Stuart McGill

[thewhippersnapper]

Why is he still in the team?

He is getting smashed. I dont like him and I dont think he is good enough. So much for he knows what to do against these batters.


Xavier Doherty, Brad Hogg and Cameron White could all do better.

 

[Cooldude]

Originally posted by BomberAUS
Why is he still in the team?

He is getting smashed. I dont like him and I dont think he is good enough. So much for he knows what to do against these batters.


Xavier Doherty, Brad Hogg and Cameron White could all do better.

LOL, another fellow who doesn't know what he's talkin' 'bout.

 

[Crooked Rain]

Re: Re: Stuart McGill

Originally posted by Cooldude
LOL, another fellow who doesn't know what he's talkin' 'bout.

Matter of opinion mate. I rate MacGill a very scrappy bowler against teams that are used to good spin bowling. Those teams are India, Sri Lanka, QLD, VIC, TAS, SA, WA.

Just look at his state record and it aint much. But against teams that aren't exposed regularly to a half decent spinning ball, he goes ok.

In fact there are a host of NSW players over the years whose state record have not warranted a call into the national side, but they somehow get there.

Just look at Michael Clarke at the moment. Averages 38.00 in first class yet is being touted a shoe-in for Waugh's spot ahead of the likes of Love, and co. who have been averaging 45-50 for years.

Great, a 131no. against a pedestrian Indian attack looking for some practice in the lead-up to a big test the following week.

sorry to get off the topic.

cr.

 

[Cooldude]

Re: Re: Re: Stuart McGill

Originally posted by Crooked Rain
Matter of opinion mate. I rate MacGill a very scrappy bowler against teams that are used to good spin bowling. Those teams are India, Sri Lanka, QLD, VIC, TAS, SA, WA.

Just look at his state record and it aint much. But against teams that aren't exposed regularly to a half decent spinning ball, he goes ok.

In fact there are a host of NSW players over the years whose state record have not warranted a call into the national side, but they somehow get there.

Just look at Michael Clarke at the moment. Averages 38.00 in first class yet is being touted a shoe-in for Waugh's spot ahead of the likes of Love, and co. who have been averaging 45-50 for years.

Great, a 131no. against a pedestrian Indian attack looking for some practice in the lead-up to a big test the following week.

sorry to get off the topic.

cr.

Clarke was one of the leading runscorcers in Shield cricket and ING cup cricket last season, average around 50 in first class level, and have done remarkably well for his country in the One day and scored vital runs when his team needs them. If you don't quite know what you're talking about, please be quiet.

When he has an average record you slam him for not scoring runs, but when he does make a 131 n.o, you say it's against a pedestrian attack, so what exactly are your standards? That Indian bowling attack's about the standard you get in Test cricket nowadays, and Clarke made those runs when his team lost early wickets and were in trouble, and made more than half of the team's total.

With your comments of Macgill, which spin bowler wouldn't be made to look scrappy against India? Warne, possibly the greatest spinner of all time, was made to look ordinary against Inida throughout his career. It happens when you have such great players of flight bowling, who are always in position and getting to the pitch of the ball with ease.

You say he "goes okay" against other teams that ain't as good at playing spin bowling? How about a strike rate of 52 balls and a very very good average? That is world class, and possibly the greatest strike rate ever for a Test spin bowler, and you slam him for bowling to bad batsmen? So when he gets wickets, you disregards it, and when he doesn't, you're calling for his head?

Please stop contradicting yourself.

 

[Crooked Rain]

I think people get a little too carried with some of our players' performances in Test cricket which isn't as consistently strong as state cricket in my eyes.

Sure there are players in Test cricket like Lara, Tendulkar, Pollock, Murali ect. who are at a level above state cricket, but they are few and far between these days.

There are a host of players whose test records easily outshine their state records.

For mine the best players are the ones with immaculate state and Test records like Matty Hayden.

