208 in 44 overs a lot easier than 330 from 80 odd overs before you start looking at the pitches and outfields and other conditions.

Aussies only had to crawl along at 2.5 an over to leave them 215 from 44 maybe with 8 in hand.

And if you study cricket long enough you will find teams regularly achieve what would otherwise be great things when opposed to Pakistan

But not the Windies of late?
Report the budha December 16, 2009 10:07 AM GMT
Yeah, pak are hardly the best fighters when their heads go down.


Not like those West Indians hey!
Report Deadly Earnest December 16, 2009 10:22 AM GMT
the budha 16 Dec 11:02


Aussies only had to crawl along at 2.5 an over to leave them 215 from 44 maybe with 8 in hand.


The chase was 330 from 81 overs froom memory, so 37 overs at 2.5 leaves 44 overs to chase 235.

Quite a difference 235 off 44 with 8 in hand compared to 215 off 44 with 10 in hand. Also some dynamics in there with new ball scoring rates you are overlooking budha.

I'll put you on the spot, are you saying NZ could get 215 off 44 overs in those conditions v Pakistan and Australia couldn't?

Are you saying NZ get the 330 from 81 overs v Windies in the 5th days Adelaide conditions?
Report the budha December 16, 2009 10:24 AM GMT
The point is they didnt even try
Report the budha December 16, 2009 10:24 AM GMT
unlike mcintosh and debuetant Watling
Report the budha December 16, 2009 10:26 AM GMT
Scared of big Ben because he took a few first innings, well the Canary took 7 and they still took him on.

Aussies confidence shot imo
Report Lix December 16, 2009 10:29 AM GMT
All just ifs and buts anyway (or is that Asifs and Butts :p )

Aus would've gone for that chase had they not lost a few early(ish) wkts

NZ would'nt have gone for that chase had they lost early wkts.
Report the budha December 16, 2009 10:31 AM GMT
I'll put you on the spot, are you saying NZ could get 215 off 44 overs in those conditions v Pakistan and Australia couldn't?

we will never now if the Aussies are to scared to give it a bash
Report Deadly Earnest December 16, 2009 12:06 PM GMT
How did the 5 Australian wickets fall?
Report the budha December 16, 2009 12:21 PM GMT
Only Katich got out showing some intention to attack.

Punter played his usual game.

Your not suggesting- Watson SR 36.92, Hussey SR 35.80, or North SR 7.40!!- Got out attacking are you?
Report Deadly Earnest December 16, 2009 12:22 PM GMT
How did they get out then?
Report the budha December 16, 2009 12:25 PM GMT
By creating their own pressure, rather than showing some intention.

A touch of the Englander you could say
Report Deadly Earnest December 16, 2009 12:30 PM GMT
So they defend good balls they are creating their own pressure. That is why they lost 5 wickets trying to hit wide, short or full balls for boundaries is it?

So in other words if they had attacked the good balls they would have been able to leave or block the poor ones. Am I getting that right?
Report the budha December 16, 2009 12:35 PM GMT
Ones and twos of the "average" balls, lets face it average is the right word, so when the bad ones come along they could have gone after them having played more than just defensive strokes all day.
Report the budha December 16, 2009 12:36 PM GMT
Aus are an average side these days and by blocking out the day they done what average sides do 9/10
Report Deadly Earnest December 16, 2009 12:38 PM GMT
If your point is that this Australian team is not as good as the recent Australian teams that were considered great, it is a fair point. Only most cricket observers would have realised this at least 18 months ago.
Report the budha December 16, 2009 12:40 PM GMT
Not my point no.

Almost as defensive as an Aussie batsman you.
Report the budha December 16, 2009 12:43 PM GMT
The confidence of the current Aussie team was what I was hitting upoun, a side ready for the taking imo
Report the budha December 16, 2009 12:47 PM GMT
nice change of subject btw

so good balls or average? defending then attacking poor balls way to go, or one's and two's then attacking poor balls?
Report Deadly Earnest December 16, 2009 1:16 PM GMT
I cannot think of a team in world cricket who are better at working decent balls for ones and twos than Australia. So if they were struggling to do that it would suggest it was not easy to do.

