- Jun 15, 2005
- 69,233
- 60,483
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- AUFC, Everton, Sturt
He can't play spin, that is well known.Head is in woeful form. Get him out of the side.
Did make a good 50 in the BBL
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
He can't play spin, that is well known.Head is in woeful form. Get him out of the side.
Yeah, he hogged so much of the strike that he got another ton for himself (106 off 114 balls).Selfish innings from Finch
It wasn't so much selfish, but more the part where he could have done some bigger hits between the 50-100 runs. Most of them came in singles or twos. Though it was probably more the other batters' fault for keep getting out! That last 15 overs was quite anti-climatic.Yeah, he hogged so much of the strike that he got another ton for himself (106 off 114 balls).
Two in a row, now, the selfish mongrel.
Reckon Kez was set to launch before running out of luck.It wasn't so much selfish, but more the part where he could have done some bigger hits between the 50-100 runs. Most of them came in singles or twos. Though it was probably more the other batters' fault for keep getting out! That last 15 overs was quite anti-climatic.
It wasn't so much selfish, but more the part where he could have done some bigger hits between the 50-100 runs.
I don't know if you've caught on CB, but when you get a century in ODI nowadays, it's usually around the 100 or above strike rate that's required. England is killing us in the ODI thus far, because their batters know that that's the target strike rate individually, and playing with that sustained attitude of a run a ball. I'm not really the one bagging Finch, but just calling it as I see it. Finch also looked out of touch for some weird reason, it was nowhere near a fluid century and a lot of the balls down the leg side he had hit towards a fielder behind square leg.
Er, mate ... whatty what WHAT?
Do you mean more than the 9 x 4s and the six that he hit?
I repeat --- 106 off 114 balls --- which is a super-dig. As I type, no-one's come close in this game (Poms 4/201 and should win).
Don't you think that if " ... he could have done some bigger hits ..", he would have?
Can you see him going/thinking
"This is a nice and juicy half-volley, but I won't smack it for 4 or 6 , I'll just pat it away for a single to keep the strike" ...???
Finch's motivation is to get as many runs as possible, as quickly as possible. Did a good job too, I reckon.
Yeah..we lost the 2nd ODI..Any cricket news?
Yeah but who cares? Who counts these games?Yeah..we lost the 2nd ODI..
There's a damn good chance the ODI might become a mirror image of the Test series... 4 to nil, and 1 draw...wouldn't that be weird?
Of course the Ashes is much more important and worthy. However, I don't enjoy the thought of losing to the Poms 5 to nil. Want to see more conviction with the batters. The World Cup is just around the corner next year.Yeah but who cares? Who counts these games?
All I know we have the Ashes.
Nurdles it around for a ton at 5 an over on a veritable strip of tarmac then throws his wicket away immediately... yeah totally thinking team firstYeah, he hogged so much of the strike that he got another ton for himself (106 off 114 balls).
Two in a row, now, the selfish mongrel.
You've lost me John WhoI don't know if you've caught on CB, but when you get a century in ODI nowadays, it's usually around the 100 or above strike rate that's required. England is killing us in the ODI thus far, because their batters know that that's the target strike rate individually, and playing with that sustained attitude of a run a ball. I'm not really the one bagging Finch, but just calling it as I see it. Finch also looked out of touch for some weird reason, it was nowhere near a fluid century and a lot of the balls down the leg side he had hit towards a fielder behind square leg.
I think there's an over-reaction to my response. I'm not the one saying Finch is selfish, it was mattymac. However, I can see the point to his response, as in Finch was batting within himself, and not up-the-tempo when more scoring was needed during his 50-100 runs. I tried to support Finch by saying that it was also the other batters' fault for getting out, which would have put more pressure on Finch to do the scoring.You've lost me John Who
1) for being patronising ("I don't know if you've caught on CB ..." ) and
2) for not making sense.
You said:
"when you get a century in ODI nowadays, it's usually around the 100 or above strike rate that's required".
Finch's 106 off 114 balls has a Strike Rate of 92.98 which is "around the 100" you're so keen on. Isn't it?
For you (and mattymac) ---
Break down Finch's dig in terms of the partnerships he had (hard to be exact because of byes in total):
68 off 11.4 overs with Warner (40 balls faced), so Finch made about 30 off 30 balls. SR approx 100.
42 off 7 overs with SS (25 balls faced), so Finch made about 17 off 17 balls, SR approx 100.
14 off 4.1 overs with Head (18 balls faced), so Finch made about 7 off 7 balls, SR approx 100.
85 off 15.3 overs with MM (43 balls faced), so Finch made about 46 off 50 balls, SR approx 92.
The blokes "nurdling it around" were Finch's batting partners, NONE of whom had a better strike rate.
Finch's knocks were the standout in the Oz innings, supported by commentators and SSmith himself. When Finch was dismissed at 5/213 he'd made nearly half of the team's total thus far. That's a really good dig.
(Btw, Root's 46 off 58 balls was widely praised as "steady" and "solid" @ a SR of 79.3 ! *yawn*)
Complaining about a bloke for making a ton @ 92.98 is just ridiculous.
This!Australia's openers aren't the a problem... rather the middle order, which has been unsettled.
Selectors really should have replaced Lynn with Maxwell.Finch played a great innings as the rock. What we needed was other players playing more dynamic innings around him. Pretty much every batsman played the same way as Finch, just not for as long. No one had the balls to take on the bowling from start to finish.
You're right, apologies. It was mattymac. You complained about Finch's run rate , amazingly.I'm not the one saying Finch is selfish, it was mattymac.
JW, I was playing A-grade cricket when Packer revolutionised the One Day game and I twigged to the above well over 30 years ago. Please, stop stating the obvious? I get it.ODI is not the same as Test cricket. The key difference being that you need to score runs quickly. You don't need centuries to be a big help but how fast you score it at is more important. For example, if an opener gets 45 runs at a strike rate of 100, is much more important than one who gets 50 runs and a strike rate of 80.
There might be another example, but I cannot remember a time when one of our openers has scored consecutive tons in ODIs (@ average SR of 90+) and we've lost both games (anybody?).But the reality we're facing right now, is that if the openers (Finch or Warner) are scoring less than strike rate of 100, we are likely to continue to lose the ODI matches against England.
I don't want to get involve in a long-winded debate about the merits of Finch's inning. Just want to point out that I've no intent on being patronizing towards you. You are picking on certain things I say to fit with your line of thought, but bottom line is that I'm not actually bagging Finch!You're right, apologies. It was mattymac. You complained about Finch's run rate , amazingly.
Do you know what "patronising" means?
Here's an(other) example:
JW, I was playing A-grade cricket when Packer revolutionised the One Day game and I twigged to the above well over 30 years ago. Please, stop stating the obvious? I get it.
The following is just plain wrong:
There might be another example, but I cannot remember a time when one of our openers has scored consecutive tons in ODIs (@ average SR of 90+) and we've lost both games (anybody?).
The first ODI was won by Roy's terrific 180.
The second was lost by our sleepy, ineffective middle order (Smith and Head lost their wickets to non-spinner, pie-chucker Root, ffs!).
Finch has joined elite company with 10 ODI tons for Oz (Ponting (29), M Waugh (18), Gilchrist (16), Warner (14) & Hayden (10), and got his 10 faster than any of them, in 83 innings).
It's not Finch's problem. It's not Finch's fault.
mattymac was the more grumpy commenter, but I seem to be getting all the hits from CB lol.It's like Statler & Waldorf have joined this thread...
Selectors really should have replaced Lynn with Maxwell.
White needs to bat further up the order if he plays.
The batting selection is a mess!