"It didn't come down to individuals, it came down to at the right time England won the critical moments and we lost them. Everything indicates we dominated the Test series. We lost the Test series through probably five hours of cricket." This is a quote from Aussie selector Brett Twat (or something).
This is good news because it means that:
a) England are now not a bunch of gibbers, and are mentally quite tough when it matters, but more importantly that,
b) Australia are now a bunch of gibbers, and are mentally not tough enough when it matters.
Hurrah.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
4 comments:
How about:
we scored 9 centuries to 2. yes, but we scored 4 centuries when it didn't matter and 4 to save matches where twice we failed to do so.
What is the more important innings: bell's 72 or Hussey's ton at the Oval?
Sounds like they are desperately trying 'take the positives'. I thought that is what we did when we lost. However, we rarely say that we were better than the opposition. Umm, actually, that would be about right concerning the winter in the caribbean.
1st Test: West Indies v England at Kingston - Feb 4-7, 2009
West Indies won by an innings and 23 runs. England 318 and 51; West Indies 392
2nd Test: West Indies v England at North Sound - Feb 13-17, 2009. Match drawn. England 7/0
3rd Test: West Indies v England at St John's - Feb 15-19, 2009. Match drawn. England 566/9d and 221/8d; West Indies 285 and 370/9
4th Test: West Indies v England at Bridgetown - Feb 26-Mar 2, 2009. Match drawn. England 600/6d and 279/2d; West Indies 749/9d
5th Test: West Indies v England at Port of Spain - Mar 6-10, 2009. England 546/6d and 237/6d; West Indies 544 and 114/8
There might be some credence with the Aussie line in this series if not in the 2009 ashes.
another point to shove up their arses is how many series have been lost despite one or two standout players. In 2005, warne wasn't far off their best batter and bowler. its a perennial problem for NZ (flemming, vitorrie, cairns maybe), WI (lara, then chanderpaul), and probably more than a few time with Pakistan.
Basically, clark and north were very good, the rest we ok, average, or rubbish.
i am very pleased that we fucked up hughes (as i suspected we would; i hope his career goes right down the shitter). and for fucks sake, how desperate must they be to get watson opening - he's ok, but no opener. they also got more objectionable as the realisation that they were shit dawned (i always found them so, but some members of fetch became a bit gay about the whole thing).
and now they've called up the excellent nannes from holland. that's the sort of nonsense we do (to denmark).
i also do not fear sa. they are probably, marginally the best team at the moment - but before the ashes, i would have said not as good as the aussie line up. shit-steyn and parnell are potentially very scary.
Post a Comment