3RD O/D GAME NZ V AU 20/2/07

[mal]

WE LOST BECAUSE
LEE injured
MCGRATH 0 WICKETS
HOGG 0 WICKETS[?]
HUSSEY cant captain

ANOTHER REASON
When the 5th bowler allrounder is the leading wicket-taker on tour .......ANOTHER REASON.

Mal - you didn't have Watson 88 runs off 10 overs in your reasons why we lost.
If you're gonna have a crack at others for blindly having a go at Watson all the time fair enough, at least swallow YOUR pride and acknowledge that he too bowled pus if you want a balanced arguement.

I did swallow my pride
refer
tue
feb 20
8-29
a few posts ago

ROD ROOSTER asked me about the 2/88[10]
have a read i gave him a very poor rating

DOGWATCHER when he performs like a HACK on a consistent basis I will have
the balls to admit it[as i did with the 2/88]
But in 56 o/d games i will defend his overall career as being ok for
a guy who is a number 7 batter + 5th bowler.

Ive had the balls to criticise my other man WHITE as he has failed under pressure
in about 4 innings of late.

One thing for sure if he underperforms i will criticise him
BUT people like PUNK will make excuses if he makes 10 hundeds in a row
and takes 5 wickets in 33 consecutive games

[Punk Rooster]

& the dog would've caught the rabbit, if it didn't stop to do a 5hit!

[mal]

Selective comments AGAIN from you
you highlighted the 8 runs not the 68[69]
you highlighted the 2/88[10] not the 3/58[10]

Why, are you the only one allowed to use selective comments/stats?

Difference between you and me.
Ive already mentioned he bowled GARBAGE 2/88[10] today

Have you got a comment for his 68[69]
or his very very good 3/58[10] on a 2 inch ground game 2

And are you gunna face me in the nets soon
or wait till im 90years old.

[Punk Rooster]

And are you gunna face me in the nets soon
or wait till im 90years old.

I said I would face the MALsra in the nets, only when you've found enough kids to field @ long on & long off, so we don't waste all day waiting for you to retrieve your ball...

[rod_rooster]

Selective comments AGAIN from you
you highlighted the 8 runs not the 68[69]
you highlighted the 2/88[10] not the 3/58[10]

Why, are you the only one allowed to use selective comments/stats?

Difference between you and me.
Ive already mentioned he bowled GARBAGE 2/88[10] today

Have you got a comment for his 68[69]
or his very very good 3/58[10] on a 2 inch ground game 2

And are you gunna face me in the nets soon
or wait till im 90years old.

Mal you haven't answered me yet. His figures look alright from game 2 but did he actually bowl well? You and i both know a bowler can get good figures when they don't bowl well. Do you think Watson bowled well in game 2?

PS - I'll take you on























Might wait till you're 90 though

[Punk Rooster]

Why, are you the only one allowed to use selective comments/stats?

Difference between you and me.
Ive already mentioned he bowled GARBAGE 2/88[10] today

His bowling is garbage most days, not just today- it's not only stats that form an opinion.

[mal]

NZ 5/346 GAME 2
WATSON 3/58[10]

He got the centurion out TAYLOR
And 2 other top order batsmen.

On a 2 inch ground that is a very good bowling effort.

Hope that answers your question ROD.

PUNK make sure you wear pads and a solid helmet [when you bowl to me]

[-]

Very simple way of looking at it I know. If Hogg gets voges' 3 overs we win

[Punk Rooster]

NZ 5/346 GAME 2
WATSON 3/58[10]

He got the centurion out TAYLOR
And 2 other top order batsmen.

On a 2 inch ground that is a very good bowling effort.

Why didn't Watson score more runs then????
He threw his wicket away, that's why!

PUNK make sure you wear pads and a solid helmet [when you bowl to me]

I reckon I'll give you a few easy ones (out of respect for your cricketing talent), before ending the side-show with an in-swinging yorker!

