Cosgrove and Cullen cut from SA

[dan warna]

On the news now.

cosgrove, the new danny buckingham, tonnes of talent, can't stay off the burgers and fries.

Cullen, well he should have gone to NSW and then he would have got a test cap despite being crap. bad career move to stay in sa.

[Bomber Bears]

Cosgrove was cut a week or two ago, an article on cricinfo which i posted in the 2010 rumours thread in the domestic thread.

[dan warna]

ah no worries

old news /sigh

[bombersno1]

Both will be picked up somewhere, Cossie to WA, Cullen to QLD.

[QPower]

Both will be picked up somewhere, Cossie to WA, Cullen to QLD.

And Sportsbet will be paying out on SA for the wooden spoon by Christmas.

[Ill Chicken]

And Sportsbet will be paying out on SA for the wooden spoon by Christmas.

There's no real difference between finishing mid-table and last. They've lost one player.

[Cousin Jed]

Both will be picked up somewhere, Cossie to WA, Cullen to QLD.

Ah, no.

[jiphoc]

Cullen has been such a disappointment. He burst into the scene with all the promise in the world. He was a bit all over the place at times but got very good dip and spin. Had the signs of a very good international spinner. Then Cricket Australia f***ed him up imo. Trying to mess around with his action and techniques waaaay to much.

I hope he gets picked up as he is still could be a very good pick up for a side.

[HSSB]

Long time coming for Cosgrove.

[Adelaide Hawk]

Cullen has been such a disappointment. He burst into the scene with all the promise in the world. He was a bit all over the place at times but got very good dip and spin. Had the signs of a very good international spinner. Then Cricket Australia f***ed him up imo. Trying to mess around with his action and techniques waaaay to much.


Well said. I recall watching Cullen as a teenager, just before he started playing for SA, and I was very impressed by what I saw. As you say, he was imparting excellent spin for an offie with a legitimate action, and his flight, dip and variations in pace were top shelf.

Like yourself, I blame too much tinkering with his action for the fact he hasn't gone on with his cricket. I recall when Cullen and Bailey were offered CA contracts, the future looked bright for the both of them, then everything went pair shaped after that. Someone stuffed them up, I believe I know who it was, but I won't be disrepectful by naming him.

[roostersgal4eva]

I have also believed that the mis management of both Cullen and Bailey has been diplorable and has made my blood boil. IF we are on the same wavelengh i think ive guessed who you are talking about AH

AS for Cosgrove it was a long time comming IMHO - Like Jamie Cox said its time we got rid of this near enough is good enough attitiude.

[Cooldude]

Well said. I recall watching Cullen as a teenager, just before he started playing for SA, and I was very impressed by what I saw. As you say, he was imparting excellent spin for an offie with a legitimate action, and his flight, dip and variations in pace were top shelf.

Like yourself, I blame too much tinkering with his action for the fact he hasn't gone on with his cricket. I recall when Cullen and Bailey were offered CA contracts, the future looked bright for the both of them, then everything went pair shaped after that. Someone stuffed them up, I believe I know who it was, but I won't be disrepectful by naming him.

You are gonna say TJ, it's okay, it's exactly disrespectful despite his recent health problems. It's just what you think

I merely thought that they weren't given as much of a go to get experiences by playing games. Hauritz is probably far inferior to Cullen in terms of technique, but because the selectors like him (and Ponting likes him), he gets to have a go for a long period of time in the Test/ODI teams. That really is the best way a novice spinner can learn his trade. You can't expect a young spinner to just keep playing at First Class level and become world class. Warnie had to learn it the hard way in the top level as well

I wouldn't blame it on any coaching aspects, but rather the selectors lack the ability to judge whether a young spinner has a naturally good technique or temperment and have the balls to play them in the Test/ODI teams to blood them.

