View Full Version : Ten Reports McGrath 12th Man Rumour
Ten sports news tonight in Melbourne reported a rumour was going around suggesting that Johnson would come into the third test side at the expense of McGrath.
Would people want to see this?
Can't see it myself, but stranger things have happened.
Sylvia Saint
13 Dec 2006, 16:02
Highly unlikely I would have thought.
Maybe his bruised heel did not come up?
Would be a blessing for Glenn, I think he'll get pasted all over the WACA this test.
For the sake of the future...
Yes
bushranger
13 Dec 2006, 16:11
Bring In White Or Denton
TheColeTrain
13 Dec 2006, 16:19
Bring In White Or Denton
A fast bowler for a batsmen? Explain why that would be considered, or why they would play a bowler who is in Melbourne the other side of the country from Perth, isn't even in the squad, and is nowhere near consideration?
kane249
13 Dec 2006, 16:25
Bring In White Or Denton
Nah bring in Dean Jones or Bill Lawry! :rolleyes:
kane249
13 Dec 2006, 16:26
A fast bowler for a batsmen? Explain why that would be considered, or why they would play a bowler who is in Melbourne the other side of the country from Perth, isn't even in the squad, and is nowhere near consideration?
I beleive our friend bushranger is taking the p!ss
Or if not he is most likley been on the p!ss
Wouldn't mind this TBH. McGrath is rumoured not to be fit for this match and we learnt our lesson in Adelaide about not playing injured players.
Johnson bowled very well over in Perth in the PC match IIRC.
Quarterbrain said it would be a demotion, not an injury related decision if it occurred.
sportznut
13 Dec 2006, 16:40
No way. If he didn't play, it would simply be because he's not fully fit.
spookism
13 Dec 2006, 16:41
Quarterbrain said it would be a demotion, not an injury related decision if it occurred.
If that was the case (Highly unlikely) then would possibly see the second retirement in a week....
If true would probably see the biggest dummy spits of all time, excluding Martyn's recent nervous breakdown.
With all the trash he's been filling the papers with this week would be quite a large slice of humble pie. Quite different from the litres of his bath water he usually consumes.
pinkus maximus
13 Dec 2006, 16:50
glenn mcgrath dropped? thats blasphemy
Dropped as in Glenn thinks he is fit, but the selectors disagree ?
Does this apply as a 'dropping'
Cassius_Clay
13 Dec 2006, 16:55
Ten sports news tonight in Melbourne reported a rumour was going around suggesting that Johnson would come into the third test side at the expense of McGrath.
Would people want to see this?
Can't see it myself, but stranger things have happened.
Good. McGrath was utterly crap last test.
pinkus maximus
13 Dec 2006, 16:56
Dropped as in Glenn thinks he is fit, but the selectors disagree ?
Does this apply as a 'dropping'
if he is unfit he is unavailable for selection
Cassius_Clay
13 Dec 2006, 17:02
No way. If he didn't play, it would simply be because he's not fully fit.
Why? And dont give me the crap 'Oh it's McGrath, they cant drop him'. Thats a load of BS. He went injured into the Adelaide test and it nearly cost us dearly. He's still injured now so stuff him. Dont pick him. Simple.
Oh When the Saints
13 Dec 2006, 17:11
Agree Cassius_Clay
McGrath was poor in Adelaide ... if he is injured, or even 90%, then he shouldn't be selected. You must have 11 guys at 100% fitness on Day 1.
But if McGrath is fit, he deserves the next Test or so to prove his form ... but the axe is hovering if McGrath doesn't perform in Perth.
Coin_Toss
13 Dec 2006, 17:15
It's a good chance for Johnson to step up and make his name as a Test player. We lead the series 2-0... and McGrath needs to rest his injury.
I doubt it's true... but I'm sure Johnson is hoping otherwise.
I hope he does play and shows exactly how crap Brett Lee really is. Clark did it in South Africa and all this summer, time for another talented quick to provide further evidence to his lack of test match ability.
Would make the Melbourne selection interesting, eh?
Grimreepah
13 Dec 2006, 17:21
McGrath would only be dropped if he was unfit, not because of form. He has 9 wickets in the series, and was our best bowler in Brisbane.
McGrath would only be dropped if he was unfit, not because of form. He has 9 wickets in the series, and was our best bowler in Brisbane.
