Page 1 of 15

Australia v New Zealand

Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2015 11:53 am
by God is an Englishman
More hypocrisy already.

1. All we have heard over the last few years is that England play non English people now we have Khawaja playing again.

2. Australians whingeing about the pitches not being good enough then produce a pitch for the kiwis practice game that was so bad they refused to bat.

3. Kiwis said this morning that they were desperate to win the toss and bat. It's almost like a wicket has been produced that will favour one team. Some may call that "doctoring".

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:03 pm
by Stitch This
God is an Englishman wrote:More hypocrisy already.

1. All we have heard over the last few years is that England play non English people now we have Khawaja playing again.

2. Australians whingeing about the pitches not being good enough then produce a pitch for the kiwis practice game that was so bad they refused to bat.

3. Kiwis said this morning that they were desperate to win the toss and bat. It's almost like a wicket has been produced that will favour one team. Some may call that "doctoring".
Apparently Australia not beaten in a Test at the Gabba in over 20 years.

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2015 1:20 pm
by Bomber
:lol:

1. One or two players over a long period as opposed to half a team over a long period

2. They've played plenty cricket over here already, so they missed the equivalent of couple days worth of rain, big deal

3. And if NZ did win the toss and batted, how would that be "doctoring" or favouring the home side?

Feeble attempt, even by your standards. Oh, and good luck against Pakistan.

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2015 1:29 pm
by N5 1BH
aussies won the toss and surprise, surprise chose to bat. So when's the next test then ?

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2015 1:35 pm
by God is an Englishman
Bomber wrote::lol:

1. One or two players over a long period as opposed to half a team over a long period

2. They've played plenty cricket over here already, so they missed the equivalent of couple days worth of rain, big deal

3. And if NZ did win the toss and batted, how would that be "doctoring" or favouring the home side?

Feeble attempt, even by your standards. Oh, and good luck against Pakistan.
1. So it's OK to do as long as there's not too many. It's either wrong or it's OK.

2. Schedules are produced for a reason and you lot couldn't even be decent enough to give them batting practice.

3. It wouldn't, but a pitch produced that favoured whoever batted first. Doesn't sound like a balanced wicket to me. Once again, Aussies doing exactly what they'd complained about in the past.

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2015 3:34 pm
by Bomber
God is an Englishman wrote:
Bomber wrote::lol:

1. One or two players over a long period as opposed to half a team over a long period

2. They've played plenty cricket over here already, so they missed the equivalent of couple days worth of rain, big deal

3. And if NZ did win the toss and batted, how would that be "doctoring" or favouring the home side?

Feeble attempt, even by your standards. Oh, and good luck against Pakistan.
1. So it's OK to do as long as there's not too many. It's either wrong or it's OK.

2. Schedules are produced for a reason and you lot couldn't even be decent enough to give them batting practice.

3. It wouldn't, but a pitch produced that favoured whoever batted first. Doesn't sound like a balanced wicket to me. Once again, Aussies doing exactly what they'd complained about in the past.
1. Relying on foreigners to do most of the work - I thought that was generally speaking in UK, but not in sport.
2. Did NZ get batting practice since they arrived? Yes or no
3. Is this pitch unlike any other recent Gabba wicket?

You're the only one whingeing (yet again) by the way.

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2015 4:21 pm
by God is an Englishman
Bomber wrote:
1. Relying on foreigners to do most of the work - I thought that was generally speaking in UK, but not in sport.
2. Did NZ get batting practice since they arrived? Yes or no
3. Is this pitch unlike any other recent Gabba wicket?

You're the only one whingeing (yet again) by the way.
1. well you don't have an empire if you can't make them earn their keep. Or in more recent times, why wouldn't you hire a pole who will do it at a fraction of the price. YET, once again australia are claiming someone who isn't australian whilst whingeing about others doing it.

2. Yes, but clearly not enough as they "prepared" a dangerous wicket.

3. I haven't looked at it but it's clearly been set up to for batting to be easier early on. Not the same for both sides - in previous times australia have whinged like little girls when this has happened to them.



AND it's not whingeing, I've merely pointed out the hypocrisy.

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2015 6:15 pm
by Bomber
God is an Englishman wrote:
Bomber wrote:
1. Relying on foreigners to do most of the work - I thought that was generally speaking in UK, but not in sport.
2. Did NZ get batting practice since they arrived? Yes or no
3. Is this pitch unlike any other recent Gabba wicket?

You're the only one whingeing (yet again) by the way.
1. well you don't have an empire if you can't make them earn their keep. Or in more recent times, why wouldn't you hire a pole who will do it at a fraction of the price. YET, once again australia are claiming someone who isn't australian whilst whingeing about others doing it.

2. Yes, but clearly not enough as they "prepared" a dangerous wicket.

3. I haven't looked at it but it's clearly been set up to for batting to be easier early on. Not the same for both sides - in previous times australia have whinged like little girls when this has happened to them.



AND it's not whingeing, I've merely pointed out the hypocrisy.
You really have a big imagination then because that's all bollocks. Seriously, you need therapy. These nasty Aussies are really getting to you.