[Ill Chicken]

You are gonna say TJ, it's okay, it's exactly disrespectful despite his recent health problems. It's just what you think

I merely thought that they weren't given as much of a go to get experiences by playing games. Hauritz is probably far inferior to Cullen in terms of technique, but because the selectors like him (and Ponting likes him), he gets to have a go for a long period of time in the Test/ODI teams. That really is the best way a novice spinner can learn his trade. You can't expect a young spinner to just keep playing at First Class level and become world class. Warnie had to learn it the hard way in the top level as well

I wouldn't blame it on any coaching aspects, but rather the selectors lack the ability to judge whether a young spinner has a naturally good technique or temperment and have the balls to play them in the Test/ODI teams to blood them.

Utter rubbish.

[Cooldude]

I would like to just say anything as "utter rubbish" either, without saying anything to back it up. That's what people call a "senseless troll", correct?

[roostersgal4eva]

he never said anyone's name - you guys put it out there

[Cooldude]

Well I said it, so I will take any blame for it. I could well be wrong and I'm fine with it. I love TJ and think he's fantastic, so I was just saying that our selectors don't really know how to find the next world class spinner instead of any people destroying the young un's techniques.

Anyone are entitled to disagree with anything I say, but I thought there would be more intelligent and sensible people than those who just reply saying "utter rubbish" without backing themselves up. I guess it's Bigfooty afterall

[roostersgal4eva]

I do think we need to get to the bottom of it regardless of whos fault

I do agree with you in as much as I think nationally in general we are too busy waiting for the next warnie rather then working out how to develop our next spinners

Development at Junior level is almost non existant - Cousin comming up in the ranks as a spinning all rounder - one year his coach wont bowl him cause if it was up to him no spinners would play period cause they are a liablity in his eyes and the next year he doesnt get much of a bowl cause the other spinner is the team is the coaches son. No wonder our spinners are screwed when they get to state level

[Ill Chicken]

Well I said it, so I will take any blame for it. I could well be wrong and I'm fine with it. I love TJ and think he's fantastic, so I was just saying that our selectors don't really know how to find the next world class spinner instead of any people destroying the young un's techniques.

Anyone are entitled to disagree with anything I say, but I thought there would be more intelligent and sensible people than those who just reply saying "utter rubbish" without backing themselves up. I guess it's Bigfooty afterall

Previous posts by yourself are littered with belittling remarks along with absurdity.

Dan Cullen is 2 years younger than Hauritz, so you're not dealing with young kids. You can't compare Dan Cullen who is playing district cricket to Nathan Hauritz who is a proven performer at the top level. Add Hauritz's batting and you've got a far superior player in all departments. Hauritz isn't a novice spinner, he was an Australian U19 skipper. He has been left out of the side when doing the job required, so to suggest that Hauritz is getting a game because he is liked, is utter rubbish.

[Cooldude]

Now now now, no one would belittle you if you stop doing silly things like that, would they? If you keep behaving like a troll then you will be belittled like one, so don't complain about a behaviour that you reinforced yourself

I think you missed my entire point, which is sad. Dan Cullen got a Test way before Hauritz did, suggesting that he was looked upon as having more potential. I'd agree to that, probably 4-5 years ago, Cullen had a wonderful action, turned the ball more and had great flight. Hauritz just darted it in the entire time for much of his domestic career. Not that I thought Cullen would've become a top class spinner, but he wasn't given much of a go to prove himself.

Then there was Krejza, who took a bunch of wickets in his debut and didn't get a game after his 2nd Test on a flat WACA pitch. He has a natural aptitude to turn the ball and clearly had something special going on about him

None of them were allowed the time and games that Hauritz have gotten so far. I myself admit that Hauritz has improved to such an extent that I now respect his bowling as acceptable, but he was only allowed to become that good because he was given a period to develop. Surely even the most objective judges have to admit there are some double standards at work there

That same period of development wasn't afforded to other younger spinners whom I dare say have better natural ability than he does.

Save the rubbish about the batting, I want a spin bowler in the side to bowl, not to bat. That's just Duncan Fletcher Ashley Giles type bullshit.

I think you took my post a little personally there, it wasn't berating Hauritz at all, which you seem to think so. It's merely pointing out the selectors don't seem to afford the same patience and time for a younger prospect, who may or may not be Cullen, before you turn this into a Cullen vs Hauritz thread, which wasn't my intention.

