1st ODI - Australia vs New Zealand @ SCG (Dec 4)

Remove this Banner Ad

McCullum was the talisman of the Kiwis. All series he was slogging with lucky results.
But Kiwis and McCullum drank their own bathwater and thought he was a genius.

The moment he tried slogging an inswinging Starc bowling yorkers and was bowled for duck eggs, the Kiwis went to water.
What was it? 180 or so? Aussies in a canter.
Maybe if McCullum hadnt been so wreckless and irresponsible, the Kiwis may have made a game of it.

Eady to play on postage stamp sized grounds in front of a capacity 10k. But when everything was on the line, Kiwis couldnt handle the pressure.

Simply not good enough. SA would have been a better final. They have spirit and talent.


Mate would you make up your mind?
"Kiwis could not handle the pressure"
"Simply not good enough."

Which is it?

On one hand you're blaming their loss on their captain, on another hand you're saying they lost because they.just weren't that good, and on a third, possibly growing out of your arse hand, you're saying they lost because they went to water


At least pick one and stay with it.
 
This is pathetic
When Harmison hit Langer on the elbow second ball of that first morning at Lords, and then split Ponting's cheek you knew it was game on. That was a ripper of a series, I lost my virginity during the 89 Ashes though, and for that reason it shades 05 slightly for me.

Lost my plates the night before Senna drilled Mansell at the Adelaide GP in 92.


edit - lol not your story was pathetic Gough

That was a comment on the Kiwis imploding that i had sitting there ready to go when i started typing
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this ad.

Mate would you make up your mind?
"Kiwis could not handle the pressure"
"Simply not good enough."

Which is it?

On one hand you're blaming their loss on their captain, on another hand you're saying they lost because they.just weren't that good, and on a third, possibly growing out of your arse hand, you're saying they lost because they went to water


At least pick one and stay with it.
This is basically the NZ version of the David warner argument. Some one just say "that's the way he plays" and we can move on
 
F*** off mate.

It's a team game - as a side they weren't good enough.

He could just as easily turn around and say he helped create their only ever chance.of winning one.

By the way, NZ have made, off the top.of my head, 6 WC semi finals despite rarely having a top 4 quality line up. that shows they generally over achieve - there is no reason to suggest they won't be thereabouts again.

Cause we all remember every World Cup semi finalist ???

Other than the West Indies capitulation in '96 I don't recall too many? Great game that one. Aus top order falling apart. Law and bevan rescuing, Umpire venkat stopping a certain boundary at Sq leg off warnies bowling f and Steven roger Waugh bowling Brian Charles Lara with a flower bowl when the windies were cruising and tried to knock off the last 45 runs in boundaries.

If your not first your last

Massive inferiority complex over the Tasman


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
Cause we all remember every World Cup semi finalist ???

Other than the West Indies capitulation in '96 I don't recall too many? Great game that one. Aus top order falling apart. Law and bevan rescuing, Umpire venkat stopping a certain boundary at Sq leg off warnies bowling f and Steven roger Waugh bowling Brian Charles Lara with a flower bowl when the windies were cruising and tried to knock off the last 45 runs in boundaries.

If your not first your last

Massive inferiority complex over the Tasman


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

1. I'm not from over the Tasman. I just go into bat for most of australia's opponents.

2. I was simply making the point that if anything NZ usually OVER achieves at world cups so suggesting that it was their only ever chance is pretty misguided when they've shown repeatedly that with mid-range sides they can go deep into the tournament

3. you really don't remember, say, SA needing 13 off 1 in the 92 semi? or inzamam pulling an innings out of his bum in the other semi the same.year? or that semi where the two southern African fellows ended up at the same end of the pitch? or grant Elliott launching dale steyn into space last year? Kenya making the semis in 03?
 
Let's not try and pretend that Williamson isn't anything other than a complete jet just cause he nicked one to first slip today.
He'd be 2nd batter picked if he played for Australia.

But if you don't make runs every time you bat idiots will try & knock you down apparently
 
1. I'm not from over the Tasman. I just go into bat for most of australia's opponents.

2. I was simply making the point that if anything NZ usually OVER achieves at world cups so suggesting that it was their only ever chance is pretty misguided when they've shown repeatedly that with mid-range sides they can go deep into the tournament

3. you really don't remember, say, SA needing 13 off 1 in the 92 semi? or inzamam pulling an innings out of his bum in the other semi the same.year? or that semi where the two southern African fellows ended up at the same end of the pitch? or grant Elliott launching dale steyn into space last year? Kenya making the semis in 03?

Was too young for 92 World Cup.

First cricket innings I can remember is dean jones making 98 off 125 in his recall to the one day team in 1994 v the kiwis ironically.

Yep the South African matches were great in 1999 World Cup and yeah they have on their wiki page 99 World Cup semi finalists....


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Let's not try and pretend that Williamson isn't anything other than a complete jet just cause he nicked one to first slip today.

He'd be the first picked if he was playing for Australia. He's a mile better than Smith considering he quite often is coming in at 1 for stuff all every innings as NZ have barely had a competent opener in years.
 
Calling Williamson anything other then a world class batsmen is ridiculous but to say he'd be picked ahead of Smith if he was Australian is just as ridiculous especially at the current time, Smith makes more runs, more often and at more vital times.
 
Calling Williamson anything other then a world class batsmen is ridiculous but to say he'd be picked ahead of Smith if he was Australian is just as ridiculous especially at the current time, Smith makes more runs, more often and at more vital times.

Yeah, both are world class. But Smith averages 57 in Test cricket compared to Williamson's 49. And Smith's ODI average of 43 (compared to Williamson's 46) would be higher if he wasn't initially played as a slogger coming in at 7-8.

Probably equally good ODI players, but Smith is the better Test batsman.
 
Playing devils advocate for a moment but has the Steve Smith catch reached well OTT levels yet? An amazing catch no doubt (and clearly the best this summer) but don't really see why makes it stand out from loads of other catches taken over the years - including many during the social media age where everything gets blow to stupid levels.

Trent Boult has two catches in point in this video that are on about the same level.

 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top