QueenC

Yep....... As for Hussey, I'm sorry that this has happened to him but I'm not sure anyone should be automatically included because of precedent. His frustration is clear and fair I guess but he is over 35 years old and had pulled his hammy badly, and unfortunately for him there can't be any half measures here with this team, especially since there are an odd number of replacement rules in place. I'm however not convinced this will be the last we see of him in the PJ's, but it is going to be tough to get back. Especially given the kiddies coming through now.

.....Or you'll cry !!!

On the womens side, both of the men got through pretty easily!!!

The last time he beat Federer......

If he plays like that and can remain injury free through out the tournament then he can probably beat just about anyone, even Federer. That being said too many long grinding matches early will put his fragile body under enormous stress and someone will benefit from that later on. The mental thing is the best for Hewitt, he knows how to win a Slam and understands what it takes to succeed during the two weeks. And on grass he is more or less at his best, and he is playing better than I have seen him in ages (he also played well going down to Rafa in Paris) But I wouldn't think he is in with a legitimate chance of claiming the trophy, but I would hoped a quarter final appearance would not be out of sight. All depending on the draw of course......

He tends to draw that particular short straw pretty regularly, he also seems to get Nadal in Paris in the same round every year. So maybe beating Hewitt is like some kind of a key to winning a Grand Slam !!!

Oops, that didn't go so well did it...... England beat Australia by seven wickets to win World Twenty20 final

Brett's body has all but given up, he is permanently sore and needs a lot of physical therapy just to stand up straight...... I love Brett and have championed him throughout his career but the end seems to be seriously nigh !!!

I think he answered all the critics and their vitriol......

I tend to agree here...... While she was, for want of a better word, exploited in regards to the publication of that photo, that is where any sympathy for her ends I am afraid. She loses all kinds of credibility and respectability IMO by selling her side of the story (whatever that is) back to the same rag that published the photo in the first place. And what story is there other than how I bedded an idiotic married footballer? I can't see how she or her publicity [censored] manager thinks that is going to get anyone onside or to make her look more credible. I mean she is either going to come across in any interview where Fevola is concerned as either a liar (which seems likely) or a complete ditz. And selling this side of that relationship, while apparently lucrative, is completely thoughtless and disrespectful to your current relationship. Now her family want to sell their souls and berate Clarke (for whatever reason) for a couple of pieces of silver as well? Oh yeah lets all stop and bow down to them all !!!

He'll cop plenty and take it on the chin, just like every other criticism he has to wear. The decision he made to come home was not popular and he would have known that, but I want fully committed and mentally fit Clarke playing for the team not one that is full of holes because of personal issues. And he is not the first to be granted time off to deal with this kind of stuff. And he won't be the last. I didn't like the fact he came home, but I understood it, and hopefully now he can get his mind back onto the game he loves. And hopefully he will be supported in doing that from the cheap seats......

And at 6-336 you have your wish HT......

You seem so proud, congrtaulations !!! Him, and they date back years........ And I have no issue with where Australian cricket is at, a step back from near invincibility was always going to happen, and they have to work through it as best they can. But there is a lot of talent in our country, however not all of it is going to match what we had, nor is it automatically going to be ready on command. So to me that is not an issue, it's just time, although that being said we still should have kept a hold of the Ashes !!!

Fair enough but it was just a simple question in that it was clearly a wicket that if you win the toss you would bowl first on. Ponting didn't make that decision (not a criticism) so the Indians copped (by their own design) most of the difficulties the pitch had to offer. I think he has his good moments as a captain, but I have real and long term issues with a number of aspects of his leadership. True as is the reverse, so the criticism and compliments should go both ways then. But you don't hear "oh the captain made a poor decision bringing this bowler on" do you? !!!

Geez Rhino, where in my comments have I ever given you the opinion that I am so stupid as to require your condescension....... True but IMO his captaincy skills get lauded a little too much..... He is perfectly fine captain in most situations, that had little choice but to show faith in the inconsistent and the young. And he came out trumps so well done to him for doing it, but his captaincy can be sketchy and as inconsistent as Johnson's bowling at time. Just my opinion <_< !!!

He didn't win the toss did he? He batted alright but his bowlers did the damage. So I'm more inclined to congratulate Doug Bollinger for the figures he got.

Amen to that..... This is fantastic new Two Sheds, thanks for keeping us updated.

Yeah Blues.....Woo Hoo :D !!!

2/100 now!!! Thanks for that, but it really doesn't change Johnsons voting question marks......

Yes they were, as were the ODI's in England after the Ashes...... Really begs the question of who the hell else was nominated?

