Cricket, lovely cricket

[Adam Went]

Monty:

Actually I was thinking more along the lines of the possibility of you getting injured before the Ashes in 2013, like, say, from a ramp shot off my bat straight into your face.

Cook? Even Boycott probably had a better strike rate than Cook, one of the most annoying and boring batsmen in world cricket.

Martin:

Freddie? LOL.

I'm not old enough to remember Gower in his playing days but have seen plenty of footage, such a classy and elegant player.

I reckon you guys picking the Aussie team might have missed one, a very under-rated player in both ODI and Test cricket, the kind of player people paid their fees just to come in and watch bat: Dean Jones. Excellent player. Who could forget his 210 in that famous Test match in Madras in '86?

Cheers,
Adam.

[Robert]

There's nothing like a good, steady Boycott innings, Neil. I call him the Ken Dodd of the crease.

[Monty]

You a positive Cricketer huh Robert?

Monty

[Robert]

Boycott is a must for a Test team.

Not for junk cricket of course but who needs that?

[martin wilson]

Hi all
Boycott would be the #1 pick if you needed someone to bat all day for your life, but not in a run chase,unless it was a run off 90 overs I suppose!
I like Statham though,he was Mr consistent apparently.
No Freddie? it might reverse later on, well bound to with that lot clouting the ball everywhere.
Absolutely love the idea of Gower captaining Freddy Trueman, he couldnt get the ball off Botham,no chance with Fred!
All the best

[Monty]

Sure Adam,

I can understand that you have no confidence in your team and would rather wait before committing.

I dont blame you, Id be worried $hitless if I were you also.


Monty


PS Boycott? Yeah, that sums up your knowledge. Cook son, Cook. Hobbs and Cook.

[Adam Went]

Monty:

Actually, you chose the McGrath Foundation last time - remember? That was your call, I just agreed to it. I'd be happy to go a couple of thousand dollars/pounds, BUT, in the interest of fairness, I suggest we wait until much closer to the time before making a final decision on this - a lot can change in two years. Though it would be virtually impossible for your team to become any more purile.

Steven:

With the way our injuries are at the moment, it could be that we go into the WC, certainly the early stages of it anyway, without a specialist spinner - that would be a huge blunder on the sub-continent. But, if our batting line-up can fire as they did in Sydney this series, it might be alright. Watson, the newly crowned Allan Border medallist, is the key, as Gilchrist was before him.

In all seriousness, with the series over, I will be a sportsman and say congrats to England on the Ashes win - they outplayed us right through the series and there's nothing to say than that they deserved to win. I don't think we played particularly badly, we were just beaten by an extremely well prepared team.

Martin:

Not sure when we play SA next, but surely they're not as bad as India? I even support England against India!

Phil:

A very good question. I'll admit to not being that knowledgeable on older England cricketers, but i'll have a go:

1.) Hobbs
2.) Boycott
3.) Gower (c)
4.) Barrington
5.) Botham
6.) Hammond
7.) W.G. Grace
8.) Knott (wk)
9.) Trueman
10.) Laker
11.) Statham

Cheers,
Adam.

[martin wilson]

Hi all
450 off 90 at 5 an over? against Freddie and Beefy swinging it everywhere and Underwood keeping it tight, tough one.
Anyway I would go;

Hayden.
Chappel .I (captain)
Bradman
Ponting
Waugh.S
Hussey
Miller
Gilchrist
Benaud
Lillee
Lee.

Hussey gets in ahead of Mark Waugh because he was the best batsman,apart from maybe Hadden in the recent series for Australia, and from memory Mark could be a bit in and out.
Ian Chappel gets the captaincy on the basis if you can skipper Dougie Walters you can skipper anybody.
All the best.

[Steven Russell]

I like it! Armstrong could be our twelfth man and spare heavy roller.

Best wishes,
Steve.

[Phil Carter]

Hello Steve,

Yes, I entirely agree. My (and your) revised line up is therefore:-

1. M. Hayden
2. M. Taylor
3. D. Bradman
4. V. Trumper
5. S. Waugh
6. M. Waugh
7. A. Gilchrist
8. R. Benaud.
9. K. Miller
10.S.Warne
11.B.Lee


I'd thought of Trumper strangely enough, but didn't think of Keith Miller, for unknown reasons.

The omission of Chappel, Walters and Co really does put the 70's Aussie side into the shade compared with before and afterwards. Also, without Ponsford and Armstrong for example, the only pre-war players are Trumper(1900s) and Bradman(late 1920s to late 1940s). From the 50/60's Benaud and Miller, 6 (mainly) x 1990's players and one, Brett Lee, mainly from the 2000's.