I think Clark outbowled him at GABBA. McGrath was pretty ordinary in the second dig there.
Cassius_Clay
13 Dec 2006, 17:31
I hope he does play and shows exactly how crap Brett Lee really is. Clark did it in South Africa and all this summer, time for another talented quick to provide further evidence to his lack of test match ability.
Would make the Melbourne selection interesting, eh?
Brett Lee pretty much (He did. Fact. Without him we wouldnt have won) won us the game in Adelaide with that spell in the 2nd innings. McGrath was utter crud in the 1st innings (Same as Lee) and was too injured to bowl in the 2nd innings until Ponting brought him on to the tailenders.
davey_magik
13 Dec 2006, 18:06
Brett Lee pretty much (He did. Fact. Without him we wouldnt have won) won us the game in Adelaide with that spell in the 2nd innings. McGrath was utter crud in the 1st innings (Same as Lee) and was too injured to bowl in the 2nd innings until Ponting brought him on to the tailenders.
He won the game for us?
WTF?
Ah, who was the guy who decimated the England top order?
Lee got Flintoff who is in terrible form and Jones who is an average bat. Warne won the game for us.
Pidge has been average though and if he isn't 100% I wouldn't play him.
Brett Lee pretty much (He did. Fact. Without him we wouldnt have won) won us the game in Adelaide with that spell in the 2nd innings. McGrath was utter crud in the 1st innings (Same as Lee) and was too injured to bowl in the 2nd innings until Ponting brought him on to the tailenders.
Disagree, Warne won the game for us.
His second innings spell was much improved I'm glad to admit, but this is only one of two decent spells of bowling he has produced this summer. He needs to produce this, and much better, consistently to keep his place.
With Tait, Clark and Johnson all taking wickets in the PC this season I think Lee is aware of his need to improve too.
Anyway, all I am saying is that if Johnson does play and bowl well it will be an interesting selection meeting for Melbourne.
Bombers_Forever
13 Dec 2006, 18:13
I think England would be delighted NOT to be facing him.
The selectors would be stupid to do it- might as well drop Lee if any quick is going to go
footy_rulz
13 Dec 2006, 18:15
If the selectors want to drop someone to accommodate Johnson, it should be Lee, not Pigeon.
Might be a good time to reinvigorate my Dad's Army thread, it looks like they are dropping like flies.
TheColeTrain
13 Dec 2006, 18:43
Brett Lee pretty much (He did. Fact. Without him we wouldnt have won) won us the game in Adelaide with that spell in the 2nd innings. McGrath was utter crud in the 1st innings (Same as Lee) and was too injured to bowl in the 2nd innings until Ponting brought him on to the tailenders.
No, the fact is Warne won us the game, not Lee, Lee bowled a good spell, but it was Warne who built up the pressure got the wickets, and killed the Poms, Lee supported him just like the other quicks did.
Fact
Cassius_Clay
13 Dec 2006, 18:45
Disagree, Warne won the game for us.
His second innings spell was much improved I'm glad to admit, but this is only one of two decent spells of bowling he has produced this summer. He needs to produce this, and much better, consistently to keep his place.
With Tait, Clark and Johnson all taking wickets in the PC this season I think Lee is aware of his need to improve too.
Anyway, all I am saying is that if Johnson does play and bowl well it will be an interesting selection meeting for Melbourne.
Sorry but you're wrong. Warne was always going to dominate on day 5. ALWAYS. Thats not to say he was going to win the game on his own because he couldnt. He needed someone at the end to rip through the middle order. I said it at the time that Lee's spell of bowling will decide whether we won the game or not and I was right. McGrath was rooted and Stuart Clark could only restrict the runs and couldnt get a wicket. If Lee had have failed to take a wicket, Australia wouldnt have gone close to winning.
Cassius_Clay
13 Dec 2006, 18:50
No, the fact is Warne won us the game, not Lee, Lee bowled a good spell, but it was Warne who built up the pressure got the wickets, and killed the Poms, Lee supported him just like the other quicks did.
Fact
Thats fine however as I said, Warne was always going to get wickets at one end as long as pressure was being put on at the other. No one thought Lee could have done the job and with McGrath injured and Clark not getting a wicket in his first spell the game looked to be a draw.
