ICC Cricket World Cup 2003 - Australia vs Namibia
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
You are clueless. As I said, Namibia would prefer us to play at our best to see where they are at. Would you have preferred us to block the last few overs to make the final result smaller? Then we would get accused for not taking the game seriously, and it would be an insult to Namibia. Think about it.
No of course not. I am a woman how the hell would I know anything about cricket? Umm err, let me see now.... Matthew Hayden is a big hunk, Glen McGrath is very tall. Will that do?
Don't have my hand on 'it'. In fact I don't even have an 'it'. But I am sure you do, and I am sure you have a handful of it at the moment.(If you have a very small hand, that is) If you really think that so called records against a country that is worse than second rate are credible then you need a reality check. I am embarrassed about it!
Yes, proof that not all countries have a win at all cost attitude like the Aussies. Maybe England took it easy. Ever think of that?Originally posted by red+black
And as for England being able to achieve such records, that's proof of your ignorance. Namibia batted the 50 overs against England and scored 217, and Namibia, NOT England, achieved, for that game alone:
- the best batsman, AJ Burger with 85 runs
- the best bowler, van Vuuren with 5 for 43
- the best partnership, 97 for the 3rd wicket
- the MOTM award, AJ Burger
Yeah England broke a lot of records that day
BTW, is your hand tired yet?
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
you're very much in the minority, and your argument is a poor one. As if England ever have control of a cricket match? What a joke, England don't have a win at all costs attitude!!! They're happy just to get a win against anyone.
I know ur a F, doesn't mean u ain't got yer hand on it. Did any players brag about the records? McGrath wasn't exactly happy to have such a record and says as much by his intentions to beat the record against stronger opposition.
England took it easy! Still getting over that one.
I know ur a F, doesn't mean u ain't got yer hand on it. Did any players brag about the records? McGrath wasn't exactly happy to have such a record and says as much by his intentions to beat the record against stronger opposition.
England took it easy! Still getting over that one.
Sorry sunshine, but most people I have spoken to in the last couple of days have agreed with me. I think maybe you are in the minority. If you want to accept records like that, fine, it's up to you.
yeah i guess you're right. when i look up the record books in a few years, i guess any records v namibia just won't be anywhere to be found. Which test team has lost a test by the most number of runs? You wouldn't even know.
funny, people used to think Sri Lanka weren't that good.
you lose, back to the other General Boards.
funny, people used to think Sri Lanka weren't that good.
you lose, back to the other General Boards.
I wonder if Pakistan v India (the thread or the game) will get as heated as this thread.
Australia 301
Namibia 45
Australia win, McGrath won something too.
End of story. Move on.
Australia 301
Namibia 45
Australia win, McGrath won something too.
End of story. Move on.
Yeah stand up Australia, be proud, be very proud!
Did I watch the game? Yes! Did I watch all of it? No, I do have to get up early and go to work.
Who cares what games they have taken it easy against. The point I am making is those 'records' are not as credible as records made against a recognised cricketing nation. It's a sham!
you're the only one beating the story up. you probably think the team all stood up and did a great big circle jerk for all the records they broke. the final is all that matters, and the players know that, even if you don't.
and why don't you look it up? which team lost a test match by a record margin (number of runs)? poor little defenceless nation really didn't deserve to be humiliated like that, ruined cricket in that country.
i hope you don't have kids.
"No honey, let them win, or else they'll get upset. Don't beat them you big school bully! What chance did they have? They'll never learn unless you let them win!"
and why don't you look it up? which team lost a test match by a record margin (number of runs)? poor little defenceless nation really didn't deserve to be humiliated like that, ruined cricket in that country.
i hope you don't have kids.
"No honey, let them win, or else they'll get upset. Don't beat them you big school bully! What chance did they have? They'll never learn unless you let them win!"
A circle jerk? Oh, charming and how so unlike you to resort to talk like that!
