Re: Indian Board President's XI v Aus, Chandigarh, Sep 25-27

by skully Mon Sep 27, 2010 5:07 pm

G.Wood wrote:The quicker haddin comes back the better

Aye. T-Pain is a great prospect but Haddit deserves the spot (IMHO, h) for a while yet.

by Zat Mon Sep 27, 2010 5:23 pm

Katich retired hurt in the first innings according to cricinfo, and yet to bat in the 2nd. Anything serious? Anyone know?

by tac Mon Sep 27, 2010 5:25 pm

just afraid of leaving his form on the practice field, I hope . . .

by tac Mon Sep 27, 2010 5:26 pm

watto and spud attacking for all they're worth . . the future of Oz cricket . . .

by Nath Mon Sep 27, 2010 6:01 pm

Zat wrote:Katich retired hurt in the first innings according to cricinfo, and yet to bat in the 2nd. Anything serious? Anyone know?

probably just the usual "retired hurt" instead of "retired out" in the dickinfo score book

by skully Mon Sep 27, 2010 6:19 pm

Aye, Nath. Ollie did the same. Fleas will be fine.

Meanwhile, much to JGK's delight, Watto marches towards a meaningless ton in each innings (match doe not have FC status). Cool

by tac Mon Sep 27, 2010 6:20 pm

Actually skull, as it's not 12 players, 11 bat, 11 bowl, it will have 1st class status, no?

by skully Mon Sep 27, 2010 6:24 pm

I dunno, taccy. Was assuming JGK knew what he was talking about when he said a couple of days ago that it was non-FC.

I'm happy enough for Watto. I'm a bandwagonner these days. Just ask Mick. Cool

by tac Mon Sep 27, 2010 6:24 pm

I don7t need to ask Mick . .you're a dingo pack of one . . .

by skully Mon Sep 27, 2010 6:28 pm

I learnt from the master. Cool

by horace Mon Sep 27, 2010 6:29 pm

gabba dan?

by tac Mon Sep 27, 2010 6:30 pm

you saved me from asking the question, h . . .

by skully Mon Sep 27, 2010 6:30 pm

Hehehe. noice. Cool

by Zat Mon Sep 27, 2010 6:32 pm

tac wrote:Actually skull, as it's not 12 players, 11 bat, 11 bowl, it will have 1st class status, no?

It was supposed to be a 12/11 match (at least according to crocinfo). Then again. it's in India, anything could happen.

by tac Mon Sep 27, 2010 6:33 pm

Yeah, zatty, but it seems only 11 have played for both teams . . .thought it's hard to tell the bannies apart . . .

by tac Mon Sep 27, 2010 6:42 pm

Watto gets back-to-back tons . . now for a string of failures in the tests . .

by Blackadder Mon Sep 27, 2010 6:47 pm

Surely Watto is over due for a long term injury.

by Zat Mon Sep 27, 2010 6:52 pm

Careful guys, you'll upset Mick Sawyer.

by JGK Mon Sep 27, 2010 7:53 pm

Seems the Cricinfo is now treating this as First Class.

So well done Watto.

by skully Mon Sep 27, 2010 8:39 pm

tac wrote:Watto gets back-to-back tons . . now for a string of failures in the tests . .

I think you are getting him mixed up with Ollie. I expect Watto to milk a few runs off the quicks. Ollie will be coming to the wicket once the tweakers have gone to work.

And we seem to be getting smacked around at the moment. Bannie Board XI none-for-plenty (admittedly chasing a billion).

by skully Mon Sep 27, 2010 8:40 pm

JGK wrote:Seems the Cricinfo is now treating this as First Class.

So well done Watto.

Aye. Well played, JGK. Cool

by Henry Mon Sep 27, 2010 11:36 pm

Rahane has an amazing first class record. Seems like those that matter (ie the selectors) don't rate him, though.

by Guest Tue Sep 28, 2010 3:24 am

skully wrote:
JGK wrote:Seems the Cricinfo is now treating this as First Class.

So well done Watto.
Aye. Well played, JGK.

So I noticed earlier. In that case then, why are players allowed to "retire not out"? I thought that you could retire, but it was equivalent to actually getting out (retired out).

In fact, having just checked again, Katich, North and Dhawan all "retired hurt". It was definitely "retired not out" earlier.

by Henry Tue Sep 28, 2010 6:32 am

Aussies cheapening first class cricket.

by taipan Tue Sep 28, 2010 6:38 am

Clamson wrote:
skully wrote:
JGK wrote:Seems the Cricinfo is now treating this as First Class.

So well done Watto.
Aye. Well played, JGK.

So I noticed earlier. In that case then, why are players allowed to "retire not out"? I thought that you could retire, but it was equivalent to actually getting out (retired out).

It is.
If this is FC cricket the game is even more farked than I thought

by Sponsored content