Sorry but you're wrong. Warne was always going to dominate on day 5. ALWAYS. Thats not to say he was going to win the game on his own because he couldnt. He needed someone at the end to rip through the middle order. I said it at the time that Lee's spell of bowling will decide whether we won the game or not and I was right. McGrath was rooted and Stuart Clark could only restrict the runs and couldnt get a wicket. If Lee had have failed to take a wicket, Australia wouldnt have gone close to winning.
Stop blowing your own bags muhammed.
Cassius_Clay
13 Dec 2006, 18:53
Stop blowing your own bags muhammed.
Its a fact.
Shouldnt you be posting about how crap Warne, McGrath and Hayden etc. are?
Grimreepah
13 Dec 2006, 18:54
Sorry but you're wrong. Warne was always going to dominate on day 5. ALWAYS. Thats not to say he was going to win the game on his own because he couldnt. He needed someone at the end to rip through the middle order. I said it at the time that Lee's spell of bowling will decide whether we won the game or not and I was right. McGrath was rooted and Stuart Clark could only restrict the runs and couldnt get a wicket. If Lee had have failed to take a wicket, Australia wouldnt have gone close to winning.
So because Warne was expected to take wickets his doesn't count:rolleyes:
Lee took 2 wickets - Flintoff and Jones, neither of whom are posing much of a threat with the bat at the moment, and both of whom IIRC got out to pretty ordinary shots.
It was an improved performance from Lee and his 2/35 was good, but to say that we wouldn't have won the Test without him is ridiculous.
Cassius_Clay
13 Dec 2006, 18:57
but to say that we wouldn't have won the Test without him is ridiculous.
Thats total bull******** and even the Lee haters would have to admit that.
How many overs did we have left? Wasnt it like 5? There was no way in hell that we would have won the game. Seriously, can't you see that?
Cassius_Clay
13 Dec 2006, 19:00
Lee took 2 wickets - Flintoff and Jones, neither of whom are posing much of a threat with the bat at the moment, and both of whom IIRC got out to pretty ordinary shots.
Okay.
If Lee didnt get them out, more than likely they both would have lasted another 5 overs and made 10-20 runs. Thats at an absolute minimum. Take the situation into account and we wouldnt have won.
I admit, both were pathetic shots and both balls weren't great however it wasnt the wicket balls that were so good about his bowling.
Don't think it would be the worse thing that could happen. Gives him a chance to get his heal cherry ripe for the Boxing Day Test, and gives either Tait or Johnson a gig in the big time.
Grimreepah
13 Dec 2006, 19:15
Thats total bull******** and even the Lee haters would have to admit that.
How many overs did we have left? Wasnt it like 5? There was no way in hell that we would have won the game. Seriously, can't you see that?
Firstly I'm not a Lee hater.
Secondly, if you are using the fact that it was a tight game to glorify Lee's performance, you are really clutching at straws. By that logic, everyone that makes even the slightest contribution is the match winner, because without them we wouldn't have won.
But in the context of "if anyone is to go, it should be Lee", which is where this conversation stems from, all that is relevant are his figures of 2/35, with the wickets of Flintoff and Jones. A not bad effort, but not the type of figures that demand selection, and he still has a long way to catch up if he wants to say that he has had a good series.
Cassius_Clay
13 Dec 2006, 19:22
Firstly I'm not a Lee hater.
Secondly, if you are using the fact that it was a tight game to glorify Lee's performance, you are really clutching at straws. By that logic, everyone that makes even the slightest contribution is the match winner, because without them we wouldn't have won.
But in the context of "if anyone is to go, it should be Lee", which is where this conversation stems from, all that is relevant are his figures of 2/35, with the wickets of Flintoff and Jones. A not bad effort, but not the type of figures that demand selection, and he still has a long way to catch up if he wants to say that he has had a good series.
but to say that we wouldn't have won the Test without him is ridiculous.
Thats the quote I'm referring to. Are you admitting you're wrong? If he didnt take a wicket, would we have won or not?
Grimreepah
13 Dec 2006, 19:26
If Lee didnt get them out, more than likely they both would have lasted another 5 overs and made 10-20 runs. Thats at an absolute minimum. Take the situation into account and we wouldnt have won.
You could say the same thing about McGrath getting the tailenders out. To assess Lee's performance you have to ask, if someone else was in the team instead of him, would they have done a better/worse job?
TheColeTrain
13 Dec 2006, 19:27
Thats the quote I'm referring to. Are you admitting you're wrong? If he didnt take a wicket, would we have won or not?
