They're a bunch of third-graders: Jeff Thomson

[aussie1st]

CRICKET legend Jeff Thomson has blasted Australia's bowling stocks, saying the South Africa will continue to feast on an attack he rates no better than a "third-grade club side".

With Ricky Ponting's pace options at crisis point following Stuart Clark's injury setback last Thursday, Thomson believes Australia will struggle to take the required 20 wickets to win a Test on their tour of South Africa.

Thomson took particular aim at off-spinner Nathan Hauritz, tour hopeful Shaun Tait and spearhead Mitchell Johnson.

Australia head abroad in a fortnight confronting the grim reality that not one of their frontline quicks - including Johnson, Peter Siddle and Doug Bollinger - has bowled a ball in Test cricket on South African soil.

Clark was the exception, having routed the Proteas with 20 wickets at 15.85 in his maiden Test series in 2006.

But his elbow injury has left Australia at the mercy of a South African side already buoyed by the absence of Brett Lee, who is recovering from stress fractures in his foot.

Thomson was dismayed when Australia took just two wickets in their crushing one-day loss last Monday and predicted more pain for Ponting's bowlers in South Africa. The bowlers fared little better in Perth on Friday night.

"From what I saw of the Australian attack the other day, what they bowled was absolute crap.

"Every one of them was terrible," said Thomson, Dennis Lillee's partner in crime during a career that reaped 200 Test scalps at 28.01.

"It looked like South Africa was playing a third-grade club attack. I'm not the only one who thinks that. What I saw the other night was just gun-barrel bowling. There was no creativity.

"Nobody likes bowling on a flat wicket with no swing, but that wicket (in Adelaide) the other night showed how wanting our bowling attack is.

"You have to be able to perform when the wicket isn't doing too much and South Africa showed them up the other night.

"The South African wickets are very similar to here, but they'd want to have something up their sleeve because at the moment how are they going to take 20 wickets to win a Test? We took two in 50 overs the other day, so maybe if we bowl 250 overs we'll get 10 wickets."

National selectors are expected to take one spinner to South Africa but Thomson insists they can't pick Hauritz.

He also canned Tait's selection prospects and said Johnson was showing signs of burnout after a gruelling summer in which he carried Australia's Test attack.

"You can't pick Shaun Tait, seriously. He runs out of puff in a limited-overs match. No way," Thomson said.

"They better not be taking that refugee from Queensland that plays in Sydney. Nathan Hauritz should be called Nathan Horror. Does he spin the ball? They have to take Jason Krejza, at least he turns the ball.

"Mitchell Johnson looks tired. He's bowling so round-arm at the moment you may as well call him Mitchell Malinga (a reference to Sri Lankan slinger Lasith Malinga)."

Thomson hopes selectors take Tasmanian quick Ben Hilfenhaus and Queensland's Ashley Noffke on tour.


http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,8659,24988964-23212,00.html

Wow someone actually saying what we think. Was going to point that Hilfy was swinging it but he didn't attack him.

[Cleavy]

The truth hurts!

[TassieSaint]

lol. funny, but I agree with it all.

[foxdoog50]

HAHHA Wow There you go hahaha

[bus24]

Can't disagree with any of that. Bang on.

[HawkieTalkie]

Yeah Godd onya, Thommo. Go away now. please.

Biggest "story" is the lazy journalist who rang old "dial-a-quote".

Can't believe what sports journalism in this country has come to.

[Blue Dimension]

Everything he says is true. I agree with it all.

Krejza should tour, along with Noffers, and Hilf should be in the side ahead of Bollinger.

[didak04]

Everything he says is true. I agree with it all.

Krejza should tour, along with Noffers, and Hilf should be in the side ahead of Bollinger.

I agree to an extent.

Krejza is very overrated though. McGain needs to tour if fit.

[Blue Dimension]

I agree to an extent.

Krejza is very overrated though. McGain needs to tour if fit.

He's overrated but he should still tour. He killed it in India, has one bad Test in Aus and is dropped. Hardly fair.

I would say McGain is MASSIVELY overated. He's had one good season, he's 36, and had minimal experience at FC level. He's also underdone on top of that. He's also gone wicketless thus far in his comeback match for Victoria and has gone at 4.5 an over.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

I dont know what the fuss is with Krezja, he may be able to turn it substantially but it seems that he doesn't have an arm ball, which is a pretty crucial delivery for a right arm offie to have. With Krezja it just seems to be turn it as much as possible. Im afraid that's not good enough when you consider his poor control.

Good batsmen will get used to the turn and will start to play him with ease especially when they know that he doesnt have an arm ball and that he doesnt try and vary the amount of turn he puts on the ball. As an offspinner not being able to do that is a pretty limiting factor.

[Made4September]

Yeah Godd onya, Thommo. Go away now. please.

Biggest "story" is the lazy journalist who rang old "dial-a-quote".

Can't believe what sports journalism in this country has come to.

He's been Mr "Dial/Rent-a-Quote" for years, and nothing will change...

Come 12 months down the track, when (hypothetically) Mitchell Johnson is on fire, and Siddle/Hilfy and co have really broken through big time... he will be " I've been saying for years that these guys have what it takes"

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

To be honest, Jeff Thompson is just making an arse of himself, much the same way Andrew Symonds did on that radio call. Funny how everyone isnt getting stuck into Jeffrey are they?

Calling Nathan Hauritz "Nathan Horror" is not even the slightest bit funny, no doubt Thommo thought he was some sort of genius to come up with that.

[Cousin Jed]

I would say McGain is MASSIVELY overated. He's had one good season, he's 36, and had minimal experience at FC level. He's also underdone on top of that. He's also gone wicketless thus far in his comeback match for Victoria and has gone at 4.5 an over.

Ohhh controversial - won't you get kicked out of Victoria for saying this? :D

FWIW I wholeheartedly agree.

He's been Mr "Dial/Rent-a-Quote" for years, and nothing will change...


Not really - They generally go to Thommo only a couple of times a year.

Rodney Hogg on the other hand....pretty sure he was quoted in articles every day for nearly 2 weeks just recently.

[Bananayard]

To be honest, Jeff Thompson is just making an arse of himself, much the same way Andrew Symonds did on that radio call. Funny how everyone isnt getting stuck into Jeffrey are they?

You ********. Symonds gets paid to play cricket. Not make an arse of himself while drunk on radio. He's a disgrace and only bogans like you would think otherwise.

