C/H series game 3 NZ vs Aus

[bayrep]

....

gee, how arrogant are the Kiwis in resting Harry Potter and Bond

lol - the kiwi selectors thoughts were we didnt need them to beat your lot .

 

[Timmah]

Timmah, Watson is in the WC squad. Gilchrist is missing the first couple of games and Ponting is the best no3 in the world. Jaques is crap, so the best openers we have are Watson and Clarke or possibly Brad Hodge short term. Hodge/Clarke will move down to 4/5 when Gilly returns.

He won't be selected to play if he can't improve his sh*house bowling. Australia with Watson in February 2007 now reads 0/5... those figures speak for themselves

 

[Manu Vatuvei]

Still think that?

Despite a record innings, Australia lost.

Obviously it was not enough.

Yes, I do still think that. wtf. Hayden played a magnificent innings. You have one of the worst bowling attacks ever. That's not Hayden's fault.

 

[PARRA_FAN]

We need to score 460 to win these days

we need to bowl to win.

 

[JJ]

Yes, I do still think that. wtf. Hayden played a magnificent innings. You have one of the worst bowling attacks ever. That's not Hayden's fault.

That's the key - the depth is a myth and the frontline attack is awful.

 

[Azkatro]

Well if they cleaned up their extras, it alters NZ's chase from being 350 scored off 297 deliveries to only 327 runs off 308. I realise extras are part of the game, but that is a critical factor in one day cricket, and hugely underscores how woefully inaccurate some of our bowling was. So in that sense we REALLY carried NZ home with our bowling.

Having said that it also shows that our bowling maybe isn't as bad as people are making out. Without the wides and no-balls, the Kiwis might have finished on 9/330 odd or even all out for a similar total. And when you assess the situation as a whole over the last two games, what made our bowlers any worse than what the Kiwis dished up? (Ignore the first game where I think the Aussie players where there but the team hadn't showed up yet).

Australia's bowlers, in the last two matches, took 14 wickets for 690 runs.
New Zealand's bowlers took 9 for 682.

If you take the wides and no-balls out of the equation for BOTH teams, which is a problem I think Australia CAN correct for the world cup:

Australia took 14 wickets for 656 runs.
New Zealand got 9 wickets for 669 runs.

So if Australia can tidy up the wides and no-balls, they don't quite look so bad, and really that's a lack of experience, concentration, leadership etc. I think we're jumping to rash conclusions by suggesting they're the worst bowling lineup we've ever had, and if the Kiwis bowlers are "good" by comparison, then we're very close to "good" as well.

 

[JJ]

Well if they cleaned up their extras, it alters NZ's chase from being 350 scored off 297 deliveries to only 327 runs off 308. I realise extras are part of the game, but that is a critical factor in one day cricket, and hugely underscores how woefully inaccurate some of our bowling was. So in that sense we REALLY carried NZ home with our bowling.

Having said that it also shows that our bowling maybe isn't as bad as people are making out. Without the wides and no-balls, the Kiwis might have finished on 9/330 odd or even all out for a similar total. And when you assess the situation as a whole over the last two games, what made our bowlers any worse than what the Kiwis dished up? (Ignore the first game where I think the Aussie players where there but the team hadn't showed up yet).

Australia's bowlers, in the last two matches, took 14 wickets for 690 runs.
New Zealand's bowlers took 9 for 682.

If you take the wides and no-balls out of the equation for BOTH teams, which is a problem I think Australia CAN correct for the world cup:

Australia took 14 wickets for 656 runs.
New Zealand got 9 wickets for 669 runs.

So if Australia can tidy up the wides and no-balls, they don't quite look so bad, and really that's a lack of experience, concentration, leadership etc. I think we're jumping to rash conclusions by suggesting they're the worst bowling lineup we've ever had, and if the Kiwis bowlers are "good" by comparison, then we're very close to "good" as well.

1. You can't discount the first match.
2. Yes the kiwi bowling was better - if only becuase you do not have an ODI bowler of the class of Bond or Vettori (who of course were rested for the third match). Note we were also missing Mills and Oram.

Finally - it should be remebered that we were 41/4 - that was a staggering chase, and to me clear evidence that the Kiwis (and I'd expect a few other teams) are very very confident against this Australian unit.

 

[yobbo84]

1. You can't discount the first match.
2. Yes the kiwi bowling was better - if only becuase you do not have an ODI bowler of the class of Bond or Vettori (who of course were rested for the third match). Note we were also missing Mills and Oram.

