Re: Shaun Tait- Just saw the 1st over....

by PlanetPakistan Mon 12 Jan 2009, 05:58

horace wrote:hehehehehe...

PP I saw a bit of Gul bowling the other day for the Wozzies...got carted a bit (by hodge) but looked in good nick...he seemed a really cheerful sort of bloke and to have fitted in really well with his team mates

yeah he seems like a good guy, quite a hard working cricketer but a bit injury prone due to his bowling action.

by OP Tipping Mon 12 Jan 2009, 06:00

If Ponting was smart, he would have been made captain of the test team.

by PlanetPakistan Mon 12 Jan 2009, 06:03

if i was smart i would have been in my bed by now

by OP Tipping Mon 12 Jan 2009, 06:05

Or perhaps someone else's.

by PlanetPakistan Mon 12 Jan 2009, 06:06

perhaps.....but i can afford my own Wink

by lardbucket Mon 12 Jan 2009, 06:18

JGK wrote:Tait is NPFAA in Tests but will be first picked in the lesser forms.

If he's smart, he will find a good agent to tape his first over yesterday and send it to all the IPL franchises.

Where he can bowl 24 balls per match in front of the easily impressed

by tac Mon 12 Jan 2009, 06:35

lardbucket wrote:
JGK wrote:Tait is NPFAA in Tests but will be first picked in the lesser forms.

If he's smart, he will find a good agent to tape his first over yesterday and send it to all the IPL franchises.

Where he can bowl 24 balls per match in front of the easily impressed

Yeah, right . . . . suicide

by lardbucket Mon 12 Jan 2009, 06:37

Well, they seem to like him.

by tac Mon 12 Jan 2009, 06:52

It's the 24 balls, I have a problem with . . . . oh! you meant 24 legal deliveries . . .

by lardbucket Mon 12 Jan 2009, 06:55

Yes ... well, 24 deemed legal, to be more precise.

by taipan Mon 12 Jan 2009, 06:58

There was a bit of chatter in the local pubs here yesterday about his "delivery"

by embee Mon 12 Jan 2009, 07:03

He was chucking , Taips

I have no doubt at all about it

by Zat Mon 12 Jan 2009, 07:06

He might have been chucking. (Looked like it to me. And the missus.) But he hurt someone. Excellent.

by taipan Mon 12 Jan 2009, 07:09

Can't comment embee, I was watching my son playing real cricket.

However I clearly remember the first time I saw Figjam bowl. I was having a beer with a former provincial quickie and he was in no doubt.

by taipan Mon 12 Jan 2009, 07:10

Zat wrote:But he hurt someone. Excellent.

Very sporting Zat.

by embee Mon 12 Jan 2009, 07:11

taipan wrote:Can't comment embee, I was watching my son playing real cricket.

However I clearly remember the first time I saw Figjam bowl. I was having a beer with a former provincial quickie and he was in no doubt.

Botha's action was doubtful too

by taipan Mon 12 Jan 2009, 07:12

embee wrote:
taipan wrote:Can't comment embee, I was watching my son playing real cricket.

However I clearly remember the first time I saw Figjam bowl. I was having a beer with a former provincial quickie and he was in no doubt.

Botha's action was doubtful too

Have never disputed that.

by Zat Mon 12 Jan 2009, 07:13

taipan wrote:
Zat wrote:But he hurt someone. Excellent.

Very sporting Zat.

It worked for quick bowlers for years. As many a heckler has said 'You've got a bat, use it.'

by tac Mon 12 Jan 2009, 07:13

Botha's a pinger . . . no 2 ways about it.

Tait looks suspect, but slow-mo replays show that his elbow rotates during delivery which makes it look worse than it is. Still reckon he pings the odd one . . .

by embee Mon 12 Jan 2009, 07:14

taipan wrote:
embee wrote:
taipan wrote:Can't comment embee, I was watching my son playing real cricket.

However I clearly remember the first time I saw Figjam bowl. I was having a beer with a former provincial quickie and he was in no doubt.

Botha's action was doubtful too

Have never disputed that.

...but I'd rather face Botha than Chait

by taipan Mon 12 Jan 2009, 07:16

Zat wrote:
taipan wrote:
Zat wrote:But he hurt someone. Excellent.

Very sporting Zat.
It worked for quick bowlers for years. As many a heckler has said 'You've got a bat, use it.'

Zat I have no problem if it is a legitimate delivery but you seem to be condoning chucking in order to hurt a batsman.

by Zat Mon 12 Jan 2009, 07:21

taipan wrote:
Zat wrote:
taipan wrote:
Zat wrote:But he hurt someone. Excellent.

Very sporting Zat.
It worked for quick bowlers for years. As many a heckler has said 'You've got a bat, use it.'

Zat I have no problem if it is a legitimate delivery but you seem to be condoning chucking in order to hurt a batsman.

Blame the ICC. If they're gonna let blokes who chuck play at the highest level, then so be it. Too fuckin' bad if someone gets hurt because the ICC lets quickies chuck.

by taipan Mon 12 Jan 2009, 07:22

Still sounds like you are condoning it.

Bodyline was also legal IIRC.

by Zat Mon 12 Jan 2009, 07:24

Bodyline was legal at the time.

by lardbucket Mon 12 Jan 2009, 07:24

When chuckers play, batsmen will be hit by chucks, and dismissed by chucks.

by Sponsored content