Really who is to know, whoever else was bowling could have taken the wickets. To say that Lee won it for us is ridiculous, Warne's bowling won it for us, just accept it:thumbsu:
Grimreepah
13 Dec 2006, 19:40
Thats the quote I'm referring to. Are you admitting you're wrong? If he didnt take a wicket, would we have won or not?
As I said, in a tight game every contribution is potentially 'the difference'. That includes, Warne, Lee, McGrath and Clark. But in terms of whether Lee should be retained it adds nothing to the discussion.
You are doing your best to focus discussion on his 2/35, but his 1/139 is just as relevant to his selection chances.
King Elvis
13 Dec 2006, 19:55
Quarterbrain said it would be a demotion, not an injury related decision if it occurred.
And I didn't think Quartermain could be any more stupid or ignorant than when he was commentating the footy, good to see him prove me wrong.
glenn mcgrath dropped? thats blasphemy
Agreed.
All of you 'people' saying he's close to being dropped have got to be ********ing kidding.
He basically won the game for us in Brisbane.
He struggled in Adelaide? Really?
He wasn't fit in Adelaide, and he was bowling on what every single person has said was a batting paradise, and you tossers are ready to swing the axe already?
Anyone who thinks Glenno is anywhere near being axed is both a disgrace and un-Australian.
crowsarethebest
13 Dec 2006, 19:57
McGrath is a champion. He'll bounce back. If he dropped... we are screwd. McGrath is not at his best.. but hey he'll bounce back. It's just that Mcgrath sets such a high standard.. that when after just like 1 match he fails everyone is callnig for his head.
scottywiper
13 Dec 2006, 19:58
Ponting quote: "Mitchell Johnson is 12th man".
Seems pretty clear to me.
bushranger
13 Dec 2006, 19:58
what a johnson done to get selected nothing
denton has taking wickets every game
King Elvis
13 Dec 2006, 20:03
what a johnson done to get selected nothing
denton has taking wickets every game
I guess Enough Rope is a pretty good show.
I think Clark outbowled him at GABBA. McGrath was pretty ordinary in the second dig there.
Agree, and was awful in Adelaide. But we wouldn't want JM to read this.:)
King Elvis
13 Dec 2006, 20:09
Agree, and was awful in Adelaide. But we wouldn't want JM to read this.:)
Absolute crap.
Won us the game in the first Innings.
WAS INJURED IN THE SECOND.
Crap figures in the first innings in Adelaide - whose weren't?
Second innings was always going to be the Warne show, and Lee actually managed to bowl a half decent spell, so McGrath wasn't really needed.
Disgraceful.
And I didn't think Quartermain could be any more stupid or ignorant than when he was commentating the footy, good to see him prove me wrong.
Agreed.
All of you 'people' saying he's close to being dropped have got to be ********ing kidding.
He basically won the game for us in Brisbane.
He struggled in Adelaide? Really?
He wasn't fit in Adelaide, and he was bowling on what every single person has said was a batting paradise, and you tossers are ready to swing the axe already?
Anyone who thinks Glenno is anywhere near being axed is both a disgrace and un-Australian.
I can't see how anyone can use McGrath's alleged injury as an excuse for his poor bowling in Adelaide. He declared himself 100% before the game. We had 2 viable replacements waiting in the wings and he knew it would be tough work on that wicket. He chose to go into the game so he was fully fit. In any case he wasn't limping or anything, just bowling pedestrian crud in that first innings and KP and co. exposed him with KP disdainfully walking down the wicket to him.
Absolute crap.
Won us the game in the first Innings.
WAS INJURED IN THE SECOND.
Crap figures in the first innings in Adelaide - whose weren't?
Second innings was always going to be the Warne show, and Lee actually managed to bowl a half decent spell, so McGrath wasn't really needed.
Disgraceful.
Well they actually opened with McGrath in the 2nd innings and he looked woeful. When Clark came on he looked like separating the openers - and he did. Clark's figures in the 1st innings in Adelaide were more than respectable considering the pitch and the fact that the bowlers at the other end often weren't able to place pressure on the batsmen. And Hoggard did all right as well. 7/107 is a lot better than 0/107.
And in Brisbane his 2nd innings bowling was ordinary. In the 1st innings he got the wickets but also with a bit of help from cracks in the pitch and injudicious shots from the likes of Strauss.