Well it certainly hasn't hurt her game and her fitness is back to being first class........ But I think that what motherhood has probably helped more than anything else, and I think she has said this herself, is the mental side of the game. No longer is tennis the be all and end all, she has a daughter that is the most important thing, and tennis is there more for the fun of the sport and she can play for enjoyment and without the pressures she had before, because while the push to win is still there, it is not the most important thing and once she leaves he court life goes back to Play School and The Wiggles. Now it wouldn't be that simple but she had struggled with pressure and closing out matches in the first half of her career (I remember an Australian Open final against Serena in which she should have won in two, easily, but instead lost in three), now that pressure is elsewhere and the court is a place to enjoy yourself, win or lose. Of course winning helps here!!! All that, and her beautiful little girl doesn't care if mummy won or lost (despite the look on her face after the final), she is still her little girl !!!

Agree with you here Titun..... Huge congratulations to Kimmy for her win at the USO. It was one of those fantastic sporting fairy tales that gets thrown up every so often, and it couldn't have happened to a better or nicer person. It's strange to remember that this is only her second slam win, but hopefully it will be the first of many in this the second chapter of her stellar career. And generally if you are able to beat both Williams girls (albeit the second one in spectacularly ordinary circumstances) you probably should be winning the event. Great stuff!!! Nadal's injury has been with him since the tournament in Montreal, but got progressively worse as the Open wore on, but being a grand slam pulling out was not an option (like it ever is ever with this kid). Apparently he has a large tear in his right abdominal and has been banned from playing or training (that will kill him) for a month or so. It is a shame that his comeback was curtailed by yet another injury, kind of like his year to date really, given how he started, winning here and four other tournament wins (including three masters) up until the French. And it's funny you should mention the Nadal v Federer matches of the past, as those have made plenty of tennis history in recent years on all surfaces (except the US Open) because Del Potro is the first person to beat Federer in a grand slam final other than Rafa. And Roger even mentioned in a presser prior to the final the fact that he was thrilled he wasn't going to have to face Nadal again, given the Spaniard has a massive winning record over Fed in all tournaments. He also mentioned Nadal again after the match regarding the quality of their past finals. I'm not sure he is so happy about it now though !!!

It's happened a few times over the years, but not too many..... It was an interesting final to say the least. I mean from what I saw in the opening set and a half I would have thought Federer was going to walk away with it. Delpo had no penetration into the court and was having trouble with Fed's serve, as well as his own. But after the squabble at about 5-4 in the second things seemed to go down hill for Roger. He lost his normally air tight composure on a few occasions and couldn't close out either of the tie-breaks, either of which would have won the match. And while all of this is going on Del Potro is getting more confident and stronger and is hitting the ball with a hell of a lot more authority (like he was able to do in the semi) and eventually Federer got rolled in the fifth. And if you think the men's tour is getting younger have a look at the babies running around on the WTA !!!

Well it didn't even take him getting back to full fitness to re-gain the #2 ranking..... The system is based on twelve months of consistency. The only reason Murray gained the #2 ranking (and to a lesser extent Federer regaining the #1 ranking) was because Rafa was not able to defend the points that he won at the French Open, Queens and Wimbledon because of his poor knees. So while he gets hit with a massive points subtraction Murray, who went further this season at the All England Club and won Queens, picked up enough to jump into the second spot and Federer did the same to jump into the first. I remember reading that Nadal only had to make the quarters at Wimbledon to hold onto the #1 ranking even if Federer claimed the crown, but he couldn't even contest it and therefore suffered the ranking consequences. As for Andy Murray's grand slam record, it is actually fairly ordinary, especially in the two tournaments he should prosper in being here and the US. Many people in the know believe that he will, or at least should win a grand slam at some point but so far he has only made the one final and seems to fall pretty early. You need to be mentally tough to win one of these things, which is what makes Federer and Nadal so amazing in their pursuit and success in recent years. Murray needs to get a bit more of that into him, and soon before he becomes the best never. He made the final last year in New York but was blown off the court and this year was bounced in the fourth round both here and there. His ranking is not because of grand slam success like the other two now above him, but more so on the Masters events which give 1000 points to the winner (more than other tournaments) compared to 2000 for a grand slam win. He was won two this season and a couple of runners up as well. Although Nadal has won three with a runners up thrown in as well as a grand slam, so those lost injury points really do hit very hard.

We're probably down one batsman all things being considered, especially now that Watson is injured....yet again. Hughes's biggest issues may well be the sharp bounce, given that he got out twice in the trial game to short pitched stuff from Harmison. And our spinner is quite useless. The question is do they risk going in with the four quicks or play a useless spinner?