Everything Thommo said was absolutely spot on.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

McGain over-rated? Compared to ****ing who?

Hauritz or Krezja. Give me a break.

I love the way you get posters on here on say "player X cant bowl" but they don't offer alternatives to be picked.

**** me, McGain hasnt taken a wicket from his 12 overs and has gone for a little bit in his comeback game. Wooh, ****, i better have a lie down.

[Jimthegreat]

He's overrated but he should still tour. He killed it in India, has one bad Test in Aus and is dropped. Hardly fair.

I would say McGain is MASSIVELY overated. He's had one good season, he's 36, and had minimal experience at FC level. He's also underdone on top of that. He's also gone wicketless thus far in his comeback match for Victoria and has gone at 4.5 an over.As you said, comeback game. Not easy a comeback game as a leg-spinner. He'll be right by SA.

What are the options? Krejza's current on 1/153 from 35 overs, Hautitz got 3/40 but is never going to worry anyone. McGain has be at least pretty good and is alot better than anyone else and can apply some pressure

As for Thommo....spot on. Bowling killed us against SA in Test and ODIs.

[didak04]

He's overrated but he should still tour. He killed it in India, has one bad Test in Aus and is dropped. Hardly fair.

I would say McGain is MASSIVELY overated. He's had one good season, he's 36, and had minimal experience at FC level. He's also underdone on top of that. He's also gone wicketless thus far in his comeback match for Victoria and has gone at 4.5 an over.

Krejza played one good match on a dust bowl pitch in India. His axing was warranted. Without massive assistance from the pitch he is a liability because he is very expensive.

Of all the spinners in the country McGain is the one most likely to cause South Africa any headaches as Leggies are harder to play than offies.

He may not have set the world on fire in his comeback match but Krejza got spanked against NSW too, 1/153 at close to 5 per over, not exactly demanding selection.

[mediumsizered]

He's overrated but he should still tour. He killed it in India, has one bad Test in Aus and is dropped. Hardly fair.

I would say McGain is MASSIVELY overated. He's had one good season, he's 36, and had minimal experience at FC level. He's also underdone on top of that. He's also gone wicketless thus far in his comeback match for Victoria and has gone at 4.5 an over.

Krejza continues to bleed runs at an alarming rate, conceding 150 runs for 1 wicket in the current Shield match. Until he can become more controlled in his bowling, he will have no value at Test level.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

You ********. Symonds gets paid to play cricket. Not make an arse of himself while drunk on radio. He's a disgrace and only bogans like you would think otherwise.

Everything Thommo said was absolutely spot on.

Yeah, bring out on the old chestnut. He gets paid to play cricket. He represents Australia. Got any more love?

So Thommo can do exactly the same thing, make an arse of himself on radio or the media, and you lot lap it up. Dont you see the double standards here love?

Symonds did the wrong thing sure, i agree with that. I dont agree with assertions however that it means his not in a "fit state of mind". Thommo does the same thing here and no-one blinks twice, it's got **** all to do with someone being paid to play cricket.

If people are going to justify Symonds radio call as evidence that his head isnt right then what about Thommo?

[Blue Dimension]

Ohhh controversial - won't you get kicked out of Victoria for saying this? :D

FWIW I wholeheartedly agree.

I probably will, they're hunting me down as i type this :eek::p

Nah, look i understand that Australia are desperate for a spinner but i don't believe Mcgain is the answer. I may be wrong but that's where i'm at.

Krezja continues to bleed runs at an alarming rate, conceding 150 runs for 1 wicket in the current Shield match. Until he can become more controlled in his bowling, he will have no value at Test level.

The pitch was a road and no other bowlers performed any better.

I'm not saying he's been great my any means but Mcgain hasn't been either. Everyone is acting as if he's the messiah and it's sickening. I bet half of the people on this forum have ever seen him bowl!

Krejza played one good match on a dust bowl pitch in India. His axing was warranted. Without massive assistance from the pitch he is a liability because he is very expensive.

Of all the spinners in the country McGain is the one most likely to cause South Africa any headaches as Leggies are harder to play than offies.

He may not have set the world on fire in his comeback match but Krejza got spanked against NSW too, 1/153 at close to 5 per over, not exactly demanding selection.

I wouldn't go with the 36 year old with hardly any experience in FC cricket, over the guy who stood up on the international stage, is 10 years his juniour and has room for growth. But that's just me.

[Jimthegreat]

I probably will, they're hunting me down as i type this :eek::p

Nah, look i understand that Australia are desperate for a spinner but i don't believe Mcgain is the answer. I may be wrong but that's where i'm at.Who do we pick then? We're not good enough to go 4 quicks.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Fine, we'll take where you are at under advisment.

[Cousin Jed]

McGain over-rated? Compared to ****ing who?

Hauritz or Krezja. Give me a break.

I love the way you get posters on here on say "player X cant bowl" but they don't offer alternatives to be picked.

**** me, McGain hasnt taken a wicket from his 12 overs and has gone for a little bit in his comeback game. Wooh, ****, i better have a lie down.

You have become a caricature of yourself.

Yeah, bring out on the old chestnut. He gets paid to play cricket. He represents Australia. Got any more love?

So Thommo can do exactly the same thing, make an arse of himself on radio or the media, and you lot lap it up. Dont you see the double standards here love?

Symonds did the wrong thing sure, i agree with that. I dont agree with assertions however that it means his not in a "fit state of mind". Thommo does the same thing here and no-one blinks twice, it's got **** all to do with someone being paid to play cricket.

If people are going to justify Symonds radio call as evidence that his head isnt right then what about Thommo?

One of the dumbest posts in the history of bigfooty.

[Jimthegreat]

Yeah, bring out on the old chestnut. He gets paid to play cricket. He represents Australia. Got any more love?

So Thommo can do exactly the same thing, make an arse of himself on radio or the media, and you lot lap it up. Dont you see the double standards here love?

Symonds did the wrong thing sure, i agree with that. I dont agree with assertions however that it means his not in a "fit state of mind". Thommo does the same thing here and no-one blinks twice, it's got **** all to do with someone being paid to play cricket.

If people are going to justify Symonds radio call as evidence that his head isnt right then what about Thommo?

Thought Roy's situation was overplayed for an off the cuff "tongue in cheek" comment . An example of people seeing too much into things so trivial.

