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!

3rd Test: Australia v New Zealand at Adelaide on Nov 27-Dec 1, 2015

kdalymc

Bench
Messages
4,350
Like i said earlier in the thread (im only guessing) they wanted 11 to be able to sprint a single if it comes to it. With the field up and boult with two balla left i think they expected boult to either bowl him or starc to hit a four.

Da f**k? There was two days left bro
 

chigurh

Guest
Messages
3,958
http://www.espncricinfo.com/australia/content/story/945281.html

Australia fast bowler Mitchell Starc may yet be available for the tour of New Zealand early next year after examination of his broken right foot revealed he does not require surgery and will be able to resume training in less than a month.

Starc suffered a stress fracture in the third metatarsal of his right foot, something the assistant coach Craig McDermott said may have been as a result of compensating for the painful "impingement" or bone spurs in his heel/ankle. That issue has been affecting Starc since the first Test of the Ashes series earlier this year.

Apart from a brief, brave appearance while batting on the second afternoon, Starc has cut a disconsolate figure with crutches and a "moon boot" to support the injured foot. However McDermott said early fears about his availability for next year's early assignments had eased. Nevertheless, Australia must find other pace resources against West Indies in Tests and India in ODIs before the New Zealand tour.

"He's got a crack on the top of his foot," McDermott told ABC Grandstand radio. "He's had a heel impingement which may have affected that, who knows, trying to compensate for landing on his heel he may have put more pressure on the front of his foot and that's eventuated in a crack.

"The good news for us is it's not going to be as long as we thought, so he's going to be out for three weeks and then we can work on him from there. Hopefully we can get him up for the New Zealand series and the World Twenty20 where he's ranked No. 1 in the world.

"All the way through England and the one-day series he's had his heel impingement. In the last 12 months he's done an unbelievable job."

Running his eye over Australia's bowling stocks, McDermott mentioned the West Australian Nathan Coulter-Nile - suspended this week from Sheffield Shield cricket on a dissent charge - in addition to James Pattinson. He also spoke approvingly of Joel Paris and Billy Stanlake, though admitting both needed more match experience.

"James Pattinson went back to Perth and he gets to bowl tomorrow, the Vics are batting today, he was pretty close to playing here, so with him back we've got our three quicks and Mitchell Marsh," McDermott said. "After that we've got Nathan Coulter-Nile, if he can keep his tongue wired it would be great, and then we can get him involved if he bowls well enough as well.

"Certainly we wouldn't want too many more injuries, because then we get down past the blokes who are bowling 140kph plus, and that's the way we like to put our bowling attack together. Joel Paris is very skilful in all formats, he's had a bad run of injuries ... he just needs to make sure his pace is up. Billy's got the pace, but we need to get him through a fair bit more cricket before he gets into this sort of arena."
 

Pete Cash

Post Whore
Messages
62,165
Da f**k? There was two days left bro

Yes well done mister but imagine if boult bowled two screamers and ripped through haze and lyon. Suddenly we need two runs fast with a guy who cant run quick singles. If he rips through starc and haze then lyon is able to run a quick single.

Also Starc has the best chancd of just connecting with a big swing.,
 

JJ

Immortal
Messages
32,588
First day night test was fun - like it or not Llong's decision was the deciding factor.

We saw once again that batsmen simply cannot handle a moving ball these days...

And all of Guptill, the Marsh brothers, Siddle, and Craig are pretty much shit - but I think all will continue to be in their respective test teams

Not sure who said we'd teach you about cricket - we were obviously underdone, and beaten badly in Brisbane. On a diabolical wicket in Perth we were at least as good as you on days 2-5, and we were the better team in this test, despite the result - teams are pretty even, and in moving conditions I back us with the caveat that we have a sane umpire looking at replays
 
Last edited:

Pete Cash

Post Whore
Messages
62,165
If you were better you would have won. This is an australian side with about twenty caps between them and had their best fast bowler go down. We still won. I think we also batted better against the moving ball at twilight. You guys didnt have to play starc either. Him running in at full fitness in the evening day 2 wed have bowled you guys out in a session.

