Re: Australian Domestic Cricket 2019-20
Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2019 5:05 pm3 needed, last ball 
win by 1
Page 41 of 76
Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2019 5:05 pmRe: Australian Domestic Cricket 2019-20
Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2019 5:07 pm win by 1
Re: Australian Domestic Cricket 2019-20
Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2019 5:07 pmwinners are grinners
Re: Australian Domestic Cricket 2019-20
Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2019 5:08 pmGreat last ball by Valente .... knee high full toss a foot outside leg stump
Re: Australian Domestic Cricket 2019-20
Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2019 5:14 pmArmchair expert wrote:winners are grinners
Not Dutchy!!
Re: Australian Domestic Cricket 2019-20
Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2019 5:16 pmwestcoastpanther wrote:Armchair expert wrote:winners are grinners
Not Dutchy!!
He wouldve laid it back i reckon
Re: Australian Domestic Cricket 2019-20
Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2019 9:07 pmJust watching the highlights, Ross and then Valente at long off are very lucky that the Redbacks managed to get up today! Geez you can't give blokes like Aaron Finch a lives like that!mighty_tiger_79 wrote:Ross drops Finch at long on an absolute sitter
Re: Australian Domestic Cricket 2019-20
Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2019 9:31 pmyahoo!! we win a game of no consequence!!!
Re: Australian Domestic Cricket 2019-20
Posted: Wed Nov 20, 2019 9:01 amThe Dark Knight wrote:Just watching the highlights, Ross and then Valente at long off are very lucky that the Redbacks managed to get up today! Geez you can't give blokes like Aaron Finch a lives like that!mighty_tiger_79 wrote:Ross drops Finch at long on an absolute sitter
Agree, some terrible dropped catches, should have cost the game.
And the last ball of match by Valente was terrible. Full toss down leg, if it missed his pad would have been a wide and then another ball, or should have been hit for six anyway.
Re: Australian Domestic Cricket 2019-20
Posted: Wed Nov 20, 2019 10:09 amEagles2014 wrote:The Dark Knight wrote:Just watching the highlights, Ross and then Valente at long off are very lucky that the Redbacks managed to get up today! Geez you can't give blokes like Aaron Finch a lives like that!mighty_tiger_79 wrote:Ross drops Finch at long on an absolute sitter
Agree, some terrible dropped catches, should have cost the game.
And the last ball of match by Valente was terrible. Full toss down leg, if it missed his pad would have been a wide and then another ball, or should have been hit for six anyway.
perhaps they tried to lose
Re: Australian Domestic Cricket 2019-20
Posted: Wed Nov 20, 2019 10:57 amwestcoastpanther wrote:Armchair expert wrote:winners are grinners
Not Dutchy!!
Incorrect, backed at $2.30, moved into $1.11 and layed it for a result either way....perfect game to trade
Re: Australian Domestic Cricket 2019-20
Posted: Tue Nov 26, 2019 11:47 amQueensland 5/57 in final of One day Cup vs WA.
Game just about over already!
Game just about over already!
Re: Australian Domestic Cricket 2019-20
Posted: Tue Nov 26, 2019 4:13 pmQld got to 205 in the end.
Came out and had WA 3/23 in comes S. Marsh, looks like a different wicket 57* off of 64, WA 3/97
Came out and had WA 3/23 in comes S. Marsh, looks like a different wicket 57* off of 64, WA 3/97
Re: Australian Domestic Cricket 2019-20
Posted: Tue Nov 26, 2019 8:06 pmWA win their 14th ODD title by 4 wickets, finishing at 6/210
Marsh 101* (132)
Stoinis 37 (62)
Steketee 2/32
Just watched the highlights of Marsh's 100, geez he hit them well, his 9th ODD century.
Marsh 101* (132)
Stoinis 37 (62)
Steketee 2/32
Just watched the highlights of Marsh's 100, geez he hit them well, his 9th ODD century.
Re: Australian Domestic Cricket 2019-20
Posted: Wed Nov 27, 2019 7:42 amMarsh man of the match in the Marsh Cup
No surprise, he is perhaps WA greatest one day batsmen
Did anyone see how Usman Khawaja tossed the coin !
No surprise, he is perhaps WA greatest one day batsmen
Did anyone see how Usman Khawaja tossed the coin !