Other than being personal, which he didn't need to be (different context to Roy) Thommo was spot on.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Im not saying was Thommo was wrong, even though Thommo strikes me as one of those personalities who would say that he caught a 80 cm fish when it's only 50 cm, if you know what i mean.

I just find it a bit strange that Symo can make a radio call and people use it to justify Symonds "head isn't right" and Thommo can do a similar thing and people not blink twice. It has nothing to do with being paid to play cricket.

Cousin Jed, why don't you actually address the point instead of just spouting crap. Probably has something to do with the fact that deep down you know im right and you just pass it off with the daily "worst post ever in history of BF" quote.

**** off.

[Blue Dimension]

Who do you pick then? We're not good enough to go 4 quicks.

I would go with 4 quicks and a spinner, but ensure that the tail is able to bat. It's unorthodox but we're not going to win a game with the attack we've got. We don't have an outstanding spinner, but still need one, and hence why i'd have the 5 pronged attack.

Some will argue the 4 bowlers should be good enough to take 20 wickets but any spinner we pick will not be up to the standard we expect or currently require.

McGain over-rated? Compared to ****ing who?

Hauritz or Krezja. Give me a break.

I love the way you get posters on here on say "player X cant bowl" but they don't offer alternatives to be picked.

**** me, McGain hasnt taken a wicket from his 12 overs and has gone for a little bit in his comeback game. Wooh, ****, i better have a lie down.

Overrated? Since when does someone have to be compared to another to be overrated? It's got nothing to do with it.

So Symonds and Mcgain in the same team at international level, both underdone and haven't had any sort of success (thus far) in their comeback matches. Yeah. that's really smart.

Excuse me while i take a lie down! :thumbsd:

As you said, comeback game. Not easy a comeback game as a leg-spinner. He'll be right by SA.

What are the options? Krejza's current on 1/153 from 35 overs, Hautitz got 3/40 but is never going to worry anyone. McGain has be at least pretty good and is alot better than anyone else and can apply some pressure

As for Thommo....spot on. Bowling killed us against SA in Test and ODIs.

I'd still go with the guy who's been able to take a game by the throat on the international stage.

If McGain was in peak fitness and performing (like he was prior to the India tour) then yes, it should be considered, but at this point in time I doubt if he can perform to the standard we are looking for. Hell, all i want is for Aus to do well, and if he's able to do it then i'd be the first one to step back and say i was wrong, but i have my doubts.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

I never said Symonds, i said that he should play cricket for Australia again, after his form at the Gabba i wouldnt pick him for the tests.

McGain is the best spinner we have got. Therefore he plays. Pretty simple.

[Cousin Jed]

Im not saying was Thommo was wrong, even though Thommo strikes me as one of those personalities who would say that he caught a 80 cm fish when it's only 50 cm, if you know what i mean.

I just find it a bit strange that Symo can make a radio call and people use it to justify Symonds "head isn't right" and Thommo can do a similar thing and people not blink twice. It has nothing to do with being paid to play cricket.

Cousin Jed, why don't you actually address the point instead of just spouting crap. Probably has something to do with the fact that deep down you know im right and you just pass it off with the daily "worst post ever in history of BF" quote.

**** off.

Because you're not.

When Symonds speaks he represents not just Andrew Symonds but his employer - Cricket Australia. Andrew Symonds has a history of trouble and is trying to prove to people he is not a drunken ******** who would rather go fishing or get pissed than play cricket. So he gets pissed and goes on Radio and slags off other cricketers. They day before his comeback game.

When Jeff Thomson speaks he represents Jeff Thomson. Thomson doesn't need to prove that he would rather play for Australia than get drunk. He was merely offering criticisms of the current Australian bowlers Etc etc

[Blue Dimension]

I never said Symonds, i said that he should play cricket for Australia again, after his form at the Gabba i wouldnt pick him for the tests.

McGain is the best spinner we have got. Therefore he plays. Pretty simple.

I would say that coming back from injury, that he may not be in the form to produce what he has done previously. But that's just me.

God i hope he does though, i don't have anything against any player, as all i want is for Aus to do well. I just don't believe he's the guy for the job, that's all.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Because you're not.

When Symonds speaks he represents not just Andrew Symonds but his employer - Cricket Australia. Andrew Symonds has a history of trouble and is trying to prove to people he is not a drunken ******** who would rather go fishing or get pissed than play cricket. So he gets pissed and goes on Radio and slags off other cricketers. They day before his comeback game.

When Jeff Thomson speaks he represents Jeff Thomson. Thomson doesn't need to prove that he would rather play for Australia than get drunk. He was merely offering criticisms of the current Australian bowlers Etc etc

Thats not the point who Symonds is representing, that all sounds high and mighty though, well done.

I dont see how Symonds having a few beers and then taking an interview is representative of him displaying the attitude that he doesnt give a ****? It doesn't, but people are trying to say it does.

Attitude like missing a team meeting or missing a bus displays that someone couldnt care less. Having a few beers over dinner and then taking a radio call where he has a slight misdemanour is not evidence of "someones head not being right, or not giving a stuff". Good try though. Cricketers drink during test matchs, you saying that he drunk a day before his comeback game means shit to me, but you lot try and build it up as some massive issue that proves Symonds doesnt care. Once again, good try.

I have pointed out the double standards here, that is all. I have never said Symonds wasnt an idiot for saying what he did. What i did say was that the incident is not proof that Symonds has relapsed, when most said it was "evidence" that Symonds head wasnt right. IT has nothing to do with who he represents. It is purely a case of judging whether someone is in the right frame of mind from a radio interview. Of course, it is impossible to tell from a radio interview but it doesnt stop flogs from doing it.

Thommo makes a similar arse of himself but people lap it up and then try and justify it by saying that Symonds is employed by CA. That has **** all to do with it.

Double Standards are rife.

[Blue Dimension]

I dont see how Symonds having a few beers and then taking an interview is representative of him displaying the attitude that he doesnt give a ****? It doesn't, but people are trying to say it does.

Because Symonds has an alcohol problem for starters. That's pretty common knowledge.

So he goes and gets drunk before a practice match in which is meant to be part of his preparation for International representation.

There's no dedication there, this is what people are saying. He of all people should be working hard to ensure he can get his form back up to what is expected considering his lack of runs in all levels of cricket.

[aussie1st]

If Symonds did that radio interview when he was retired then nothing would have been made of it because what are the media going to do? Call for his head, ask for him to be sacked? He would have been retired so all they would have done was post the quotes of what he said just like they have done with Thompson. People on here wouldn't really care if he was drinking or that he made some stupid comments because again it has no effect on the thing we are discussing on this forum i.e cricket.

