AUS v NZ 3rd Test

Decentric - 11 Jan 2020 9:33 AM

MikeR - 11 Jan 2020 8:19 AM

Paddles - 10 Jan 2020 3:57 PM

baggygreenmania - 10 Jan 2020 9:53 AM

Paddles - 9 Jan 2020 1:07 PM

baggygreenmania - 8 Jan 2020 5:02 PM

Paddles - 8 Jan 2020 4:19 PM

baggygreenmania - 8 Jan 2020 2:24 PM

Paddles - 8 Jan 2020 2:18 PM

Unauthodox, unique whatever. None of those bowlers listed bowl the way he does. In fact I dont know anyone outside of the England team of 1932/33 that employ this tactic. It shud be banned.. then Wagner will revert to being the in/out bog ordinary trundler that he was.

You don't remember Johnson, Thommo, the entire WI quartet bowling short to catching leg side? Okily dokily then.

The real difference with Wagner is twofold; 1 his stamina to keep it going for longer and repeatedly than Johnson et al could muster, but then he is a lot slot slower, so that will help his stamina levels and 2, his accuracy in keeping it below the head, not that the WI quartet or Thomo Lillee et al had to worry about that rule which was brought in to negate the WI tactics of the 1970's and 1980's in 1994.

What I find most amusing, is that batsman are allowed to walk outside leg or bat in front of their stumps,... The batsman seems to be allowed the entire crease, but the bowler not. Hardly seems fair.

You don't remember the entire WI quartet bowling short to catching leg side? Okily dokily then.
No. I watched quite a deal of them so surely I'd have remembered any condemnation of Bodyline tactics.

Wagner is given the whole crease. The batsman is not trying to kill you with a hard leather ball. So totally fair.

But the Windies were't openly condemned for it.Nor is Wagner being condemned. And to be honest, its just leg theory, not Body line, the fields are totally different - he wants the batsman playing shots, not just fending to leg slips and gully. For the WI quartet era, whenever safety was raised, Viv would point out that he does not bat in a helmet. Nor did Richardson. In fact, when Marshall asked Boon whether he was going to get out or whether he had to go around the wicket and kill him, there were even chuckles in that era. Post Hughes, those comments would rightly be criticised and widely as horridly inappropriate. But the West Indies bouncer barrage was so common for 20 years, that the bouncer restriction rule was put in place in 1994. Minimum over rates were introduced as well, cos the WInides would bowl as few as 9 overs an hour.If you need a refresher on how the Windies bowled - this might jog your memory. This is the test that Gatting nearly loses his face.The trouble was the uneven bounce. If somebody’s bowls two balls in the same spot at that pace, and one goes past your neck and one goes past your ankles, you’re knackered.”"Peter WilleyForgive me for being so bold, but I am not entirely convinced you remember WI cricket before 1994. EVen after the bouncer law, Steve Waugh made a name for himself in the WI in 1995 - wearing many shots all over his body because he put the pull and hook away. Ambrose, Walsh, et al still served him plenty of short stuff.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/aug/13/scariest-test-england-ever-played-terror-west-indies-cricket-1986-patrick-patterson

"We didn’t mind the bouncers; that’s the way cricket was. They could bowl you four or five bouncers an over and it wasn’t a bother, you learned how to play them.

But nothing was "DELIBERATELY PITCHED OUTSIDE LEG with an obvious LEG THEORY FIELD". WAGNER AIMS FOR THE BODY. HE IS BOWLING BODYLINE". My last word on the subject.

All bouncers are aimed at the body. How else could they ever get a wicket. Whether its the badge on the helmet or the ribs, all bouncers are aimed at the batsman on a bodyline.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hp17RYl5d1M - where are these head shots aimed at? The stumps?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cozSq8XC-LU - This is where the WI start it in 1976. Look what happens to Close. SOmeome tell me where Michael Holding is aiming if not the body? He tenderises him up like a cheap steak ready to be bbq'd.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yOOQn-kGpGk - at the 1 min mark - another West Indian favourite - long made famous by Roberts, Croft and Marshall, here Ambrose bowls AROUND the wicket to a rhb and bounces him. Now its impossible to get more deliberately pitching wide outside leg, than a rhb bowler - bowling to a rhb AROUND the wicket.... Remember Marshall's sledge to Boon - you gonna get out or do I have to bowl around the wicket and kill you?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VOGoiaZlX8 - was there always someone out to catch the hook shot? You bet cha.

