Why are we waiting?

There is some consternation in the ranks as to why the review of cricket is taking ever so long.

http://www.theage.com.au/sport/cricket/chant-is-why-are-we-waiting-20110716-1hj5u.html

Interesting comment about Punter having too much influence.

Noticed today also that Clarke has dumped his underwear sponsorship because the image of him running around half naked doesn't befit that of an Aussie cricket captain.

"Johnson last week said McDermott had already shown him how to better grip the ball, hopefully improving his control and accuracy."

Dear God, that nearly makes me weep. Either Cooley had no farquin idea afterall (and really it was the mints ), Midge hated and ignored him, or the tattoo-ed sleeved one really is thick-as-two-short-planks.

"Clarke had made it known for two months he wanted former Test gloveman Steve Rixon, his first coach at NSW, to replace Mike Young and take charge of fielding in the Australian side.

Standards have fallen in recent seasons. Clarke wanted a hard nut to run these sessions in the mould of a Bob Simpson. Rixon's history with the Blues, in New Zealand and with Indian Premier League champions Chennai Super Kings is impeccable."


Interesting. Always wondered what a baseballer could do for an Aus cricket side.

He made you the best fielding side in the world, didn't he?

No, Simmo did, with a sh!tload of hard work.

Maybe nobody has a farqin idea, and they are waiting for a Messiah to appear from New Zealand, South Africa, Pakistan or somewhere to show them all the way?

The solution might be simple - sack just about all the guys in the top spots.

I thought S Rixon was busy making golf balls.

Mike Young made a solid contribution. Clarke obviously wants a new broom; out with the old.

Bizarre comments re Cooley. Maybe Johnson has learned to listen? We should wait and see Midge's results before we give any credit to Billy or direct any flak at Troy.

Personally, I think a bunch of soft qunts got elevated to the top 15 or so while we were on top and were handed positions on a plate. Hughes, North and Johnson are prime examples.

Still every team goes through cycles. I think CA dropped the ball and didn't do the hard work in the background to groom real hard-nosed talent, when the likesof McGrath, Warne, Hayden, Gilchrist and LAnger were carrying all before them.

Maybe Johnson didn't want to listen to Cooley?

Re: Lardbucket:

True, not to rush to judgment, but you have to see signs as they appear.

At thsi stage, the deduction might be that Cooley has "his" methods, to which the bowlers must conform. For every Harmison (for whom it briefly workd) an Anderson.

The better method with most bowlers should surely be to go with whatever the bowler finds most effective, and help him to find his own optimum style, with enough resourcefulness to deal with difficulties and unfavourable conditions ... Johnson should have been "sorted" some time ago.

Yeah, but we don't know the intricacies of their coaching of Midge. Could be he didn't command enough respect, as stated. Maybe Midge is a bit of a FIGJAM?

Brass Monkey wrote:Yeah, but we don't know the intricacies of their coaching of Midge. Could be he didn't command enough respect, as stated. Maybe Midge is a bit of a FIGJAM?

Maybe? MAYBE?

Well, the media go the other way, don't they. They say he's mentally fragile and constantly underconfident.

Yeah, maybe I'm letting the full sleeve tattoo cloud my thinking.

Shows he's not happy in his own skin, surely

Try Jade Dernbach ...

Indeed. To each their own, but does that sort of thing give the GF a massive wetty or summat?

Personally, weeks in a tattooist's chair and another few weeks of potentially pus-filled healing for something that looks like varicose veins gone mental seems a bit dense to me. It just struck me as a massive and unnecessary "Look at me, I'm FIGJAM" moment in Midge's career.

He's one of those metrosexuals what likes to decorate himself innit!

True. Pup did hiself no favours in that department. He also went beresk on the body ink and came off looking like a massive tool in my book.

Only today he has dropped his involvement with Bonds undies, citing "it's unbecoming for the captain of Aus to be running around in his underpants".

Well, I disagree with that. That's how most of you Aussie fans picture your players anyway.

Which bit? Pup's tats or him dropping his daks sponsor?

In their underwear. Y'know, that whole totally wiped out conversation a few years back that led to a reporting... oh never mind.

PeterCS wrote:Re: Lardbucket:

True, not to rush to judgment, but you have to see signs as they appear.

At thsi stage, the deduction might be that Cooley has "his" methods, to which the bowlers must conform. For every Harmison (for whom it briefly workd) an Anderson.

The better method with most bowlers should surely be to go with whatever the bowler finds most effective, and help him to find his own optimum style, with enough resourcefulness to deal with difficulties and unfavourable conditions ... Johnson should have been "sorted" some time ago.

What I meant was that we've seen no better results from McDermott's methods, yet. Not saying Cooley was the duck's nuts, but it's a bit unfair to blame him for all Midge's failings ... no coach can turn a pig's ear into a silk purse.

CA's position is: "If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all", and here we are...