Finally - it should be remebered that we were 41/4 - that was a staggering chase, and to me clear evidence that the Kiwis (and I'd expect a few other teams) are very very confident against this Australian unit.

FFS. Do it when it counts. World cup is there for the taking for your "very very confident" side.

 

[Mr Angry]

Yes, I do still think that. wtf. Hayden played a magnificent innings. You have one of the worst bowling attacks ever. That's not Hayden's fault.

Fair enough, I will disagree.

It was clearly a pitch and a ground that required more than 350 runs.

Two teams scored 350 it is pretty obvious it was a batsmen pitch. Innings of the day goes to McMillian not Hayden.

It is not the bowlers fault Australia did not score enough runs on a small ground and flat wicket.

ffs hayden was in the losing team.

 

[byrne_rovelli_fan82]

Haydos's innings stood out thou. It was breath-taking, the ball disappeared everywhere (the guy broke his toe too and deserves some credit) and he alone (bar a few contributions) carried that total.

Macca's was brilliant despite the fact he had NO idea he got a 100! lol, but they all contributed with Fulton and McCullum.

Usually I'd dispute the MOM award but this time around, well deserved to Haydos

 

[skeepe]

Fair enough, I will disagree.

It was clearly a pitch and a ground that required more than 350 runs.

Two teams scored 350 it is pretty obvious it was a batsmen pitch. Innings of the day goes to McMillian not Hayden.

It is not the bowlers fault Australia did not score enough runs on a small ground and flat wicket.

ffs hayden was in the losing team.

What a ludicrous post. The vendetta against Hayden, who has been close to if not our best batsman this summer, is stunning.

 

[JJ]

FFS. Do it when it counts. World cup is there for the taking for your "very very confident" side.

The Chappell Hadlee series does count, as did the COmmonwealth Bank series...

The World Cup is not there for anybody's taking - but your side is no better than any of the others - and hasn't been for some time... You barely beat us in this series last year, lost a series in RSA, weren't nearly as convincing as your media would have us believe in the quilifying in the CB series, were trounced in the final by England and now have been swept in the Chappell Hadlee series - and in the last game we were every bit as 'under-strength' as you were (again, injuries happen, Aust has been very fortunate in that regard).

 

[yobbo84]

The Chappell Hadlee series does count, as did the COmmonwealth Bank series...

The World Cup is not there for anybody's taking - but your side is no better than any of the others - and hasn't been for some time... You barely beat us in this series last year, lost a series in RSA, weren't nearly as convincing as your media would have us believe in the quilifying in the CB series, were trounced in the final by England and now have been swept in the Chappell Hadlee series - and in the last game we were every bit as 'under-strength' as you were (again, injuries happen, Aust has been very fortunate in that regard).

....and yet Australia have won the last 2 world cups and the last Champions trophy. They win when it counts.

 

[Twizzle]

I just heard we added some one to our squad on the news, but didn't get their name

 

[JJ]

....and yet Australia have won the last 2 world cups and the last Champions trophy. They win when it counts.

Fine - just count the games you win... note the Champion's Trophy didn't "count" until Aust won it :lol:

The last 2 world cups weren't won by this team

 

[_goParra]

Fair enough, I will disagree.

It was clearly a pitch and a ground that required more than 350 runs.

Two teams scored 350 it is pretty obvious it was a batsmen pitch. Innings of the day goes to McMillian not Hayden.

It is not the bowlers fault Australia did not score enough runs on a small ground and flat wicket.

ffs hayden was in the losing team.

Mate if you cant defend 340+ score after having the 4/40 odd then the blame solely rests on the bowlers. 9.5/10 times you should easily defend a score in excess of 340.

I am not a fan of hayden, but surely suggesting that he should have scored more when he had 181 and the team's score was 340+ is wrong.

 

[JJ]

347,

lets see the kiwis chase this one down

How did you enjoy it? ;-)

 

[MKEB...]

How vital was the 28 from Gillespie... Sure they were mostly edges. But that was fun to watch. It is always fun watching a batsman with no idea eking out runs.
Reminds me of Murali's and to a lesser extent Harbajan Singhs batting.

 

[douglasallen91]

has he???

you going to leave out Fulton or Oram for him?

styris

 

[douglasallen91]

What motivation you tool?

He was just telling the truth

just like lou!