[Ill Chicken]

Now now now, no one would belittle you if you stop doing silly things like that, would they? If you keep behaving like a troll then you will be belittled like one, so don't complain about a behaviour that you reinforced yourself

I think you missed my entire point, which is sad. Dan Cullen got a Test way before Hauritz did, suggesting that he was looked upon as having more potential. I'd agree to that, probably 4-5 years ago, Cullen had a wonderful action, turned the ball more and had great flight. Hauritz just darted it in the entire time for much of his domestic career. Not that I thought Cullen would've become a top class spinner, but he wasn't given much of a go to prove himself.

Then there was Krejza, who took a bunch of wickets in his debut and didn't get a game after his 2nd Test on a flat WACA pitch. He has a natural aptitude to turn the ball and clearly had something special going on about him

None of them were allowed the time and games that Hauritz have gotten so far. I myself admit that Hauritz has improved to such an extent that I now respect his bowling as acceptable, but he was only allowed to become that good because he was given a period to develop. Surely even the most objective judges have to admit there are some double standards at work there

That same period of development wasn't afforded to other younger spinners whom I dare say have better natural ability than he does.

Save the rubbish about the batting, I want a spin bowler in the side to bowl, not to bat. That's just Duncan Fletcher Ashley Giles type bullshit.

I think you took my post a little personally there, it wasn't berating Hauritz at all, which you seem to think so. It's merely pointing out the selectors don't seem to afford the same patience and time for a younger prospect, who may or may not be Cullen, before you turn this into a Cullen vs Hauritz thread, which wasn't my intention.

You made the comparison. Hauritz was in the exact same position that Cullen was in six years ago, got a taste, big things were expected and then was almost never heard of again.

Cullen has been given ample opportunity and has not progressed. Claiming one has had the rough end of the stick and not the other is what you are doing. You are not being objective at all.

As for batting, I said, he is a far superior player in all departments, which you have failed to comprehend. Claiming that he is only in the team because the Selectors & Ponting like him can only be seen as berating.

[Cooldude]

I wasn't comparing Hauritz to Cullen specifically, actually. If you can read and comprehend English then you would've known that

You are severely missing the point if you think I was pointing this to be a Cullen vs Hauritz debate, because I wasn't. So I'm not interested in jumping into your pointless arguments, you can argue with yourself

Everyone knows that selection to the Australian team isn't necessarily based purely on merit. The captain still has to want you in the team. How is that berating if I presented all the alternate options to Hauritz, who have lost their spots for something little. Yet Hauritz has probably gone through as many if not more beltings and still stayed in the team? I'm afraid you are the one not being very objective here, is Hauritz your lovechild by any chance?

Just to keep in mind and state it in clearer words, in case you can't read again and start raising irrelevant points: I think Hauritz has improved leaps and bounds and is now a very good off spin bowler. I was just suggesting that he has gotten the time to develop into that at the top level which other spinners of more natural ability didn't get. That is the point, I hope you get it this time

[Ill Chicken]

You indicated that you believe Hauritz technique is inferior to Cullen. This would indeed be a comparison.

Hauritz has been dropped from the national team five times, indicating that he is in the team on merit only and not because he is liked.

It is criticism of a player to say they in the team because they're liked, not ability.

So now we've cleared up the rubbish you've been spouting, yes Hauritz is best spinner in Australia and thoroughly deserves his place in the team.

[Cooldude]

Heh, have I hit a nerve by mentioning Hauritz that has made you so stupidly missed the main point of the discussion time and time again?

1. Hence why I said not "specifically", if you understand that word. I was mentioning Krejza, Cullen and any other spinners young and old around who might have a technique better than Hauritz. I believe there are many who are better when first coming into the Australian team. You were trying to make it look like I was arguing Cullen vs Hauritz specifically, if you're gonna argue semantics then do it properly

Also, may I remind you that the discussion is on selectors finding a young spinner, not about Hauritz? So maybe you should stop missing the point and start talking about selectors needing to find a good young spinner, play and develop them? When has this become an alleged Hauritz slating/defending session?

2. He was dropped from the team 5 times and gotten back, whereas others have been dropped once and never gotten a look in. Dare I say, Hauritz was strictly an ODI bowler when he got his Test debut. Everyone was raving on about him as someone who darts it in and doesn't turn it, and they would've been correct.