MacGill is good, but the opposition has to be of a certain type for him to succeed. We are seeing this now.

Can't wait to see how he goes in the next two tests.

And they can ship him off to Sri Lanka and India after that.

cr.

 

[Cooldude]

Originally posted by Crooked Rain
I think people get a little too carried with some of our players' performances in Test cricket which isn't as consistently strong as state cricket in my eyes.

Sure there are players in Test cricket like Lara, Tendulkar, Pollock, Murali ect. who are at a level above state cricket, but they are few and far between these days.

There are a host of players whose test records easily outshine their state records.

For mine the best players are the ones with immaculate state and Test records like Matty Hayden.

MacGill is good, but the opposition has to be of a certain type for him to succeed. We are seeing this now.

Can't wait to see how he goes in the next two tests.

And they can ship him off to Sri Lanka and India after that.

cr.

What a load of jibe, who cares what you do in State level if you're great in Test level, Warne has never been brillant in national or club matches, but his test record speaks for itself, and what you can do on the highest level is all that matters. Having a great State record does not mean you can succeed in test level.

What type? What are ya talking about? Macgill is just simply bowling to some of the best players of spin you'll ever see, have you ever see Laxman play spin? Macgill has had success over many other test nations, there are bound to be one or two nations you don't have as much success with, that happens to all test players, but if you're saying he's crap just because he can't succeed against one or two, then you're pretty small-minded.

 

[Crooked Rain]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Stuart McGill

Originally posted by Cooldude
Clarke was one of the leading runscorcers in Shield cricket and ING cup cricket last season, average around 50 in first class level, and have done remarkably well for his country in the One day and scored vital runs when his team needs them. If you don't quite know what you're talking about, please be quiet.

When he has an average record you slam him for not scoring runs, but when he does make a 131 n.o, you say it's against a pedestrian attack, so what exactly are your standards? That Indian bowling attack's about the standard you get in Test cricket nowadays, and Clarke made those runs when his team lost early wickets and were in trouble, and made more than half of the team's total.

With your comments of Macgill, which spin bowler wouldn't be made to look scrappy against India? Warne, possibly the greatest spinner of all time, was made to look ordinary against Inida throughout his career. It happens when you have such great players of flight bowling, who are always in position and getting to the pitch of the ball with ease.

You say he "goes okay" against other teams that ain't as good at playing spin bowling? How about a strike rate of 52 balls and a very very good average? That is world class, and possibly the greatest strike rate ever for a Test spin bowler, and you slam him for bowling to bad batsmen? So when he gets wickets, you disregards it, and when he doesn't, you're calling for his head?

Please stop contradicting yourself.

Clarke may well have been ONE of the leading runscores in the Pura Cup last year, but that does not entitle him to a Test berth - just look at the numbers mate. Tell me the last batsman to make his test debut for Aus with a first class average still in the 30's?

My point is there are guys that have been doing it for bloody years. Love, Bevan, Hussey and co. have far better records than your mate Clarke, who should have to wait his turn. He must consistently turn his regular 30's and 40's into 100's - like these guys do. Ian Chappell said as much during the coverage at the weekend.

There are guys with far better records over the years than Clarke. A guy like Stuart Law played only one test and scored 54 not out - a travesty.

I don't care about his one-day form, we are talking the long version of the game here mate - take your friggin speed blitz blinkers off for a change.

Clarke made a nice unbeaten ton last weekend but was that better than Love's 300 not out v Victoria or Bevan's 200 at the weekend which will no doubt be passed under the carpet? Ask any player which attack they would prefer to face - that indian one or a state side. Plus that Indian side had a care factor of zero - it was net practice for them - whereas Aus A were trying their best to impress.

All I say with MacGill is lets play him in Sri Lanka and India and see if he comes out of it with his average still under 30.

We should drop him against teams, like India, who can play him with ease on pitches that will not suit him. The guy offers nothing in the field and with the bat, unlike Warne.