[Jimthegreat]

I would go with 4 quicks and a spinner, but ensure that the tail is able to bat. It's unorthodox but we're not going to win a game with the attack we've got. We don't have an outstanding spinner, but still need one, and hence why i'd have the 5 pronged attack.

Some will argue the 4 bowlers should be good enough to take 20 wickets but any spinner we pick will not be up to the standard we expect or currently require.



Overrated? Since when does someone have to be compared to another to be overrated? It's got nothing to do with it.

So Symonds and Mcgain in the same team at international level, both underdone and haven't had any sort of success (thus far) in their comeback matches. Yeah. that's really smart.

Excuse me while i take a lie down! :thumbsd:



I'd still go with the guy who's been able to take a game by the throat on the international stage.

If McGain was in peak fitness and performing (like he was prior to the India tour) then yes, it should be considered, but at this point in time I doubt if he can perform to the standard we are looking for. Hell, all i want is for Aus to do well, and if he's able to do it then i'd be the first one to step back and say i was wrong, but i have my doubts.4 quicks is ok but can that bat 6. Not as if we're going well there and will be against the best pace in the world on their own track. If your top 3 quicks can't do it the next best is unlikely to help much. Having said that Ranga has a"6 for" against South Australia but if he struggles at no.6 then it's no point. Great if he does though.

I my own belief is Noffke, Johnson, Hilfenhaus and McGain are alot more likely to bowl sides out than what we had during the Test series. That's a decent line-up. Our attack there was terrible. If we could take that Indian track around I'd take Krezja but other than that I don't want to know.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Because Symonds has an alcohol problem for starters. That's pretty common knowledge.

So he goes and gets drunk before a practice match in which is meant to be part of his preparation for International representation.

There's no dedication there, this is what people are saying. He of all people should be working hard to ensure he can get his form back up to what is expected considering his lack of runs in all levels of cricket.

So what? He never said that he was going to give up the drink.

Are the people who drink during test matchs displaying a lack of dedication?

YOu keep skirting around that issue, i wonder why?

[Blue Dimension]

So what? He never said that he was going to give up the drink.

Are the people who drink during test matchs displaying a lack of dedication?

YOu keep skirting around that issue, i wonder why?

It's not about giving up the drink, but it's about knowing when it's appropriate to do so. Getting smashed the day before a preparation game is showing lack of dedication.

These players play for their country and get paid to do so, and hence should be devoting themself to what they do.

But you seem to think it's ok to not prepare in an appropriate manner. It's not good enough, simple.

And yeah, players go and get smashed during Test Matches, ok :thumbsd:

This thread isn't about Symonds anyway, there's a thread for that.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Was Symonds smashed?

He went to bed at 9pm and was one of the first to arrive for the game, hungover free.

Symonds isnt the most eloquent or articulate speaker, i dont think he was "smashed" as you put it. He had been drinking but he wasnt smashed. People instand of using the phrase " under the influence" us the term "smashed".

I have read numerous articles from cricketers outlining that people do drink during test matchs. They dont get smashed obviously, but Symonds wasnt smashed.

MY point is very clear, Symonds behaviour on radio was disappointing but it is not evidence that he has relapsed. It is far from it. Many people are trying to say that it's evidence that his a "angry man" and a "troubled soul".

Right, thats fine to take that approach. But Thommo does a similar thing and its lapped up. Can you understand where i am coming from here?

The fact Symonds is employed by CA is beside the point. Deep down i suscept that you know that there is a double standard here and you are trying to use the old chestnuts to proof otherwise.

Symonds wasn't smashed, he had a few beers but he wasnt drunk or hammered. He made a slip up but it doesnt point to any deeper problems.

[blackhead&boil]

So what? He never said that he was going to give up the drink.

Are the people who drink during test matchs displaying a lack of dedication?

YOu keep skirting around that issue, i wonder why?


alcoholics are like drowning people. they drag everyone down with them. his attitude and ill-discipline are not exactly the kind of example that cricket australia need to be encouraging right now with this new bunch of cricketers coming through...

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Symonds isnt an alcoholic you clown.

People are clawing at a number of chestnuts and it is embrassing to be honest.

[blackhead&boil]

Symonds isnt an alcoholic you clown.

People are clawing at a number of chestnuts and it is embrassing to be honest.

he's admitted to having a drinking problem, and he certainly seems to not be in control of his drinking, even when there has been a lot of public speculation about it. didn't he make some kind of promise during a press conference that he was going to be much more careful about his drinking in the future? well, that certainly didn't happen. there have been numerous incidents across his career involving drink. you'd think he would have learnt some kind of a lesson by now.


you're right, it's embrassing (sic)...

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Well so admitting to having a "drinking problem" equates to being an alcoholic?

Rather Symonds said that AT TIMES he wasnt a pleasate person to be around after having a few drinks. Rather he could become argumentative and abusive even aggresive after having a few drinks, especially after the Singh incident at the SCG last year.

That does not equate to be an alcoholic, there is a distinct and obvious difference. If you can realise that then im not going to bother arguing.

With his careful drinking he ment the decision to choose where to drink (Ie, not in a popular Brisbane pub on Sunday afternoon). People take little things and morph them into things they are not just to suit their flawed arguments.

Carry on.

[blackhead&boil]

Well so admitting to having a "drinking problem" equates to being an alcoholic?

Rather Symonds said that AT TIMES he wasnt a pleasate person to be around after having a few drinks. Rather he could become argumentative and abusive even aggresive after having a few drinks, especially after the Singh incident at the SCG last year.

That does not equate to be an alcoholic, there is a distinct and obvious difference. If you can realise that then im not going to bother arguing.

With his careful drinking he ment the decision to choose where to drink (Ie, not in a popular Brisbane pub on Sunday afternoon). People take little things and morph them into things they are not just to suit their flawed arguments.

