So much for essay writing, this is going to be far more interesting. The two, of course, haven’t played since the group stages, and Australia still haven’t lost a game. Will this be the one? South Africa have won the toss, and elected to bat.
Catch Will, and the scorecard, over here. In the meantime, chat away!
Loading ...
Agreed. I ranted somewhere here about the “system” not allowing bowlers to have snarl. Forget where. He has snarl. I like him a good portion of the time. Other times he’s just an idiot. But I like him.
Joke taken, Fiona
I should use more smilies 
Gutted. Absolutely gutted. Could have coped if the Saffers had given Aus a run for their money, but it sticks in my craw that Aus could win this without having had a *real* match to play.
Great work by the Aussies, though. Bless Matthew Hayden, he needed to take a page out of Andrew Hall’s book and tuck a towel in the back of his trousers. I will say, I’m looking forward to getting a chance to watch him in action on Saturday.
So, which teams have given Australia the best run for their money in this tournament? Does anyone have the stats in front of them?
Who needs stats?
The answer is painfully bleedin’ obvious. No-one.
I can hear the Aussies giggling with glee in the background there.
Actually, Wraye, you’re wrong. the Sth Africans, in their first match, back in the group stages, were about 2-160 round the 25-30 over, (don’t quote me, this is from memory, not stats), and the Oz bowling looked toothless. Then Smith had to retire with cramps, and it gradually folded from there. But I remember it being tense for much of the match. That was the best performance against Oz I remember. Graeme Smith remembers it also!
At that stage our bowling attack looked much more unstable. It’s so long ago, now, people forget that we arrived at the tournament from 5 losses, were being talked about as on the downhill and that the Cup was much more of a level playing field then. Back then, you Englsih were the gigglers
Actually, Wraye, you’re wrong. the Sth Africans, in their first match, back in the group stages, were about 2-160 round the 25-30 over, (don’t quote me, this is from memory, not stats), and the Oz bowling looked toothless. Then Smith had to retire with cramps, and it gradually folded from there. But I remember it being tense for much of the match. That was the best performance against Oz I remember. Graeme Smith remembers it also!
At that stage our bowling attack looked much more unstable. It’s so long ago, now, people forget that we arrived at the tournament from 5 losses, were being talked about as on the downhill and that the Cup was much more of a level playing field then. Back then, we were thought of as has-beens. ( that giggling you hear is gleeful Michael, who is glleeing while he can )
Will, why has my unedited comment gone in, too????
Rusty, it is sometimes worth emailing Will when things aren’t working properly — he is such a busy lad, he doesn’t always read everything we say here.
I reckon Rusty is right. I remember the feeling I had in my stomach at the time. Although it was Watson’s freak direct hit FIRST, then Smithy falling apart (physically).
As for pre-talk hype: Who remembers the article asking if Australia can beat Scotland? Who remembers Viv himself writing Australia off? Who remembers Pat Symcox having his bite?
God I LOVE it when the media fuel the fire. Ricky Ponting loves it too. He’s extremely witty, KNOWLEDGEABLE and blessed with a long memory when he enters Press Conferences to boot…
Thinking a tad more on this: at times when it seems like there is nothing left to achieve, we always have some media shark swimming nearby to have a crack at the Aussies upon first slip-up.
And suddenly we have something to achieve.
Yes, nothing inspires Punter more than someone denigrating him.
Gee, it’s a surprise to see Viv wanting to see Australia on the skids.
After all, Viv did manage to steer the mighty Windies unerringly onto the rocks. I’m sure he’d like a bit of company on the pedestal of skippers-that-manage-to-junk-goliaths.
Yes Michael. Ponting certainly is the greatest Cricket Anorak that there ever was.
Did you mean to use the word Anorak marcus?
Yeah. It was something he said on the “Quote…Unquote” page on CricInfo a while back. In response to a question, he said something like, “despite my reputation as being a bit of a cricket anorak, I don’t really know the answer.” (I asssume he was looking for Almanak). Anyway, that was just terribly funny to me.
Specifically…
What a wally.
No, he would have meant “anorak” as in nerd/geek/enthusiast, not “almanac” as in repository of knowledge.
loofer is right – “anorak” is a slang term for someone obsessively interested in a topic that doesn’t seem of interest to anyone else. It’s british slang, so the the joke is on you, Will!