Boy, did you get that right. About the only thing you've been right about all day.
Originally posted by red+black
"No honey, let them win, or else they'll get upset. Don't beat them you big school bully! What chance did they have? They'll never learn unless you let them win!"
Listen up, sweetness. I never said let them win. What I said was, why go in with all guns blazing when it was obvious it was going to be an easy win anyhow. But you be proud of that win, okay?
The Old Dark Navy's
Moderator
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2000
- Posts
- 98,220
- Reaction score
- 132,221
- Location
- Wherever I am
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Nottingham Forest
- Staff
- #89
I would suggest that there are many sporting records that are broken in favourable conditions so Australia shouldn't feel embarrassed that they played well and won easily. Actually Bevan and Martyn had a slow run rate and the running between the wickets was not the best either so there is still a little work to do. McGrath could hardly bowl tame deliveries outside off stump for 10 overs so that the Namibians had a better chance either. Would have been counter productive to his form.
People shouldn't crow about meaningless records but they exist and we shouldn't be embarassed about the record, just the attitude if we make a big deal out of it.
I remember watching Aust v W.I in the mid 80's where we got absolutely pummelled many times. In fact the only celebrating Australia did back then was when we passed the follow-on target! Nobody let up on us and nor should they have. We gained a lot of character and perhaps the player who suffered the most during this period, Allan Border, helped Australian cricket to learn and bounce back to the top. Strength comes from great adversity and if they love their cricket, the Namibians will not despair and be discouraged but will be a spurred on and work on their game. Australia have shown everybody a blueprint on how to be successful and sooner or later, one country will implement it to the letter.
People shouldn't crow about meaningless records but they exist and we shouldn't be embarassed about the record, just the attitude if we make a big deal out of it.
I remember watching Aust v W.I in the mid 80's where we got absolutely pummelled many times. In fact the only celebrating Australia did back then was when we passed the follow-on target! Nobody let up on us and nor should they have. We gained a lot of character and perhaps the player who suffered the most during this period, Allan Border, helped Australian cricket to learn and bounce back to the top. Strength comes from great adversity and if they love their cricket, the Namibians will not despair and be discouraged but will be a spurred on and work on their game. Australia have shown everybody a blueprint on how to be successful and sooner or later, one country will implement it to the letter.
If we really wanted to, we could have scored a lot more than 300. We played Bevan at no. 3 who had a hit around to get himself some practice and time in the middle for future games. I'd hardly call it 'all guns blazing'.
Oh puhleeze, spare me! The best cricket nation in the world taking on Namibia. I've told you my opinion and that's it. You are entitled to believe what you want, just as I am.
honestly bee, what are the players meant to do. its not as if they are the ones parading around like they are the greatest thing ever to grace this planet because they beat namibia. i agree we have had better sides than this in recent years, but you really cant expect for australia to do anything less than play to the best of their ability.
the players are vying for selection themselves. a failure against namibia is a huge black mark against their name.
i think being in the doldrums in the 80's and having a few players from that era in the side that was eventually ranked #1 (unoficially) in 1994, is responsible for the ruthless attidude our team displays when playing other sides. they dont take being on top for granted, because we did spend so long at the bottom.
That's not my point. My point is the way everyone, well a lot of people anyway, are going around crowing about the 'records'. Big bloody deal, they don't mean anything to me. Of course we were going to get records like that against a country like Namibia. For Christ's sake we are 'The Invincibles' reborn. Honestly, do you think those records mean as much as if they were against South Africa? I don't. Sorry, but I feel embarrassed about it. My opinion and I am not the only one to feel that way.
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
Only while our three front-liners are injury-free ... traditionally a hard state to maintain, especially for Gillies Pie.
As for the other argument raging here, it is unrealistic to expect individual players to ease up in the course of a game, not to mention somewhat condescending and even a little insulting to the weaker oppostion.
