titan_uranus

It's not just the HUN. A few weeks back The Age reported that Daniel Blennel was playing for us.

Heard on the rumour file this morning that we're going to announce our sponsor(s) on The Footy Show on Thursday.

The outlook for this test would be so different if North had held on to Kallis first ball. Instead, we're in trouble of not winning a test that hasn't been in question since early on day 2. I said this before the 5th day of the first test, where the situation was similar, and we ended up knocking them over pretty easily, but I can see a South African win here, but if Kallis and de Villiers survive the first session, we're in a lot of trouble.

I agree.

That's a nice way of looking at it. Not having an LTI by round 4 would definitely be nice. But I see it more like this: Agreed. I like mo's solution: Definitely an idea that will be considered. But, if Martin does ruck, what happens if/when Spencer is ready to play? Do we go with PJ and Spencer, which leaves us with the plethora of defenders? Or do we not play PJ?

The referral system is a joke. It takes far too long, and doesn't always make the correct decision. As for the match, it's not often you can lose 5/4 yet end the day in control. But I'm sure the Melbourne Test will be in the back of the Aussies' minds at the moment. Credit to McDonald for bowling so well.

Don't know about being a darkhorse, but we're definitely a better team with those two in it.

Getting Collingwood in Round 2, even though it's an away match, is a huge bonus to the MFC. I agree that the MFC store is not in the best of locations during the week, but I think it's in a great spot for match days. I've been there a few times when Melbourne's been playing at the G and it's been packed out. Plus, having the store at the MCG shows where we want our home to be.

Hmm. I agree with the whole Collingwood media saturation stuff. But Essendon v Collingwood is always going to take precedence over a practice match between Brisbane and Melbourne. As for the draw, you're right, they've had it easy. But who cares? We should have beaten Hawthorn. Good point: the last time we won an interstate match was Round 14, 2006, when we beat Brisbane at the Gabba by 8 points (that doesn't include the 2007 NAB Cup/Challenge). Brisbane's back half isn't that bad. I'd say West Coast's is worse. Fremantle's too.

4/303 at stumps. Brilliant start, didn't quite go on with it as we were 0/184 at the second drinks break. But overall a good day's play. Hughes is a very exciting prospect, at 20 years old. Had the guts to go for consecutive sixes to race through the 90s. First time we've gone into a test match with an unchanged line up since the SCG test of 2008. Let's hope Siddle and Hilfenhaus are actually fit.

Great read. How did Newton kick 3 goals in a cyclone, but can't get a possession in the dry?

They're from Greece, and they're in no position to be sponsoring an AFL club. Profits are severely lower than what was planned and budgeted for. They only operate in Victoria (so they don't need national exposure), and there's no guarantee they'll still be here in 24 months. Exactly.

Still sounds wrong to me.

I think we are due to tour India this year, for one of those long ODI series. Not sure though.

So who will our ruckmen be in Round 1? Jamar's injured, Meesen's crap, Spencer's a rookie. So it's PJ and who? Definitely Whelan's last year.

There was a feature on Nine News on Monday, if that's what you mean.

Glad to see Rivers back. What's up with McNamara?

McGain faces uphill battle to debut Looks like Ponting wants to stick with the 11 that won at the Wanderers. According to the article, only Warne and Kumble have had any effect at Durban since 2002, and Sth Africa haven't played a specialist spinner in their last 2 tests at the venue. McGain's no certainty. This is worrying though. Magoffin has been called into the squad as cover. So it's conveivable that we could have another two debutants in Durban, should Siddle and Hilfenhaus be unfit. 5 debutants in 2 matches!

I said no, but I really dont' care. At first I thought maybe it might be seen as being pretentious or smug (i.e. we've been around since 1858), but it doesn't bother me.

I read on cricinfo.com that South Africa has come back from 1-0 down to win home series in the last two summers, against India and West Indies. Definitely no room for complacency. Agree that a lot went right for us, and South Africa played well below their capability. Morkel and Harris were nowhere near as good as they were in Australia. And the batsmen obviously were disappointing for them. The gloss seems to have come off Duminy a little: his last 4 innings have all been 24 or below. I'm with you deanox. McDonald's bowling was praised on cricinfo and on the ABC. We went into the match with 4 'pacemen' (McDonald gets included in that group) and they combined to take 19 wickets. Despite McDonald's poor batting, he vindicated his selection. By tying up one end in the 4th innings, he frustrated Kallis to the point of him playing the expansive drive that saw him get out. Part of our loss in Perth came from Krejza leaking runs far too easily. Defending a total in the 4th innings is much easier if the runs aren't flowing. It builds confidence in the bowling team to see the lead holding up. Disagree. Obviously if you bowl them out they lose, but if they're making runs a sense of confidence and a 'we can do this' attitude develops. It definitely helps the chasing team if they're scoring. Having said that, the pitch definitely helped us out. If the next pitch demands a spinner, though, I'm not convinced the selectors will play McGain anyway. McDonald's ability to get a wicket, combined with his super economy rate, should be helping him stay in the selector's minds.

I think Ponting has been vindicated: those runs from Hilfenhaus and Siddle could prove vital. At 2/178, with Amla and Kallis doing fine and de Villiers, Duminy and Boucher to come, Sth Africa can still win. A loss, or even a draw, from here would be morale-destroying for us. When you're in a position to enforce the follow-on, and don't go on to win the match, that hurts. We must take 2 or 3 wickets before lunch, else we'll either lose to Sth Africa or the weather/light. Agree re: Hussey though. He should be batting at 5. And why don't we have another specialist batsman in the squad? If one of our top 6 goes down with an injury we've got no cover.

Did anyone else see the article in the Sporting Life section of The Age last week about 'average' footy players? Based on team lists, the average height and weight and age were something like 187cm and 88kg (could be wrong), and Chris Johnson is both of those, making him the most 'average' football in the league. Justifies our decision. I find that funny and I'm in uni...

North is our no. 6. A composed batsman. Stabilises the order, has a cool head and knows the game well. And bowls handy off spin. The team is starting to come together nicely. We have a proper top 6 (though IMO Hussey should be batting at 5 and Clarke at 4), three good pacemen who all bring something different, and a wicket-keeper-batsman who can bat well enough at 7 but needs to work on his keeping. Johnson should bat at no.8, leaving the door open for another bowler. Having said that, McDonald does bowl well, has a habit of getting wickets when we need them, and, despite his two innings so far, can bat. McDonald could be played as a bowler at 9 if there was no need for a spinner. As for the match, we shouldn't lose from here, but I'm not convinced we're going to win. Bad light seems to end each day prematurely, there's been rain about, and South Africa won't be bowled out for 220 again I don't think. But the lead we've got should mean we can set a target of 450 and still have enough time to bowl them out.

Yes, it wouldn't work well if it was all the Victorian teams in one conference. You'd maybe split the two WA and SA teams, and the two Sydney and Qld teams, and then fill the rest with Victorian teams. You'd have to split Rich, Coll, Carl and Ess into 2 groups of 2 as well I'd think. The NFL's conference system is pretty complex. Just having 22 rounds where everyone plays everyone else at least once per year seems easier to me.

Not a bad idea, but it seems a little complex. Plus 9-9 doesn't work with 10 Victorian teams, unless Geelong gets the boot, which would be unfair for them.