If you think I am being defensive I am merely responding to your suggestion that the truncated NZ chase at a different venue, against a different opponent, in different conditions, in different circumstances somehow says something about Australia.

Your point now seems to be that Australia should have worked average balls for 1s and 2s. Did you watch the innings in question? Did you see the fields that were set? Did you note the pitch conditions? Do you understand the history of the Adelaide pitch? Do you understand how and why players find it easier to work decent balls into gaps at some times and more difficult at others, especially when the gaps aren't there?

I saw the innings. 5 wickets fell. All fell attempting boundaries. In a chase like that where you hit a string of boundaries, fieldsmen will be sent to the outfield, which in turn creates gaps to work decent balls into for 1s and 2s. I'm sure you knew that though.

I could see what they were trying to do. I thought Watson could have shown a lot more intent when facing Benn. Apart from that they did as I would have expected. F*ck all to do with NZ v Pak though if we are being serious.
Report Deadly Earnest December 16, 2009 1:19 PM GMT
the budha 16 Dec 13:43


The confidence of the current Aussie team was what I was hitting upoun, a side ready for the taking imo




Ready for the taking by who? They have already been 'taken' by South Africa, India and England in recent test series. If you don't mind me saying you seem a bit behind the times, have you been in a coma for the last 18 months?
Report Lix December 16, 2009 1:29 PM GMT
Aus results are fitting with a side ranked 4 in the world right now. no more no less. Agree with DE. How are Aus there for the taking? To be laid vs Pak maybe?
Report the budha December 16, 2009 1:30 PM GMT
Going completely off my tongue in cheek opening remark but hey.

What about Aussies first innings runrate of 3.35?, showed no intention to win with the bat at all. Thought they would roll over the windies batting at least once, but it didnt happen. Then showed no intention to chase down the target.

imo Aussies thought they had more chance of losing than winning and set out for the draw, going into the last day.

adelaide history suggest teams collapse 3rd innings, windies didnt. Does that suggest the pitch was better than the usual adelaide pitch or that the aussie bowling is carp? either way you must concede aussies bowling is carp or the pitch was better but the aussie batsmen werent up to the job!
a bitter blow one way or other
Report the budha December 16, 2009 1:39 PM GMT
Aussie there for the taking in reference to the next ashes.

well if the windies can get a draw on a result pitch.....
Report the budha December 16, 2009 1:41 PM GMT
Aus results are fitting with a side ranked 4 in the world right now.

Fair point, but surely even more reason to chase wins
Report Deadly Earnest December 16, 2009 1:46 PM GMT
A bitter blow to who?

You are hardly breaking new ground here, do you have anything new to bring to the table about the Australian team? A team who incidentally have taken part in most of the watchable test cricket that has been played in the last 2 years.

What don't you like about the Australian bowlers, if you think they are poor who is better, bearing in mind they have all sorts of injury problems. You think they bat too slowly at scoring ratesgenerally well above 3?
Report the budha December 16, 2009 1:50 PM GMT
A bitter blow to Austalia, or perhaps thats way cricket has lost it's appeal in Australia recently.

they only sing when their winning.
Report the budha December 16, 2009 1:52 PM GMT
Anyway you skipped my whole point, then refrenced the last sentence. Is this forum tactics?
Report the budha December 16, 2009 1:55 PM GMT
It's like England v West Indies at lords this year, we could have said oh well this is Lords always a draw here. Then just plodded along with two bowlers making their debut, if I remember onions and bresnan.

No we won by 10 wickets
Report the budha December 16, 2009 2:02 PM GMT
You think they bat too slowly at scoring ratesgenerally well above 3?

Yes 3.35 against a second string windies attack on a "flat deck" is very poor.
Report Deadly Earnest December 16, 2009 2:34 PM GMT
You must think Australia are pretty good. It seems anything under 500 at 4+ run rates is unacceptable for them.

It seems they have responded to your clarion call though, 339-3 after day one at the generally low scoring Perth ground.