In the 2nd innings in Adelaide, Ponting only trusted him against the tail after his uninspiring opening spell. Even then his wickets (#10 and 11) were to dubious LBW decisions.
I said before the series, much to the chagrin and dismay of JM and others that I wasn't convinced McGrath would last the series. And I don't resile from that statement now. I still think that the jury on his form and longevity is still sitting.
King Elvis
13 Dec 2006, 20:24
I can't see how anyone can use McGrath's alleged injury as an excuse for his poor bowling in Adelaide. He declared himself 100% before the game. We had 2 viable replacements waiting in the wings and he knew it would be tough work on that wicket. He chose to go into the game so he was fully fit. In any case he wasn't limping or anything, just bowling pedestrian crud in that first innings and KP and co. exposed him with KP disdainfully walking down the wicket to him.
They carted us in the first Innings.
Warney got his worst ever figures didn't he?
Should we drop him too?
Most of our bowlers were rubbish in the first Innings, as were theres (Hoggard took a lot of wickets, but we still made a lot of runs)
And in Brisbane his 2nd innings bowling was ordinary. In the 1st innings he got the wickets but also with a bit of help from cracks in the pitch and injudicious shots from the likes of Strauss.
In the 2nd innings in Adelaide, Ponting only trusted him against the tail after his uninspiring opening spell. Even then his wickets (#10 and 11) were to dubious LBW decisions.
I said before the series, much to the chagrin and dismay of JM and others that I wasn't convinced McGrath would last the series. And I don't resile from that statement now. I still think that the jury on his form and longevity is still sitting.
He was injured in the second Innings.
And your typical crap about the first innings. Did the cracks magically disappear for every other bowler did they? It's no credit to the bowler when the batsman gets out playing a bad shot?
So he had a bad innings on a pitch where they made over 500, and the best bowler in the history of the game got belted as well.
And in the second Innings he took two wickets, Lee took two, Warney took 4 and Clark took what, one?
McGrath is nowhere near done, there is no reason for him to be.
He hasn't lost pace - he never had it to start with, and he can still land it where ever he wants 5/6 times.
Again, disgraceful and un-Australian.
Theseventhhamster
13 Dec 2006, 20:25
McGrath will be better than Lee until he retires, hell he may even out-last the pie chucker. Dropping him would be moronic.
King Elvis
13 Dec 2006, 20:28
McGrath will be better than Lee until he retires, hell he may even out-last the pie chucker. Dropping him would be moronic.
Best fast bowler in the history of the game, why some idiots think his wheels have fallen off due to a twelve month lay-off is beyond me.
Again, age won't rob him of any of the abilities that have made him so good.
Theseventhhamster
13 Dec 2006, 20:38
Best fast bowler in the history of the game, why some idiots think his wheels have fallen off due to a twelve month lay-off is beyond me.
Again, age won't rob him of any of the abilities that have made him so good.
I didn't see some of the great pacemen play but it's hard to imagine anyone being much better than the great man.
FWIW I think McGrath will last the series, but the ageing Australian side need to accept that selection is about WHAT THEY ARE DOING and not WHAT THEY HAVE DONE.
Glenn is on the way out, it is just a matter of how long he lasts. It may be 3 tests, it may be three years. As long as he is bowling well I don't care how long he plays for, but he needs to keep bowling well.
Apart from first innings at GABBA he has been disappointing this series. Doesn't matter if he was injured or not in Adelaide, he declared himself fit. If he wasn't fit then he shouldn't have played. If he wasn't fit then he put himself before the team. If he was fit then he needs to improve.
He has 3 tests now to stay healthy and PERFORM. The ball is in his court and I hope he rips the poms a new asshole tomorrow.
Grimreepah
13 Dec 2006, 20:42
I can't see how anyone can use McGrath's alleged injury as an excuse for his poor bowling in Adelaide. He declared himself 100% before the game. We had 2 viable replacements waiting in the wings and he knew it would be tough work on that wicket. He chose to go into the game so he was fully fit. In any case he wasn't limping or anything, just bowling pedestrian crud in that first innings and KP and co. exposed him with KP disdainfully walking down the wicket to him.
Dude, let it go. You're only saying this to try and back up your pre-Ashes predictions. McGrath has 9 wickets from 2 Tests on batsman friendly pitches and you should know that that is pretty good going.
