Australia v England, 1st ODI, Melbourne, Jan 16, 2011

vilkrang wrote:

Zat wrote:

JKLever wrote:Fancy Aus to win the ODI's comfortably. No woofing....

Dello wrote:Word. Also no woof.

OK, you two, take your consistent woofing 'but it's no woof, honest, guv' BS and jam it fair up your respective clackers. Nobody falls for it any more, you do it every time England play. Just piss off with it.

You were saying?

Merely lame insurance that didn't pay off.

It's amazing how often Watson gets away against England. We can't seem to ever get him out early.

Watching Doherty live you wouldn't want to bet on him effecting a run out under pressure - his throwing under duress is terrible.

Henry wrote:

Eric Air Emu wrote:Well there was always going to be a hangover- remember England winning the ODI tri series last time after getting tonked 5-0 and Oz are a far better ODI than test team. With their two bowling spearheads not available as well a convincing Oz win is more than likely.

Quite instructional though. Looks like Tremlett is still not a one day bowler and surely Yardy's improbable ODI career is in jeapardy. No more than a useful bowler and doesn't offer enough with the bat and in the field at this level. Even the Aussie commentators are describing him as "limited". With Jimmy and Broad back and dare I say Tredwell as second spinner, England should be far more competitive in the world cup.

Agree with everything except for Tredwell. I don't like the idea of two offies in the same side, especially when one of them is him. Yardy is good in the T20s because 7 an over is considered a good return. In ODI cricket it's too expensive, though. And he doesn't take wickets. KP should be told to take his offies more seriously. We could get 10 overs out of him and Colly in the Sub Continent. And for this form of the game I think Bopara ahead of Trott would have been the way to go also. He wont get picked now, though. Oh well.

Perhaps-

Strauss(c)
Davies+
Bell
Pietersen
Morgan
Collingwood
Bopara
Broad
Bresnan
Swann
Anderson

That's a decent enough line-up, but it's times like this when I want to get Samit Patel into a dark room and punch him very hard in his ample gut, as the number six slot would otherwise be his for the taking.

Red wrote:Watching Doherty live you wouldn't want to bet on him effecting a run out under pressure - his throwing under duress is terrible.

Who's the pretty lass in your avatar, Red?

Awesome innings by Watson from the sound of it. The qunt.

skully wrote:

Red wrote:Watching Doherty live you wouldn't want to bet on him effecting a run out under pressure - his throwing under duress is terrible.

Who's the pretty lass in your avatar, Red?

Farah Alsies, I would say.

Paul Keating wrote:Seriously someone has to teach Watson how to run between wickets. Even the commentator picked up on the fact that he hit a ball straight to a fieldsman and called yes and just set off. Clarke said no as he would have been run out by 10 metres.

That was Watson's plan presumeably.

vilkrang wrote:Awesome innings by Watson from the sound of it. The qunt.

2nd highest against England next to Big Viv's rescue act at OT in 1984 and 2nd highest undefeated score for Oz next to Hayden's 181* at Hamilton in '07.

Great knock Watson, but England continue to fail to defend 290+ scores. We must hold the record.

I know we were short of Anderson & Broad in this game but for an attack that looks menacing in test cricket, it just looks hittable and without penetration in the one day game. Bizarro...

Zat wrote:

JKLever wrote:Fancy Aus to win the ODI's comfortably. No woofing....

Dello wrote:Word. Also no woof.

OK, you two, take your consistent woofing 'but it's no woof, honest, guv' BS and jam it fair up your respective clackers. Nobody falls for it any more, you do it every time England play. Just piss off with it.

It's not woofing though. Although we've improved recently at the one day lark, the amount of time we fail to chase 260 or fail to defend 290 is unreal. And as I say above, our bowling becomes bizarrely non-threatening in the short form of the game.

Henry wrote:Yardy needs to go down the order. Way down the order. He could hardly get the ball off the square. If he's gonna be in the side he should bat at 10, where his crabbing will do less damage.

Yup, he isn't in the top 25 of English batsmen so we have this weird notion he has to bat high up just because he's bat. That isn't what he's selected for though.

0/53 off 9 overs suggests that he didn't cut it with the ball either.

True, he's a gun in the T20 format because batsmen have to look for boundaries off of him.

Topbottom gun in the 50 format?

I don't think he's too bad in fact. One particular over with the two Watto megaheaves put a dent in his figures.

Will be interesting to see if he has bouncebackability.

From about Number 7.

JKLever wrote:Great knock Watson, but England continue to fail to defend 290+ scores. We must hold the record.

