Aussie Cricket
-
How ... Why... do you have a toasted sandwich in your pocket ...
-
How ... Why... do you have a toasted sandwich in your pocket ...
@booboo said in Aussie Cricket:
How ... Why... do you have a toasted sandwich in your pocket ...
Ran out of muffins?
-
@Siam said in Aussie Cricket:
To be fair, Starc is an absolute gun, a very fine bowler. His off days are peculiar though
He is seriously good but better with a white ball. Strike rate isn't really the best way to look at him in tests I don't think because when he has an off day he leaks runs. 3.35 econ and an average of 27.6. Not as good as Wags and only slightly better than Southee and Boult.
Cummins is the standout obviously in all regards. Hazlewood not too far behind.@booboo said in Aussie Cricket:
How ... Why... do you have a toasted sandwich in your pocket ...
Was it hot? Hand warmer? Willy warmer? Was the yellow filling cheese, or yellow sandpaper? Too many questions.
-
@NTA said in Aussie Cricket:
Having said that:
https://twitter.com/WisdenCricket/status/1355319821466910721?s=19
Bowlers to take more Test wickets at a better strike-rate than Mitchell Starc when he's on his period.
Matt Henry
Matthew Hoggard
Jackson Bird
Darrell TuffyNot end of list
Happy birthday to the Australian sulkster
@Siam said in Aussie Cricket:
@NTA said in Aussie Cricket:
Having said that:
https://twitter.com/WisdenCricket/status/1355319821466910721?s=19
Bowlers to take more Test wickets at a better strike-rate than Mitchell Starc when he's on his period.
Matt Henry
Matthew Hoggard
Jackson Bird
Darrell TuffyNot end of list
Happy birthday to the Australian sulkster
Ouch
-
The underarm incident was a boring, overblown non event 40 years ago.
How people still feel the need to wank on about it to this day is completely beyond me.
@MN5 said in Aussie Cricket:
The underarm incident was a boring, overblown non event 40 years ago.
How people still feel the need to wank on about it to this day is completely beyond me.
holy shit
the absolute blackest of pots calling out a kettle right here
-
@MN5 said in Aussie Cricket:
The underarm incident was a boring, overblown non event 40 years ago.
How people still feel the need to wank on about it to this day is completely beyond me.
holy shit
the absolute blackest of pots calling out a kettle right here
@mariner4life said in Aussie Cricket:
@MN5 said in Aussie Cricket:
The underarm incident was a boring, overblown non event 40 years ago.
How people still feel the need to wank on about it to this day is completely beyond me.
holy shit
the absolute blackest of pots calling out a kettle right here
Not sure what you're getting at, am I missing something ?
-
@mariner4life said in Aussie Cricket:
@MN5 said in Aussie Cricket:
The underarm incident was a boring, overblown non event 40 years ago.
How people still feel the need to wank on about it to this day is completely beyond me.
holy shit
the absolute blackest of pots calling out a kettle right here
Not sure what you're getting at, am I missing something ?
@MN5 said in Aussie Cricket:
@mariner4life said in Aussie Cricket:
@MN5 said in Aussie Cricket:
The underarm incident was a boring, overblown non event 40 years ago.
How people still feel the need to wank on about it to this day is completely beyond me.
holy shit
the absolute blackest of pots calling out a kettle right here
Not sure what you're getting at, am I missing something ?
Obviously February 1981.
It was huge news. Involved governments and was the first time anyone saw that the Australian public had a soul
-
I've always been a bit perplexed by underarm. It still resonates so strongly, and yet what Australia did was entirely legal at the time. It seems to be the 80s equivalent to Sandpapergate, and yet they are completely different situations with only one actually outside the rules of the game.
I don't agree with the decision to bowl underarm, but still to be talking about it 40 years later?
-
I've always been a bit perplexed by underarm. It still resonates so strongly, and yet what Australia did was entirely legal at the time. It seems to be the 80s equivalent to Sandpapergate, and yet they are completely different situations with only one actually outside the rules of the game.
I don't agree with the decision to bowl underarm, but still to be talking about it 40 years later?
@barbarian said in Aussie Cricket:
I don't agree with the decision to bowl underarm, but still to be talking about it 40 years later?
Aus is consistently so much better than us at Cricket, that to get robbed of the chance to win by something that Benaud called a disgrace really rankles.
Let's be honest, the chances of scoring a 6 off the last ball was tiny. Yet it's not sporting to not allow a competition. It's like that bowler this week conceding a wide on the last ball of the innings preventing a batter getting a ton. If he did it, it was completely legit, but people arc up, the media get going, etc.
