• Categories
Collapse

The Silver Fern

Cricket: NZ vs Aus

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Sports Talk
cricket
1.4k Posts 62 Posters 106.2k Views
Cricket: NZ vs Aus
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • H Offline
    H Offline
    hydro11
    replied to Godder on last edited by
    #632

    @Godder said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:

    Under 3 an over and 4 down is an even day, not clearly better for one side. Hopefully we can clean them up under 350, but let's see.

    Hmm - I don't really agree. Especially given that we have to win this test. If we can't clean them up for under 350 then I don't think we can win this series. 400 in the first innings is quite a lot these days given that batsmen aren't so dominant - 10 years ago you might be right.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • SnowyS Offline
    SnowyS Offline
    Snowy
    wrote on last edited by
    #633

    They have just shown the Dick French "not out" call from 30 years ago. All I can say is fck that was so wrong. Michael Vaughn was spot on "well it wasn't hitting leg, and it wasn't hitting off..."

    It was Whitney batting wasn't it?

    mariner4lifeM 1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • mariner4lifeM Online
    mariner4lifeM Online
    mariner4life
    replied to Snowy on last edited by
    #634

    @Snowy said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:

    They have just shown the Dick French "not out" call from 30 years ago. All I can say is fck that was so wrong. Michael Vaughn was spot on "well it wasn't hitting leg, and it wasn't hitting off..."

    It was Whitney batting wasn't it?

    McDermott i think.

    SnowyS 1 Reply Last reply
    2
  • mariner4lifeM Online
    mariner4lifeM Online
    mariner4life
    wrote on last edited by
    #635

    also, our attack of gallant, accurate swing bowlers just isn't quick enough in Australia. So we can apply pressure, but lack the threat to get the wickets. Australia are playing us so well, showing a heap of patience.

    Aus will come in, with 3 blokes bowling 10-15kms faster and run through us. Awesome.

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • Chris B.C Offline
    Chris B.C Offline
    Chris B.
    wrote on last edited by
    #636

    Yeah - I think 220/4 was evens, so by stumps Australia were probably a wicket in hand ahead of the game. Now they've pressed on and are significantly ahead.

    But, it's a bit worse, because we've inserted the Aussies and we know that their attack will be tougher than ours.

    I think yesterday morning Kane wouldn't have taken 350 (though he'd think, at least we're in the game) - he'd have hoped for significantly better. Now he'd bite your hand off for 350.

    On reflection, though - he possibly had to put them in. Conditions were overcast and likely to swing, so he had to give our bowlers that prospect while it was there.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • SnowyS Offline
    SnowyS Offline
    Snowy
    replied to mariner4life on last edited by
    #637

    @mariner4life said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:

    @Snowy said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:

    They have just shown the Dick French "not out" call from 30 years ago. All I can say is fck that was so wrong. Michael Vaughn was spot on "well it wasn't hitting leg, and it wasn't hitting off..."

    It was Whitney batting wasn't it?

    McDermott i think.

    Right you are. Whitney held up the other end.

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/cricket/100016879/thirty-years-on-the-boxing-day-test-that-stopped-two-cricketing-nations

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • KiwiMurphK Online
    KiwiMurphK Online
    KiwiMurph
    wrote on last edited by
    #638

    Beauty of a wicket!

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • Chris B.C Offline
    Chris B.C Offline
    Chris B.
    wrote on last edited by
    #639

    Great bowling, great catch!

    And Wagner just got his foot down on the right side of the line - have to admit I had a sinking feeling as it was coming down....

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • G Offline
    G Offline
    Godder
    wrote on last edited by
    #640

    I think if Aussie had won the toss and batted anyway, we'd be happy with ~250/4 at stumps.

    H 1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • G Offline
    G Offline
    Gunner
    wrote on last edited by
    #641

    Watching Santner & CdG bowl in tandem is pretty uninspiring stuff.

