titan_uranus

Vettori will be glad he sent us in: 6/147. Clarke's still there at least. Watson managed just 1. Symonds 26.

I'm hoping for Martin to settle down into a FB or CHB role, play most of the season and develop physically. Spencer I don't know much about. I'm not expecting anything, but it'd be nice if he became an AFL standard ruckman so we don't have to rely on Jamar.

We were in trouble at 3/23, but Clarke and Hussey look settled now. I'm surprised Vettori hasn't bowled himself yet.

Michael Clarke has just said that Watson is playing and Krejza is 12th man. Delayed start to the test because of the storms up there.

Agreed. On this pitch, which got rained on last night again, Watson will do better than Krejza.

The fact that they bowl left arm orthodox does not mean they're not front line spinners. But I guess you're right in that Australia doesn't bode well for them. Kallis has taken 240 Test wickets at 31.22, and took 10 wickets in the 4 test series against England earlier this year. He can bowl.

They do have a spinner: Paul Harris. And some other guy called Botha is vying for his spot, so I guess maybe he's a spinner as well. The South African team to play Bangladesh in the 1st of two tests today is: 1. Smith 2. McKenzie 3. Amla 4. Kallis 5. De Villiers 6. Prince 7. Boucher 8. Harris 9. Morkel 10. Steyn 11. Ntini Similar to India in that they play 6 batsmen and 4 bowlers. Kallis will bowl as well. But to me Boucher looks older. Plus I'd thought he'd retired already...

This has gone unnoticed due to the Ben Cousins saga, but at yesterday's commission meeting the topic of the GC17 license was debated, and the commission decided it needs 'more detailed analysis': AFL stalls for time on Gold Coast bid approval With this current global financial crisis, the AFL is (rightly) reconsidering the GC17 bid because of the huge outlay of money that is associated with it.

You mean this? <---> I guess there's some similarity there. We can only hope.

I can't believe Boucher is still playing. How old is he? Amla, McKenzie, De Villiers, Kallis, Prince and Smith are all doing very nicely. Last time we played them Prince was Warne's bunny. He couldn't get a start. Now he's arguably their best or second best bastman. Moving De Villiers down the order has seen him flourish. Usually one of those 6 fires in a match. As for their bowlers, Ntini, while old, is still effective, Dale Steyn, when not injured, bowls faster than Lee. They've got Morkel and Nel as well. So overall I think they'll provide more than a decent challenge. Expect at least one loss over the 6 tests we play home and away.

Once again, Daniel Vettori plays a lone hand for NZ. He's their best bowler, and frighteningly enough he's their most consistent batsman as well. You would think they wouldn't stand a chance against us at the Gabba. With a 490 target, what chance did we leave the South Africans? Not much, which meant they were content to bat out a draw rather than go for the win. If we'd declared a little earlier, then maybe, with a lower target, they might have gone a bit harder for it. However, you're right in that, in 127 overs, and with Warne, we should have taken more than 5 wickets.

Stynes mines the surge in Dee spirit The HUN mentioned this in today's paper: 'Suggestions for a youth summit...particularly impressed Stynes. "I love the first idea that came out of the group I was in: Why aren't we doing this with the kids?" he said. "It's like, God, how obvious is that? We will definitely run with that one before the season starts."' Good to see Stynes is still looking at research into junior supporters. This seems critical to me.

He made 203* at the WACA in 2005 vs Sth Africa. Letting him get to 200 meant we declared too late, and Sth Africa were able to draw the test match. That was the match before we began our 15 match winning streak that didn't end until India earlier this year. If Clarke's unwell, Hodge is the obvious replacement. I'm just unsure if the selectors want to pick another 33 year old.

We can only hope that a deal was struck so that we don't have to pay his full 2009 salary, which I think is $250,000. A ridiculous amount of money for a player of Carroll's quality.

Ha! Good point Redleg. I hate St Kilda so much, now I have a reason.

Exactly. Shut up Chook.

You're kidding right? You call yourself a football supporter and you don't like a Collingwood joke? Seriously, though, why must everything be so PC these days? I take it then you wouldn't find jokes about blondes, red-heads, men, women, snobs or any other type of person funny then?

I'll have a go. Good distraction from my exam in 3 hours time... B: Whelan Warnock Rivers HB: Garland Martin Petterd C: Green Moloney Morton HF: Robertson Miller Davey FF: Sylvia Johnson Bate R: Jamar McLean McDonald I: Bruce Maric Buckley Wonaeamirri Intentionally no Jones or Wheatley.

It was the decision to use Hussey that got to me. Obviously he should have used Lee or Watson, who were reversing it for the first time in 4 tests, but if he was under orders to use part-timers, why not use Katich? He at least has taken wickets at test level, and is certainly more likely than Hussey to take a wicket. But putting on Hussey was not only wrong, it was stupid.

I was just about to say I thought we had a chance. 5 minutes ago we were 3/150, Hussey and Hayden doing very well working singles. Then, in the space of 5 balls, both are out, so we're 5/154. We had a chance, India was playing defensively, but they've started to attack and have made breakthrough. We're still well over the run rate but Haddin and Watson don't exactly inspire confidence.

We have no idea what to do in a situation such as the one we are in now. Katich and Hayden have come out slogging, Katich can't do it, played an awful stroke and was caught. Next over, Ponting takes a suicidal run and is run out by a metre. 2/37. We mightn't be there at tea. Awful batting. Absolutely awful.

It's not about being democratic, it's about following the rules set out in the MFC 'constitution'. Jim doesn't have a choice. He can't say 'We are not going to stand for re-election because we feel we deserve it', even if people would support him. Besides which, I can't think of any reason why the current board wouldn't be re-elected anyway. The election may take time and money, which is unwanted, but it has to happen.

Ponting's captaincy has, on this tour, been exposed for what it is: not that good. As Jon Pierik writes in the HUN today, Ponting's not an 'intuitive' captain, like Mark Taylor. I see that as somewhat of a criticism of Ponting's captaincy. Since he began, Australia has been the dominant force in cricket, and with bowlers like Warne and McGrath, you don't need to do as much as a captain than you would with the Bangladesh team. Now that we're struggling, Ponting's lack of ability to analyse the game and intuitively know what to do and when has been exposed. However, I doubt it was his decision to bowl the part-timers. What is his fault is the constant talking to the bowler between overs and the eternity he spends setting fields. If he'd not wasted so much time between overs in the first 2 sessions, then maybe he wouldn't have had this problem. As for the match, I think India will go for it to start with. They've got plenty of runs to play with, so they could well go on the attack and look for quick wickets early. If that works then they can push for a win, but if it doesn't, they can slip into an 8-1 field whenever they want to shut us out. Which they will do as soon as we look like getting close to the target.

That's what I used to believe. But we spent all day at the crease yesterday. 85.4 overs, 8 wickets in hand, but just 166 runs in total. Something like our second or third worst run rate in an innings 9 years. What will happen from here: Optimist's view: we'll bowl India out by the end of today for 200, then chase down 290-odd tomorrow and win the trophy back Pessimist's view: India will bat for almost the rest of the game, Dravid will get going and score 70 off 300 balls. I think India will post a sizeable lead (350-400), then declare, giving us 2-3 sessions to try and win. But we won't.

Because we made the finals in 2004, and represented one of few Victorian teams who could challenge the interstaters. I wouldn't have thought that would take much mulling over BBP.