Carry on.

do you think that's the whole story, then? each of those examples in isolation doesn't mean much, but all of them together over a sustained period of time suggests that there is something to worry about. here are a few symptoms of alchoholism:



tolerance, meaning that a person becomes accustomed to a particular dose of alcohol, and must increase the dose in order to obtain the desired effect
withdrawal, meaning that a person experiences unpleasant physical and psychological symptoms when he or she does not drink alcohol
the tendency to drink more alcohol than one intends (once an alcoholic starts to drink, he or she finds it difficult to stop)
being unable to avoid drinking or stop drinking once started
having large blocks of time taken up by alcohol use
choosing to drink at the expense of other important tasks or activities
drinking despite evidence of negative effects on one's health, relationships, education, or job



most of those we can't make a judgement on from our living room, but recent behaviour certainly indicates the last one, at least. 3 and 4 are a possibility, too. the rest we can only speculate on, but there is nothing there that suggests to me that it could be entirely ruled out as a possibility...

[bus24]

How did this become anything to do with Andrew Symonds and his drinking issues?

****ing chinese whispers in 'ere.

[Cleavy]

if our bowling attack are 3rd-graders, what grade is our batting attack? :o

[blackhead&boil]

How did this become anything to do with Andrew Symonds and his drinking issues?

****ing chinese whispers in 'ere.


http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showpost.php?p=13576574&postcount=14


I agree, every thread seems to drift off topic way too easily...

[Kram81]

Thomson is a can short of a six pack.

[The Reaper]

4 quicks is ok but can that bat 6. Not as if we're going well there and will be against the best pace in the world on their own track. If your top 3 quicks can't do it the next best is unlikely to help much. Having said that Ranga has a"6 for" against South Australia but if he struggles at no.6 then it's no point. Great if he does though.

I my own belief is Noffke, Johnson, Hilfenhaus and McGain are alot more likely to bowl sides out than what we had during the Test series. That's a decent line-up. Our attack there was terrible. If we could take that Indian track around I'd take Krezja but other than that I don't want to know.

That is the best attack I think we can play

With Noffke and Johnson reasonable with the bat we could play haddin at 6 and McDonald at 7.

His 6/68 looks good on that wicket

[mediumsizered]

So what? He never said that he was going to give up the drink.

Are the people who drink during test matchs displaying a lack of dedication?
YOu keep skirting around that issue, i wonder why?

First of all, who are these players who drink during Test matches (& please don't mention the long retired 'Funky' Miller)? Secondly, these players that allegedly drink during Test matches (if they exist), do they have a history of missing team meetings & training sessions, getting in fights, making a dill of themselves on radio whilst drunk, getting wasted before a ODI?

Realistically there is nothing wrong with a cricketer having a drink during Test matches, if they do it responsibly & present themselves in the best possible condition & most importantly don't miss team meetings or training sessions, don't get into fights & don't make idiots of themself on the radio.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

I give up, i really have.

I have made my view clear, Symonds made an idiot of himself on radio, sure. I accept that.

It does not indicate he has relapsed however, which most people are trying to say.

That is all. Symonds has done the time for missing meetings and what not. This is not in that league, despite what people say. He hasn't demonstrated his not committed by making a poor remark on radio.

If he was in form right now he'd be picked. The radio incident wouldn't enter the frame.

[Blue Dimension]

I give up, i really have.

I have made my view clear, Symonds made an idiot of himself on radio, sure. I accept that.

It does not indicate he has relapsed however, which most people are trying to say.

That is all. Symonds has done the time for missing meetings and what not. This is not in that league, despite what people say. He hasn't demonstrated his not committed by making a poor remark on radio.

No, what people are trying to say is that his dedication is not where it should be, and that is a solid point.

If he was in form right now he'd be picked. The radio incident wouldn't enter the frame.

Maybe he'd be in form if he took his preparation seriously.

[Adelaide Hawk]

Just a word on Jeffrey Robert Thomson. He was quick, damned quick, and most of us remember his thunderbolts and spurts of brilliance. I was a big Thommo fan.

However, what a lot tend to forget, and newer cricket fans will never see, is all the garbage Thommo used to dish up in between the odd unplayable delivery.

One thing Thommo had that today's bowlers don't is the incomparable Dennis Lillee at the other end to hold it together when Thommo was bowling "3rd grade rubbish". Thommo never had to play 20/20 .... he'd be nigh on useless in that, just as modern quick bowlers are. He'd be bowling wides and no-balls by the bucket full. The modern game is more difficult for quicks than ever before.

Ask Thommo to tell us how well the Aussie attack went on the 1977 Ashes tour without Lillee. They were absolute crap, and yet Thommo was the spearhead. There's no Lillee in the current team either, otherwise they'd be winning Tests, and the other bowlers would be performing support roles.

Thommo also once labelled Shane Warne as "bowling that boring spin crap" .... the guy is right out of the Neil Harvey "nobody's as good as they were in my day" school.

Australian cricket is in a re-development stage, there's no escaping that fact, and no amount of condemnation from past players is going to hasten the process.

[blackhead&boil]

Just a word on Jeffrey Robert Thomson. He was quick, damned quick, and most of us remember his thunderbolts and spurts of brilliance. I was a big Thommo fan.

However, what a lot tend to forget, and newer cricket fans will never see, is all the garbage Thommo used to dish up in between the odd unplayable delivery.

One thing Thommo had that today's bowlers don't is the incomparable Dennis Lillee at the other end to hold it together when Thommo was bowling "3rd grade rubbish". Thommo never had to play 20/20 .... he'd be nigh on useless in that, just as modern quick bowlers are. He'd be bowling wides and no-balls by the bucket full. The modern game is more difficult for quicks than ever before.

Ask Thommo to tell us how well the Aussie attack went on the 1977 Ashes tour without Lillee. They were absolute crap, and yet Thommo was the spearhead. There's no Lillee in the current team either, otherwise they'd be winning Tests, and the other bowlers would be performing support roles.

Thommo also once labelled Shane Warne as "bowling that boring spin crap" .... the guy is right out of the Neil Harvey "nobody's as good as they were in my day" school.

Australian cricket is in a re-development stage, there's no escaping that fact, and no amount of condemnation from past players is going to hasten the process.

yet another level headed post from mr perspective... :D:thumbsu:

[Kid A]

He's overrated but he should still tour. He killed it in India, has one bad Test in Aus and is dropped. Hardly fair.


I wouldn't say Krezja killed it in India. 12/360 is very much a mixed result.

[Blue Dimension]

12/360 is an average of 30 per wicket after an initial Sehwag onslaught (mind you, who had also destroyed Mendis and Murali earlier on the Sri Lankan tour while all other indian batsman struggled)

[bluespooner]

Symonds isnt an alcoholic you clown.

People are clawing at a number of chestnuts and it is embrassing to be honest.