Re: Australian Domestic Cricket 2019-20
Posted: Wed Nov 27, 2019 11:47 amLiam Scott apparently named in Redbacks squad, Lehmann dropped.
Big call for an 18 year old!
Big call for an 18 year old!
Re: Australian Domestic Cricket 2019-20
Posted: Wed Nov 27, 2019 12:14 pm5 years today that Phil Hughes passed away.
Time flies, i remember this like yesterday.
You kind of new when the likes of Nova were 'breaking' news that a player had been taken to hospital after being hit in a shield game that it must have been very serious.
Still couldn't believe that he would pass away though, it's cricket, he was a wearing a helmet. The news came as a massive shock, 'celebratory' 'sport star' dont normally 'get' me but this one did. I think we were all in shock, we had all been the batsmen and had all faced bouncers before of numerous speeds.
Never did i think that playing cricket was putting my life in danger, it never crossed the mind once....get seriously hurt yes, never go home no.
RIP Hughesy.
Time flies, i remember this like yesterday.
You kind of new when the likes of Nova were 'breaking' news that a player had been taken to hospital after being hit in a shield game that it must have been very serious.
Still couldn't believe that he would pass away though, it's cricket, he was a wearing a helmet. The news came as a massive shock, 'celebratory' 'sport star' dont normally 'get' me but this one did. I think we were all in shock, we had all been the batsmen and had all faced bouncers before of numerous speeds.
Never did i think that playing cricket was putting my life in danger, it never crossed the mind once....get seriously hurt yes, never go home no.
RIP Hughesy.
Re: Australian Domestic Cricket 2019-20
Posted: Wed Nov 27, 2019 12:29 pmEagles2014 wrote:Liam Scott apparently named in Redbacks squad, Lehmann dropped.
Big call for an 18 year old!
Hopefully he is given a few opportunities to find his feet.
Re: Australian Domestic Cricket 2019-20
Posted: Wed Nov 27, 2019 1:05 pmLightning McQueen wrote:Eagles2014 wrote:Liam Scott apparently named in Redbacks squad, Lehmann dropped.
Big call for an 18 year old!
Hopefully he is given a few opportunities to find his feet.
The 19s will be in Perth with the national champs starting next week so given the match is at the WACA, seems to make sense that he's included in the squad to give him some experience. I'd imagine he would then join up with the 19s afterwards (unless he's 12th man he can play in the 19s in round 1 on Monday and they can get one of the other lads who don't play in round 1 to act as 12th on the last day of the shield game).
There seems to be some opinion around that the 19s this year is one of the better teams SA have sent in recent years and hopefully should do quite well.
I wonder how some of the young SA-born players feel with Scott being here for 5 minutes and having the red carpet rolled out? Granted he has performed (and it's not his fault he got picked) but what does it say for some of the locals who have also done well?
Re: Australian Domestic Cricket 2019-20
Posted: Wed Nov 27, 2019 1:42 pmA very fine article by Gideon Haigh in this mornings Australian.
The enduring legacy of Phillip Hughes GIDEON HAIGH
My younger brother recently turned 50. At least he would have done had he not died in an accident at the age of 17.
Such an event splits the individual in your mind. You are left with memory of who they were, so vivid, and also a sense of the space where they should be, with all that they were precluded from achieving — less palpable, but in some senses just as influential, as you move on without the communion and consolation of their company.
This has also become integral to my understanding of Phillip Hughes, who died five years ago today, aged 25, and who this Sunday would have turned 31. A cricketer of seemingly limitless potential, he would now, had he lived, be in his batting prime.
So we are left with the Hughes fixed in time, as indelible as the inked likeness on Matthew Wade’s right forearm, and the cricketer and the man he might have become, the ‘promise’ he was prevented from fulfilling.
Sport intensifies such sensations. It compresses and accelerates time, makes everything seem so close and so graspable.
In a single game, a cricketer can take huge strides, as Hughes did in March 2009 when in his second Test he made twin hundreds at Kingsmead against South Africa — he remains the youngest to achieve the feat.
Hughes peeled these runs off with such confounding ease and contagious glee it was as though he did not know to be intimidated.
Temperament and technique are usually distinguished, or are seen as developing at different rates: a cricketer strong in one may not be strong in the other.
It was Hughes’s particular faculty that temperament and technique formed part of the same continuum. His cricket seemed an extension of his personality: game, spontaneous, sunny, eager.
In a time of great change, he also pleasingly married old and new. From Macksville, a banana farmer’s son, he was the country cricketer in excelsis who became the project cricketer in progress.
These roles had not been entirely reconciled at his death. There had been criticisms of Hughes’s method, so homespun, so unique, built around not canonical correct drives but a rasping square cut.
It’s one of the many things impossible to say, but you suspect that this was a phase, that eventually success would have disarmed the doubters.
After all, in 2014, there remained those who still could not work out how Steve Smith, six months Hughes’s junior, succeeded by his heterodox fashion.
Hughes had a similar avidity for batting, and for runs. In 88 first-class matches ex Test cricket, he had made 23 centuries and averaged 51. He was the same age on his death as Marnus Labuschagne now, and even had the same coach in the ubiquitous Neil D’Costa.
This brings us to the other great significance of Hughes’s death, that it evoked both the tightness of the elite cricket community and the breadth of the game’s appeal.
There is a superb memento of Hughes’s career, the official biography written by my colleagues Peter Lalor and Malcolm Knox at the behest of the cricketer’s bereaved family.
Through extensive first-hand testimony, it evokes Hughes’s close kinship with his cricket generation — their awe at his talent, their delight in his warmth, their universal satisfaction at his success.
So much cricket had Hughes played already that everyone knew him, and he knew them. Justin Langer, then in his role as Australian batting coach, spoke of trying to “break him to see what he had” by his training regime but being unable to; also that he and his wife “wanted him as either a son or a son-in-law”.
A host of interviewees testified to Hughes’s knack of relaxing match situations and changing rooms, his cheek and his humour, the genuine goodwill he radiated to seeming rivals, the esteem in which he was held by opponents.
In the aftermath of Hughes’s death, Virat Kohli’s Indians were grace personified, and New Zealand and Pakistan first delayed a Test then continued it in his sportsmen’s spirit.
Cricket in Australia is seldom entirely content. It has strong personalities, competing influences, abiding discontents. On only two occasions can I recall it feeling as though the public were completely unified in expressing their love for and protectiveness of the game: in the overwhelming mourning of Hughes’s death, and in the unmitigated disgust after Sandpapergate.
A further imponderable: would there have been a Sandpapergate had Hughes been in that tense, embattled, exhausted and alienated dressing room at Newlands? From that team something had clearly gone missing. Hughes might well have provided it.
Certainly, scratch the surface of the game in this country and the space Hughes left remains, notwithstanding the constructive initiatives to assuage the trauma and often quite heroic efforts to make good his loss.
Most obviously, everyone understands the stakes of cricket’s inherent danger. When Smith was felled by Jofra Archer at Lord’s in July, the alarm was electric and the fear tangible.
There was hearty approval of the insouciance with which England’s fielders treated Ricky Ponting when his eye was gashed by a Steve Harmison bouncer at Lord’s in 2005.
This time, Archer was excoriated for showing insufficient solicitousness of Smith’s condition. It was, definitively, a post-Hughes behavioural critique.
But I think it is more. Cricket is increasingly geared to manufacturing lookalikes; there seems less scope for the self-taught, the self-directed. The game still possesses fine players, suitable for admiration; it rather wants for winning personalities, easy to like.
Andrew Ramsey’s fine account of the aftermath of Hughes’s death for Wisden was entitled ‘Everyone’s Little Brother’, taking its cue from Hughes’s cheery habit of calling everyone ‘bru’, and also the conclusion to Michael Clarke’s uplifting eulogy: “So rest in peace, my little brother, I’ll see you out in the middle.”
On November 27, 2014, cricket lost its little brother. And coping with such a loss is a lifetime’s work.
The enduring legacy of Phillip Hughes GIDEON HAIGH
My younger brother recently turned 50. At least he would have done had he not died in an accident at the age of 17.
Such an event splits the individual in your mind. You are left with memory of who they were, so vivid, and also a sense of the space where they should be, with all that they were precluded from achieving — less palpable, but in some senses just as influential, as you move on without the communion and consolation of their company.
This has also become integral to my understanding of Phillip Hughes, who died five years ago today, aged 25, and who this Sunday would have turned 31. A cricketer of seemingly limitless potential, he would now, had he lived, be in his batting prime.
So we are left with the Hughes fixed in time, as indelible as the inked likeness on Matthew Wade’s right forearm, and the cricketer and the man he might have become, the ‘promise’ he was prevented from fulfilling.