I suppose this proves that SA 2.85 have lost all confidence. ;)
Report the budha December 16, 2009 2:51 PM GMT
Rather it shows how poor they were at adelaide no?..
Report the budha December 16, 2009 2:52 PM GMT
I wonder if they got any stick in the press and are responding here
Report the budha December 16, 2009 2:55 PM GMT
SA arent playing windies.
And before you say it, Taylor and Edwards played in that game.
Report the budha December 17, 2009 9:39 AM GMT
4.65 - Now thats a run rate ;)
Report Deadly Earnest December 17, 2009 9:44 AM GMT
I hope you took your own tip and opposed the Aussies then.
Report the budha December 17, 2009 9:51 AM GMT
Wasnt up for the start of the innings and wouldnt leave anything up overnight were the windies are concerned. Released a couple hundred of my sa-eng funds this morning though and got on the draw av 2.88.

Really feel the windies will be unlucky to lose this series,infact with proper preparation and Edwards and Taylor available I reckon the would have won the series.

How far from grace can a team fall?
Report Deadly Earnest December 18, 2009 7:19 AM GMT
It seems the WI rr first innings was below the Australian rr. And now the Australians are a bit of a sniff to win the match! Remarkable recovery in Austraian cricket underway perhaps?

Going by the logic of Buddha, Australia's fast run rate here, and their pre tea day 2 declaration, establishes that South Africa are gutless, too negative, are there for the taking and have fallen from grace.
Report Lies, DamnLies, and Statistics December 18, 2009 8:39 AM GMT
aus cricket in dire trouble again...

:(
Report Deadly Earnest December 18, 2009 8:39 AM GMT
Just moving the game along Lies. ;)
Report Deadly Earnest December 19, 2009 2:37 PM GMT
England get their chance needing under 4 rpo here, let's see what approach they take.

What was it, average balls for ones and twos, then hit the bad ones?

Or will the Budha find grounds to distinguish this chase from the Adelaide one?
Report oitoitoi December 19, 2009 3:04 PM GMT
the budha 16 Dec 11:07
Yeah, pak are hardly the best fighters when their heads go down.

my man hanif mohammed won't like that.

for the ignorant few of you who don't know wtf im talking about

http://www.cricinfo.com/pakistan/content/player/40373.html
Report Lies, DamnLies, and Statistics December 19, 2009 3:08 PM GMT
he won't...

but i assume we were referring to those born post WWII here...
Report the budha December 19, 2009 6:04 PM GMT
oi oi,

twas lix not me that you have just referenced.

DE,

Plenty of reasons to distinguish the two games.... But I guess we at least now know why the Aussies were not happy to attack at Adelaide, could have ended up 150 All Out!!!
Report Deadly Earnest December 19, 2009 8:54 PM GMT
Feel free to start detailing why the Adelaide 4th innings is precedent to the Napier 4th innings, but not this Centurion 4th innings Budha.....

The Adelaide ask was 330 from 81 overs, the preceding 3 innings were:

451 @ 3.6rpo
439 @ 3.3rpo
317 @ 3.1rpo(with C Gayle carrying his bat,)

Australia lost early wickets and scored 212-5 at 2.78 rpo on a pitch that scores alone indicate was getting tougher to score on.

Series score stood at 1-0 Australia with another test to play. Still unsure what your main objection to the Australian chase was, their lack of willingness, or their lack of ability.....?


The Napier ask was 214 from 43 overs, the preceding 3 innings were:

223 @ 3.45 rpo
471 @ 3.4 rpo
455 @ 2.35 rpo

NZ cruised to 90-0 from 19 overs on a pitch that scores alone indicate was getting easier to score on.

The series score stood at 1-1 and this was the final test of the series.


England need 364 from 96 overs at around 3.8 rpo. the preceding 3 innings were:

418 @ 2.7 rpo
356 @ 3.4 rpo
301/7 @ 3.5 pro with innings finishing with 110-1 from last 22 overs

Scores alone indicate ease of scoring similar throughout the match.

Series score stands at 0-0 in the first test.


Now, if the NZ match showed what Australia should have done, why does it also not show what England should do?