I know we were short of Anderson & Broad in this game but for an attack that looks menacing in test cricket, it just looks hittable and without penetration in the one day game. Bizarro...

I guess you have to bowl it in different places as you're bowling to different types of fields and batting approaches etc. Our bowlers have always been poor at adapting, we've not had many who have made a real success of all formats.

Some sections of the media are saying Haddins crapola performance was due to his 'confusion' over being dropped from the 20/20 side. What a load of bollocks.
Surely the best reaction would be to put on a superlative display, not fall in a steaming pile of poo. As much as it grates me to say, i think Hilditches decision to replace Haddin in the 20/20 has been vindicated.

Red wrote:Clarke deservedly got booed for his go-slow. White looked a slogger.

Quite possible that the former caused the latter.

Big Dog wrote:Some sections of the media are saying Haddins crapola performance was due to his 'confusion' over being dropped from the 20/20 side. What a load of bollocks.
Surely the best reaction would be to put on a superlative display, not fall in a steaming pile of poo. As much as it grates me to say, i think Hilditches decision to replace Haddin in the 20/20 has been vindicated.

Haddin's work behind the stumps was disgraceful. No other word for it.

JKLever wrote:

Zat wrote:

JKLever wrote:Fancy Aus to win the ODI's comfortably. No woofing....

Dello wrote:Word. Also no woof.

OK, you two, take your consistent woofing 'but it's no woof, honest, guv' BS and jam it fair up your respective clackers. Nobody falls for it any more, you do it every time England play. Just piss off with it.

It's not woofing though. Although we've improved recently at the one day lark, the amount of time we fail to chase 260 or fail to defend 290 is unreal. And as I say above, our bowling becomes bizarrely non-threatening in the short form of the game.

Zat has either seen more of England's one-day cricket than you or I, or was indulging in a little woofery of his own.

They ballsed that up royally. 330+ was more than on with the bat - the openers got in but didn't cash in. As they do. Yet all it needed was for one of the middle order batsmen to support Pietersen, who was chugging along nicely, but Trott, Bell, Morgan and Yardy all gave it away feebly, when there was just no need to be doing anything other than rotating the strike, with England going nicely @ 6 rpo.

The bowling was terrible. Didn't look like taking a wicket with the new ball - and they just sprayed it everywhere. Any time it looked like one of them was about to complete a half-decent over, the final ball would be a leg-side attempted slower ball, dispatched to the fence. Unless it was a spinner. Then it'd be a leg-side attempted I don't know what, dispatched to the fence.

And yet, they still could've won. Dropped Watson early. And then the key moment in the game was at around the 22 over mark. The ball started reversing. England had 12 overs before the ball change to exploit what was surely their best chance at taking wickets and force themselves into the ascendency, but Strauss didn't seem interested in veering from Plan A, giving Shahzad only a couple of overs before going back to the spinners and saving him and Bresnan - their best reverse-swing exponents - until the very end of the innings with the game all-but lost.

Pietersen, Swann and, just about, Shahzad the only players to come out of the game with any credit.

And Michael Clarke, of course, who almost won it for England. If only they hadn't got him out.

No woof - this England ODI side isn't much cop. Better than they used to be, but all things are relative: they used to be an embarrassment to limited overs cricket.

skully wrote:

Big Dog wrote:Jeez....Johnson really IS crap is'nt he. Bollinger is'nt much better. Clarke may as well bring himself on. He could'nt do any worse.

Johnson, Bolly and Haddit should all be jettisoned on today's display.

well done skullywag...good to see the penny has dropped...add clarke and the FISB to your list...

Brad -man Haddmul's bank account should be checked this morning - worst display of keeping since the Sydney test last year

Zat wrote:

Red wrote:Clarke deservedly got booed for his go-slow. White looked a slogger.

Quite possible that the former caused the latter.

Big Dog wrote:Some sections of the media are saying Haddins crapola performance was due to his 'confusion' over being dropped from the 20/20 side. What a load of bollocks.
Surely the best reaction would be to put on a superlative display, not fall in a steaming pile of poo. As much as it grates me to say, i think Hilditches decision to replace Haddin in the 20/20 has been vindicated.

Haddin's work behind the stumps was disgraceful. No other word for it.

check Haddmul's bank account

England have collapsed in every limited overs game so far. Both the T20s and now the first ODI.

And the next game isn't until Friday?? WTF? That's a lot of down time when there are still six matches to go.

not really trev...the spiv members of the the team have prior engagements doing more ads...also the tennis is on