4th ODI: Australia v England at Adelaide on Jan 26, 2018

[hineyrulz]

gee we're good at dead rubbers

That’s what my last missus said.

 

[ANTiLAG]

gee we're good at dead rubbers

This is Cummins' 7th.

Aus way on top but this innings aint over yet.

Edit - Morgan out. Lol.

Now it looks like 1 wicket from being over.

 

[Twizzle]

Paddy

 

[ANTiLAG]

That was so stupid of Morgan. It was wide and in context - it was just dumb to play that high risk shot in Cummins' 7th over in the 21st over.

 

[Twizzle]

Morgan has a technical defect with his hook shot and Cummins exploited it, good cricket. Morgan is always going to attack a short ball

 

[2 weeks]

That I don't reasonably believe even if the cricket finishes early that your mate with 3tvs hosting an Aussie day BBQ will have Fox League on instead of the tennis.

Why are you so obsessed with the tennis?
And what are these tennis jokes i've supposedly made?

 

[ANTiLAG]

Morgan has a technical defect with his hook shot and Cummins exploited it, good cricket. Morgan is always going to attack a short ball

Good cricket? It was a Mitch McClenaghan type wicket at best.

Rubbish ball. Rubbish shot. And it could go a long way into making this a rubbish game.

Who's playing in the tennis tonight?

 

[Bazal]

Why are you so obsessed with the tennis?
And what are these tennis jokes i've supposedly made?

He's a pelican, best not to question what he says lest you find yourself on the end of a 3000 word rant

 

[Twizzle]

Good cricket? It was a Mitch McClenaghan type wicket at best.

Rubbish ball. Rubbish shot. And it could go a long way into making this a rubbish game.

lol

he bowled for it and got a wicket, yeah rubbish ball

 

[ANTiLAG]

lol

he bowled for it and got a wicket, yeah rubbish ball

Mitch McClenaghan may well agree with you. I don't.

"I love it when the ol' wide leg side bouncer plan comes together"

It was an epitomised example of LU's favourite catchphrase "shit gets wickets".

 

[Twizzle]

Mitch McClenaghan may well agree with you. I don't.

"I love it when the ol' wide leg side bouncer plan comes together"

At least he's played cricket so he might have a clue

Bowlers do plan their wickets you know

 

[ANTiLAG]

At least he's played cricket so he might have a clue

Bowlers do plan their wickets you know

Sure they do, but they don't plan most their wides. And most balls don't goto plan of actually successfully taking wickets.

 

[Vozzy]

They should have opened with Woakes we struggle to get him out for some reason

 

[Twizzle]

Sure they do, but they don't plan most their wides. And most balls don't goto plan of actually successfully taking wickets.

not talking about most balls, read what I said

Morgan has a technical defect with his hook shot and Cummins exploited it, good cricket. Morgan is always going to attack a short ball

 

[Twizzle]

I'd get the spinner off, he's getting no turn out of this pitch, get the quicks back on and bowl them out

 

[ANTiLAG]

not talking about most balls, read what I said

I read what you said. I said I disagreed. Why are you so offended that someone would dare disagree with you and offer a counter-opinion?

 

[Twizzle]

I read what you said. I said I disagreed. Why are you so offended that someone would dare disagree with you and offer a counter-opinion?

f**k me, how the hell is that going to offend me, lol

I am not disagreeing with your opinion as uninformed as it is, but I am disagreeing with your reasoning.

 

[Hutty1986]

Aussies had them 5/8 and still no certainties to win this

 

[2 weeks]

He's a pelican, best not to question what he says lest you find yourself on the end of a 3000 word rant

Nah he's got me intrigued.

 

[ANTiLAG]

f**k me, how the hell is that going to offend me, lol

I am not disagreeing with your opinion as uninformed as it is, but I am disagreeing with your reasoning.

How is my opinion uninformed?

How is my reasoning regards bowlers not planning most wides invalid?

You may think you're attacking my logic, but all I read after you say it was a plan is some ad hominem remarks against me on the basis of me being allegedly uninformed and not having played the game.

As far as I see, you're arguing against me personally, not my reasoning.