Cricket 2016/7 Season

[backintheswing]

Maddison and Bird out.
Cartwright and O'Keefe in.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Thesloth96]

Maddison and Bird out.
Cartwright and O'Keefe in.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Big chance for Cartwright... can't see o'keefe taking many seeing he can't spin the ball


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Toxic]

Big chance for Cartwright... can't see o'keefe taking many seeing he can't spin the ballSent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hasn't stopped Lyon taking wickets

[Thesloth96]

Hasn't stopped Lyon taking wickets

Haha very true


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Yossarian]

Renshaw's strike rate is clearly an issue for Warner.

[Toxic]

Thats one of the best 100s I've seen

[TheNuclearOne]

Renshaw's was very impressive too. He got better as the day went on. Great days entertainment. Handscomb continues to accumulate runs as well. Could he possibly one day be the new Mr.Cricket? He has that sort of feel about him. Here's to hoping over the long haul.

[AndyP]

Renshaw's is better because he made more runs, isn't it?

[jimandr]

There were some brief highlights in one of the breaks of Clarke's triple century. It looked like the same pitch. I'd say Khawaja and Smith would be kicking themselves for missing out on such an easy track.

About the only real interest in tomorrow's play is in what Cartwright and Wade do. They'll never get a better chance, and if Wade misses out he might not get another one.

It didn't turn for Yasir Shah, so I can't see O'Keefe getting anything either. He might get to go to India anyway if he doesn't get thrashed out of the attack.

But if Pakistan put their heads down they should be able to bat all day as well, so it might not be the exciting match from this point on.

[AndyP]

Nic Maddinson nearly beat his test average one shot tonight. It was an amazing effort.

[TheNuclearOne]

About the only real interest in tomorrow's play is in what Cartwright and Wade do.

I don't know, i'm pretty interested to see where Renshaw ends up personally.

[3oneday]

Thats one of the best 100s I've seen

Exciting, if not a little self serving.

[coalesce]

Renshaw's is better because he made more runs, isn't it?

I'd say so. I mean it's a good achievement for Warner but a small century on a flat pitch doesn't win the game on its own. Would Aus rather he scored 200 off 300 balls or 100 off 80?

[TheNuclearOne]

I'd say so. I mean it's a good achievement for Warner but a small century on a flat pitch doesn't win the game on its own. Would Aus rather he scored 200 off 300 balls or 100 off 80?

Fully agree with what you say, but will expand for the sake of it (not so much a reply to your post).

Fast hundreds with decent batting from the rest of the side set up wins too. Warners set up countless winning Tests for Australia with his not only rapid hundreds, but quite consistent hundreds. Even tho his SR is somewhere around 78 he still averages almost 50 which is amazing really. He has 17 tons which for example is fast approaching a Justin Langer, who has 23 tons off 73 more innings at a much lesser SR. So basically he averages more than Langer, scores much faster, hits tons more often etc. I use Langer because he was a slower more steady opening bat of great standing.

Obviously Warner will be less valuable when you are getting touched up and playing out time, but you have to win your share of matches too. A blend of steadiness helps tho, even the mighty peak W.I. was helped by Larry Gomes consistent and steadying influence. With the recent changes we are looking like finding a good blend too. We have excellent aggressive bats like Warner and Smith but also guys like Renshaw and Handscomb providing real grit and solidity. Hopefully they can keep on keeping on.

[3Puttpete]

Countless winning tests?

I'll give you 2

[TheNuclearOne]

It's more than that.

[3Puttpete]

I couldn't find them

[TheNuclearOne]

Look harder.

[3Puttpete]

I'll get to it as soon as I find the second gunman on the grassy knoll and alien life.

I'm sure you could rattle 5 or 6 off the top of your head to get me started

[TheNuclearOne]

Rapid 180 in the first innings vs India
Two rapid (sizable) tons in one Test vs S.A.
Two rapid tons in one Test vs India
Two rapid tons in one Test vs N.Z.