You calling people a clown is a joke. Your one of the most opinionated posters on this site and virtually everything you say is wrong. What are you but a tiresome apologist for the appalling cricket team that impersonates the Australian cricket team.

Your rant suggesting Thomson as dial a rent comment is a joke. I reckon a bloke that has picked up 200 test wickets has every right to call it as he sees it - and incidentally, he happens to be right on the money. As events continue to prove over and over.

[beatnik]

Just a word on Jeffrey Robert Thomson. He was quick, damned quick, and most of us remember his thunderbolts and spurts of brilliance. I was a big Thommo fan.

However, what a lot tend to forget, and newer cricket fans will never see, is all the garbage Thommo used to dish up in between the odd unplayable delivery.

One thing Thommo had that today's bowlers don't is the incomparable Dennis Lillee at the other end to hold it together when Thommo was bowling "3rd grade rubbish". Thommo never had to play 20/20 .... he'd be nigh on useless in that, just as modern quick bowlers are. He'd be bowling wides and no-balls by the bucket full. The modern game is more difficult for quicks than ever before.

Ask Thommo to tell us how well the Aussie attack went on the 1977 Ashes tour without Lillee. They were absolute crap, and yet Thommo was the spearhead. There's no Lillee in the current team either, otherwise they'd be winning Tests, and the other bowlers would be performing support roles.

Thommo also once labelled Shane Warne as "bowling that boring spin crap" .... the guy is right out of the Neil Harvey "nobody's as good as they were in my day" school.

Australian cricket is in a re-development stage, there's no escaping that fact, and no amount of condemnation from past players is going to hasten the process.

thanks goodness, i read to the end of this twisty turny thread and was beginning to lose my way but finally someone brought it back to the OP...you nailed it Adelaide Hawk :thumbsu:

Thommo is well within his rights to have an opinion but he's got expect that it might generate some opinions in return focussing on the flaws in his own game/career

it's stating the obvious to say that the Aussies are struggling in the bowling department and if he wants to refer to them collectively as 'third-graders' then, again, that's his opinion

the issue i have is the personalised sledging of young and inexperienced bowlers doing their best to live up to the weight of expectations built up by one of the greatest Test teams in history

the nasty nicknames were childish and unnecessary Thommo, go and sit in the naughty corner!

:D

[bluespooner]

Ask Thommo to tell us how well the Aussie attack went on the 1977 Ashes tour without Lillee. They were absolute crap, and yet Thommo was the spearhead. There's no Lillee in the current team either, otherwise they'd be winning Tests, and the other bowlers would be performing support roles.


In fairness that was after he had done his shoulder. Hard to think of a fast bowler those right shoulder was more important to them in generating the pace he had - he was never the same bowler after the Turner collision.

Jeffrey Thomson was the bowler at the other end to Lillee againt the English in 1974/75 and the West Indies in 1975/76 when he was the major threat and the clear leading wicket-taker.

[robbo75]

4 quicks is ok but can that bat 6. Not as if we're going well there and will be against the best pace in the world on their own track. If your top 3 quicks can't do it the next best is unlikely to help much. Having said that Ranga has a"6 for" against South Australia but if he struggles at no.6 then it's no point. Great if he does though.

I my own belief is Noffke, Johnson, Hilfenhaus and McGain are alot more likely to bowl sides out than what we had during the Test series. That's a decent line-up. Our attack there was terrible. If we could take that Indian track around I'd take Krezja but other than that I don't want to know.

That attack doesn't look too bad on paper. I would like to see Bollinger and Siddle in the squad as well. Krezja shouldn't go to SA. He really needs time at SS level to develop his bowling. Test level isn't the place to develop the basics. Really that only leave McGain if he is fit enough.

I agree with Thommo btw. Not PC but who cares....it definitely hits the nail on the head.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

You calling people a clown is a joke. Your one of the most opinionated posters on this site and virtually everything you say is wrong. What are you but a tiresome apologist for the appalling cricket team that impersonates the Australian cricket team.

Your rant suggesting Thomson as dial a rent comment is a joke. I reckon a bloke that has picked up 200 test wickets has every right to call it as he sees it - and incidentally, he happens to be right on the money. As events continue to prove over and over.

Im not an apologist, im a realist.

Some of you people have only known Australia winning for 10 years +.

I couldn't give a stuff how many wickets he took, just like i dont care that Neil Harvey was a great batsmen. Anyone who acts like a ******** is a ******** no matter how many wickets or runs they have taken.

Look at our team, look how inexperienced it is, look how many crucial players we have lost. Yet you lot still cant understand why we dont win as much as we used to.

If you want to hang inexperienced players trying to find there way at international level, then fine. Kick em out and replace them with more inexperienced players. You'll soon realise that you go around in circles. These guys are good enough, they just need time. Unfortunately, most people cant realise this.

[Adelaide Hawk]

In fairness that was after he had done his shoulder. Hard to think of a fast bowler those right shoulder was more important to them in generating the pace he had - he was never the same bowler after the Turner collision.

Jeffrey Thomson was the bowler at the other end to Lillee againt the English in 1974/75 and the West Indies in 1975/76 when he was the major threat and the clear leading wicket-taker.

In fairness? Sorry, but I don't feel compelled towards fairness towards Thommo. Were HIS comments fair? Facts are, there were times when Thommo bowled absolute garbage, and at times was an embarrassment, it's just that people choose to forget.

[Underdog]

In fairness? Sorry, but I don't feel compelled towards fairness towards Thommo. Were HIS comments fair? Facts are, there were times when Thommo bowled absolute garbage, and at times was an embarrassment, it's just that people choose to forget.

It's totally irrelevant. Firstly, he still has a terrific and relatively long test record to back him up. Secondly, that was 30 years ago, the game has changed substantially that it is just impossible to compare performances. Look at footy games from the 70's, there is no way you could possibly say their performances would rate in the modern game.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

I think his point is that past players push forward this fantasy that they never had bad games, never made wrong decisions and never lost.

[chaddles]

Yep Krezja is a great bowler - 1 for 153 off 35 overs and 1 for 52 off 9 overs v NSW... Sure he can spin the ball but he is awefully expensive and isn't a big wicket taker - his claim to fame is the 12 wickets for 358 in India, which isn't that inpressive. It highlights how weak our bowling attack was to allow him to pick up that many wickets, and bowl that many overs.

Then in Perth he gets 1 for 103 and 0 for 106....

