wuddie
Black by Demand
want a medal?u-borat said:predictedhussey'scenturyatcloseofplayyesterday
want a medal?u-borat said:predictedhussey'scenturyatcloseofplayyesterday
This pitch is great compared to some of the others it looked ordinary from day 1 but has held up pretty well except for the occasional uneven bounce,I think there will be a result India's batting line up is pretty sketchy at the momentwuddie said:i just hate the way indian pitches deteriorate through the test it is ridiculous. credit to their bowlers though, took full advantage of the condition and cleaned up the top order. the aussies had no idea where the next run was coming from. it'd be interesting to see how the aussies bowl to the indian batsmen and how the batsmen respond differently.
What you have said is wrong in so many ways Watson does not deserve selction for Australia and never has he is an injury prone piece of shit he is neither a good batsmen or bowler and if he wasn't considered an all rounder he would not make the team it's this stupid idea that you need an all rounder to be a great cricket team it is complete rubbish Australia from 1999 to 2006 never really had an all rounder and they are possibly the greatest test cricket team ever,as for Symonds he has proven himself at both forms of the game Watson has not proven himself at any levelwuddie said:watson is alright if he gets a few tests under his belt and gets himself going. all his injuries have taken a hell of a lot out of him. i daresay if he kept himself fit all those seasons ago, he'd actually be a better (perhaps not as exciting) player than symmo.
you may try and use some punctuation marks in your posts, they at least make you sound like you know what you are talking about. calling a player a 'piece of shit' doesn't make your argument any stronger.Mozza91 said:What you have said is wrong in so many ways Watson does not deserve selction for Australia and never has he is an injury prone piece of shit he is neither a good batsmen or bowler and if he wasn't considered an all rounder he would not make the team it's this stupid idea that you need an all rounder to be a great cricket team it is complete rubbish Australia from 1999 to 2006 never really had an all rounder and they are possibly the greatest test cricket team ever,as for Symonds he has proven himself at both forms of the game Watson has not proven himself at any level
Maybe you might want to use someone else to compare with Watson, champ.wuddie said:you may try and use some punctuation marks in your posts, they at least make you sound like you know what you are talking about. calling a player a 'piece of shit' doesn't make your argument any stronger.
no one has come out and said a team needs an all rounder to do well, watson is there more for his bowling and can also give the batting a bit of strength. if you think he doesn't deserve the test spot, well, he just saved aust from an utter embarassment in the first inning. and his bowling, 3-45 in the first test, second to only johnson, and 71 off 24 overs in second test, most economical out of them all. if you ask me, shouldn't the 'all rounder' be the worst of the bowlers? brett lee, on the other hand, has picked up 1 wicket from each inning, so much for the spearhead of the aussie attack.