LukeParkerno1
Post-Human
Handscomb failed in the first innings, must be his fault as well.
He had an average series as well.
At least he isn't 34 years old with no chance of improving though
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.
Handscomb failed in the first innings, must be his fault as well.
'Average', very funny. More like complete and utter s**t.He had an average series as well.
At least he isn't 34 years old with no chance of improving though
'Average', very funny. More like complete and utter s**t.
And here of course comes the biased excuses.Newsflash every batsman aside from Steve Smith was ordinary. Renshaw gets a somewhat pass. The rest were awful. I'd rather stick with the younger Handscomb over a tried injury prone Marsh who yet again left us one short in the middle of a test match!
And here of course comes the biased excuses.
He also failed to capitalise on another start. Lets crucify him, when Shite Marsh wasn't even getting starts when he was throwing it away to pie chuckers.Handscomb failed in the first innings, must be his fault as well.
Chipping in with some piddly 'starts' woppee do.He also failed to capitalise on another start. Lets crucify him, when Shite Marsh wasn't even getting starts when he was throwing it away to pie chuckers.
Chipping in with some piddly 'starts' woppee do.
The only reason the test needed saving is because they made 600. We made 450 ffs, how the * do you think it was his fault for us being in that situation?You're very good at cherry picking arguments.
Not his fault they made 600; is his fault he made 2 in the first innings.
It's disingenuous to give him credit for saving the Test, when his s**t contribution was one of the reasons it required saving. Like starting a fire and then wanting praise for putting it out.
A good player doesn't get under 10 every other game.
Biased much? Jesus Christ he was mostly dead weight.Butters wasn't great with the bat, but more than made up for it with his fielding in the first 2 tests.
Overall, his series has been OK with the bat and exceptional in the field.
Very harsh on Maxwell there, played only two tests and did alright in them. Wade improved as the series wore on too.Newsflash every batsman aside from Steve Smith was ordinary. Renshaw gets a somewhat pass. The rest were awful. I'd rather stick with the younger Handscomb over a tried injury prone Marsh who yet again left us one short in the middle of a test match!
So you admit that you didn't watch the first test, when he took 3 blinders?Biased much? Jesus Christ he was mostly dead weight.
I watched, good fielding but doesn't make up for contributing nothing with the bat bar one innings.So you admit that you didn't watch the first test, when he took 3 blinders?
Or the half-dozen or so blinders over the tour. By far our best fielder, without peer.
Cartwright or Patterson
Are you kidding? Eths entire argument is bias and it goes like this "I like Marsh so I will ignore his 6 s**t scores and count his 2 good ones" If you and Eth can't understand why we have more patience with a 25 year old than a 34 year old walking Injury, then good luck to you. Pretty straight forward for just about every other poster in this thread I would have thought.Biased much? Jesus Christ he was mostly dead weight.
I'm with youWhy? So he can fail miserably again?
Give Cartwright a go can't be any worse
Are you kidding? Eths entire argument is bias and it goes like this "I like Marsh so I will ignore his 6 s**t scores and count his 2 good ones" If you and Eth can't understand why we have more patience with a 25 year old than a 34 year old walking Injury, then good luck to you. Pretty straight forward for just about every other poster in this thread I would have thought.
Bring back Marcus North.