I would rather take no spinner than have Krejza in the side - Hauritz may not turn the ball but at least he ties up an end, and he picked up 4 for 86 in the 1st inns on the same pitch as Krejza got embarrassed and racked up another ton with the ball..

McGain would be the 1st choice but he has been out of cricket for a while so IMO it is either Hauritz or no spinner.

[Underdog]

I think his point is that past players push forward this fantasy that they never had bad games, never made wrong decisions and never lost.

But that's irrelevant.

His comments were valid or at the very least understandable. Whether they were too harsh or not is subjective.

I think they were fairly decent comments. I don't necessarily agree with all of it, but I can understand the view.

[goalpie]

Hilf should be in the side easy, not sure why he wasnt playing last night.

Interesting to see who replaces Hayden, should be Hughes but most likely some over 30 cripple will get the spot. McGain is to old and spends more time injured than fit probably because he is close to retirement age.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

But that's irrelevant.

His comments were valid or at the very least understandable. Whether they were too harsh or not is subjective.

I think they were fairly decent comments. I don't necessarily agree with all of it, but I can understand the view.

I don't think they are decent comments at all. I dont know if a journo rang Thommo while he was in an angry mood or what but i think Thommo needs to pull his head in. That era of cricketers from the 70's seem to portrat a real "macho" image. Like Chappell, Thompson, Lillee, Marsh. From what i understand if you weren't in the boys club then the way those cricketers treated you was a deplorable.

I just get sick and tired of listening to the likes of Ian Chappell and Thompson harp on about their era and how they did this and that and how'd theyd drink the 20 beers and it had no effect on them. I dont give a **** if Chappell thinks coachs are useless, or if warm ups have no point.

Our team is very inexperienced. Hilfenhaus is just emerging. Tait is coming back from a long lay-off. Johnson is still relatively inexperienced and Bracken is the only veteran in the team. The last thing the team needs is a boofhead ex player coming out and saying the team is a bunch of hacks.

How the **** does that help anyone? It gets Thommos name in the paper and further fuels the belief that his a "in my day" ex player.

[Underdog]

I don't think they are decent comments at all. I dont know if a journo rang Thommo while he was in an angry mood or what but i think Thommo needs to pull his head in. That era of cricketers from the 70's seem to portrat a real "macho" image. Like Chappell, Thompson, Lillee, Marsh. From what i understand if you weren't in the boys club then the way those cricketers treated you was a deplorable.

I just get sick and tired of listening to the likes of Ian Chappell and Thompson harp on about their era and how they did this and that and how'd theyd drink the 20 beers and it had no effect on them. I dont give a **** if Chappell thinks coachs are useless, or if warm ups have no point.

Our team is very inexperienced. Hilfenhaus is just emerging. Tait is coming back from a long lay-off. Johnson is still relatively inexperienced and Bracken is the only veteran in the team. The last thing the team needs is a boofhead ex player coming out and saying the team is a bunch of hacks.

How the **** does that help anyone? It gets Thommos name in the paper and further fuels the belief that his a "in my day" ex player.

Let's get some things straight here.

Thompson was talking about the Adelaide ODI only when talking about a "third grade bowling attack".

This was a game where they made our total with 12 overs remaining and with a loss of just 2 wickets.

MJ went for 6.3 runs an over, Hilfy 6.12, Tait 5.44 and Hussy 7.25.

They were truely terrible in this game. What he said was valid.

He then went on discussing the test series in South Africa. He didn't like the selection of Tait because he's struggling with fitness in ODI's, nor Hauritz who he simply doesn't rate for various reasons (which many don't).

He finally said Mitchell Johnson looked tired from a grueling series.

Nothing terrible there whatsoever and it's all understandable.

It was the journo who positioned the reader to take it as controversial.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Lets get another thing straight.

Thompo was about as reliable as a german WW2 machine gun, he had many a game when he bowled absolute crap. So our guys have one bad game and he says they are 3rd grade attack. The guy was trying to be funny with his Nathan Horror comment but really, he just looked like an idiot, much like Andrew Symonds on that Roy and HG radio show.

I just find it a bit rich for a guy that could have many games when he bowled like shit to get stuck into a inexperienced lineup up for a bad game in Adelaide.

[Underdog]

Lets get another thing straight.

Thompo was about as reliable as a german WW2 machine gun, he had many a game when he bowled absolute crap.

Absolutely irrelevant.

So our guys have one bad game and he says they are 3rd grade attack.

No. He didn't say that at all.

He said their performance in that particular game was that of a 3rd grade club attack. Now obviously that's such a stretch you know it's an exaggeration but he essentially made the point they were terrible.

get stuck into a inexperienced lineup up for a bad game in Adelaide.

Tait, Johnson and Hopes are experienced enough. Hilfy isn't and he deserves slack. D Hussey isn't a bowler and deserves slack also. However, that's irrelevant because as an attack they were woeful regardless of whether they had excuses or not.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Well shock, horror, a bowling attack has a game where the bowl like shit. Happens very often, still Thommo doesnt have to act like an idiot.

[Underdog]

Well shock, horror, a bowling attack has a game where the bowl like shit. Happens very often, still Thommo doesnt have to act like an idiot.

He was discussing thoughts on a game and a journo made a big deal over bugger all because he knew he could twist his words and gullible people like yourself would eat it up.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Im not eating it up. Im going by quotes, Thommo was trying to be funny with his "Nathan Horror" comment which he no doubt thought was quite smart. Its like people calling Aker, Jason Acnemanis, they think its a funny play on words but everyone has heard it all before.

Thommo is a first grade clown, decent bowler in his time albeit in partnership with Lillee, never really did much on his own.

I just find it ironic that Thommo, a well known larrkin can act like a clown and everyone lap it up while Symonds does something similar and there is uproar.

Deal with it love.

[Underdog]

Im not eating it up. Im going by quotes, Thommo was trying to be funny with his "Nathan Horror" comment which he no doubt thought was quite smart. Its like people calling Aker, Jason Acnemanis, they think its a funny play on words but everyone has heard it all before.

Yeah look, it wasn't funny. I never said it was or that I like the guy.

I said his views were valid even if his delivery of said views was stupid.

I just find it ironic that Thommo, a well known larrkin can act like a clown and everyone lap it up while Symonds does something similar and there is uproar

Symonds represents Cricket Australia, Thommo doesn't.

If the sheer majority of employees in any company appeared drunk to the media and made the comments he did no matter how tongue in cheek, they would be facing disciplinary action.