King Elvis
13 Dec 2006, 20:45
Dude, let it go. You're only saying this to try and back up your pre-Ashes predictions. McGrath has 9 wickets from 2 Tests on batsman friendly pitches and you should know that that is pretty good going.
Romeo might understand this;
9 wickets + 2 wins > 2 centuries + 0 wins.
Romeo might understand this;
9 wickets + 2 wins > 2 centuries + 0 wins.
But KP owns McGrath - made him look second rate in Adelaide.
And cut out this injury nonsense.
You take the field and you're 100%.
If he knowingly did otherwise he not only deprived Johnson or Tait of a game and a fair chance of being a lot more penetrating but is selfish for putting himself ahead of the team.
If indeed he wasn't injured he looked pedestrian.
LIONS then DAYLIGHT
13 Dec 2006, 22:36
And I didn't think Quartermain could be any more stupid or ignorant than when he was commentating the footy, good to see him prove me wrong.
Agreed.
All of you 'people' saying he's close to being dropped have got to be ********ing kidding.
He basically won the game for us in Brisbane.
He struggled in Adelaide? Really?
He wasn't fit in Adelaide, and he was bowling on what every single person has said was a batting paradise, and you tossers are ready to swing the axe already?
Anyone who thinks Glenno is anywhere near being axed is both a disgrace and un-Australian.
That my friends is the posting i like to see on Bigfooty.
True and consice
About time the rookies who know ******** all about cricket on BF (99% of posters) get told some harsh truths.
That they have no idea and that they should stick to getting sloshed on sundary arvo playing 4th grade and smoking on the boundary, thinking that they actually know the game of cricket.
ManWithNoName
13 Dec 2006, 22:44
But KP owns McGrath - made him look second rate in Adelaide.
And cut out this injury nonsense.
You take the field and you're 100%.
If he knowingly did otherwise he not only deprived Johnson or Tait of a game and a fair chance of being a lot more penetrating but is selfish for putting himself ahead of the team.
If indeed he wasn't injured he looked pedestrian.
So should Flintoff be dropped?
Romeo is still pissed off because he listened to the "experts" and actually believed them when they said McGrath was past it. He's been on the backfoot ever since that 6/50 and has yet to make a sound case. Really is quite terrible, he's lost any credibility he may have had.
yeh i think it might actually be true...
i don't mind, bring on johnson:thumbsu:
Romeo is still pissed off because he listened to the "experts" and actually believed them when they said McGrath was past it. He's been on the backfoot ever since that 6/50 and has yet to make a sound case. Really is quite terrible, he's lost any credibility he may have had.
He's bowled in 4 innings and only looked good in one, the first innings of the first in Brisbane. Bear in mind there he was bowling to a nervous batting lineup, the top 7 of whom were basically having their first test innings in Australia. He was helped by cracks and poor shot selection from the batsmen. What has he done since?
Cassius_Clay
14 Dec 2006, 06:49
As I said, in a tight game every contribution is potentially 'the difference'. That includes, Warne, Lee, McGrath and Clark. But in terms of whether Lee should be retained it adds nothing to the discussion.
You are doing your best to focus discussion on his 2/35, but his 1/139 is just as relevant to his selection chances.
Bye McGrath then. He's had 1 good innings with the ball, 2 pathetic innings and 1 innings where he did nothing.
FWIW, McGrath is a selfish prick who needs to be told what to do instead of him telling the selectors what to do. He was injured before the last test yet he played. If anyone else was injured the selectors wouldnt have picked em
So should Flintoff be dropped?
Not a fair comparison, and you know it.
Flintoff is their captain and inspiration. In any case he's an all-rounder whose sore ankle shouldn't affect his batting too much. And regardless of him being possibly less than 100% fit, in all innings he has looked dangerous and the bowler the Aussies most fear. He has been penetrating and has taken important wickets.
The other obvious aspect is that England have not got a readymade replacement for him. We had Tait and Johnson who were raring to go in Adelaide and would have been more venomous and added more variety to the attack on a flat track with McGrath theoretically a tad unfit.
He's bowled in 4 innings and only looked good in one, the first innings of the first in Brisbane. Bear in mind there he was bowling to a nervous batting lineup, the top 7 of whom were basically having their first test innings in Australia. He was helped by cracks and poor shot selection from the batsmen. What has he done since?