Sport intensifies such sensations. It compresses and accelerates time, makes everything seem so close and so graspable.
In a single game, a cricketer can take huge strides, as Hughes did in March 2009 when in his second Test he made twin hundreds at Kingsmead against South Africa — he remains the youngest to achieve the feat.
Hughes peeled these runs off with such confounding ease and contagious glee it was as though he did not know to be intimidated.
Temperament and technique are usually distinguished, or are seen as developing at different rates: a cricketer strong in one may not be strong in the other.
It was Hughes’s particular faculty that temperament and technique formed part of the same continuum. His cricket seemed an extension of his personality: game, spontaneous, sunny, eager.
In a time of great change, he also pleasingly married old and new. From Macksville, a banana farmer’s son, he was the country cricketer in excelsis who became the project cricketer in progress.
These roles had not been entirely reconciled at his death. There had been criticisms of Hughes’s method, so homespun, so unique, built around not canonical correct drives but a rasping square cut.
It’s one of the many things impossible to say, but you suspect that this was a phase, that eventually success would have disarmed the doubters.
After all, in 2014, there remained those who still could not work out how Steve Smith, six months Hughes’s junior, succeeded by his heterodox fashion.
Hughes had a similar avidity for batting, and for runs. In 88 first-class matches ex Test cricket, he had made 23 centuries and averaged 51. He was the same age on his death as Marnus Labuschagne now, and even had the same coach in the ubiquitous Neil D’Costa.
This brings us to the other great significance of Hughes’s death, that it evoked both the tightness of the elite cricket community and the breadth of the game’s appeal.
There is a superb memento of Hughes’s career, the official biography written by my colleagues Peter Lalor and Malcolm Knox at the behest of the cricketer’s bereaved family.
Through extensive first-hand testimony, it evokes Hughes’s close kinship with his cricket generation — their awe at his talent, their delight in his warmth, their universal satisfaction at his success.
So much cricket had Hughes played already that everyone knew him, and he knew them. Justin Langer, then in his role as Australian batting coach, spoke of trying to “break him to see what he had” by his training regime but being unable to; also that he and his wife “wanted him as either a son or a son-in-law”.
A host of interviewees testified to Hughes’s knack of relaxing match situations and changing rooms, his cheek and his humour, the genuine goodwill he radiated to seeming rivals, the esteem in which he was held by opponents.
In the aftermath of Hughes’s death, Virat Kohli’s Indians were grace personified, and New Zealand and Pakistan first delayed a Test then continued it in his sportsmen’s spirit.
Cricket in Australia is seldom entirely content. It has strong personalities, competing influences, abiding discontents. On only two occasions can I recall it feeling as though the public were completely unified in expressing their love for and protectiveness of the game: in the overwhelming mourning of Hughes’s death, and in the unmitigated disgust after Sandpapergate.
A further imponderable: would there have been a Sandpapergate had Hughes been in that tense, embattled, exhausted and alienated dressing room at Newlands? From that team something had clearly gone missing. Hughes might well have provided it.
Certainly, scratch the surface of the game in this country and the space Hughes left remains, notwithstanding the constructive initiatives to assuage the trauma and often quite heroic efforts to make good his loss.
Most obviously, everyone understands the stakes of cricket’s inherent danger. When Smith was felled by Jofra Archer at Lord’s in July, the alarm was electric and the fear tangible.
There was hearty approval of the insouciance with which England’s fielders treated Ricky Ponting when his eye was gashed by a Steve Harmison bouncer at Lord’s in 2005.
This time, Archer was excoriated for showing insufficient solicitousness of Smith’s condition. It was, definitively, a post-Hughes behavioural critique.
But I think it is more. Cricket is increasingly geared to manufacturing lookalikes; there seems less scope for the self-taught, the self-directed. The game still possesses fine players, suitable for admiration; it rather wants for winning personalities, easy to like.
Andrew Ramsey’s fine account of the aftermath of Hughes’s death for Wisden was entitled ‘Everyone’s Little Brother’, taking its cue from Hughes’s cheery habit of calling everyone ‘bru’, and also the conclusion to Michael Clarke’s uplifting eulogy: “So rest in peace, my little brother, I’ll see you out in the middle.”
On November 27, 2014, cricket lost its little brother. And coping with such a loss is a lifetime’s work.