When a guy like Warner gets going, particularly in the first innings he often sets the tone for much of what follows. Bowlers are quickly demoralised, Captains have to go on the defensive earlier than they would have hoped, batting becomes easier for those that follow and the list goes on. He can totally upset the apple cart and is a real match winner. You can look beyond his tons too, even some of his higher scores short of 100 can turn the tide for the positive.

[3Puttpete]

Rapid 180 in the first innings vs India
Two rapid (sizable) tons in one Test vs S.A.
Two rapid tons in one Test vs India
Two rapid tons in one Test vs N.Z.

When a guy like Warner gets going, particularly in the first innings he often sets the tone for much of what follows. Bowlers are quickly demoralised, Captains have to go on the defensive earlier than they would have hoped, batting becomes easier for those that follow and the list goes on. He can totally upset the apple cart and is a real match winner. You can look beyond his tons too, even some of his higher scores short of 100 can turn the tide for the positive.

Rapid 180 in the first innings vs India
Agree. @113. Led by 200 on first innings.

Two rapid (sizable) tons in one Test vs S.A.
First innings 135 @ 88. Clarke 161* @ 53
Led by 210
Second innings 145 @ 92

Two rapid tons in one Test vs India
First innings 145 @ 89. Clarke 128 @ 78. Smith 162* @ 70.
Led by 70
Second innings 102 @ 61

Two rapid tons in one Test vs N.Z.
First innings 163 @ 72. Khawaja 174 @ 72
Led by 240
Second innings 116 @ 102. Burns 129 @ 104

The others:
2nd innings 124 @ 80. Clarke 113 @ 86.
We led by 160 on first innings.

Smith first innings 111
Second innings 112 @ 80. Watson 103 @95
Led by 130

Marsh 148. Smith 100. first innings.
Second innings 115 @ 76.
Led by 190

First innings 144 @ 101. Smith 165 @ 67.


I think it's a bit of a leap to give him credit for others' runs to build his record. To do this you must also blame him for any failures by the middle order when he fails first. A number of the second innings tons were made when we were in an almost unbeatable position.

He's very good (might even be great) but I don't think he's quite the single-handed match-winner you make him out to be.

[jimandr]

I didn't see Cartwright bat. So, what is the verdict? Was he impressive, or not?

I saw him bowl, but I wasn't impressed in the slightest. I didn't see much 3rd seamer potential there.

[TheNuclearOne]

Rapid 180 in the first innings vs India
Agree. @113. Led by 200 on first innings.

Two rapid (sizable) tons in one Test vs S.A.
First innings 135 @ 88. Clarke 161* @ 53
Led by 210
Second innings 145 @ 92

Two rapid tons in one Test vs India
First innings 145 @ 89. Clarke 128 @ 78. Smith 162* @ 70.
Led by 70
Second innings 102 @ 61

Two rapid tons in one Test vs N.Z.
First innings 163 @ 72. Khawaja 174 @ 72
Led by 240
Second innings 116 @ 102. Burns 129 @ 104

The others:
2nd innings 124 @ 80. Clarke 113 @ 86.
We led by 160 on first innings.

Smith first innings 111
Second innings 112 @ 80. Watson 103 @95
Led by 130

Marsh 148. Smith 100. first innings.
Second innings 115 @ 76.
Led by 190

First innings 144 @ 101. Smith 165 @ 67.


I think it's a bit of a leap to give him credit for others' runs to build his record. To do this you must also blame him for any failures by the middle order when he fails first. A number of the second innings tons were made when we were in an almost unbeatable position.

He's very good (might even be great) but I don't think he's quite the single-handed match-winner you make him out to be.

I think you get my general gist tho. He's definitely a match winner for mine. It will always be a team sport but he really does hammer things in motion.

[dc68]

I'd say so. I mean it's a good achievement for Warner but a small century on a flat pitch doesn't win the game on its own. Would Aus rather he scored 200 off 300 balls or 100 off 80?

Going by the release of limited edition commemorative bats by the Ch9 $$$ machine today I'd say they reckon the latter.

[TheNuclearOne]

Going by the release of limited edition commemorative bats by the Ch9 $$$ machine today I'd say they reckon the latter.

They were also making a big point on the radio commentary of how much Warner and innings like this does for Test cricket at a time when it can do with all the boosts it can get.