Anyway, here's Benaud on it:
"Let me just tell you what I think about it. I think it was a disgraceful performance from a captain that got his sums wrong today, and I think it should never be permitted to happen again." -
@barbarian said in Aussie Cricket:
I don't agree with the decision to bowl underarm, but still to be talking about it 40 years later?
Aus is consistently so much better than us at Cricket, that to get robbed of the chance to win by something that Benaud called a disgrace really rankles.
Let's be honest, the chances of scoring a 6 off the last ball was tiny. Yet it's not sporting to not allow a competition. It's like that bowler this week conceding a wide on the last ball of the innings preventing a batter getting a ton. If he did it, it was completely legit, but people arc up, the media get going, etc.
Anyway, here's Benaud on it:
"Let me just tell you what I think about it. I think it was a disgraceful performance from a captain that got his sums wrong today, and I think it should never be permitted to happen again."@nzzp said in Aussie Cricket:
@barbarian said in Aussie Cricket:
I don't agree with the decision to bowl underarm, but still to be talking about it 40 years later?
Aus is consistently so much better than us at Cricket, that to get robbed of the chance to win by something that Benaud called a disgrace really rankles.
Let's be honest, the chances of scoring a 6 off the last ball was tiny. Yet it's not sporting to not allow a competition. It's like that bowler this week conceding a wide on the last ball of the innings preventing a batter getting a ton. If he did it, it was completely legit, but people arc up, the media get going, etc.
Anyway, here's Benaud on it:
"Let me just tell you what I think about it. I think it was a disgraceful performance from a captain that got his sums wrong today, and I think it should never be permitted to happen again."I don't disagree with any of that. It should have been the talk of the town... for a week or two. Then life should have moved on, like it does after a bowler chucks down a wide to rob a batsman of his hundred.
Instead, here we are 40 years later...
-
oh no, absolutely everyone should just forget about an Australian Captain deciding to deny a cricket minnow a slight chance of a draw by dredging up a delivery that, while "legal" had not been seen since the 1700s. It was decided the risk of Brian McKechnie, a player who had a grand total of 54 ODI runs, at an average of 13, could just hit a 6 at the MCG was far too great to follow standard cricketing protocol.
That it happened between NZ (the minnow) and Australia (the cricketing giant), with all the big brother/little brother national rivalry; that it was big brother doing it; that it forced an immediate rule change, all of that should just be ignored.
It's part of sporting lore, of course it should be talked about. Sport is stories, or why do we watch?
-
oh no, absolutely everyone should just forget about an Australian Captain deciding to deny a cricket minnow a slight chance of a draw by dredging up a delivery that, while "legal" had not been seen since the 1700s. It was decided the risk of Brian McKechnie, a player who had a grand total of 54 ODI runs, at an average of 13, could just hit a 6 at the MCG was far too great to follow standard cricketing protocol.
That it happened between NZ (the minnow) and Australia (the cricketing giant), with all the big brother/little brother national rivalry; that it was big brother doing it; that it forced an immediate rule change, all of that should just be ignored.
It's part of sporting lore, of course it should be talked about. Sport is stories, or why do we watch?
@mariner4life Yeah, I just don't think it's a story worth 40 years of retelling.
-
@mariner4life Yeah, I just don't think it's a story worth 40 years of retelling.
@barbarian said in Aussie Cricket:
@mariner4life Yeah, I just don't think it's a story worth 40 years of retelling.
seriously weird take i reckon.
way more minor shit than this comes up all the time.
-
@barbarian said in Aussie Cricket:
@mariner4life Yeah, I just don't think it's a story worth 40 years of retelling.
seriously weird take i reckon.
way more minor shit than this comes up all the time.
@mariner4life Really? I reckon we've pretty much forgotten far more serious stuff than this.
Are we going to be talking about Hansie Cronje in 2042? I doubt it, but what the bloke did was far worse (and more interesting IMO) than the underarm ball.
-
Is this from the nation that still refers to Bodyline and that villainous Harold Larwood?
-
@mariner4life Yeah, I just don't think it's a story worth 40 years of retelling.
@barbarian said in Aussie Cricket:
@mariner4life Yeah, I just don't think it's a story worth 40 years of retelling.
Some of us on here are still aggrieved over things relating back to 9 July 1927 http://rugbymuseum.co.nz/tdih-july-9-1927-the-battle-of-solway/
and don't get me started on the event at Cardiff Arms Park on 16 December 1905!