Drop him for the Melbourne and bring him back for Sydney to see how he goes.

This must be done, but it wont!
cr.

 

[Cooldude]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stuart McGill

Originally posted by Crooked Rain
Clarke may well have been ONE of the leading runscores in the Pura Cup last year, but that does not entitle him to a Test berth - just look at the numbers mate. Tell me the last batsman to make his test debut for Aus with a first class average still in the 30's.

Actually, 4th leading runscorer behind Waugh, Blewett and someone else, and you're just being silly. Selectors don't pick players for their overall career record, it's their form of the past 12 months.

Originally posted by Crooked Rain

My point is there are guys that have been doing it for bloody years. Love, Bevan, Hussey and co. have far better records than your mate Clarke, who should have to wait his turn. He must consistently turn his regular 30's and 40's into 100's - like these guys do. Ian Chappell said as much during the coverage at the weekend. [/B]

Love is turning 30 next year, Bevan's 33, Hussey's 28. They'd have let's say, 4-5 years of cricket in them? Clarke is 22. You're underestimating the benefits of youth investment, Ponting was about the same kind of player Clarke was when he made his debut as a very good young batsman, and look how he's become. The current test team is getting old, we need to pick a 10 year player like Clarke to add freshness to the squad. And quite frankly I wouldn't bother much about what Chappellie says, sometimes he just talks utter bullsh*t, even though I totally respect him as an intelligent cricket brain, and I wouldn't think the selectors would listen to him either.

Originally posted by Crooked Rain
There are guys with far better records over the years than Clarke. A guy like Stuart Law played only one test and scored 54 not out - a travesty. [/B]

Blah, that happens, there are a lot of one-test wonders in cricket

Originally posted by Crooked Rain

I don't care about his one-day form, we are talking the long version of the game here mate - take your friggin speed blitz blinkers off for a change. [/B]

Woo woo, calm down, kid, no need to get personal here. One day form or five day form, he still played for Australia, the way he played in the One Dayers show that he's got enough temperment to succeed in the international scene.

Originally posted by Crooked Rain
Clarke made a nice unbeaten ton last weekend but was that better than Love's 300 not out v Victoria or Bevan's 200 at the weekend which will be just passed under the carpet? Ask any player which attack they would prefer to face - that indian one or a state side. Plus that Indian side had a care factor of zero - it was net practice for them - whereas Aus A were trying their best too impress. [/B]

Bevan's 200 was a great knock against the odds, Love's 300 was a brillant innings, but if you're talking about attack strength, don't you understimate the current Indian attack, good young bowlers, Pathan bowled well, Balaji was so-so, Nehra's still battling for fitness after being out of the game through injury since the world cup, and Murali Kartik is a very, very good left arm spinner. If the Indian attack's so crap, why didn't Hussey, Love, Rogers and Hodge score anything? BTW, it's more than a nets practice, those Indian bowlers are bowling for a spot in the Test team.

I don't think Clarke will be in the Test XI yet, Lehmann will retain his spot, but we should start including him in the touring squad and give him valuable experience, he's a player with a big future, not so Hussey, Love, Bevan, Maher, or whoever.

Originally posted by Crooked Rain
All I say with MacGill is lets play him in Sri Lanka and India and see if he comes out of it with his average still under 30?

I say drop him against teams, like India, who can play him with ease on pitches that will not suit him. The guy offers nothing in the field and with the bat, unlike Warne.

Drop him for Mel and bring him back for Sydney.

cr. [/B]

You said " I say", the thing is, what you say don't matter, you don't pick the squad. All you're doing is bagging Macgill and say he'd be crap against the two best nations against spin, while you disregards it when he takes wickets against every other nation, you still haven't answer me, when he takes wickets you say it's against crap batsmen, and when he doesn't take any you want him dropped, so what are your standards? What can he possibly do if you're unhappy with him taking wickets and not taking wickets?

