Nasher

If we were to draw a parallel to the MFC, then Doherty is James Magner. Available, mature, plays a role, will bust a gut, but ultimately no good. He certainly doesn't belong in the "talented youngster" group at 30.

No doubt to tell us all that cricketers should just play and not have to worry about all that professionalism stuff. I wouldn't expect anything less. Am I the only one who couldn't GAF what the players think on issues like this one?

Wow, tough. I'm torn between demanding standards and "they're just simple cricketers, let them play cricket". Gods, I can hear Ian Chappell moaning about it from here. That alone makes me feel compelled to side with the opposing view.

I think your joke-o-meter needs adjusting H_T

If Fawad Ahmed fails, we could always give Imran Tahir a run.

For both his bowling prowess and his ability to stay on the park. Edit: Also a late bloomer like Harris. The similarities are noticeable now that you point it out.

And just to go for the hattrick of consecutive posts - I'm also happy to put my hand up for judging. I promise to judge with the impartialty of the AFL in a tanking inquiry and the integrity of a Pakistani fast bowler. Please leave any bribes in unmarked brown paper bags - thanks.

Here's the post of mine that Rogue moderator deleted

Yaaayyyyyy! Finally.

Technically I didn't name names. Nonetheless, the bottom of the barrell hasn't been reached yet re: NZ. (Can I say that?)

Eww. We'll have to start calling you Barry, H_T.

Phew! Thank goodness they finally played Clarke, Wade, Warner et al. Definitely made them a stronger and more competitive side.

'Take it out of our hands' - Harris http://www.espncricinfo.com/australia/content/current/story/600951.html I'm really glad to read this article. When the media is saturated with dinosaurs like Ian Chappell who is stuck in the 70s and every fast bowler in the nation understandably going "stuff this rest crap, I want to play!", it's nice to hear that at least one cricketer actually gets it.

I'm not as quick to speculate on reasoning, but his fielding has been nothing short of shocking in the BBL this year from the couple of games I've seen.

0/7? Goodness, at that pace, they should've made at least 70 runs.

Yes, the timing is a bit of a bugger, but then again, when's a good time to lose one of your most experienced campaigners? I'll be sorry to see Mr Cricket go. He's been an amazing and ultra-reliable player over the years, especially when you consider he didn't make his test debut until he was 30. Like Matty Hayden he had to just keep amassing a mountain of runs at Shield level before the selectors had no choice but to pick him. He turned out to be a gem in all forms of the game as well, in that regard he was probably more versatile than any other player in era of Tests, ODIs and T20s. My hat goes off to him.

I entertained the idea of Johnson as the all-rounder when pondering this last night, but then I dismissed it, because he's just not good enough with the bat. You have to look beyond one (very good) innings - his test average is 22.45 and he's scored one century in nearly 50 tests. Is that the guy to bat at 4 or 5 or 6? Bottom line is he's a bowler who is handy with the bat, but a true all-rounder he aint. I'd rather a guy in the du Plessis mould; a genuine batsman who can bowl 15 overs an innings if necessary. Watson as an opener - surely we've been there, done that. I know Cowan is B-grade and probably isn't the long term answer, but if we're going to start stuffing around with our opening then it has to be because the options we've got are genuinely better, not to go from ordinary pair to ordinary pair. Watson has proven he can't get big scores when opening the innings; I'd say that ship has well and truly sailed.

It wouldn't be the first time it had been paid that way. I doubt it's ever happened in Test cricket, but it certainly has in lower levels.

Did he throw the ball over the fence when he caught it? It looked like he may have on TV, but they only showed him throwing it, they didn't show where it landed. By the letter of the law it should have been six if he did.

Huh? I thought Bird could only bowl well on Bellerive? It's pretty funny though, I remember listening to one of the SA tests on the radio and O'Keefe prattled on about how he didn't rate Bird at all (without offering any logical reasoning at all). Then yesterday on TV, Mark Nicholas was making Glenn McGrath comparisons. It's like reading Demonland on the off-season.

My browsing time is too sporadic sorry. I tend to hold these things up. Also, I can't really be bothered.

Yes, I used to see the council guy with the leaf blower every day and wondered whether that was his only task for the day, or...? It's hard to imagine a more menial, low responsibility job. Maybe it's the job for me when I win div 1 in the lottery and just need something to do to pass the time.

Unless a miracle happens, Hastings will be a one test wonder. Props to his nuggety innings with the bat, but it's not what he's there for. All three of the specialist quicks have been bloody hopeless though. This test is all but lost, on day two. I'm feeling very blah now after what had been a great series so far. Couldn't even be farked watching the last hour.

Found it! http://demonland.com...-t-no-b-thread/

Bump.