By mentioning that he was dropped 5 times and still gotten back in, you only reinforced my point. He has gotten more chances than others. Not everyone gets back into the team due to merit, ask Brett Lee recently

3. You are well off your bonkers if you really do think that. It's a criticism of the selectors to say they favour a player over another.

If I say that Warnie has been favoured in the side over Macgill even during times when Macgill has bowled better than Warnie, would it be criticising Warnie? No, because that means Warnie has the track record to keep his selection, and also that Macgill's personality mightn't be compatible with the team. That's not crticising any of their ability, it's just the way the selectors worked at the time.

4. I'm afraid the rubbish is coming from your keyboard, since you continually argue around my main point and focus on pointless irrelevant little subjects. My original point was about the selectors' lack of ability to find the next young spinner, not criticising Nathan Hauritz. My constant focus have been the selectors and Hauritz an example, but you seem to have severely miss the point and how many times must I repeat myself?

If you love Hauritz so much and decides to take offense, and start wanting to defend him, then it's up to you. But please get to the picture and focus on the issue at hand: whether the selectors have the nous to pick the next world class spinner. If you're gonna sprout more irrelevant rubbish to defend Hauritz or turn this discussion into an non-existent Hauritz bagging session, then you clearly are deluded. I have made my point time and time again that Hauritz is a very good offie now and deserves his spot in the side.

So we'll talk about the selectors rather than any of your pathetic and irrelevant attempts at trying to defend Hauritz, shall we? So if you're still precious about any alleged attacks on Hauritz and wanting to defend them, then you can do that, I will just ignore it like people ignore Ian Healy

[Doodlesweaver]

Heh, have I hit a nerve by mentioning Hauritz that has made you so stupidly missed the main point of the discussion time and time again?

1. Hence why I said not "specifically", if you understand that word. I was mentioning Krejza, Cullen and any other spinners young and old around who might have a technique better than Hauritz. I believe there are many who are better when first coming into the Australian team. You were trying to make it look like I was arguing Cullen vs Hauritz specifically, if you're gonna argue semantics then do it properly

Also, may I remind you that the discussion is on selectors finding a young spinner, not about Hauritz? So maybe you should stop missing the point and start talking about selectors needing to find a good young spinner, play and develop them? When has this become an alleged Hauritz slating/defending session?

2. He was dropped from the team 5 times and gotten back, whereas others have been dropped once and never gotten a look in. Dare I say, Hauritz was strictly an ODI bowler when he got his Test debut. Everyone was raving on about him as someone who darts it in and doesn't turn it, and they would've been correct.

By mentioning that he was dropped 5 times and still gotten back in, you only reinforced my point. He has gotten more chances than others. Not everyone gets back into the team due to merit, ask Brett Lee recently

3. You are well off your bonkers if you really do think that. It's a criticism of the selectors to say they favour a player over another.

If I say that Warnie has been favoured in the side over Macgill even during times when Macgill has bowled better than Warnie, would it be criticising Warnie? No, because that means Warnie has the track record to keep his selection, and also that Macgill's personality mightn't be compatible with the team. That's not crticising any of their ability, it's just the way the selectors worked at the time.

4. I'm afraid the rubbish is coming from your keyboard, since you continually argue around my main point and focus on pointless irrelevant little subjects. My original point was about the selectors' lack of ability to find the next young spinner, not criticising Nathan Hauritz. My constant focus have been the selectors and Hauritz an example, but you seem to have severely miss the point and how many times must I repeat myself?

If you love Hauritz so much and decides to take offense, and start wanting to defend him, then it's up to you. But please get to the picture and focus on the issue at hand: whether the selectors have the nous to pick the next world class spinner. If you're gonna sprout more irrelevant rubbish to defend Hauritz or turn this discussion into an non-existent Hauritz bagging session, then you clearly are deluded. I have made my point time and time again that Hauritz is a very good offie now and deserves his spot in the side.