[rod_rooster]

NZ 5/346 GAME 2
WATSON 3/58[10]

He got the centurion out TAYLOR
And 2 other top order batsmen.

On a 2 inch ground that is a very good bowling effort.

Hope that answers your question ROD.

PUNK make sure you wear pads and a solid helmet [when you bowl to me]

No mal, that doesn't mean he bowled well. If you were coaching a guy in the nets and he bowls a few very ordinary balls (not saying this was the case with Watson or not) and they happen to get wickets, do you instruct him to correct this and bowl a better line and length or tell him to keep bowling bad balls? I say this because just because a bowler gets a couple of wickets it doesn't mean overall they bowled well. Take out the stats, do you think Watson bowled well and with control throughout the second match. Do you think he would look at the way he bowled and think "that's how i planned it to come out"?

[mal]

NZ 5/346 GAME 2
WATSON 3/58[10]

He got the centurion out TAYLOR
And 2 other top order batsmen.

On a 2 inch ground that is a very good bowling effort.

Why didn't Watson score more runs then????
He threw his wicket away, that's why!

PUNK make sure you wear pads and a solid helmet [when you bowl to me]

I reckon I'll give you a few easy ones (out of respect for your cricketing talent), before ending the side-show with an in-swinging yorker!

PUNK
Please explain
""""""why didnt watson score more runs then ???? """""
MAL does not understand that comment

[Punk Rooster]

You defended Watson going for 88 because they played on a "postage stamp", yet are strangely quiet on why Watson didn't score more runs himself, on the "postage stamp".
Surely that lessens his effort with the bat today then????

[mal]

NZ 5/346 GAME 2
WATSON 3/58[10]

He got the centurion out TAYLOR
And 2 other top order batsmen.

On a 2 inch ground that is a very good bowling effort.

Hope that answers your question ROD.

PUNK make sure you wear pads and a solid helmet [when you bowl to me]

No mal, that doesn't mean he bowled well. If you were coaching a guy in the nets and he bowls a few very ordinary balls (not saying this was the case with Watson or not) and they happen to get wickets, do you instruct him to correct this and bowl a better line and length or tell him to keep bowling bad balls? I say this because just because a bowler gets a couple of wickets it doesn't mean overall they bowled well. Take out the stats, do you think Watson bowled well and with control throughout the second match. Do you think he would look at the way he bowled and think "that's how i planned it to come out"?

He bowled slower balls, shorter balls and did OK
In o/d games they bowl lots of full tosses for variety as well
He has to mix it up, he dosent swing the ball he likes to dig it in
The small grounds and lack of pace and bounce on the NZ pitches means the
good line and length bowlers can struggle.
I have seen him bowl much better in the past.

[rod_rooster]

NZ 5/346 GAME 2
WATSON 3/58[10]

He got the centurion out TAYLOR
And 2 other top order batsmen.

On a 2 inch ground that is a very good bowling effort.

Hope that answers your question ROD.

PUNK make sure you wear pads and a solid helmet [when you bowl to me]

No mal, that doesn't mean he bowled well. If you were coaching a guy in the nets and he bowls a few very ordinary balls (not saying this was the case with Watson or not) and they happen to get wickets, do you instruct him to correct this and bowl a better line and length or tell him to keep bowling bad balls? I say this because just because a bowler gets a couple of wickets it doesn't mean overall they bowled well. Take out the stats, do you think Watson bowled well and with control throughout the second match. Do you think he would look at the way he bowled and think "that's how i planned it to come out"?

He bowled slower balls, shorter balls and did OK
In o/d games they bowl lots of full tosses for variety as well
He has to mix it up, he dosent swing the ball he likes to dig it in
The small grounds and lack of pace and bounce on the NZ pitches means the
good line and length bowlers can struggle.
I have seen him bowl much better in the past.

That was pretty much the answer i was expecting. Without directly admitting it you have said he didn't bowl all that well.

