FootballNews

MegaBonus wrote:I'm tired of educating you....do your own readings....

So you can't back up your comments, nothing changes.

Bomber wrote:

God is an Englishman wrote:It is certainly expected that the teams get the facilities they ask for, it's called common corteousy.

Have watched a fair bit of net action and its VERY rare to see the same teams bowlers bowling to their own batsmen on the day of a test. It's very counter productive. Remember last year and an English net bowler hurt an Aussie bowler.

The Indians complained (via a press statement) when the injury happened. Well before their collapse. They had complained to cricket Australia and the Gabba the previous day. But Australia not doing their job doesn't make a good story for channel 9.

So, they should have without a warm up or getting their eye in?

Also, now hearing the food was poor as well.

I'm sure India will reciprocate next time out if deemed so "bad". After all, they seem to control the rules on everything these days.

As for Indians complaining about poor food..................

I'd take Indian cuisine over Australian cuisine every day. Live curry, don't like witchety grubs.

God is an Englishman wrote:

Bomber wrote:

God is an Englishman wrote:It is certainly expected that the teams get the facilities they ask for, it's called common corteousy.

Have watched a fair bit of net action and its VERY rare to see the same teams bowlers bowling to their own batsmen on the day of a test. It's very counter productive. Remember last year and an English net bowler hurt an Aussie bowler.

The Indians complained (via a press statement) when the injury happened. Well before their collapse. They had complained to cricket Australia and the Gabba the previous day. But Australia not doing their job doesn't make a good story for channel 9.

So, they should have without a warm up or getting their eye in?

Also, now hearing the food was poor as well.

I'm sure India will reciprocate next time out if deemed so "bad". After all, they seem to control the rules on everything these days.

As for Indians complaining about poor food..................

I'd take Indian cuisine over Australian cuisine every day. Live curry, don't like witchety grubs.

So you like curry thats live. Odd.
What do witchety grubs taste like?

Live curry can be killed wih lager, just ask Dave Lister.

Bomber wrote:
So you like curry thats live. Odd.
What do witchety grubs taste like?

Well I like beef so rare it might as well be alive.

Witchety grubs - well you can live on them, but they taste like cabernet.

God is an Englishman wrote:

Bomber wrote:
So you like curry thats live. Odd.
What do witchety grubs taste like?

Well I like beef so rare it might as well be alive.

Witchety grubs - well you can live on them, but they taste like cabernet.

I've never tasted one.

I don't think the wind up merchant has either.

Cloister wrote:I don't think the wind up merchant has either.

Then how would he know if they tasted like cabernet?

Cloister wrote:Live curry can be killed wih lager, just ask Dave Lister.

Was on the Syfy channel just a few nights ago.

Any complaints, whinges from GIAE (or India) so far on day 1 of third test?

Bomber wrote:Any complaints, whinges from GIAE (or India) so far on day 1 of third test?

Why the hell is Watson still in the team?

I don't care how much 'potential' he may have - he hasn't consistently produced anything of note and clearly isn't in the top 6 batsmen in the country - yet always gets a game!

Frank Costanza wrote:

Bomber wrote:Any complaints, whinges from GIAE (or India) so far on day 1 of third test?

Why the hell is Watson still in the team?

I don't care how much 'potential' he may have - he hasn't consistently produced anything of note and clearly isn't in the top 6 batsmen in the country - yet always gets a game!

I think the fact he can bowl a bit just does it for him. But he is lucky when you look at how others have been treated over the years

The cons would have been lost without his bowling in the last series. How many bowlers off the field injured, any comment from the tranny lover on that one?

God is an Englishman wrote:The cons would have been lost without his bowling in the last series. How many bowlers off the field injured, any comment from the tranny lover on that one?

Not sure who you're referring to here mate.

The thing is he's not in the team for his bowling - there are better bowlers out there not playing.
He's in there for his batting - but he's nowhere near good enough to be a No.3 and I don't believe he's in the best 6 or 7 in the country.

Frank Costanza wrote:

God is an Englishman wrote:The cons would have been lost without his bowling in the last series. How many bowlers off the field injured, any comment from the tranny lover on that one?

Not sure who you're referring to here mate.

The thing is he's not in the team for his bowling - there are better bowlers out there not playing.
He's in there for his batting - but he's nowhere near good enough to be a No.3 and I don't believe he's in the best 6 or 7 in the country.

If you don't know who I'm referring to then you did a very good job of continuing what I was talking about.

I would agree with you, then again 18 months ago I would have laughed at the idea of Smith even being considered as test quality.

He gets in because he can bowl a bit, ever since Flintoff tore you apart you have had this idea that you HAVE to have an all rounder. On current form that's Mitchell Johnson anyway, even when his bwoling isn't on form he seems to pop up with some runs. BUT, in the last test you needed Watson's overs. With the way you're bowlers seem to be dropping like flies, I guess they see Watson as that back up.

You also have to remember how often a year ago the whole of the top 5 failed consistently.

Mitchell Johnson getting all angry yesterday because he's bowling like cabernet

Geeeeez.....the Indians are bigger cheats than the Poms....

MegaBonus wrote:Geeeeez.....the Indians are bigger cheats than the Poms....

are they as bad as the Aussies though?

What have they done now?

Fair series to date. Good to see some close tests here for a change.

anything other than a 5-0 series would make it interesting....

MegaBonus wrote:anything other than a 5-0 series would make it interesting....

a carton says you won't get a 5-0

why didn't you offer the same bet last year??????

God is an Englishman wrote:

MegaBonus wrote:anything other than a 5-0 series would make it interesting....

a carton says you won't get a 5-0

Given there is only four tests that's a safe bet.

MegaBonus wrote:why didn't you offer the same bet last year??????

I probably would have done if you'd asked.

Dinodon Orientale wrote:

God is an Englishman wrote:

MegaBonus wrote:anything other than a 5-0 series would make it interesting....

a carton says you won't get a 5-0

Given there is only four tests that's a safe bet.

Was hoping the simpleton didn't realise

^^^^^^^

You'll have to do better....


"It's all about you".......brilliant.....

It doesn't look like India are going to win this one either.

glenn mcgrath wrote:I don't like it when people go running to the umpire when someone gives something back to them

MegaBonus wrote:^^^^^^^

You'll have to do better....


"It's all about you".......brilliant.....

well it was a fair chance you didn't have a clue when you were stating that it's better than a 5-0 seeing as it could never have been a 5-0.

Good to see that someone educated you though.

Disappointed that declaration took so long. Aussies are renown for going for results and whilst have no issue with making a further quick 20 or 30 runs, the way they went about it was almost laughable. Normally english captains go the ultra safe method in these calculations.