This should be an education....
Report the budha December 19, 2009 9:05 PM GMT
An Aussie never would settile for a tame draw against the Windies, just an example of how Aussie culture has changed. Has to import skilled workers, lost their identity and now the fatest nation on earth per capita. Just seems hard to except for some...

No need to educate me chap, I leave that to the inplay thread boys- always needing a second opinion them guys.

Like I said, two days s ago? there for the taking - anyteam, anywhere.
Report the budha December 19, 2009 9:07 PM GMT
I would go in to great depth to explain the in and outs of those games - but I wouldnt want to teach you to suck eggs;)
Report Deadly Earnest December 19, 2009 9:22 PM GMT
Yes, I am finding it very difficult to except Budha.

Apologies for the cheap shot. You seem to have balked at explaining why the England team you quoted earlier as a paragon of winning intent are now exempt from attacking at all costs when faced with a similar chase to the one you criticised Australia for not achieving.

Muscle weighs more than fat btw, I hope this clue to the silly 'fact' you quoted helps. ;)
Report the budha December 19, 2009 9:34 PM GMT
This was never about England, just the Aussies sides apparent lack of believe, Punter excluded. Although even he is not the player he was. Wheres the young blood that seems in abundance pretty much every where else.

Muscle has no links to ebesity rates btw, To many greeks etc in Australia now cant help, but you need some skilled people within the population I guess ;)
Report Lies, DamnLies, and Statistics December 19, 2009 9:45 PM GMT
i would love to see some stats that compare australia's obesity per capita to america

i know we have a lot of fatties, but feel confident we would be a distant second there...
Report Deadly Earnest December 19, 2009 9:49 PM GMT
the budha 16 Dec 14:55


It's like England v West Indies at lords this year, we could have said oh well this is Lords always a draw here. Then just plodded along with two bowlers making their debut, if I remember onions and bresnan.

No we won by 10 wickets



------------------------------------------------------------------------------


the budha 19 Dec 22:34


This was never about England, just the Aussies sides apparent lack of believe, Punter excluded.




The person who introduced England to this thread was none other than YOU Mr Budha. You seemingly attempted to use their totally irrelevant beating of WI at Lord's to suggest they somehow have a greater winning intent than Australia.

Now that England are faced with a situation that is actually comparable to the one you criticised Australia's approach towards you say 'this was never about England.'

I don't wish to be cruel so I will simply say you should shut up shop now and not risk more wickets chasing a win here, and I will let you away with a face saving losing draw. ;)
Report TwoTonTed December 19, 2009 9:52 PM GMT
Strauss/Flower would cream for a draw as of about 3 days ago ;)

Weather vs SA, all eyes on the radar, morning session (as ever) will dictate the result imo.
Report Deadly Earnest December 19, 2009 9:54 PM GMT
Obesity as I have seen it defined is a total joke Lies. When I was seriously fit(a few years ago now admittedly) a doctor told me I was bordering on obese by the suggested measure, which is simply height divided by weight from memory.

You need much more sophisticated measures to give any meaningful guide as to how fat a nation is imo.
Report Deadly Earnest December 19, 2009 9:59 PM GMT
I think it should be a draw even if the 90 overs are played out Ted, and for the record, i don't think this will bring any shame on England.

Putting aside silly partisan arguments for a moment, it would be nice to see teams have a serious crack at winning in these chases until it becomes virtually impossible to do so. No team really does it though so the bowling team v the draw is usually what these chases amount to, and these days the draw usually wins, so to speak.
Report Deadly Earnest December 20, 2009 1:19 PM GMT
Don't think I will be so charitable to let you off with the losing draw here now Budha.

Your argument has been defeated by your own team here.

Eerily similar to the Australian chase this, but poms gone even slower, and have not lost a wicket to an attacking shot in the first 4.

Get back here and admit you are wrong. ;)
Report dougydougy. December 20, 2009 1:22 PM GMT
not losing a wicket to an attacking shot would suggest a more difficult pitch would it not
Report Deadly Earnest December 20, 2009 1:28 PM GMT
No, it would suggest no attempt to accelerate.
Report dougydougy. December 20, 2009 1:29 PM GMT
a run out would suggest an attempt to score quick runs though i suppose
Report Deadly Earnest December 20, 2009 1:33 PM GMT
No, it was from a defensive shot, pushed straight to the bowler. It would suggest a backfired attempt to run out the main threat to KP's selfish king of England title.