You have learnt so much from all these articles. Gold Star :thumbsu: . This is plagiarised surely.
red+black
14 Dec 2006, 08:45
I predict Sydney will be the last Test match for McGrath.
I can't see him hanging on for 11 months to continue his Test career.
I expect him to retire after the World Cup.
I predict Sydney will be the last Test match for McGrath.
I can't see him hanging on for 11 months to continue his Test career.
I expect him to retire after the World Cup.
When would he announce something like that?
His ego is too big IMO to step down gracefully, he'll need to be pushed by the selectors.
I think he'll try and get back to England for the next Ashes. I think Warne will be there.
Grimreepah
14 Dec 2006, 09:15
Bye McGrath then. He's had 1 good innings with the ball, 2 pathetic innings and 1 innings where he did nothing.
FWIW, McGrath is a selfish prick who needs to be told what to do instead of him telling the selectors what to do. He was injured before the last test yet he played. If anyone else was injured the selectors wouldnt have picked em
No. McGrath is someone who will do anything to play for his country, and the selectors will do anything to get him into the team, because they know how valuable he is.
Don't blame McGrath. Everyone knows McGrath will declare himself fit even if he's got a broken leg. You can call that selfish, but IMO that's exactly the attitude that I would be encouraging. It is the medical staff who should be making that decision, and it is they who should take the blame.
No. McGrath is someone who will do anything to play for his country, and the selectors will do anything to get him into the team, because they know how valuable he is.
Don't blame McGrath. Everyone knows McGrath will declare himself fit even if he's got a broken leg. You can call that selfish, but IMO that's exactly the attitude that I would be encouraging. It is the medical staff who should be making that decision, and it is they should take the blame.
No, if a player is injured they owe it to their team mates to not play. Cricket is a team game not an individual one.
No, if a player is injured they owe it to their team mates to not play. Cricket is a team game not an individual one.
No, if a player is injured they owe it to their team mates to not play. Cricket is a team game not an individual one.
Well said and particularly where the team already has a superfluity of 'aged' players in the team and is looking at introducing some young talent. It could have helped either Tait or Johnson's future development by exposure in Adelaide. McGrath is on record as saying he might go on until he's forty. I hope the selectors have a say in this.
Another thing people seem to forget is that he's lost pace.
King Elvis
14 Dec 2006, 14:09
Well said and particularly where the team already has a superfluity of 'aged' players in the team and is looking at introducing some young talent. It could have helped either Tait or Johnson's future development by exposure in Adelaide. McGrath is on record as saying he might go on until he's forty. I hope the selectors have a say in this.
Another thing people seem to forget is that he's lost pace.
Hard to lose something you never had.
King Elvis
14 Dec 2006, 18:23
Go Fellate yourselves!
King Elvis
15 Dec 2006, 12:01
Another wicket for the broken down old hack.
King Elvis
18 Dec 2006, 21:18
Everyone who posted in this thread, bagging the greatest fast bowler in the history of the universe, give yourself an uppercut.
Grimreepah
18 Dec 2006, 23:21
Everyone who posted in this thread, bagging the greatest fast bowler in the history of the universe, give yourself an uppercut.
Yes Romeo, that includes you;)
frankrizzo
19 Dec 2006, 00:48
the old man has outbowled every englisman so far.
age is just a number anyway, simon jones for example might be 28 but he's injured so many times he might as well be 60.
same with watson, who cares how young he is? mcgrtah is fitter.
Grimreepah
6 Jan 2007, 18:59
But KP owns McGrath
How's McGrath doing? Apparently I knew nothing by suggesting that he was in decline. He's looked very ordinary. I thought Tait should have replaced him and I think I was right.
Glenn McGrath's Ashes campaign: 21 wickets at 23.90.
Over the 5 Tests Pieterson scored 88 runs from 186 balls off McGrath, and McGrath got him out 3 times. That is an average of 29.33, at a strike rate of 62, and an economy rate of 2.83.
I think you were wrong.
RoosterLad
6 Jan 2007, 19:15
Grimreepah that is an awesome stat to dig up. Top effort son.
carntheroos4eva
6 Jan 2007, 19:39
Ten sports news tonight in Melbourne reported a rumour was going around suggesting that Johnson would come into the third test side at the expense of McGrath.
Would people want to see this?
Can't see it myself, but stranger things have happened.
that's utter bulltish.
Why would they do that?
:thumbsd: