spendius wrote:Flintoff's major mistakes were-
Thinking he knew how to captain a team effort.
spendius wrote:1- Declaring in No 2 and then losing. He underestimated the opposition. He should have batted to 650.
Ponting declared twice. History will show that he knew what he was doing.
spendius wrote:2- Choosing to bat in No 4 because he hadn't the bottle to risk putting the Australians in and losing.
The only good batsmen in the side got clean bowled. You can't blame him for that.
spendius wrote:Talking about field placings when catchables dropped harmlessly is talking after the event.
This is the real issue. He never talked to his bowlers about field positions. That is why the team struggled in the field.
spendius wrote:He can't be expected to win against a far superior side on their home grounds but he could possibly have averted a whitewash. To
That's a pisspoor attempt at an apology. In the leadup to the Test, the Pomgolians were confident and poised to win.
spendius wrote:go for victory at all was foolish. After hubris comes nemesis.
It would be nice if you could field a team next time.
spendius wrote:Still- it might inspire a rethink and next time there will be no McGrath, Warne, Langer and probably not Gilchrist. And we will be at home which is a bigger advantage than many people are aware of.
Clark is just good as McGrath, and Gillie might play on. As for Warnie, he's an anomoly. I never liked him anyways. Tubby little substance abuser. Reminds me of me. LOL.
spendius wrote:But I'll still want us to lose badly because I just can't stand bloody rate-busters pulling the lookers just because they train hard, practice a lot, suffer injections and soak themselves in ice-baths. I can't understand fat Australian slobs wanting their own side to be anything other than splatted for the same reason.
Damn, you're a fixated firker. I haven't met many of them before. Pleased to meet you spendius.
spendius wrote:What's sexy about training hard, bloody practicing (nightmares both), being needled and pulverised and reclining in ice? I'll bet there's 50,000 guys here who would be better than that lot if they were prepared to undergo a lifestyle like that during the very best years of a young man's life.
Hard training is part of being an all-rounder. Get over it. You think becoming an internationally famous sportsman, and earning enough money to retire at thirty years of age is a bad thing?
spendius wrote: And having to dive at the boundary rope at full speed crashing into the BREATHFRESH hoarding and a cameraman to try to save one run and next ball is a no-ball wide for four and the one after a long-hop which goes for six.
Dude, don't ever play indoor cricket. You will die in there.
spendius wrote:And be a sandwich-board man into the bargain for HEALY'S SAUSAGES.
Ola. Send me some input.
spendius wrote:Only really ugly, stupid blokes would stoop to such desperate tactics to get the better of us Jack-the-lads. Eh lads?
D'uh. That's pretty shallow dudess.
spendius wrote:And is it not just the money anyway. It's odd how similar all their WAGS look. And behave.
Yeah, not as "special" as Flintoff looked taking a walk on two runs.
spendius wrote:And us normals have to have the leavings who are not posh.
Suck it up.
spendius wrote:Aren't we lucky and we get to moan and groan as well.
Good practice for next time. Keep moaning.
spendius wrote:Wasn't it funny when Strauss (is that an English name- come to think of it is Pieterson. Or Panasar. ) got poleaxed by a Brett Lee special. I would have stood a bit farther off myself.
Backseat batsmen? You have them in Pomgolia too? That's too cute.
spendius wrote:The excuses are good though.
Good enough for whom? You? LOL
spendius wrote:It's LADYTV stupid.
Awww, okay.