Anyway, gtf off the thread I have hijacked Dougy. This is the business of nobody else but the Budha and I, and I wanted to go mono on mono and get an easy kill. ;)
Report the budha December 20, 2009 7:17 PM GMT
Not sure why you think I believe England are so great

the budha 16 Dec 13:25


By creating their own pressure, rather than showing some intention.

A touch of the Englander you could say



.............. Was just using the Lords example of how a poor side like the Windies can be rolled over even on a draw pitch.

no time to reply more yet....
Report Deadly Earnest December 21, 2009 7:18 AM GMT
Strange point Budha.

Lords under grey skies has now produced 2 results in 2 matches, one of which was the WI match, in which it was generally accepted the WI were not giving their best.

Adelaide is not a draw pitch, it is a pitch where late scoring is difficult historically. And there is no question the WI were giving their best.

So you use the England Lord's example which was in no way relevant to the Australian run chase at Adelaide. Now, you should address the England run chase at Centurion which was quite similar to the Australian run chase at Adelaide. Certainly a lot more similar than the NZ chase at Napier.
Report the budha December 21, 2009 10:09 AM GMT
Deadly I dont have the patience to type a debate on here sorry.

But.... As I have already highlighted my first comment was a bit tongue in cheek, but the gist was that THIS CURRENT Aussie team are short on confidence, possibly talent as well, and they could be beaten anytime anywhere, something it seems you agreed on in the Pak v Aus thread?.

Since opening the thread....... I believe a second string Windies attack has had them 150 AO, and then despite Aus having them 68-3 with both best bats out, were only 35 runs from complete embarassment.

I said the Aussie team had no confidence, within days I feel I was justified. And now confidence can only be even lower.

Shane Watson celebration sums it up for me, an act of nervous desperation in what should have been a walkover win for Aussie.
Report the budha December 21, 2009 10:11 AM GMT
RockMonkey 20 Dec 10:10


Likely to be hugely frustrating as AUS obviously there for the taking but Pakistan hardly the most trustworthy team to entrust the task to.
Probably the biggest discrepancy in any team between the excellence of the Pakistan bowlers & flakiness of the Younis-less batting line-up.
All in all AUS still gotta be lay at probable 1/2.

Deadly Earnest 20 Dec 10:52

I think most of us thinking the same RM.



Report Deadly Earnest December 21, 2009 12:07 PM GMT
No doubts they can be beaten Budha. As I have said throughout the thread that is saying nothing that people who follow cricket don't realise already, but Australia have also shown they can beat decent teams and at times annhialate them. The 2-0 series win here was the same result as they achived v Wi in Wi 2008 and on balance of play, Australia probably held sway by a similar margin, so we have seen nothing in this series just gone that appears any revelation to me.

My issue with your posts is more the startling evidence you are using to suppport your unstartling conclusions.

There is not a team in test cricket who would have done differently to Australia in that Adelaide chase after losing early wickets trying to play attacking shots. The England chase yesterday showed me England are certianly not the team to attack when the odds are against them succeeding.

Australia won't be beaten in the series by Pakistan, because even if Pakistan are level with their opponents, their spasmodic non trying will normally be enough to ensure they don't win.

If you think Australia are there to be taken then back NZ to beat them in NZ would be my advice, or lay Australia to win there, you will certainly get a very tidy price.

It seems to me there are plenty of people waiting for Asutralia to collapse into total misery in test cricket. It won't happen. They remain a decent, but not dominant team.
Report the budha December 21, 2009 1:06 PM GMT
Dont know how you can compare the two series. The 2-0 HOME was flattering to say the least and had the Windies had the time to prepare, and a fit Edwards and Taylor I reckon they could have won 2-1. The away was dominated by Aus, just a matter of whether they could get the wickets on flat tracks, Lee done the job.

England never had a target to chase, just overs to survive. Completely non-comparable.

Pak have just secured a draw in New Zealand, no mean feat for an Asian side. Potentially got the bowlers to leave Aus in tatters. But agree can be poor at times.