So we'll talk about the selectors rather than any of your pathetic and irrelevant attempts at trying to defend Hauritz, shall we? So if you're still precious about any alleged attacks on Hauritz and wanting to defend them, then you can do that, I will just ignore it like people ignore Ian Healy

I think the part of the reason that Hauritz was finally stuck with and has been given time is that the selectors probably finally got it through their thick skulls that picking and dropping spin bowlers after one or two games would lead us to NEVER having anyone with confidence enough to bowl at international level. He's not great, but he's no fool, he's got a lot of courage and hasn't really let anyone down so far in test cricket.

[Cooldude]

I think the part of the reason that Hauritz was finally stuck with and has been given time is that the selectors probably finally got it through their thick skulls that picking and dropping spin bowlers after one or two games would lead us to NEVER having anyone with confidence enough to bowl at international level. He's not great, but he's no fool, he's got a lot of courage and hasn't really let anyone down so far in test cricket.

Thank you sir :D Finally someone doesn't miss the point!

Yep I agree, what they've done with Hauritz is the right thing to do. They just need to do it with a young spinner with lots of potential like Steve Smith as well, instead of giving them for one Test then do away with them for the next 5 years.

Warnie actually came to Test cricket as a very raw bowler, never took a 5fer in district cricket. He was able to develop because of the beltings he took in his early Tests, and the likes of TJ and Bob Simpson working on him to make sure he keeps improving. You can't expect a young spin bowler to develop the same way in first class cricket without having consistent games in the top level.

[Ill Chicken]

Heh, have I hit a nerve by mentioning Hauritz that has made you so stupidly missed the main point of the discussion time and time again?

1. Hence why I said not "specifically", if you understand that word. I was mentioning Krejza, Cullen and any other spinners young and old around who might have a technique better than Hauritz. I believe there are many who are better when first coming into the Australian team. You were trying to make it look like I was arguing Cullen vs Hauritz specifically, if you're gonna argue semantics then do it properly

Also, may I remind you that the discussion is on selectors finding a young spinner, not about Hauritz? So maybe you should stop missing the point and start talking about selectors needing to find a good young spinner, play and develop them? When has this become an alleged Hauritz slating/defending session?

2. He was dropped from the team 5 times and gotten back, whereas others have been dropped once and never gotten a look in. Dare I say, Hauritz was strictly an ODI bowler when he got his Test debut. Everyone was raving on about him as someone who darts it in and doesn't turn it, and they would've been correct.

By mentioning that he was dropped 5 times and still gotten back in, you only reinforced my point. He has gotten more chances than others. Not everyone gets back into the team due to merit, ask Brett Lee recently

3. You are well off your bonkers if you really do think that. It's a criticism of the selectors to say they favour a player over another.

If I say that Warnie has been favoured in the side over Macgill even during times when Macgill has bowled better than Warnie, would it be criticising Warnie? No, because that means Warnie has the track record to keep his selection, and also that Macgill's personality mightn't be compatible with the team. That's not crticising any of their ability, it's just the way the selectors worked at the time.

4. I'm afraid the rubbish is coming from your keyboard, since you continually argue around my main point and focus on pointless irrelevant little subjects. My original point was about the selectors' lack of ability to find the next young spinner, not criticising Nathan Hauritz. My constant focus have been the selectors and Hauritz an example, but you seem to have severely miss the point and how many times must I repeat myself?

If you love Hauritz so much and decides to take offense, and start wanting to defend him, then it's up to you. But please get to the picture and focus on the issue at hand: whether the selectors have the nous to pick the next world class spinner. If you're gonna sprout more irrelevant rubbish to defend Hauritz or turn this discussion into an non-existent Hauritz bagging session, then you clearly are deluded. I have made my point time and time again that Hauritz is a very good offie now and deserves his spot in the side.

So we'll talk about the selectors rather than any of your pathetic and irrelevant attempts at trying to defend Hauritz, shall we? So if you're still precious about any alleged attacks on Hauritz and wanting to defend them, then you can do that, I will just ignore it like people ignore Ian Healy

Do you want to write any more filler rubbish? You've contradicted yourself, changed your opinion and failed to hold any objectivity from post one. I've pointed out that you can't use Hauritz as an example but you continue to do so.

