|
The Ashes 2006/07 (pg. 18)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Ian |
| quote: | Originally posted by Trance Nutter
amazing fightback, to come back from nowhere like that, awesome effort. |
lol i gave up at lunch, especially after Bucknor gave strauss out on plate to start the rot. I said 3 years ago that he should retire, and he's making more & more poor calls like this since. We really should've batted out a bit more though, disappointed in one or two of the dismissals, I think nerves finally got in. Hopefully now we'll pick the best players, but i won't hold my breath. |
|
|
| S_madis |
who would pick Ian?
personally Monty has to come in for Giles to start with. Giles hasn't troubled the Aussies at all this series and even in that final session, could get any turn out of the rough. Both Harmison and Anderson need to go but for who is the question? England battling without Jones! Along with Flintoff in the last series he was the main destroyer but unfortunately he's injured for you blokes. Unless England have an ace up their sleave in terms of a pace bowler, the likes of Ponting, Hussey and to a lesser extent Clarke will continue to dominate.
Batting I wouldn't say is a major disaster, however Collingwood and Pieterson cannot be expected to perform for the rest of the side. Cook, Strauss, Bell and Flintoff don't or should I say havn't looked up for it at all. |
|
|
| Philby |
oh yeah what a game!! far out that was great :D put that in your pipe and smoke it raistlin! brilliant match, what a fight back by the aussies!! you could easily see how excited the team was to win this won, they deserve it!
| quote: | Originally posted by 00soups00
but goddamn it bill lawry stop jacking off over Warney on the air! |
OFF :whip:
he bowled ing non stop for 4 hours just about, he deserves all the ing jacking off! you leave bill lawry alone! :mad: :toothless
i didn't see strauss go out, the commentators were saying he didn't deserve it though. you win some you lose some, there's always descisions that could have gone one way or another and well the way england played this morning they get no sympathy from me! :p |
|
|
| Ian |
| quote: | Originally posted by S_madis
who would pick Ian?
personally Monty has to come in for Giles to start with. Giles hasn't troubled the Aussies at all this series and even in that final session, could get any turn out of the rough. Both Harmison and Anderson need to go but for who is the question? England battling without Jones! Along with Flintoff in the last series he was the main destroyer but unfortunately he's injured for you blokes. Unless England have an ace up their sleave in terms of a pace bowler, the likes of Ponting, Hussey and to a lesser extent Clarke will continue to dominate.
Batting I wouldn't say is a major disaster, however Collingwood and Pieterson cannot be expected to perform for the rest of the side. Cook, Strauss, Bell and Flintoff don't or should I say havn't looked up for it at all. |
Monty not being picked is a travesty, it's pathetic. He's had a great summer but fletcher plays favourites & that's not what we need, we need the best players. Personally and this would be for melbourne since he's not fit yet but our 11 should be
Vaughan (c)
strauss
bell
pietersen
collingwood
flintoff
read (WK)
plunkett
hoggard
anderson
panesar
Cook is young & isn't ready yet for the Aussie tracks, Vaughan was phenomenal opening last time, so let's give him the go. Even if he fails with bat, his tactical nous is half of what won us the last series. Until then I'd pick Ed Joyce in his place. Plunkett is a good young seamer (he's 22 now) who while not having the skill of jones, can at least bowl well for us in theory, better than harmison. Our biggest worry is flintoffs fitness, he can't handle himself as captain & his batting hasn't been good for a long time now.
I'm very unhappy with the politics that's come into the side in the last year & I think fletcher has gone past his best. we've begun to sink from the highs we reached & it's time we picked someone who can take us forwards. The biggest loss, and it's behind the scenes, is bowling coach troy cooley who is now with your lot. He was behind so much for us & we also miss Rod Marsh who fell out with fletcher & i kinda sensed something was brewing, after Read was dropped in the west indies for Jones & it came to an end when he left last september. |
|
|
| Trance Nutter |
| quote: | Originally posted by Ian
Vaughan (c)
strauss
bell
pietersen
collingwood
flintoff
read (WK)
plunkett
hoggard
anderson
panesar
|
I'd agree with that. Maybe not Anderson though, he hasn't done much. However I suppose its a bigger risk to bring in Mahmood than to keep him. However its movement of that ball which cuased us problems last year and Mahmood does get some decent movement (from memory)
And yes I know Pieterson does have a better average at 4 than 5, but I'd keep Collingwood at 4 for the moment. No point mucking with those two. |
|
|
| Trance Nutter |
In other news, this is crap.
| quote: | Shoaib and Asif acquitted
Osman Samiuddin
December 5, 2006
The saga continues: First the ban and, then, complete acquittal © Getty Images
Shoaib Akhtar and Mohammad Asif have been acquitted by the tribunal appointed to review their appeals against the drugs ban imposed on them by an earlier committee. The three-man committee, headed by Justice Fakhruddin Ebrahim, voted two to one in favour of the acquittal. Haseeb Ahsan, former Test cricketer, and Ebrahim were in favour of the acquittal while the third member, Danish Zaheer, dissented.
"This appeal committee holds that Shoaib Akhtar and Mohammad Asif will not be deemed to have committed a doping offence," Ibrahim told reporters in Karachi. "The ban and punishment imposed by the earlier tribunal is hereby set aside as being contrary to the provision of laws."