Just can't believe some idiots would just jump out and call the second best leg spinner in the world and one of the best ever a hack, just don't know what they're talking about, do they?

 

[Crooked Rain]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stuart McGill

Originally posted by Cooldude
Actually, 4th leading runscorer behind Waugh, Blewett and someone else, and you're just being silly. Selectors don't pick players for their overall career record, it's their form of the past 12 months.

So friggin what??? Let's see him score consistently. 100's I mean. You're just a typical biased blue. Ther are guys in that side who have had to perform for more than just one year. Clarke did not average over 50 last year anyway. So what, he scored a 100 on TV!!!!

Love is (29) turning 30 next year, Bevan's 33, Hussey's 28. They'd have let's say, 4-5 years of cricket in them? Clarke is 22. You're underestimating the benefits of youth investment, Ponting was about the same kind of player Clarke was when he made his debut as a very good young batsman, and look how he's become. The current test team is getting old, we need to pick a 10 year player like Clarke to add freshness to the squad. And quite frankly I wouldn't bother much about what Chappellie says, sometimes he just talks utter bullsh*t, even though I totally respect him as an intelligent cricket brain, and I wouldn't think the selectors would listen to him either.

I think Australia have done well bey giving a host of players second chances like Hayden, Langer, MArtyn and Lehmann. Stuff youth policy for the sake of it. Wasn't Ponting dropped at one stage throughout his career? Blooding him early didn't seem so good then didn't it? You're logic is crud.


Blah, that happens, there are a lot of one-test wonders in cricket. Yeah shrug it off Blue boy.

Woo woo, calm down, kid, no need to get personal here. One day form or five day form, he still played for Australia, the way he played in the One Dayers show that he's got enough temperment to succeed in the international scene.

Well Put BEVAN IN THEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Bevan's 200 was a great knock against the odds, Love's 300 was a brillant innings, but if you're talking about attack strength, don't you understimate the current Indian attack, good young bowlers, Pathan bowled well, Balaji was so-so, Nehra's still battling for fitness after being out of the game through injury since the world cup, and Murali Kartik is a very, very good left arm spinner. If the Indian attack's so crap, why didn't Hussey, Love, Rogers and Hodge score anything? BTW, it's more than a nets practice, those Indian bowlers are bowling for a spot in the Test team.

You are kidding champ. You are dead-set kidding. The straw-clutching king.

I don't think Clarke will be in the Test XI yet, Lehmann will retain his spot, but we should start including him in the touring squad and give him valuable experience, he's a player with a big future, not so Hussey, Love, Bevan, Maher, or whoever.

And he's got plenty of time to pay his dues.



You said " I say", the thing is, what you say don't matter, you don't pick the squad. All you're doing is bagging Macgill and say he'd be crap against the two best nations against spin, while you disregards it when he takes wickets against every other nation, you still haven't answer me, when he takes wickets you say it's against crap batsmen, and when he doesn't take any you want him dropped, so what are your standards? What can he possibly do if you're unhappy with him taking wickets and not taking wickets?

Ok he is not a threat against this Indian side and should be dropped for Melbourne!!! Can't you see what I'm trying to say??? I'd have him back for Sydney. But he's not the be-all like you think. He is not a Warne and shouldn't play every Test if the conditions and opposition don't suit him.

Just can't believe some idiots would just jump out and call the second best leg spinner in the world and one of the best ever a hack, just don't know what they're talking about, do they?

And who is the third best leggie in the world champ? You? Me? Nagamootooooooo??? Great depth hey. Now I've heard it all.

cr.

 

[RogerC]

I saw Martin Love's 300 against Victoria, and I can tell you Clarke's century was better than that. The Junction Oval pitch was doing absolutely nothing, and while other Qld batsmen went out trying to push the scoring along, Love just plodded along. What he was doing wasn't difficult. A great score, but it's rare you'll get a pitch like that and an attack as insipid as Victoria's was that day.