[Cooldude]

Thanks for continually behaving like a pointless troll. I bet if you are about to do VCE English (or have done, my guess is you are yet to do), you'd be one of those students who are so full of themselves, think they know it all, and start writing up piles of trash, just to fail because you didn't answer to the question

I've justified myself in using the Hauritz example, but you just took offense of me saying things about Hauritz that you thought were criticisms. You decided to defend him, and now that you realise you've missed the point, you change your tune and claims you've been disputing my example all along, even though all your points reinforce my example. Learn to 1. Not miss the main contention. 2. Argue more like a civil educated person instead of a feral redneck, don't just say "utter rubbish" to things you see and actually explain yourself. Do you have the intelligence? C'mon, two people are able to do both 1 and 2 in this thread so far, are you that far below average?

Ya know, I can be an internet hero going around posting "utter rubbish" on any posts I see. It would just be pot kettle black. Your mind is rubbish, you think nothing but rubbish and write nothing but rubbish, that's probably why it took you a day to get my main point. It's okay to be slow. It's alright, I'm used to it coming from you, since "being constructive" isn't exactly one of your attributes. Maybe "being a buffoon" is though

[Ill Chicken]

Thanks for continually behaving like a pointless troll. I bet if you are about to do VCE English (or have done, my guess is you are yet to do), you'd be one of those students who are so full of themselves, think they know it all, and start writing up piles of trash, just to fail because you didn't answer to the question

I've justified myself in using the Hauritz example, but you just took offense of me saying things about Hauritz that you thought were criticisms. You decided to defend him, and now that you realise you've missed the point, you change your tune and claims you've been disputing my example all along, even though all your points reinforce my example.

Ya know, I can be an internet hero going around posting "utter rubbish" on any posts I see. It would just be pot kettle black. Your mind is rubbish, you think nothing but rubbish and write nothing but rubbish, that's probably why it took you a day to get my main point. It's okay to be slow

Yeah exactly, you can't compare Cullen to Hauritz, but you can use him as an example. Ponting doesn't like Hauritz, he favours him.

[Cooldude]

Utter rubbish

(see what I did there?)

Heh, it's pointless to engage in your irrelevant points that are so far from the actual main points. You can go talk to yourself in an empty room about that, wake me up when you wanna talk about the selectors instead of dwelling on some small detail.

Sometimes I feel you deliberately act that illogical and silly just to wind people and get a reaction, maybe I should give you way less respect than you deserve. Possibly none

[Ill Chicken]

So now you agree. You flip flop quite a bit.

[Cousin Jed]

Ah, guys?

[Doodlesweaver]

Ah, guys?

Ha, ha, ha.

Anyway I hope that Cosgrove comes to WA. Arthur might sort him out, he might not as well, but weight 'issues' not withstanding, Cosgrove won't be any worse than our bunch of nervous nellies in the top 6.

Looking at scorecards periodically during the summer from the opposite side of the world, became thoroughly disheartening. Having someone averaging 40 would be a real boon in the badly named Warriors outfit.

Apropos of nothing, I managed to listen online to the 20/20 match v Blues which was great entertainment especially when Marsh Jnr skittled the Blues tail.

[Carl Spackler]

Looking at scorecards periodically during the summer from the opposite side of the world, became thoroughly disheartening. Having someone averaging 40 would be a real boon in the badly named Warriors outfit.

Apparently batters averaging 40 is over-rated.

[Ill Chicken]

If Cullen goes to WA and does well it should mean that his bowling has progressed and should mean he would have a legitimate chance at making the national squad again. Unlikely though.

Cosgrove doesn't actually have to go anywhere. All he has to do is lose 30kgs.

[jiphoc]

Cannot see Cullen getting picked up. In his teens he was an unwritten book, which CA slowly destroyed. Either that or he is stubborn.

Regardless he does not spin the ball as much these days. Lost the drift he used to had all for more consistency which did not come after all that. Thus the story of his demise.

As for Cosgrove. He is bound to get picked up. By who though I am unsure. People have been saying he might come to WA. I cannot see Author taking him tbh. Author is a tough coach to play under and I can see him taking a player of his weight class. I think Tasmania would be a decent fit for him. They always seam to get the best out of players.

