Aussie Cricket
-
Starc, meanwhile, is busily giving as few fucks as possible:
87.5
Jadeja to Starc, SIX
87.4
Jadeja to Starc, no run, defended back
87.3
Jadeja to Starc, FOUR, a swipe across the line for four through midwicket. Sits on one knee and belts the slog sweep wide of long-on
87.2
Jadeja to Starc, FOUR, a thick inside edge and that will be four more. Flat delivery outside off, Starc is beaten on the inside edge, plenty of turn. Takes the inside edge and races down to the fine leg fence
87.1
Jadeja to Starc, no run, well bowled. Slow through the air outside off, pushed back86.1
J Yadav to Starc, SIX, that's massive. Flight from Jayant, Starc gets under the length and sends the ball sailing way over midwicket for a gigantic six. That's a Starc special.85.3
UT Yadav to Starc, FOUR, nicely played. Waits for the one that is full, the follow-up to the bouncer, and then drills a delectable drive through mid-off. Lovely stroke82.3
Ashwin to Starc, SIX, a slog sweep and that's way over square leg for six! Flat delivery down leg, Starc clears his front leg and swipes the ball into the stands -
@NTA said in Aussie Cricket:
@MajorRage almost as unsurprising as the wicket, which Warne describes as "an 8th Day wicket".
Guess it works if you're allowed to play nearly every game at home.
I hope we post something reasonable and fucking flog them, using spin.
Careful mate, producing 500+ roads so that you can sell concessions on day 5 ain't cricket either
-
Jeez that was all out for about 200 but for Starc's obstinacy
Yes, hand up, I do like to see Aus cricket fall on bluster but the tiny bit of rationality that exists in me, also has to say fair dues to home records in home conditions. Hell at the moment no one wins overseas (except against minnows or Aussie teams in NZ overhyped test series - see what Idid there, applied a reverse shit sandwich review by snidely bagging Aus cricket and then acknowledging that they reamed us at home last time
-
http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/605597.html
Still a good read (Jones pissing himself), trho' I think everyone heard it a dozen times -
I didn't want to come out after tea. I was 202 and I was just gone. Simmo and AB just pushed me out and said, "You're batting." When you're urinating in your pants and vomiting 15 times, you've got massive problems. It wouldn't happen now because of litigious players and workplace safety. Should we be playing in 42 degrees? We go off for rain but we don't go off when it's 42.
@Kruse said in Aussie Cricket:
Yep... I didn't think it was possible, but somehow the fucking injuns have managed to make themselves a hatier cricket team than Aus.
I struggle to dislike India, Kohli seems an OK bloke, Ashwin is a decent guy. They were easier to dislike under Ganguly who modelled himself on Border & was equally arseholic.
While Starc, Wade, Warner & Smith are all utter cockholes. There's no one in the Indian team remotely close to Warner & Starc as assholes
-
-
@Kruse said in Aussie Cricket:
@gollum I suspect the BCCI clouds my view a fair bit; and it's not so much the individuals - but just the team in general... the arrogance that comes with privileged Indians.
Yeah, I'm a bit more relaxed about the Indians.
England and Australia drove world cricket forever, and arranged it to suit themselves. Now the Indians generate 80%plus of all the revenue in the game, they're calling the shots. It sucks, but it's an important lesson for us all in life: if you're rich, you do what you farking want and everyone else bends over for you.
And yes, some of their supporters can be arse, but the revenue from BCCI effectively finances our first class game, so take the rough with the smooth.
-
Have zero issue with guys like Kohli - though I sometimes gnash my teeth when he's playing and doing well, he's a smart, aggressive cricketer with a classy game.
But there is preparing a home ground advantage, and then there is this bullshit. The sheer corruption also gets on my tits. Reading about tours in the past where, once India were getting beaten, the tournament prize money mysteriously went away.
-
@gollum said in Aussie Cricket:
While Starc, Wade, Warner & Smith are all utter cockholes. There's no one in the Indian team remotely close to Warner & Starc as assholes
I don't mind Smith, at all. He seems like a slightly unusual bloke, but I can't recall him doing anything particularly arsehole-ish. I can recall him doing a few good things - including more or less telling one of his players to pull his head in during a TV interview.
Davy, I can agree on - he seems to be on the top level of the pantheon of great Australian cricketing arseholes (with Michael Clarke).
It's hard to say about the Indian team. The concerted, vociferous appealing for things that are clearly not out is pretty annoying. And it works - though at least they're now using the DRS. Nonetheless, I'd argue Wade was a victim last night.
-
-
@Bovidae Both had a fair chunk of Timmy involved. The commentators were critical of both.
The lbw review against Smith was particularly bad. It was one that simply didn't look out to me when it happened and at best they were going to get an on-field call for the ball clipping. As it turned out it was hitting nothing.
As a matter of policy I don't think it's worthwhile reviewing lbws on line - in tests anyway - I think they've changed the rules a bit in at least one of the shorter forms, but I can't remember if it favours batsman or bowler.
-
-
@NTA said in Aussie Cricket:
@Chris-B. really it's about protecting the umpires, so I reckon if you're going to try and overturn a not-out LBW decision at this level, you'd better be pretty fucking confident
Same in Rugby now - at least that sped shit up significantly. Cricket DRS still sounds like talking to an anally retentive health and safety person.
-
@NTA Yeah. As a batsman I'd only review if I'd got an edge on it. As a bowler, only if I thought the decision was based around a non-existent edge.
It looks to me that the Aussies - Smith at least - has this well worked out. Ahead of some of the other teams. In particular, Smith was far better at reviews than BMac in the 6 test "series" we played.
In India it's very important to get this right, because you're going to have umpiring fuck-ups due to the umpires being put under intense pressure.
-
@nzzp said in Aussie Cricket:
Cricket DRS still sounds like talking to an anally retentive health and safety person.It does a bit, but I kind of like it because it shows that they are very systematically reviewing the evidence. At some point it will wear thin though and - like all these TV review systems - it sucks if you're at the ground and don't know what's going on - especially if there's no big screen.
-
@Chris-B. said in Aussie Cricket:
@NTA Yeah. As a batsman I'd only review if I'd got an edge on it. As a bowler, only if I thought the decision was based around a non-existent edge.
It looks to me that the Aussies - Smith at least - has this well worked out. Ahead of some of the other teams. In particular, Smith was far better at reviews than BMac in the 6 test "series" we played.
In India it's very important to get this right, because you're going to have umpiring fuck-ups due to the umpires being put under intense pressure.
Things might be a bit different in India but I think this is generally a really bad strategy. In the history of test cricket, only 30% of wickets have been reviewable. What that means is that only 30% of dismissals in cricket are LBW or caught behind. That means that in an average innings a batting team should probably only need 3 reviews anyway. If your innings lasts more than 80 overs then you get 4 reviews - which is more than you should ever really need. It is tempting to save reviews up but reviews become less valuable as the innings continues. You want to use your reviews on the best batsmen.
If someone gets out LBW and your team has two reviews left and they are an established batsman then they should pretty much always review. There's often a good chance you won't have another LBW given to the 80th over. Up until the 60th over you probably want to keep at least one review in hand for the obvious nicks. Apart from that you should be taking a punt unless you are 100% confident you were plumb. From a batting perspective, reviews aren't really a scarce resource.
From a fielding perspective, it is completely different. There are many shouts you could review but have to choose not to.