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2015 7:06 pm
by God is an Englishman
None so blind as those who cannot see

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2015 10:15 pm
by Bomber
God is an Englishman wrote:None so english as those who cannot stop whingeing
Fixed

Bad luck with Pakistan btw.

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2015 10:25 pm
by God is an Englishman
Bomber wrote:
God is an Englishman wrote:None so english as those who cannot stop whingeing
Fixed

Bad luck with Pakistan btw.
That's why no away team has ever won a series in the Emirates. Maybe i should complain about the pitch being doctored.

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2015 11:07 pm
by Steve#4
N5 1BH wrote:aussies won the toss and surprise, surprise chose to bat. So when's the next test then ?
:lol: :lol: brave statement after seeing the first session off. Most of the kiwis I heard were quite confident of picking up a few wickets with how sticky it was this morning, well done nostredamus :lol:

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2015 8:50 am
by Bomber
God is an Englishman wrote:
Bomber wrote:
God is an Englishman wrote:None so english as those who cannot stop whingeing
Fixed

Bad luck with Pakistan btw.
That's why no away team has ever won a series in the Emirates. Maybe i should complain about the pitch being doctored.
One day the penny might drop about the difference when a cricket board and/or captain orders a particular type of wicket, as opposed to whatever the groundsman simply and usually prepares.

Was funny when I checked on the game at the Emirates the other day and saw Rashid and Patel at the crease. I thought Pakistan were batting. I was wrong! Might be time to revisit whether any decent young saffers have a great great English uncle again........

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2015 9:35 am
by God is an Englishman
How do you know what was ordered by the board in England or in Australia?

Do you mean Rashid from Bradford and Patel from Leicester? Any idea where Khawaja is from?

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2015 10:20 am
by Urgh! A Musíc War
Canterbury Bankstown??

* I don't know... that was just a stab in the dark.

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2015 10:51 am
by PDog
It seems that the Cricket Australia XI were trying to do them a favour by giving them bowling practice. It would seem, to me, that they needed it.

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2015 11:03 am
by MegaBonus
God is an Englishman

How do you know what was ordered by the board in England or in Australia?

so you accept that there was an order to doctor but youre not sure what it was???

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2015 11:22 am
by Urgh! A Musíc War
I don't think he has ever denied that wickets are prepared to favor the home side.

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2015 1:29 pm
by Moritaka Chisato
So when should Australia declare?

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2015 2:11 pm
by God is an Englishman
MegaBonus wrote:
God is an Englishman

How do you know what was ordered by the board in England or in Australia?

so you accept that there was an order to doctor but youre not sure what it was???
that statement shows nothing about me saying there was an order.

However, I believe all countries produce wickets to help themselves. It's called home advantage

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2015 2:14 pm
by Urgh! A Musíc War
Of course they do. It's not rocket science.

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2015 2:44 pm
by God is an Englishman
Urgh! A Musíc War wrote:Of course they do. It's not rocket science.
It is to some

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2015 3:39 pm
by Bomber
God is an Englishman wrote:
Urgh! A Musíc War wrote:Of course they do. It's not rocket science.
It is to some
Might want to explain why most of our test pitches are so different then.

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2015 4:01 pm
by Moritaka Chisato
It's a big country

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2015 4:28 pm
by God is an Englishman
Bomber wrote:
God is an Englishman wrote:
Urgh! A Musíc War wrote:Of course they do. It's not rocket science.
It is to some
Might want to explain why most of our test pitches are so different then.

are they? all are pretty hard and bouncy and good for pace bowlers. All are set up to generally be good for batsmen early on, good for spinners late on...


If the pitches were how they naturally were then who is cutting the grass? who is rolling the pitch? who is watering the pitch?

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2015 4:50 pm
by N5 1BH
Steve#4 wrote:
N5 1BH wrote:aussies won the toss and surprise, surprise chose to bat. So when's the next test then ?
:lol: :lol: brave statement after seeing the first session off. Most of the kiwis I heard were quite confident of picking up a few wickets with how sticky it was this morning, well done nostredamus :lol:
Not being blinded by parochialism does not necessarily make one a visionary however I can see how an australian could have trouble differentiating. :wink:

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2015 5:12 pm
by Urgh! A Musíc War
New Zealand have now lost more wickets than Australia.

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2015 9:11 pm
by Steve#4
N5 1BH wrote:
Steve#4 wrote:
N5 1BH wrote:aussies won the toss and surprise, surprise chose to bat. So when's the next test then ?
:lol: :lol: brave statement after seeing the first session off. Most of the kiwis I heard were quite confident of picking up a few wickets with how sticky it was this morning, well done nostredamus :lol:
Not being blinded by parochialism does not necessarily make one a visionary however I can see how an australian could have trouble differentiating. :wink:
I saw kiwis at the start of the game thinking they had a great shot bowling.
I see also a pom that waited till after lunch because he didnt have the conviction, then take a cheap shot. :wink: 8)

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2015 5:45 pm
by God is an Englishman
How cabernet must NZ be if they've let Warner get 100 in both innings and burns to a ton as well.

Only a year ago they drew with England. Maybe the deck suits Australia better.

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2015 5:46 pm
by God is an Englishman
And he looks to the sky on his ton, is he a scouser?