Crooked Rain, you're entitled to your opinion, but mine is that Clarke is the goods, and he has the temperament to make in test cricket. Right now, if required. His only flaw seems to be hitting in the air rather than keeping it down. But, you know, Gilchrist has that problem too, and it's not holding him back.

I agree with you about MacGill, though. I saw an article which argued his figures have been inflated because he was only ever played when the pitch was spin-friendly - second spinner with Warne, etc. Warne played in all conditions.

That said, no other Australian spinner is going to do as well against India, and MacGill is taking the odd wicket here and there, so I guess he stays.

 

[The Passenger]

Stuart MacGill is clearly the best available spinner in the country. if he is struggling against the Indians than imagine whats gonna happen to someone like White or Hauritz.....

As for Clarke, he's time will come.

He is good enough to play test cricket now, but it's probably better for him to wait a year or two, but if he was the man to replace Waugh in Sri Lanka i wouldn't be protesting to much.

I actually think Love's 300 may have worked against in the fact they he batted for so long it cost Queensland any chance of getting 6 points. The selectors would've loved the runs, but they would also be looking for team players.

It will clearly come down to Katich, Lehmann, Love, Clarke and Hodge battling for positions 5 and 6 in Sri Lanka.

Either one will do just as good a job as the other I reckon.

 

[Cooldude]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stuart McGill

Originally posted by Crooked Rain
So friggin what??? Let's see him score consistently. 100's I mean. You're just a typical biased blue. Ther are guys in that side who have had to perform for more than just one year. Clarke did not average over 50 last year anyway. So what, he scored a 100 on TV!!!! [/B] [/B]

So friggin' what? He WAS consistently scoring hundreds, and this season he's been away with the Aus One Day team and had just started playing state cricket and has already scored a hundred against a test team, and you fail to understand, selectors go by the form of players in the last 12 months, not their overall careers.

And also, I'm a Victorian and will always go for the mighty Bushrangers, I'm unbiase and call it as I see it.

Originally posted by Crooked Rain
I think Australia have done well bey giving a host of players second chances like Hayden, Langer, MArtyn and Lehmann. Stuff youth policy for the sake of it. Wasn't Ponting dropped at one stage throughout his career? Blooding him early didn't seem so good then didn't it? You're logic is crud. [/B] [/B]

LOL, you don't know what you're talking about. At the first two sentences of that, you're naming a list of players who all got second chance, got dropped and came back to score runs, and then you said Ponting got dropped through his career and blooding him early didn't help, do you know what you're talking about? Ponting came back and scored, didn't he? Does an average equal to Bradman in recent seasons ring a bell for ya? Besides, Clarke will fare much better around a winning team with established and experienced players.

Originally posted by Crooked Rain
Yeah shrug it off Blue boy. [/B] [/B]

LOL, so name-calling's the best you can do now?

Originally posted by Crooked Rain
Well Put BEVAN IN THEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! [/B]

Who's the blue boy now? Bevan's as old as Lehmann

Originally posted by Crooked Rain
You are kidding champ. You are dead-set kidding. The straw-clutching king. [/B]

If name-calling's the best you can come up with just because you can't put up a proper argument, then I don't blame you and your intelligence.

Originally posted by Crooked Rain

Ok he is not a threat against this Indian side and should be dropped for Melbourne!!! Can't you see what I'm trying to say??? I'd have him back for Sydney. But he's not the be-all like you think. He is not a Warne and shouldn't play every Test if the conditions and opposition don't suit him. [/B]

Not a threat? Why are the Indians attacking Macgill? That's coz they know what he's capable of as a bowler. You're the one who's failing to see the point. Macgill can run through a batting order in any given day, and India is preventing him from doing that by attacking him, dropping him would only please India.

I never said he's the be-all and end-all, but you're underestimating the value of a quality spinner. They add much needed variety and will always test a batsmen's technique and footwork, particularly a leg spinner. When you say he's no Warne, sorry, you shouldn't compare him to Warne, no one should. Warne is in a galaxy of his own and he can literally achieve miracles, he is no Macgill, so please, don't compare him to Warne.