You will never have a better chance to beat us in australia and you lost to two marsh brothers and a fast bowler you described as plodding
 

JJ

Immortal
Messages
32,588
If you were better you would have won. This is an australian side with about twenty caps between them and had their best fast bowler go down. We still won. I think we also batted better against the moving ball at twilight. You guys didnt have to play starc either. Him running in at full fitness in the evening day 2 wed have bowled you guys out in a session.

You will never have a better chance to beat us in australia and you lost to two marsh brothers and a fast bowler you described as plodding

More or less what McCullum said - nonetheless Llong's turd call was a big factor. Not sure why you'd be so precious when you won??

Think I said they were as plodding as the NZ quicks who have been described as plodding (and I don't think they are)

Hazlewood just showed the folly of not giving him helpful conditions - you don't need to bowl 150 to be a good test bowler. Siddle, yeah, I'll go all in on he's pretty much a plodder these days - but has 150 test wickets and gives a whole hearted effort
 
Last edited:

Pete Cash

Post Whore
Messages
62,165
He has 200 wickets. Add that to the list of reasons nz failed....conditions that suited them at adelaide.

It was a bad umpiring decision but guess what thats cricket. Simon Katich got one of the worst lbws ever when we were following on at trent bridge in 05 where even an extra 50 runs for warne to bowl at and we very well could have pulled off a famous comeback...we only lost by 3 wickets and you dont see me saying that umpiring cost us that game.

If australia is going to get a shocker of an umpire call go against us ill have it on the oppositions number 11 everytime.
 

Meth

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
35,736
He has 200 wickets. Add that to the list of reasons nz failed....conditions that suited them at adelaide.

It was a bad umpiring decision but guess what thats cricket. Simon Katich got one of the worst lbws ever when we were following on at trent bridge in 05 where even an extra 50 runs for warne to bowl at and we very well could have pulled off a famous comeback...we only lost by 3 wickets and you dont see me saying that umpiring cost us that game.

If australia is going to get a shocker of an umpire call go against us ill have it on the oppositions number 11 everytime.

I've heard the Lyon incident compared to the Khawaja incident in the Ashes. Both were howlers. No doubt about it, Khawaja (and Katich) are better bats than Lyon. In saying that, what kind of an impact did the Khawaja wicket have on the game? Evidently, the Lyon incident had a huge bearing. Personally, I feel more ripped off of what could have been a massive spectacle- add another 50 runs onto the NZ total and the Australian chase would have been epic?as it was, it really wasn't. The game was over long before the commentators admitted it was.

In saying that, as frustrating as the Llong decision was, the major factor really was McCullum's captaincy. I still think that if he introduces Bracewell sooner (as opposed to persisting with Craig), NZ have a decent lead and the match could have been theres.
 

hineyrulz

Post Whore
Messages
153,770
McCullum reckons the series felt closer then 2 nil???

lol NZ bowled us out once in 6 innings, that was probably the weakest and most inexperienced top 6 we have fielded since the mid 80's and even back then we had the great AB. Starc couldn't bowl bar 9 overs and yet the Kiwis still couldn't win.

Blame the Llong decision all you want but it was against a number 11, the captain and bowlers lost the plot after that decision. Plus we had to bat in two night sessions and the kiwis only 1. Kiwis had their chances and blew it.
 

JJ

Immortal
Messages
32,588
Bad decision, yes. I'd be Lyon if it wasn't.

But nz then bled another 100 to the tail.

Yep - that's it. Wrong decision, Lyon then batted well.

Even if given out, Starc might still have clobbered a quick 20. But take away the Lyon-Nevill partnership, and we have a chase that's really testing for Australia

Nevill was very good - he's solid, something sorely lacking in your top 6. He really shouldn't be batting below M Marsh - having seen him for a series now, I am surprised at how ordinary with the bat Marsh is - a #7 or 8 really
 

Meth

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
35,736
I don't think the significance of day 1 (and day 2) at the Gabba can be overstated. Australia really dispirited us there.
 

Latest posts

Top