[Chris25]

Cullen will be picked up without a doubt. I still rate him as one of the best young spinners in the country, not that there is a lot of competition in that regard. His problem was that after his Australian selection, he tried to do too much and invent new deliveries. And in doing that, his stock ball suffered. Just needs to get right back to basics, and he will be up there again.

[Pevers-Legend]

Manou got the chop as Captain with Klinger as new Captain and Ferguson VC.

the news keeps getting better.

Redbacks, are you trying to lull us diehard supporters into a false sense of hope? Or are things going to change?

[Doodlesweaver]

Manou got the chop as Captain with Klinger as new Captain and Ferguson VC.

the news keeps getting better.

Redbacks, are you trying to lull us diehard supporters into a false sense of hope? Or are things going to change?

Isn't Ferguson the new Ian Bell? You know, looks the goods but loses concentration too easily?

[Pevers-Legend]

Isn't Ferguson the new Ian Bell? You know, looks the goods but loses concentration too easily?

Ian Bell is not a bad player, so playing Sheild cricket I would be happy with him.

When you have the sort of crap dished up by the Redbacks year in year out - these changes make us almost want to believe they want to get better.

[Doodlesweaver]

Ian Bell is not a bad player, so playing Sheild cricket I would be happy with him.

When you have the sort of crap dished up by the Redbacks year in year out - these changes make us almost want to believe they want to get better.

I feel that way about Mickey Arthur going to WA.

He might have to threaten water-boarding some of the team members though to get them playing like they care.

[Bomber Bears]

cossie is a bit beyond overweight
http://www.cricinfo.com/db/PICTURES/CMS/116200/116256.jpg

[Ill Chicken]

Has had an average start to the County season.

[bombersno1]

What is he getting at tea breaks? A family feast from KFC?

[the_interloper]

I hope we get Cosgrove, i love a fatty who's a gun sportsman and he is certainly a fattie of the highest order. The bloke can really play, he's obviously got no will power!(like me)

I haven't read the whole thread, but has anyone mentioned he might be trying to qualify for England? I think in cricket, not the heavyweight section of the chicken wing eat off! :D

[steviej]

I haven't read the whole thread, but has anyone mentioned he might be trying to qualify for England? I think in cricket, not the heavyweight section of the chicken wing eat off! :D

How does he qualify?

[Cleavy]

How does he qualify?

feast of maximum occupancy? :p

[the_interloper]

How does he qualify?

Think he just has to play over there for 4 years a la Graeme Hick, so he'd be still under 30 when he's qualified i think. If he got fair dinkum over there he could play, he should really be playing for Australia, he just doesn't really seem to want to.

[Doodlesweaver]

Think he just has to play over there for 4 years a la Graeme Hick, so he'd be still under 30 when he's qualified i think. If he got fair dinkum over there he could play, he should really be playing for Australia, he just doesn't really seem to want to.

The English selectors turfed Samit Patel out of the ODI squad for fatness/unfitness so Cossie would have to do some mega-gym and training work to be acceptable to them.

Patel wasn't quite as big as cossie is from that photo.

[whats_at_stake]

The English selectors turfed Samit Patel out of the ODI squad for fatness/unfitness so Cossie would have to do some mega-gym and training work to be acceptable to them.

Patel wasn't quite as big as cossie is from that photo.

Yeah I also remember Ramesh Powar from India being dropped from the ODI team for unfitness.

[Ill Chicken]

Doesn't he also need to be making runs?

[Value Added]

The English selectors turfed Samit Patel out of the ODI squad for fatness/unfitness so Cossie would have to do some mega-gym and training work to be acceptable to them.

Patel wasn't quite as big as cossie is from that photo.

This might shake him up a bit. A fit Cossie would be a more than useful pick-up.

[ubolt]

The English selectors turfed Samit Patel out of the ODI squad for fatness/unfitness so Cossie would have to do some mega-gym and training work to be acceptable to them.

Patel wasn't quite as big as cossie is from that photo.


..and then they sent him to Adelaide!