I’ve always thought it to mean pretty much the same thing as “train-spotter”, but I’m Australian, so I could be missing the subtleties between the two terms…
Loofer, I’m pretty sure you’re right — as in anorak being the kind of raincoat your typical nerd trainspotter would wear.
Exactly, loofer and Kathy. One source says that’s exactly where it derives from – “trainspotters” wearing anoraks, and “trainspotters” being obsessives of the sort I described…….so the “anoraks” out there trainspotting go into slang as a term for nerdy obsessives!
Mind you, I never thought of Ponting as especially intelligent, anyway ( and I don’t mean in terms of a cricketing brain). I never hold my breath waiting for some pearl of wisdom to drop during his postmmatch interviews.
Huh. I’ve never heard of “anorak” in that context. I assumed that Ponting meant that he was a repository of knowledge (as in Almanac) as opposed to being some sort of winter garment, and so just mixed up his words. Just goes to show you that you learn something new every day, right?
Still, he IS a wally, and he doesn’t strike me as being particularly intelligent, either. I’ve never thought of him as being any sort of cricket repository, encyclopedia, jacket or sweater.
I’ve always thought of Ponting as being rather street-smart, rather than intelligent, if that distinction makes sense….
Someone described him on cricinfo recently as “the most driven man in cricket”, and that’s certainly what I’d think of as his most defining characteristic, particularly given the eternal thousand-yard stare of the last year or so…
Wally is a bit harsh. There are quite a few Australians and even more international cricketers I’d think of as bigger wallies than Ponting.
If anything I think he’s a bit bland. I’m sick of the current trend for sportspeople to mouth useless platitudes, and much prefer people who actually show some genuine personality… cue McGrath, Warne, Pietersen, Nel, etc.
Yes, “wally’ is rather derogatory for such an outstanding player and a man who has carried this team so far. And a bit of a “loser” term too.
On McGrath, one thing that will go with him is the generation of larrikans that used to so typify Australian sport and we’re left with SNAGS and politically-correct “wallies” !
To me the most interesting characters in cricket right now are the senior members of the Aussie team — people who know their sport but a bit about life too — McGrath, Warne, and also Langer and Hayden, who have quite interesting quirks in their lives. As for the majority of very young sportsmen, cricketers or other, they get interviewed far too much when they’ve lived very little life and have nothing much to say.
I found it a bit odd the other day, when Mike Atherton, in a general rant about what was wrong with English cricket, said the English system was fostering very one-dimensional young cricketers who could only communicate in sullen grunts as compared to the much more rounded young men coming through the Aussie system. Is this true? Who can he be talking about? Is it Mahmood, who does seem a little sullen, but is no more or less interesting than many young men his age, though his Lancashire accent is fairly impenetrable?
In my experience most young men at age 21 or so don’t have a lot of interest to say, particularly if they’ve spent their entire life obsessively practising one sport. So I’m wondering if anyone can enlighten me as to what Atherton means or who he is talking about…
Since when was “wally” a derogatory or harsh term? It’s just a mild chide, that’s all. If we want to talk about real wallies (and worse) then perhaps we should get started on Graeme Smith?
I’m rather surprised at Atherton’s comment about the young Aussie cricketers. If they do get interviewed, they usually produce standard sporting cliches or repeat themselves several times through nervousness. The only one who comes to mind as articulate is 22 year old Dan Cullen, a talented off-spinner. He could be quite a xharacter, if he fulfills the hype about him.
I believe Warne said the other day that young cricketers like Alistair Cook shouldn’t be writing cricket columns after only playing a few tests – he should be spending all his time practising. Not sure if Warne is one to talk, though.
A lot of those columns are rather tiresome I reckon, Fiona — particularly since 90 percent of them are ghost-written. Of the English players, apparently only Strauss writes his own. Does Warne write his himself?
And yeah, I reckon most young cricketers, no matter what the country, seem full of cliches and nervousness. I mean they aren’t selected on the basis of their witty conversation!
I think Atherton is in a snit about the last six months which haven’t given him much to cheer about, and understandably so, I suppose. Nasser Hussain also made a similar sort of complaint about England cricketers too during the Ashes tour of Australia — that they were too cossetted and not getting out and about enough and using a bit of young man’s initative and learning about life in a new country. (Mind you, with all the losing they were doing maybe they were too embarrassed to show their faces — I’m sure they get a siege mentality after a while.)
However, considering all the losing England did under Atherton and Hussain, I just wish we got more interesting perspectives from them on what could be going on in a team that’s on a big losing streak.