I think what Bee is implying, however, (and please allow me the power of presumption for a moment Bee) is that overall team planning and selection could be tinkered with to give those on the fringe a game (Watson, Harvey, etc..), those normally down the order a hit up the top (Lee, Bichel, McGrath etc..), and those normally not given much of the ball (Martyn, Lehmann, etc.. ) a chance to get some confidence with the pill ... sorry Shane ... the ball.
As it was, I had the feeling that our top order guys were so concerned about missing out on the run feast with the bat, that they batted with way too much conservatism, and ultimately got themselves out relatively cheaply. Even Hayden was too cautious early, and only he, Lehmann, and to a lesser extent Symonds ever really broke the shackles against inferior bowling.
Personally I think including minor countries in the World Cup is good... I mean it's not really a "world" cup if only 10 or 11 countries are eligible.
It's not good for them to get flogged of course, despite the leaning curves associated with it, all of which can only be gained through experience and through playing against the established countries (from the bottom-ranked team to the top team).
Maybe what this tournament has taught the ICC is that, while including minnows isn't a bad thing, having more than a third of the competition made up of them isn't a good thing.
I think a system should be encouraged whereby the established countries send regular second teams to play unofficial Tests and ODIs (still sanctioned as F/C and List A matches) against Canada, Namibia, Holland, etc.
Every team has been competitive in at least a couple of their games this World Cup, which shows that aside from playing against teams like Australia, they won't necessarily be embarrassed.
A few "A" tours might help these fledgling cricket countries gain experience and maybe even raise the profile of the sport locally... without copping the floggings that the Australian, Sri Lankan and South African first XIs would dish out.
Perhaps the better administered cricketing countries could look at sponsoring/subsidising players from new cricketing nations to play for (e.g.) a grade side in Australia with eligibility for state cricket if merited.
It's not good for them to get flogged of course, despite the leaning curves associated with it, all of which can only be gained through experience and through playing against the established countries (from the bottom-ranked team to the top team).
Maybe what this tournament has taught the ICC is that, while including minnows isn't a bad thing, having more than a third of the competition made up of them isn't a good thing.
I think a system should be encouraged whereby the established countries send regular second teams to play unofficial Tests and ODIs (still sanctioned as F/C and List A matches) against Canada, Namibia, Holland, etc.
Every team has been competitive in at least a couple of their games this World Cup, which shows that aside from playing against teams like Australia, they won't necessarily be embarrassed.
A few "A" tours might help these fledgling cricket countries gain experience and maybe even raise the profile of the sport locally... without copping the floggings that the Australian, Sri Lankan and South African first XIs would dish out.
Perhaps the better administered cricketing countries could look at sponsoring/subsidising players from new cricketing nations to play for (e.g.) a grade side in Australia with eligibility for state cricket if merited.
Great thinking, Darky.
Exactly, we should be doing everything we can to help the developing cricketing countries out. Maybe we can offer the better players from those countries a place at the AIS Cricket Academy. Or are we too much a 'school yard bully' to stick out a helping hand?
Time will tell, Bee. And the irony of it all is that if cricket is to flourish in this country in the long term, we need to assist our opposition while we have the resources to do so. Like the AFL, the game will be healthy if the lower teams are healthy.
Aussies crowds love to see their team win, but in the long run it requires authentication by a competitive opposition.
And soccer is seriously on our doorstep as a viable summer sport to wrest away our talented youth.
I think Kenya shouldn't be allowed to play in the World Cup. I mean, they don't play tests, no one knows where Kenya is, teams create these massive records against them and brag about them, the players are black, and they get picked on by the big schoolyard bullies aka teams with white players.
Naah, scrap that, somehow everyone gave them a fair go and they qualified for the Super Six. Lucky that big bad Australian team didn't play them.
Yet.
Naah, scrap that, somehow everyone gave them a fair go and they qualified for the Super Six. Lucky that big bad Australian team didn't play them.
Yet.
