TOPIC:

gtrxuone wrote: Who knows might be chasing just over 400 .And almost 5 sessions to do so.On this Jekyll +Hyde wicket.The wicket might play well day 4+5.Nobody knows what this wicket is going to do.

Agree, IRRESPECTIVE of the wicket the Aussies batsmen are not test standard, therin lies the problem

UNKA2 wrote:

gtrxuone wrote: Who knows might be chasing just over 400 .And almost 5 sessions to do so.On this Jekyll +Hyde wicket.The wicket might play well day 4+5.Nobody knows what this wicket is going to do.

Agree, IRRESPECTIVE of the wicket the Aussies batsmen are not test standard, therin lies the problem

90 years ago today.The largest 4th innings total was scored at the Mcg to win a test.England Scored 332 to win.Players called Hammond and Hobbs both scored centuries.
Agree the Aussie batsman are as soft as butter.

Be sods law if the Marsh boys get Aust home...LOL....

Before anyone tells me I’m full of crap and know nothing about cricket, I’ll admit I have never played the game in a serious comp. what about people like Wade et al? He’s making heaps in T20, but he’s been around long enough to know a bit about test cricket. There’s heaps of these guys around that are in fantastic form, so why not take the blinkers off and look around and try one or two. For heaven’s sake, they couldn’t do any worse than the crabs we have out there now.

ooollllrrrrrry2 wrote:

gtrxuone wrote: Who knows might be chasing just over 400 .And almost 5 sessions to do so.On this Jekyll +Hyde wicket.The wicket might play well day 4+5.Nobody knows what this wicket is going to do.

Certainly not those giving opinions after day 1, it was a dead track, nothing for the bowlers bleat, bleat, bleat. It was a borefest etc, let's change venues etc.

Yeh well, bleat bleat, bleat oooll. That’s bull crap. We have two completely polar pitches on the first two days and it resulted in deciding the match....not good enough!!!!! If Aussie had batted first, we’d all be saying what a briiiant side we have...crap.

58shark wrote: Before anyone tells me I’m full of crap and know nothing about cricket, I’ll admit I have never played the game in a serious comp. what about people like Wade et al? He’s making heaps in T20, but he’s been around long enough to know a bit about test cricket. There’s heaps of these guys around that are in fantastic form, so why not take the blinkers off and look around and try one or two. For heaven’s sake, they couldn’t do any worse than the crabs we have out there now.

Wade is a worse keeper than Paine, also a failure against quality test bowling. One looks at Finch as an example of one who is great at 20/20 , BUT technique lacking in test cricket ( and it shows). Sadly the test batsmen we have just dont have the concentraion or skill set to play test cricket. Travis head another example, great hand eye, but watched him toay, did not have a clue gainst spin or pace!!

58shark wrote: Before anyone tells me I’m full of crap and know nothing about cricket, I’ll admit I have never played the game in a serious comp. what about people like Wade et al? He’s making heaps in T20, but he’s been around long enough to know a bit about test cricket. There’s heaps of these guys around that are in fantastic form, so why not take the blinkers off and look around and try one or two. For heaven’s sake, they couldn’t do any worse than the crabs we have out there now.

I'm also a big Matt Wade fan.I think he's not in the side because he's a Wicket-keeper.

there is one bloke in the top six whom has not even troublled the scorers to make a century in first -class cricket this season. If you played Wade you could bat him at six in front of the captain and keeper; at least then, the selectors could argue that they pick the team on form.

Smith aside, all of our batsmen have technical flaws, but I would argue that those making runs in the Shield -- and there are not many -- should be rewarded with a test spot.

ArkRoyal wrote: there is one bloke in the top six whom has not even troublled the scorers to make a century in first -class cricket this season. If you played Wade you could bat him at six in front of the captain and keeper; at least then, the selectors could argue that they pick the team on form.

Smith aside, all of our batsmen have technical flaws, but I would argue that those making runs in the Shield -- and there are not many -- should be rewarded with a test spot.

My pnly concern is that wade is a failure against test standard as well....he aint the future!

One wicket down in 2nd over.Finch out-Joe Burns in.