Yup..I like that line up. Any better? And can our Antipodean friends come up with the same sort of side for England to "achieve" the feat?

best wishes

Phil

[Steven Russell]

Good game, Phil. I would replace Lillee with Miller, an all rounder but worth his place as a bowler alone so he should count. And Chappell would have to make way for this fellow, the legendary Victor Trumper, who looks as if he didn't mind giving it some pongo.

Best wishes,
Steve.

[Phil Carter]

An opposing team likely to chase down 450?

Hello all,

Here's an interesting one for us all to peruse perhaps... how about the English people on this thread make up a "Most feared Aussie team" and the Aussies on this thread do the opposite..namely make up a "Most feared English team".. from any era.

The criteria are these...

We presume it is the last day of a Test Match. We also presume it is a fairly good batting wicket. There is early morning swing and bounce, that flattens in the afternoon. There are cracks starting to appear. The weather is a balmy 26C, and there is only a very very light wind, blue sky overhead and no clouds at all, with the wind travelling across the wicket at right angles to the batting strip. The venue for the game is Trent Bridge, Nottingham.

The team you pick have to chase down 450 to win the Test match and the series. You must presume that the opposition has the best bowlers and fielders available to try to bowl your team out. There are 90 overs to be bowled in the day. No team is allowed to bat through the day for a draw. It is win or bust. Your batting team must have at least 2 known fast bowlers and a wicket-keeper.

What Aussie team would I pick, from all time, to achieve the feat of 450 runs in a day on the last day of the series?
Here's my attempt to find a line up that bats as far down as possible to get the runs, yet still is a Test team with some balance...so it isn't just filled with batsmen.
But those batsmen have to have the ability to play all types of bowling on this wicket..remember they are facing the best English team of players ever.

1. M. Hayden
2. M. Taylor
3. D. Bradman
4. G. Chappel
5. S. Waugh
6. M. Waugh
7. A.Gilchrist
8. R. Benaud.
9. S.Warne
10. B.Lee
11. D.Lillee

That line up, as opposing non-playing team selector, would in my view make me think very carefully of how my captain would restrict them to below 5 per over during the course of a long last day in a Test match.

I welcome any other line-ups to "achieve" this feat, both English and Australian.

Thinking that I have left out Ponsford, Walters, Langer, Marsh (both of them), Ponting and a few others, it took quite a while to find my team. I wish you all the best of luck!

best wishes

Phil

[martin wilson]

Hi all
Adam
Congratulations to Australia for winning the ODI series.
See you in 2013,but dont kid yourself,the only thing that will have changed is that Australia will be two years crapper.
I dont know your schedule,when are you playing Serf Effrika?,if its anytime soon,do us a favour and wallop 'em,.
I love the Aussies/hate your cricket team, but I dont like SA full stop,they really are a people who appear to have been made out of reconstituted arseholes.
All the best.

[martin wilson]

Hi All
Stephen
You make a compelling argument,particularly where cricketers are concerned,it wasnt that long ago that they were paid peanuts, and its certainly true that they are more deserving than somebody who has become famous by making a sex tape for example.
Perhaps its a subjective thing in as much that along with that fame comes the inevitable intrusion into their private lives, for some its of no interest and of no consequence, for others it may taint the view they held of a once much admired player.
I couldnt care less what Warney does with Liz Hurley or any other sportsmans private life, I think that when a scandal gets blown out of all proportion some of the past players must have a chuckle to themselves, thinking its a good job the press didnt take such an interest in their private lives when they were playing.
So,for me,I'm only really interested in what they do on the field, but I agree that the game needs characters, its a fine line maybe.
All the best.

[Steven Russell]

Steven:

Actually, my response was going to be a bit more along the lines of: what went wrong? The UN had the game in the bag half way through our innings, and they let it slip.

Surely even you most ardent of UN supporters must admit that it would have been nice to end the series in Australia on a more positive note than a 6-1 smacking?

Cheers,
Adam.

Yes, of course it would have been nice but as I said before, I would have taken a thumping in the ODIs and an Ashes victory of any kind before the tour started so on balance I'm well pleased.

The pyjama game is fine but it doesn't compare to test cricket (or cricket at the highest level as it is often called). So I've got no problem with us getting hammered in the ODIs. Plus, it annoys me the way our selectors insist on picking bits and pieces cricketers or "one day specialists" who wouldn't have a hope of getting in the test side for the one-dayers. The commentators too are always on about taking pace off the ball yet Australia played Tait, Lee, and Johnson and won 6-1! Still, we are T20 world champs so what do I know?

Anyway, well done Australia for a well deserved victory in the ODIs but our chaps came home with the real prize.

Best wishes,
Steve.

PS Put me down for £3.