Originally posted by Crooked Rain

And who is the third best leggie in the world champ? You? Me? Nagamootooooooo??? Great depth hey. Now I've heard it all.

cr. [/B]

LOL, idiot, you don't know anything about leg spin, do ya? Leg spinners are a rare breed, you're lucky to have a world class wrist spinner in your country every 30 years. Australia's lucky enough to have two in one era, and people are bagging one of them, because he cannot do what the other one, Warne, can do.

BTW, you can stop your name-calling, blue-boy, whatever sh*t, just shows you are running outta ideas.

 

[CatManDo]

The pitch was a road. MacGill is still our leading wicket taker in this series. Every Aussie bowler was below standard. Get over it.


On Clarke - Cooldude, you say not to undermine the importance of youth investment, but I think you are clearly doing the same for experienced players by suggesting guys like Love and Hussey shouldnt be bothered with. How old was Gilchrist when he played his first Test match? How old were Hayden and Martyn when they finally got another crack at the big time after churning away in Shield for season upon season?

 

[Hit And Rum]

Macgill's biggest problem, apart from his unrivalled arrogance, is that every over he fires off at least one ball with so much flight the ridicualous parabola gives the batsmen about 5 hours to react to it and then whack it.

I would not have MacGill bowling in a situation where not conceding runs was paramount.

 

[Cooldude]

Originally posted by CatManDo

On Clarke - Cooldude, you say not to undermine the importance of youth investment, but I think you are clearly doing the same for experienced players by suggesting guys like Love and Hussey shouldnt be bothered with. How old was Gilchrist when he played his first Test match? How old were Hayden and Martyn when they finally got another crack at the big time after churning away in Shield for season upon season?

The time when Gilchrist and Hayden and Martyn and the likes were back in the side, the side was not as old as it currently is. I understand the youngest batsman in our squad is Ponting on around 28, the rest are in the 30s. You can't say those guys would hang around for the next 4 years.

I agree, Love definitely deserves his chance, he was very unlucky to be dropped, in my view he should replace Damien Martyn, unless Martyn quickly get his game together and score some Test runs, but the selectors would definitely be tempted to throw in Clarke at a young age to freshen the squad.

 

[Crooked Rain]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stuart McGill

Originally posted by Cooldude

LOL, idiot, you don't know anything about leg spin, do ya? Leg spinners are a rare breed, you're lucky to have a world class wrist spinner in your country every 30 years. Australia's lucky enough to have two in one era, and people are bagging one of them, because he cannot do what the other one, Warne, can do.

BTW, you can stop your name-calling, blue-boy, whatever sh*t, just shows you are running outta ideas. [/B]

Go back and see who started the name calling pal. Mate I get the impression you're a cricketing god who cannot be messed with - all other opinions are just not valid.

I don't know anything about leg spin? You say MacGill is the second best spinner in the world, yet you also acknowledge that there isn't much competition in that field. That is my point!!! It's no big deal when you look at the other leg spinners around.

This all started because I believe that MacGill should not play in Melbourne, but you are obviously one of those robotic types that thinks WE MUST PLAY A LEG SPINNER AT ALL TIMES!

Someone take that chip out of the man's brain.

Vs India in Melbourne MacGill should carry the drinks IMO!!!!!!!!!!!

And on the Clarke issue, the bottom line is until he starts scoring consistently in the longer version of the game like the Love's and Bevans, he should wait his turn.

Why isn't everybody calling for Shane Watson to be included in the Aussie side once Waugh retires? He's a young gun with a similar batting record to Clarke at state level. Gee, he scored 157 today against the likes of Lee and Stuart Clarke and Bracken - a much better attack than Clarke's opposition at the weekend.

C'mon give WATTO some headlines - let's talk him up!! He'll be able to take wickets as well once he gets his back right!!