As for the future of Aussie cricket....?
Report the budha December 21, 2009 1:11 PM GMT
As for this chase business, it seems you just dont get that my point is Australia never went for it. I dont think at one point they were above the asking rate, never mind "get out playing attacking shots".

Just as well they didnt play their shots either.....could have been 150 All Out ;)
Report mercury1981 December 21, 2009 1:24 PM GMT
bring back paul reifell.....
Report mercury1981 December 21, 2009 1:24 PM GMT
.....and brendan julien...!
Report Deadly Earnest December 21, 2009 2:00 PM GMT
Why is 330 from 81 overs on 5th day Adelaide v WI tougher than 364 from 96 overs v SA at Centurion with an attack of Morkel, deWet, Ntini on last legs and Harris with a bit of Duminy and Kaills of 3 paces?

Disagree totally with your appraisal of the 2 sereis Australia v WI. I missed very little of either series and I thought the WI weren't far off the mark at all in theri home series and had a poor run with umpiring errors etc. The results there were:

Australia win 95 runs after being bowled out for 431 and 167

Australia score 479 and 6/244 in a draw where Wi got 352 and 5/266

Australia win by 87 runs scoring 251 and 439/5 being gifted the last 2-3 wickets at least by umpiring errors.

In this recent series Australia won by an innings plus change in Brisbane, drew in Adelaide where they'd have been tradin about 1.3 to win if time had been irrelevant, and won by 36 runs in Perth after leaving plenty of runs on the park by declaring early first innings.

So if you leave Brisbane aside for a moment, and give Wi credit for some of the worst umpiring errors seen when they batted in the last innings of their home series, Australia basically had around 100 runs or wicket equivalent in hand in the other 5 matches.

Australia had one collapse around 150 runs in both series. I could wear Taylor or Edwards or both making some difference but you are hardly talking about Dk Lillee and Malcolm Marshall. And just in case you hadn't noticed, Australia had about 3-4 fast bowlers missing throughout the series. And they all have better records than Edwards and Taylor.

So, imo, you are totally wrong on the Eng v Australia run chases not being comparable, in fact if they are not it is because the England chase was easier.

And you are less correct than that in saying Australia have somehow gone backwards v WI over the last 2 series.

You don't seem to get much right at all in fact.
Report the budha December 21, 2009 2:05 PM GMT
In your opinion..... I presume
Report Lix December 21, 2009 2:12 PM GMT
in most sensible peoples...
Report Deadly Earnest December 21, 2009 2:13 PM GMT
Yes, supported by the small matter of the relevant facts, also imo of course. ;)

Why was the England chase only a matter of batting out the overs where the Australian chase wasn't?

And do you still feel the Australians were somehow worse in their home series than in their away series v Wi and why? Or are you just full of hot air, a person who forms what you think is a fashionable view then make up spurious reasons to support your view?
Report the budha December 21, 2009 2:13 PM GMT
So, imo, you are totally wrong on the Eng v Australia run chases not being comparable, in fact if they are not it is because the England chase was easier.


Would love for this to be explained.........
Report Deadly Earnest December 21, 2009 2:17 PM GMT
It is you who has the explaining to do.

Why was the England chase tougher than the Australian chase?
Report the budha December 21, 2009 2:21 PM GMT
My reasons are - Windies completely under prepared, and lacking key players, hence why they got rolled over. However after that, and still lacking players, they were at least on par with the Aussies.

Yes the Windies gave the Aussies a run for their money in their own back yard over a 'two' game series.
Not exactly the walkover the 1.4s suggested, and also 1.4 shows that the Aussie are still over extimated - not least by their own.
Report the budha December 21, 2009 2:24 PM GMT
dont think i said it was.

so do explain...
Report Deadly Earnest December 21, 2009 2:31 PM GMT
the budha 21 Dec 15:21


[b]My reasons are - Windies completely under prepared, and lacking key players, hence why they got rolled over. However after that, and still lacking players, they were at least on par with the Aussies
.

