Sport The Hangar Cricket Thread IV

[Doss]

On a different note completely, and for a little trip down memory lane:



Take particular note of the the Ambrose delivery at 1min 45sec...possibly the most bizarre delivery I've ever seen. Ambrose's expression after it is a cracker.

 

[eth-dog]

Worse than Healy and Slater?

Completely disagree. Yes, Chapelli's lashings of macho bullshit can be a bit grating after a while.

However, Slater and Healy have lost the plot completely IMO- especially Slater. He's pretty much just become a caricature of himself- I see him as the BT of the Channel 9 commentary team. Sounds like an utter bogan and perenially on the gas.

Yes. Slater does get annoying when he's with "the boys" (Healy, Taylor etc) but when he's with Nicholas and, say, Lawry he's usually pretty good

 

[Drummer_19]

No one can hold a candle to Heals and Slats with their awfulness.

 

[Phone]

warne can. he showed some promising signs ages ago but he is just a straight up awful commentator. Makes a good point, repeats it into the ground 2000 times, and attempts to make himself look like a classic aussie character by talking about booze

 

[Andronicus]

warne can.

Ball by ball and and filling conversation in the box is horrible with Warne.

Tactical talk, and cricket knowledge is brilliant though. The guy has a phenomenal cricket brain, but seems to lack in every other area.

 

[Old Campaigner]

Watson doing a Watson, just for a change.

He just outdid himself

 

[Old Campaigner]

Poor Jonathan Agnew keeps getting paired with Kerry O'Keefe.

On another note, I need a new bat. Does anyone know a better place than Maddocks in Blackburn?

If you know someone who is going to India just get them to bring one back, you'll save a fortune. My club has a deal with an importer and I've just bought am unlabeled bat for $150 that would retail at about $600 had someone like Spartan stuck their logo on it.

Otherwise shop around, all the bats are pretty much the same quality at each price point because they're all made at one of two factories, you just need to find a place that has the bat you like at a good price. I'd look at Topline in Bayswater as well as Maddocks, and a few others too if you have the patience.

 

[Doss]

He just outdid himself

At least when he's made 103 prior to 'Watsoning' you can just have a good laugh at it all.

 

[eth-dog]

So Watson gets another ton when the series is over. ****ing hell he'll do nothing for the next 4 tests but have another ton when we're 2-0 down against the saffers

 

[Howard Moon]

Slater is an utter joke!

loved it when warne put him in check the other day..

"stop waffling slats"

 

[Andronicus]

Best start possible.

Just screamed out an expletive at work.

 

[Howard Moon]

haha hows johnson last bowling step from side on in slow mo!... its huge! so long

 

[Kong]

Heeeeeey Beerfish..

 

[Yoda_]

Heeeeeey Beerfish..

hm. a flat track bully who shows all the promise in the world, only to get himself injured or to screw something up basically.

remind you of anyone??

 

[Doss]

Shane Watson?

 

[Yoda_]

Shane Watson?

Shane Watson
Stew Crameri

 

[eth-dog]

Shane Watson?

Stewart Crameri

 

[Doss]

Yeah, decent call.

 

[BrunoV]

Test cricket can be so amazingly good and so infuriating. This series is very much proving to be the latter.

England are 5 for 250 on a supposed minefield where 3 of their top 5 (also being 2 of their best 3) players play get out shots.

There is no reason why England shouldn't have been at stumps tonight in genuine striking distance and yet they gave up before they even got going.

 

[The Speaker]

There is a very strong psychological reason why teams don't chase down 500 runs - it's 500 runs.

 

[BrunoV]

i know what you mean but psychology isnt really an excuse for what are supposed to be professional athletes.

 

[The Speaker]

i know what you mean but psychology isnt really an excuse for what are supposed to be professional athletes.

Why not? Because we can't see it?

 

[Old Campaigner]

i know what you mean but psychology isnt really an excuse for what are supposed to be professional athletes.

Of course it is. Psychology is incredibly powerful.

 

[BrunoV]

Of course it is. Psychology is incredibly powerful.

Psychology is probably the wrong word, it at least needs qualification. I'm thinking more of mentality and expectations based on largely irrelevant traditions. In the context of whether or not psychology should be an excuse for professional athletes it is more than a pedantic and poorly expressed distinction.

Teams don't even try to chase 500+. They seize up because the history books say that it can't be done which doesn't really have account of the fact that pitches have been much more durable in the last 15 or so years. There is now the convenient modern dogma that "you have to take the good with the bad as far as attacking impatient and lazy one day specialist batsman X is concerned". It has given chasing teams the perfect get out clause because not many modern players bother digging in and they're not scrutinized for it because "they never had a chance anyway".

The WACA pitch looks like a minefield but is playing as true as it was on Sunday and Monday when Australia was piling on runs. Cook is the only guy to be undone by the pitch so far.

Pietersen simply doesn't place a high enough price on his wicket. He hardly seemed to be crushed by the weight of expectation as he coasted to 45. Bell and Stokes had already given up and were just having a hit. I suppose Stokes, in particular, may never had played well if he was faced with the pressure of being able to win the match but it hasn't even gotten to that point yet.

I could stomach them seizing up at 3 for 250 to 300 tomorrow morning as the pressure built but collapsing to 5 for not many again, with 3 players getting themselves out, is not the forgivable result of psychology it is just laziness justified by an obsession with tradition.

 

[Old Campaigner]

Psychology is probably the wrong word, it at least needs qualification. I'm thinking more of mentality and expectations based on largely irrelevant traditions. In the context of whether or not psychology should be an excuse for professional athletes it is more than a pedantic and poorly expressed distinction.

Teams don't even try to chase 500+. They seize up because the history books say that it can't be done which doesn't really have account of the fact that pitches have been much more durable in the last 15 or so years. There is now the convenient modern dogma that "you have to take the good with the based as far as attacking impatient and lazy one day specialist batsman X is concerned". It has given chasing teams the perfect get out clause because not many modern players bother digging in and they're not scrutinized for it because "they never had a chance anyway".

The WACA pitch looks like a minefield but is playing as true as it was on Sunday and Monday when Australia was piling on runs. Cook is the only guy to be undone by the pitch so far.

Pietersen simply doesn't place a high enough price on his wicket. He hardly seemed to be crushed by the weight of expectation as he coasted to 45. Bell and Stokes had already given up and were just having a hit. I suppose Stokes, in particular, may never had played well if he was faced with the pressure of being able to win the match but it hasn't even gotten to that point yet.

I could stomach them seizing up at 3 for 250 to 300 tomorrow morning as the pressure built but collapsing to 5 for not many again, with 3 players getting themselves out, is not the forgivable result of psychology it is just laziness justified by an obsession with tradition.

What you are describing is a psychological effect. That's why sides hire sports psychologists to try and convince players to attempt to overcome apparently insurmountable obstacles. As good as our brains are they have some pretty major problems with some things. It's really interesting and worth reading into if you have the time.