He's also played well for Aus (like Clarke) in one-dayers!!

Put him him -young gun and all that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Geez

cr.

 

[Cooldude]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stuart McGill

Originally posted by Crooked Rain
Go back and see who started the name calling pal. Mate I get the impression you're a cricketing god who cannot be messed with - all other opinions are just not valid.

Actually, I name call coz you did it first, but that'd just be a never-ending argument of "who started it", so I'd just ignore that issue.

Cricketing god that cannot be messed with and all other opinions are just not valid? Well no, if the opinion's a good one and has a point in it then of course it's valid, but you were just talking sh*t, so obviously I disagree with you doesn't mean I disagree with everyone.

Originally posted by Crooked Rain

I don't know anything about leg spin? You say MacGill is the second best spinner in the world, yet you also acknowledge that there isn't much competition in that field. That is my point!!! It's no big deal when you look at the other leg spinners around.

Just because there ain't much more around doesn't mean Macgill isn't quality. I only say he's the second best LEG spinner in the world, not all spinners in general, because if you wanna talk about all spinners, I can name a lot. In my view Macgill's the leading spinner in the world at present, he doesn't have the luxury of bowling on turning wickets all the time like Murali does.

Originally posted by Crooked Rain

This all started because I believe that MacGill should not play in Melbourne, but you are obviously one of those robotic types that thinks WE MUST PLAY A LEG SPINNER AT ALL TIMES!

Someone take that chip out of the man's brain.

Someone should actually insert something in your brain, since I doubt there's anything in there. What you believe quite frankly does not matter, and I don't think we must play a leg spinner at all time, but it's essential for times to select a quality spinner at all times when one's availble, and Macgill's certainly quality. You need variety in your attack, or else it'd just be three fast bowlers doing the same thing: around 135 kph bowling on or outside off stump, that won't trouble the batsman.

Originally posted by Crooked Rain
Vs India in Melbourne MacGill should carry the drinks IMO!!!!!!!!!!!

Well your opinion does not matter, don't know why you keep trying to enforce it, coz the selectors ain't hearing it and even if they do, they wouldn't do it.

Originally posted by Crooked Rain
And on the Clarke issue, the bottom line is until he starts scoring consistently in the longer version of the game like the Love's and Bevans, he should wait his turn.

Bevan's at the twilight of his career, while Love should be in the Test side, but Clarke should be in the Test squad on tours to give him experience, not necessarily play him.

Originally posted by Crooked Rain
Why isn't everybody calling for Shane Watson to be included in the Aussie side once Waugh retires? He's a young gun with a similar batting record to Clarke at state level. Gee, he scored 157 today against the likes of Lee and Stuart Clarke and Bracken - a much better attack than Clarke's opposition at the weekend.

We were calling for Watson to be included, but he'd need to get over his injuries first. He's a very good batting allrounder, but he isn't as mature a cricketer as Clarke is. Unfortunately for him, like a lot of allrounders, they're injury-prone.

 

[Crooked Rain]

Go back through MacGill's career and you'll find more turning wickets than not.

"The second best leg spinner in the world" I still can't get over that one. I guess it's true but it's like saying...

It's not worth it cool one.

cr.

 

[Cooldude]

Originally posted by Crooked Rain
Go back through MacGill's career and you'll find more turning wickets than not.

"The second best leg spinner in the world" I still can't get over that one. I guess it's true but it's like saying...

It's not worth it cool one.

cr.

He is the second best behind Warne, who can be better? Kumble? Danish Kaniera? Mustaq Ahmed? I'd take Macgill anyday over those three.

 

[Crooked Rain]

Originally posted by Cooldude
He is the second best behind Warne, who can be better? Kumble? Danish Kaniera? Mustaq Ahmed? I'd take Macgill anyday over those three.

Yeah Mustaq is playing some great cricket at the moment. Why don't you bring up Dutchy Holland for crying out loud!!!