Yes the Windies gave the Aussies a run for their money in their own back yard over a 'two' game series.
Not exactly the walkover the 1.4s suggested, and also 1.4 shows that the Aussie are still over extimated - not least by their own



You are struggling here mate. Windies underprepared in the 10th day of a 3 match series after playing perfectly respectably on the 6th, 7th, 8th and 9th days of the same series???

Windies were at least on a par with Australia??????? Ahem.

And you still haven't given anything like a valid reason why 364 in 96 overs v a poor SA attack missing their premier bowler(who does have a very good terst record) is any more difficult than what the Australians faced at Adelaide.

You fool me about every 4th post by saying one or two things that sound reasonable, but in between you seem clueless and that is being charitable.
Report Deadly Earnest December 21, 2009 2:33 PM GMT
The bottom half of my last post should not be in bold of course.
Report Deadly Earnest December 21, 2009 2:34 PM GMT
Well, if you don't think the England chase was tougher, why was their chase "just a matter of batting the overs out?"

And the Australian failure to win in a similar chase somehow unforgiveable?
Report the budha December 21, 2009 2:38 PM GMT
Windies under cooked for start of series.
A draw and a 35 run loss looks like two par teams.

Like I said England were never going to go for it. Away in SA, first game of series, England.

But Aussie should have had a bash and I dont doubt if they had a better opener than Watson they would have.

Fair cop though... Problem is I start typing then lose interest LOL
Report the budha December 21, 2009 2:44 PM GMT
Thing is we all know if they had someone go out and play a shewag type innings the windies would have soon crumbled.

But no Watson went out and said were happy with a draw if you are.
Report Deadly Earnest December 21, 2009 2:46 PM GMT
the budha 21 Dec 15:38


Windies under cooked for start of series.
A draw and a 35 run loss looks like two par teams.

Like I said England were never going to go for it. Away in SA, first game of series, England.

But Aussie should have had a bash and I dont doubt if they had a better opener than Watson they would have.

Fair cop though... Problem is I start typing then lose interest LOL



A draw where one team would have been trading at 1.3 to win given enough time and a 35 run win where they declared 7 down first innings sounds like two par teams?

I think you know you have made some silly posts here and you know the things you have written are unarguable under scrutiny. We'd best leave it there I think, you almost had me fooled into thinking you might have something of value to say given the opportunity.
Report the budha December 21, 2009 2:47 PM GMT
But please tell why the England chase was easier?
Report Deadly Earnest December 21, 2009 2:48 PM GMT
the budha 21 Dec 15:44


Thing is we all know if they had someone go out and play a shewag type innings the windies would have soon crumbled.

But no Watson went out and said were happy with a draw if you are.



Sounds like you are going to keep it coming hten. Why does this point apply to Australia's chase and not England's?
Report Deadly Earnest December 21, 2009 2:49 PM GMT
Read back through to my post that detailed the match innings histories in Adelaide and Centurion. It is clear as day.
Report the budha December 21, 2009 2:51 PM GMT
What did the market think?
Report Deadly Earnest December 21, 2009 2:53 PM GMT
I didn't get a chance to have a proper chat with the market to know what it thought sorry.
Report the budha December 21, 2009 3:00 PM GMT
Whatever I may have said, nothing could have been as anal as this little gem:

I don't wish to be cruel so I will simply say you should shut up shop now and not risk more wickets chasing a win here, and I will let you away with a face saving losing draw.

Deadly Earnest 20 Dec 14:19
Don't think I will be so charitable to let you off with the losing draw here now Budha.



But I concede to you DE, you obviously have far more interest in the game of cricket than I other for the reason a winning dosh and for me to take up your time with off the top of my head thoughts without checking facts and I suspect the usual c and p that goes on a round here is wasting your time.
Report the budha December 21, 2009 3:00 PM GMT
Not what you thought anyway ;)

Sorry couldnt resist that one
Report Deadly Earnest December 21, 2009 3:03 PM GMT
:)
Report the budha December 21, 2009 3:10 PM GMT
Aussies still low on confidence though, and fattest nation on earth ;)
Post Your Reply
<CTRL+Enter> to submit
Please login to post a reply.

Wonder

Instance ID: 13539
www.betfair.com