Can't resist this little dig:

good line and length bowlers can struggle.

and bad ones go for 43 off 4 overs all through the leg side. Even if he got his length right (which he didn't) his line was clearly off and he was unable to correct it. Good line and length bowlers would have made the adjustment.

[mal]

You defended Watson going for 88 because they played on a "postage stamp", yet are strangely quiet on why Watson didn't score more runs himself, on the "postage stamp".
Surely that lessens his effort with the bat today then????

You are kidding me
68[69] balls in a 100 partnership
second highest score
NZ top order 4/41 as well
And I taped the dismissal LBW and watched it several times and it was TOO HIGH.
Good innings PLAYED ABOUT 2 BALLS POORLY ALL DAY and the 3rd one got him out
Might have been a small ground but he did bat well.

WHAT DO YOU WANT HIM TO DO MAKE 102 OFF 17 BALLS

[Punk Rooster]

WHAT DO YOU WANT HIM TO DO MAKE 102 OFF 17 BALLS

no, just making 100, instead of throwing his wicket away & costing Australia the game.

[mal]

NZ 5/346 GAME 2
WATSON 3/58[10]

He got the centurion out TAYLOR
And 2 other top order batsmen.

On a 2 inch ground that is a very good bowling effort.

Hope that answers your question ROD.

PUNK make sure you wear pads and a solid helmet [when you bowl to me]

No mal, that doesn't mean he bowled well. If you were coaching a guy in the nets and he bowls a few very ordinary balls (not saying this was the case with Watson or not) and they happen to get wickets, do you instruct him to correct this and bowl a better line and length or tell him to keep bowling bad balls? I say this because just because a bowler gets a couple of wickets it doesn't mean overall they bowled well. Take out the stats, do you think Watson bowled well and with control throughout the second match. Do you think he would look at the way he bowled and think "that's how i planned it to come out"?

He bowled slower balls, shorter balls and did OK
In o/d games they bowl lots of full tosses for variety as well
He has to mix it up, he dosent swing the ball he likes to dig it in
The small grounds and lack of pace and bounce on the NZ pitches means the
good line and length bowlers can struggle.
I have seen him bowl much better in the past.

That was pretty much the answer i was expecting. Without directly admitting it you have said he didn't bowl all that well.

Can't resist this little dig:

good line and length bowlers can struggle.

and bad ones go for 43 off 4 overs all through the leg side. Even if he got his length right (which he didn't) his line was clearly off and he was unable to correct it. Good line and length bowlers would have made the adjustment.

rod the 0/43[4] was todays game not game 2 where i made that assesment

[rod_rooster]

I know mal but i was just making the point that a good line and length bowler wouldn't do what Watson did today therefore arguing your assertion that Watson is a good line and length bowler.

Say what you want about Watson but he is easily the most discussed individual on this forum. Certainly keeps things interesting.

[mal]

One last time ROD
He does a job for the roles he is assigned.
He is not a HACK
He deserves his spot in the o/d team

PUNK this is for you so you can tell other people and look intelligent

In tests we have been dominant as you say well spotted.
In tests you only need 6 batters a keeper and 4 bowlers and that has worked very well.
B
U
T

IN ONE DAY GAMES YOU HAVE TO BOWL A FIFTH BOWLER THATS THE RULES
And whether you like it or not countries all over the world play a lot of allrounders

Thas a reason why blokes like ROY SYMONDS got a gig in o/d games.

[rod_rooster]

One last time ROD
He does a job for the roles he is assigned.
He is not a HACK
He deserves his spot in the o/d team

I never said he was a hack mal.

In your opinion he deserves his spot in the ODI team.

IMO he is a reasonable batsman but no way is he deserving of a spot based on his batting in any Australian side.

IMO his bowling is very ordinary.

IMO based on this he doesn't deserve a spot in the ODI team.

People have different views mal. What did you think of him getting hit for 43 in 4 overs all to the leg side today?