Deal with it love.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Your right, Symonds did face disciplinary action, and he was fined 4000+ dollars.

Doesn't change the fact that the simpleton Australian public lap up Thommo and hail him as a "good old fashioned aussie larrkin" and when Symonds does a similar thing, the public start frothing at the mouth. Probably because Symonds had been ordinary with the bat and the public turned against him in a nature that makes the notoriously fickle English press look like loyal servants.

His views were valid but i still find it a bit rich coming from a bowler who could serve up a heap of shit game after game. Maybe we should start calling Jeff Thompson, Jeff Dumbo as that would be equally as clever as the Nathan Horror line.

Face it, there are distinct double standards in force here whether you like it or not, im just pointing it out. Nothing personal love.

[Spook]

Your right, Symonds did face disciplinary action, and he was fined 4000+ dollars.

Doesn't change the fact that the simpleton Australian public lap up Thommo and hail him as a "good old fashioned aussie larrkin" and when Symonds does a similar thing, the public start frothing at the mouth.


You still dont you get it do you LtD.

Symonds is an Australian CONTRACTED PLAYER and is REPRESENTING AUSTRALIA and getting PAID to adhere to a CODE of CONDUCT when he speaks and Thommo is just Aussie Joe public giving his own opinion which is worth about as much as yours.

Can you see the difference?

ie What is required of you at work is different to what is required when youa re not at work... this is why Symonds is guilty of breaking the code of conduct and Thommo can say what ever he wants... get over it FFS

[ahhhhhh]

LtD and Gunner, you both need to get the **** off the computer a bit.

Really sick of you hi-jacking threads to have personal arguments with people

that are complete bullshit.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

You still dont you get it do you LtD.

Symonds is an Australian CONTRACTED PLAYER and is REPRESENTING AUSTRALIA and getting PAID to adhere to a CODE of CONDUCT when he speaks and Thommo is just Aussie Joe public giving his own opinion which is worth about as much as yours.

Can you see the difference?

ie What is required of you at work is different to what is required when youa re not at work... this is why Symonds is guilty of breaking the code of conduct and Thommo can say what ever he wants... get over it FFS

I dont disagree. Symonds is required to adhere to a code, he broke it and was fined. Just like Ian Chappell had to adhere to a code when he works for Ch 9, that code of conduct involves not swearing on air, which he has done more then once and been suspended and fined. However, the fact he swore on air is basically treated as a badge of honour and evidence of a "true aussie larrkin".

There is a double standard here, simpletons, like a majority on this board, cant see it in evidence. People are always complaining about the lack of characters in professional sport yet when one does come along, like Symonds, there is uproar.

I dont care who employs Symonds, if he had been scoring tons you mob would write it off as typical aussie larrkin behaviour being pissed on air. Because his not scoring runs he turn the knifes on him and there is hell to pay.

Symonds shouldn't have said it, he broke the code of conduct and was fined. Thommo says something similar and everyone just laughs it off. Its bullshit.

[Spook]

I dont disagree. Symonds is required to adhere to a code, he broke it and was fined. Just like Ian Chappell had to adhere to a code when he works for Ch 9, that code of conduct involves not swearing on air, which he has done more then once and been suspended and fined. However, the fact he swore on air is basically treated as a badge of honour and evidence of a "true aussie larrkin".

There is a double standard here, simpletons, like a majority on this board, cant see it in evidence. People are always complaining about the lack of characters in professional sport yet when one does come along, like Symonds, there is uproar.

I dont care who employs Symonds, if he had been scoring tons you mob would write it off as typical aussie larrkin behaviour being pissed on air. Because his not scoring runs he turn the knifes on him and there is hell to pay.

Symonds shouldn't have said it, he broke the code of conduct and was fined. Thommo says something similar and everyone just laughs it off. Its bullshit.


You agree what Symonds did is wrong and then you say it is bullshit if people say it is wrong :confused::confused:

You have the biggest chip on your shoulders of any one I have ever conversed with ever.

You still don't you get it, Symonds is representing his country. Thommo is a nobody. Its teh same as Lee Mathews coming out and saying that Sydney is soft a Kirk is all talk and he doesn't rate him as a player versus an ex old player who is not involved in coaching at any level saying the same thing... FFS, you cant compare the 2 can you?

And a person representing his country swearing in public is not good aussie behavior at all... but then again I guess you has allot lower standards to me.

[Spook]

I dont disagree. Symonds is required to adhere to a code, he broke it and was fined. Just like Ian Chappell had to adhere to a code when he works for Ch 9, that code of conduct involves not swearing on air, which he has done more then once and been suspended and fined. However, the fact he swore on air is basically treated as a badge of honour and evidence of a "true aussie larrkin".

There is a double standard here, simpletons, like a majority on this board, cant see it in evidence. People are always complaining about the lack of characters in professional sport yet when one does come along, like Symonds, there is uproar.

I dont care who employs Symonds, if he had been scoring tons you mob would write it off as typical aussie larrkin behaviour being pissed on air. Because his not scoring runs he turn the knifes on him and there is hell to pay.

Symonds shouldn't have said it, he broke the code of conduct and was fined. Thommo says something similar and everyone just laughs it off. Its bullshit.


You agree what Symonds did is wrong and then you say it is bullshit if people say it is wrong :confused::confused:

You have the biggest chip on your shoulders of any one I have ever conversed with ever.

And a person representing his country swearing in public is not good aussie behavior at all... but then again I guess you has allot lower standards to me.

[dmc333]

In fairness? Sorry, but I don't feel compelled towards fairness towards Thommo. Were HIS comments fair? Facts are, there were times when Thommo bowled absolute garbage, and at times was an embarrassment, it's just that people choose to forget.

It's crazy to come out with 'oh Thommo, it's not fair to say that because you bowled a lot of crap too.' If there was any (given the lessened media coverage) he would have received the criticism back then. And as we know, all the misdeeds and crap performances blow away with the sands of time.

The discussion is about the current team. You know when getting quotes the media doesn't work on reality, it works on perception. Thompson is on the sportsman's night circuit, bullshitting and expanding the myth of his prowess, talking of "all the blokes he nearly killed." *cue the 150 middle aged drunks in righteous laughter* That's the audience the journo is looking for, not the facts and figures audience. So Thompson's comments are perfectly fine.

It's strange that so few people ever make the distinction of who the intended audience is.