SA v WA Shield

carey · Post by **carey** » Fri Nov 06, 2015 12:19 pm

Laudeman just dropped Bosisto on a globe of Minnie

The Bedge · Post by **The Bedge** » Fri Nov 06, 2015 12:20 pm

We have missed Sayers so much, he adds a great deal to our attack - suddenly we look dangerous... WA 4/57 and the top order decimated.. really need to run through them from here!

mal · Post by **mal** » Fri Nov 06, 2015 12:24 pm

Agree Zartan, about Chad
When we had Sayers, Hughes, Botha out of the team it hurt

Lightning McQueen · Post by **Lightning McQueen** » Fri Nov 06, 2015 12:24 pm

Zartan wrote:We have missed Sayers so much, he adds a great deal to our attack - suddenly we look dangerous... WA 4/57 and the top order decimated.. really need to run through them from here!

Chuck a fit Putland in there too and we have a formidable bowling attack.

mal · Post by **mal** » Fri Nov 06, 2015 12:26 pm

Lightning McQueen wrote:
Zartan wrote:We have missed Sayers so much, he adds a great deal to our attack - suddenly we look dangerous... WA 4/57 and the top order decimated.. really need to run through them from here!

Chuck a fit Putland in there too and we have a formidable bowling attack.

Putland yes
But dunno about Chuck, he has not kept for several years

Post by **heater31** » Fri Nov 06, 2015 12:27 pm

Lightning McQueen wrote:
Zartan wrote:We have missed Sayers so much, he adds a great deal to our attack - suddenly we look dangerous... WA 4/57 and the top order decimated.. really need to run through them from here!

Chuck a fit Putland in there too and we have a formidable bowling attack.

Which equates to about 1 shield match per season [emoji38]

carey · Post by **carey** » Fri Nov 06, 2015 12:30 pm

heater31 wrote:
Lightning McQueen wrote:
Zartan wrote:We have missed Sayers so much, he adds a great deal to our attack - suddenly we look dangerous... WA 4/57 and the top order decimated.. really need to run through them from here!

Chuck a fit Putland in there too and we have a formidable bowling attack.

Which equates to about 1 shield match per season [emoji38]

I actually think Mennie is fair way in front of him in the pecking order

carey · Post by **carey** » Fri Nov 06, 2015 12:32 pm

Beaton is seriously playing to his name!

Would've played a missed 8-10 times already. Looks like shit.

** he'll probably hit a ton now.

Lightning McQueen · Post by **Lightning McQueen** » Fri Nov 06, 2015 12:36 pm

carey wrote:Beaton is seriously playing to his name!

Would've played a missed 8-10 times already. Looks like shit.

** he'll probably hit a ton now.

Is Beaton off his game?

The Bedge · Post by **The Bedge** » Fri Nov 06, 2015 12:47 pm

carey wrote:I actually think Mennie is fair way in front of him in the pecking order

Mennie under rated and undervalued by the punters I think..

wristwatcher · Post by **wristwatcher** » Fri Nov 06, 2015 12:50 pm

carey wrote:Beaton is seriously playing to his name!

Would've played a missed 8-10 times already. Looks like shit.

** he'll probably hit a ton now.

That's quite clever :lol:

Lightning McQueen · Post by **Lightning McQueen** » Fri Nov 06, 2015 12:59 pm

carey wrote:

I actually think Mennie is fair way in front of him in the pecking order

I think there's scope to have all 4 pace bowlers and Zampa in our best 11, I reckon there's enough variation between them to warrant them all , Mennie, Zampa, Richo and Sayers can handle the stick too.
There's no point playing 6 batsmen when we only have 4 semi consistent ones.

stan · Post by **stan** » Fri Nov 06, 2015 1:16 pm

Bit of moisture around and the ball is swinging, Chad Sayers in and having success.

carey · Post by **carey** » Fri Nov 06, 2015 1:25 pm

Lightning McQueen wrote:
carey wrote:

I actually think Mennie is fair way in front of him in the pecking order

I think there's scope to have all 4 pace bowlers and Zampa in our best 11, I reckon there's enough variation between them to warrant them all , Mennie, Zampa, Richo and Sayers can handle the stick too.
There's no point playing 6 batsmen when we only have 4 semi consistent ones.

Ive been a redbacks fan for long enough to know we need a minimum of 6 batsmen 'AT ALL TIMES'

Lightning McQueen · Post by **Lightning McQueen** » Fri Nov 06, 2015 1:37 pm

carey wrote:

Ive been a redbacks fan for long enough to know we need a minimum of 6 batsmen 'AT ALL TIMES'

Our tailenders are the ones that have got us to half decent totals most of the time, no point having duds up the order if they can't score runs.

At least we might not be chasing 500+'s every time.

wristwatcher · Post by **wristwatcher** » Fri Nov 06, 2015 1:48 pm

5 fa now.

Just watched the dismissals and the Chad was rolling out some pretty handy nuts with nice shape. I'm calling it now, it's a big call but f@ck it I like to be controversial. Sayers is actually a better bowler than Worrall.

Lightning McQueen · Post by **Lightning McQueen** » Fri Nov 06, 2015 2:23 pm

wristwatcher wrote:5 fa now.

Just watched the dismissals and the Chad was rolling out some pretty handy nuts with nice shape. I'm calling it now, it's a big call but f@ck it I like to be controversial. Sayers is actually a better bowler than Worrall.

That's a massive call.

mighty_tiger_79 · Post by **mighty_tiger_79** » Fri Nov 06, 2015 2:34 pm

That's almost worth the mods banning you for....with calls like that...

Lightning McQueen · Post by **Lightning McQueen** » Fri Nov 06, 2015 2:35 pm

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:That's almost worth the mods banning you for....with calls like that...

Can't put brains in a statue.

Stumps · Post by **Stumps** » Fri Nov 06, 2015 3:45 pm

Lightning McQueen wrote:
wristwatcher wrote:5 fa now.

Just watched the dismissals and the Chad was rolling out some pretty handy nuts with nice shape. I'm calling it now, it's a big call but f@ck it I like to be controversial. Sayers is actually a better bowler than Worrall.

That's a massive call.

i reckon dean sayers is a better bowler than worrall and hes well over 60 now

SA v WA Shield

Re: SA v WA Shield

Re: SA v WA Shield

Re: SA v WA Shield

Re: SA v WA Shield

Re: SA v WA Shield

Re: SA v WA Shield

Re: SA v WA Shield

Re: SA v WA Shield

Re: SA v WA Shield

Re: SA v WA Shield

Re: SA v WA Shield

Re: SA v WA Shield

Re: SA v WA Shield

Re: SA v WA Shield

Re: SA v WA Shield

Re: SA v WA Shield

Re: SA v WA Shield

Re: SA v WA Shield

Re: SA v WA Shield

Re: SA v WA Shield

Who is online