    Why the hell do they persist with Santner, he’s not a test bowler. I wish they’d go on the attack and pick a guy who’s going to take some wickets, rather than this defensive spinner bullshit.

    mariner4lifeM 1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • DonsteppaD Offline
    DonsteppaD Offline
    Donsteppa
    wrote on last edited by
    #642

    Santner back to fuck up the end of the session....

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • mariner4lifeM Online
    mariner4lifeM Online
    mariner4life
    replied to Gunner on last edited by mariner4life
    #643

    @Gunner said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:

    rather than this defensive spinner bullshit.

    this defensive spinner going at almost 5 an over...

    Edit: Sorry, almost 5.5 an over now. fucking hopeless.

    1 Reply Last reply
    4
  • DonsteppaD Offline
    DonsteppaD Offline
    Donsteppa
    wrote on last edited by Donsteppa
    #644

    Would do as well chucking the ball to Watling to roll the arm over

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • mariner4lifeM Online
    mariner4lifeM Online
    mariner4life
    wrote on last edited by
    #645

    To show how good conditions are, a bog-average player like Paine just smacked an effortless 33 at a quick clip.

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • H Offline
    H Offline
    hydro11
    replied to Godder on last edited by
    #646

    @Godder said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:

    I think if Aussie had won the toss and batted anyway, we'd be happy with ~250/4 at stumps.

    I was going to contradict you but looking at the last few boxing day tests, the team batting first basically always made over 350. Australia did the worst with just 327 versus England. Still the odds on us winning were a lot longer at the end of day one than they were at the start.

    mariner4lifeM 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • mariner4lifeM Online
    mariner4lifeM Online
    mariner4life
    replied to hydro11 on last edited by
    #647

    @hydro11 said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:

    @Godder said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:

    I think if Aussie had won the toss and batted anyway, we'd be happy with ~250/4 at stumps.

    I was going to contradict you but looking at the last few boxing day tests, the team batting first basically always made over 350. Australia did the worst with just 327 versus England. Still the odds on us winning were a lot longer at the end of day one than they were at the start.

    yep, if you are going to send the opposition in, you want more in return than what we have.

    When you consider we took a wicket in the first over, to only have 5 at the end of 4 sessions is not good enough.

    I still think the decision to bowl was the right one. And i actually think we've bowled well for the most part, the fact the Aussies have had to earn their runs is proof of that. It's just been really tough test cricket.

    It will now come down to the batsmen matching the Aussies.

    Chris B.C ACT CrusaderA 2 Replies Last reply
    2
  • KiwiMurphK Online
    KiwiMurphK Online
    KiwiMurph
    wrote on last edited by
    #648

    Blundell bowls better than Santner

    Xpat61X 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • SiamS Offline
    SiamS Offline
    Siam
    wrote on last edited by
    #649

    3 overs for Blundell to play the batsmen in after lunch has left me perplexed and questioning what the fuck they're playing at....after inserting the opposition!

    No QuarterN 1 Reply Last reply
    2
  • Xpat61X Offline
    Xpat61X Offline
    Xpat61
    replied to KiwiMurph on last edited by Xpat61
    #650

    So we’re Day 2 Start of second session and we send out a wicketkeeper with one 1st class wicket to open our bowling attack???
    This was their plan once the Aussies got to 350 with to set batsmen at the crease and only 5 down??

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • Chris B.C Offline
    Chris B.C Offline
    Chris B.
    replied to mariner4life on last edited by
    #651

    @mariner4life Spot on, I think.

    The big opening was when Kane could/should have run out Labuschagne. We could have had them 79/3 with the front line bowlers still relatively fresh and Wade, Head and Paine all under real pressure to make runs.

    We might have been able to mow through the middle order and get ahead of the game.

    Oz well ahead now - we're already pretty much playing for a draw.

    1 Reply Last reply
    1

Cricket: NZ vs Aus
Sports Talk
cricket
  • Login

  • Don't have an account? Register

  • Login or register to search.
  • First post
    Last post
0
  • Categories
  • Login

  • Don't have an account? Register

  • Login or register to search.