A 30-page plus judgement (to read the full text of the judgement click here) for released by the committee detailed the reasons for their decision and though they are extensive, one significant theme that emerges from it is problems with the workings of the previous committee.
In particular, concern has been raised over the fact that while the original body was constituted to work within the guidelines of the PCB's anti-doping policy, the punishment it decreed - and the benchmarks it derived them from - were based on the ICC's anti-doping regulations.
The ruling concludes that both players were able to prove 'exceptional circumstances', in that neither was fully aware of the substances they were taking. Crucially, it points out that 'exceptional circumstances', as defined by the PCB and the ICC were signficantly different and that while the previous committee used ICC's definition of the term, it was bound to use the PCB's.
The role of the PCB in ensuring their players were not only fully aware of banned substances but also understood the literature that they had been provided has also been highlighted in the report. "It is plainly evident that neither Shoaib Akhtar nor Mohammad Asif were ever warned or cautioned against taking supplements," the judgement reads.
"Hence, this committee is of the considered view that both players have successfully established that they held an honest and reasonable belief that the supplements ingested by them did not contain any prohibited substances."
The report also includes an 11-page note of dissent from Zaheer, the third member of the committee. He points out flaws in the testing procedures carried out by the PCB and argues, on that basis, that the whole process should be repeated, new samples provided and fresh verdicts given.
Bilal Minto, one of the lawyers representing Shoaib, told Cricinfo that the decision was a good one, but highlighted that the PCB had also let down the players. "We are very happy about the judgement obviously. But it is clear that the PCB's level of educating players about anti-doping legislation is poor. As lawyers, even we struggled to make sense of their anti-doping regulations so expecting players to be able to understand it is not right."
Shoaib, banned for two years, and Asif, for one year, appealed after they were found guilty for testing positive for the banned anabolic steroid nandrolone in dope tests that were internally conducted by the PCB at the end of September.
The ICC did not have any immediate reaction. "Malcolm Speed is currently in Uganda and we can't comment on the issue unless we have all the details," said Brian Murgatroyd, the ICC spokesman. "We need to go through the judgement and also get the PCB's version before making any comment."
The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), in charge of monitoring drugs in sport, said they needed to discuss the matter with the ICC. Frederic Donze, their media relations officer, told Cricinfo: "We will now review the reasons for the decision, liaise with the ICC and consider whether to exercise its right of appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport."
The original tribunal which had imposed the ban was chaired by barrister Shahid Hamid and included Intikhab Alam, the former Pakistan captain, and Waqar Ahmed, a doping expert. |
Asif I can sort of understand. He was a junior player, never been to a drugs seminar, was from a rural village with few communications and had a very poor understanding of English and stopped as soon as the doctor told him to. But Shoaib, thats crap. He's a senior player, been to drugs education seminars, has good understanding of English. He should have known that he needs to check all supplements with the team doctor (which he didn't do). Shoaib has no excuse in my books. |
|
|
| Ian |
| quote: | Originally posted by Trance Nutter
I'd agree with that. Maybe not Anderson though, he hasn't done much. However I suppose its a bigger risk to bring in Mahmood than to keep him. However its movement of that ball which cuased us problems last year and Mahmood does get some decent movement (from memory)
And yes I know Pieterson does have a better average at 4 than 5, but I'd keep Collingwood at 4 for the moment. No point mucking with those two. |
it's easy enough with them at 4 & 5, interchangable easily. Mahmood isn't as good as people believe him to be, in my experience. he's quick but that's about it, which is why i'd pick guys with better records over him. Sometimes he doesn't even get into his county side. Anderson just needs handling better, he's never given the chance to show his skill properly. |
|
|
| Ian |
| quote: | Originally posted by Trance Nutter
In other news, this is crap.
Asif I can sort of understand. He was a junior player, never been to a drugs seminar, was from a rural village with few communications and had a very poor understanding of English and stopped as soon as the doctor told him to. But Shoaib, thats crap. He's a senior player, been to drugs education seminars, has good understanding of English. He should have known that he needs to check all supplements with the team doctor (which he didn't do). Shoaib has no excuse in my books. |
that's bull mate. Shoaib is a cheat, simple. Look at his history, yet guys like hair who try to follow the laws get shafted. Ludicrous |
|
|
| Dean Millson |
How shocking is that decision.
It will be very interesting to see how the ICC responds as from what i heard on the radio this morning they are signed to WADA which puts the responsibility squarely on the athlete for what they put in their own body.
Perhaps we'll really see how much pull the sub-continent has over the game now (even the Hair issue has probably already illustrated this). I don't see how the ICC cannot condemn this (or even try to overturn it) if they are truly there for the good of the game. |
|
|
| drew k |
| Not really on the current topic but i am really dissapointed the game wasnt at least a draw. I feel as though now the sparkle has gone out of the series, a 1-1 tie so far would have been terrific and maybe got me interested in cricket again. |
|
|
| PauLie_C |
| COME ON ENGLAND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
|
| Ian |
| quote: | Originally posted by PauLie_C
COME ON ENGLAND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
good news: Monty Plays
bad news: Sajid plays (for every hot spell he bowls, theres about 20 beemers) |
|
|
|
|
