What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

1st Test :: AUS defeated RSA by 162 runs @ Wanderers Stadium :: Feb 26-Mar 2

1st test :: RSA vs AUS result


  • Total voters
    28
  • Poll closed .
Messages
3,140
I went to bed at the start of the South Africa, half thinking we might have even wrapped up this game before stumps ....

Well as it stands now I would not be surprised if we lose this match. Though I can't say whether we bowled like crap or not, for them to be 2/180 odd on this pitch suggests we didn't bowl well.
 

JW

Coach
Messages
12,657
First casualty should a loss occur:

merv.jpg
 

Big_Bad_Shark_Fan

First Grade
Messages
8,279
If we give up 450 to let them win ponting must step down as captain. There is simply no excuse for that happening, even if we do only have 3 bowlers out there.

Mate i dont think the guys the best captain but have a look at some of his mates first. Theres no reason the bowlers shouldnt be able to get South Africa out for under 450 on this, and the batting to let it get to that was horrific. If it wasnt for Pontings 83 on the first morning/afternoon we wouldnt of got 150 and the match would be over by now.
 
Messages
15,545
If we lose this one, the selectors should be called into question. How they could pick two all-rounders in this team is beyond me. For a week before the match, everyone was talking about how this pitch would suit the seamers down to the ground, we pick a squad with 4 seamers in it and then select a gentle medium pacer because he is supposed to be able to bat a bit as well? Two Innings for 7 runs and 1 wicket suggests that they got that choice hideously wrong. Bollinger should have been a walk up start.
 

Roosterphin1

Juniors
Messages
436
Seriously McDonald is a disgrace....since when did we start picking Nuffy's again....I am getting flashbacks to the 80's

Hopes would have been a better option
 

lockyno1

Post Whore
Messages
53,349
No he wasn't. He injured himself bowling in the nets on Saturday.

He was fit when the team was named.

So we would get another bowler getting injured during a match. The only thing worse than playing McDonald would be playing a guy that will likely get injured..if he got injured net bowling, he'd likely get injured in the centre..mind you the less Bollinger the better. Should have played McGain.
 

JW

Coach
Messages
12,657
Dougy would be at short odds to make more runs than Ronald, and given his injury situation he would still be just as effective with ball by walking into the crease and rolling his arm over.

Dougy wins.
 
Messages
15,350
I agree, if they wanted a bowling all rounder at 8..Hopes is a MUCH better bowler!

I don't know why they haven't tried him yet. Sure, he's not a world beater, but as they insist on having an all-rounder in the side, I thought they would give him a try. He is so much better than Ronald it's not funny.
 

hineyrulz

Post Whore
Messages
154,876
So we would get another bowler getting injured during a match. The only thing worse than playing McDonald would be playing a guy that will likely get injured..if he got injured net bowling, he'd likely get injured in the centre..mind you the less Bollinger the better. Should have played McGain.
Sounds a bit like Sushine ;-)
 

Latest posts

Top