I'll go Kumble ahead of MacGill actually - forgot about him. Doesn't do that great in Aus, but I'd like to see Stuey have a trundle on the sub-continent.

Bugger off Warney we want to see the great MacGill against Sri Lanka and India on their pitches!

MacGill - number 3.

sorry.

cr.

 

[Cooldude]

Originally posted by Crooked Rain
Yeah Mustaq is playing some great cricket at the moment. Why don't you bring up Dutchy Holland for crying out loud!!!

I'll go Kumble ahead of MacGill actually - forgot about him. Doesn't do that great in Aus, but I'd like to see Stuey have a trundle on the sub-continent.

Bugger off Warney we want to see the great MacGill against Sri Lanka and India on their pitches!

MacGill - number 3.

sorry.

cr.

LOL! Kumble ahead of Macgill?!?!? That's the biggest jibe I've ever heard, Kumble's record away from home is woeful to say the least, but if you give him a pitch with a crumbling top and uneven bounce, he's bloody dangerous, but in good pitches he get around Australia, England, South Africa, etc etc etc. He wouldn't be so effective, since he doesn't turn the ball nor flight it much.

Macgill's serviceable in very good batting pitches, he's capable of spinning it on any surface, with a good wrong'un and a skidder that he does have, or star ball, if you want the full name of it. When he pitches it on leg stump and spins it away outside off stump, it's bloody hard to play.

Besides, Kumble ain't a traditional leg spinner, so it might be a bit tough to compare him with Macgill.



Mustaq Ahmed's only getting wickets in county cricket where the batsmen there are bunnies against spin, but at his best he's still very devastating.

 

[Crooked Rain]

Originally posted by Cooldude
LOL! Kumble ahead of Macgill?!?!? That's the biggest jibe I've ever heard, Kumble's record away from home is woeful to say the least, but if you give him a pitch with a crumbling top and uneven bounce, he's bloody dangerous, but in good pitches he get around Australia, England, South Africa, etc etc etc. He wouldn't be so effective, since he doesn't turn the ball nor flight it much.

Macgill's serviceable in very good batting pitches, he's capable of spinning it on any surface, with a good wrong'un and a skidder that he does have, or star ball, if you want the full name of it. When he pitches it on leg stump and spins it away outside off stump, it's bloody hard to play.

Besides, Kumble ain't a traditional leg spinner, so it might be a bit tough to compare him with Macgill.



Mustaq Ahmed's only getting wickets in county cricket where the batsmen there are bunnies against spin, but at his best he's still very devastating and expensive.

I just can't go past that amazing 10 for 74 and the fact he's been doing it for years. But you are right they are two very different spinners, so it's hard to put them in the same basket.

cr.

 

[Cooldude]

Originally posted by Crooked Rain
I just can't go past that amazing 10 for 74 and the fact he's been doing it for years. But you are right they are two very different spinners, so it's hard to put them in the same basket.

cr.

Well Macgill never has a chance to do it year after year though, he's hardly played two tests in a role when Warne was around, not until Warnie getting banned has he had the chance to have a whole season of test matches, and this year he's responded beautifully, let us praise him for his efforts, not bag him.

 

[Crooked Rain]

Originally posted by Cooldude
Well Macgill never has a chance to do it year after year though, he's hardly played two tests in a role when Warne was around, not until Warnie getting banned has he had the chance to have a whole season of test matches, and this year he's responded beautifully, let us praise him for his efforts, not bag him.

Well if he responds beautifully in the next two tests I'll take your point on board.

Time will tell. He better do well with the pill because he offers nothing else to the team.

cr.

 

[Cooldude]

Originally posted by Crooked Rain
Well if he responds beautifully in the next two tests I'll take your point on board.

Time will tell. He better do well with the pill because he offers nothing else to the team.

cr.

Well he'll only play around three or four more tests until Warne comes back, so let him do his best while he still has the chance, as he surely will.