It was just over and over of this stuff - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0O3oK9bSBI - - and noone retired more batsmen out hurt than Courtney Walsh. Watch him in that long video in Australia take out Wessels. Brute of a ball.

This may your last word on the subject, but its quite bizarre you think the bouncer is aimed somewhere other than at a batsman. And even more so if you do not think the WI field was set for the bouncer barrage. The WI were right handed bowlers, thus a lot of the fending off of bouncers from an angle in went to slips, but sometimes - they would bowl around the wicket. Now - there is no lbw or even bowleds if the batsman stands ground to around the wicket.That is just to rough the batsman up. And they did it.

To claim that Wagner is doing anything near as rough as what the WI did is laughable. Let alone that he doing something worse. But how as a cricket fan you could forget the WI bouncer barrage of the quartet - I am simply astonished. Its one of the most famous ever phases of cricket history. Fire in Babylon. You don't have to saviour Wagner's success - but it would be nice to have some objective perspective on this as against WI, THommo, Mitch J, etc - FIre in Babylon trailer - a must watch for any cricket fan who wants to know about the famous WI quartet teams of LLoyd and Richards, the why's and how's. A young Jason Holder is the kid playing on the beach.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JwHgNJCI1mo

Paddles, watch it you're using basic geometry there, it may go over some heads. Right hand bowlers going over the wicket to a right hand batsman will always pitch the ball outside off, even though it will hit the head. When the West Indies were bowling they were all right arm bowlers (I'm sure you may think of a left armer but I can't off the top of my head), and at the time left hand batsmen were a rarity, there were some like Border and Wessels and basic geometry does state that to hit the stumps or bounce the batsman most balls would indeed pitch outside leg to a left handed batsman. Here is an example of Baggers favourite Glenn McGrath taking his hatrick, a right arm bowler over the wicket to 1 right hander and 2 left handers.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Toky3I9RKXE

By the way Baggers, Inside Sport is a sporting magazine which has a forum attached to it, and in the true sense of the word is a public meeting place for the exchange of ideas. In roman times where the word originated it was a place of debate, arguments for and against an idea. Most probably the magazine welcomes the forum to allow the development of stories, so an argument backed up by documentation, that Paddles and I do supply, is probably more welcome than a friendly pow wow. Afterall the authors of the stories don't want to publish something that can be ripped apart for being incorrect, it would lead to a diminished reputation of the author and the publication. I doubt very much Inside Sport is going to publish "Because Baggers says so". Documentation to support makes it harder to argue against. But because You were so polite Baggers with no chastisement from DC I may pop in now and again if my schedule allows it.

Also DC you have appeared to blame my presence for absent posters, who have always disappeared when cricket is not on, especially Bobbie the charming lady on this site, who hasn't posted for months now, before I came back. I hardly think she is psychic, Who knows maybe some creepy guy sent a personal message to her maybe asking to catch up with her, that has put her off coming back, that has happened on other sites that I know of and is unfortunately the negative aspect of forum sites with personal message attachments. Very inappropriate behaviour if you ask me if that is the case, but only Bobbie could explain her reasons for not being here, and I doubt very much it has to do with me.

Mike, a guy who has played a fair bit of cricket, who welcomed you back , and I know each other off forum.

You don't seem to be aware of how you can be perceived. I didn't read it, but he thought you posted a comment maligning the lack of cricket knowledge on here. He is reluctant to disseminate his quite vast knowledge as much as I'd like him to.

Your comment to Paddles, about going over some heads, is offensive. And - can be construed as arrogant.

It can be difficult if one feels like they have a deeper understanding of a sport, not to appear patronising. It may not be you, personally, who has in any way contributed to the lower traffic on the forum, but some withdraw from adversarial polemics.

It can be a question of humility. I think everybody reading your links to articles enjoys the content, but being friendly towards others and sometimes appreciating some inherent value in what they post is a gracious gesture and paramount for a convivial forum.

As for the PM system, it can be useful. I've met up face to face with two posters on this site - using PM as a mechanism. Since you've last posted on here, possibly around The Ashes, Baggers has attended a Shield game with me in Tas and has interacted with a lot of my TCA cricket mates - some who have played at a much higher level of cricket than you. I'm not sure if you've played Shield, English County or First Grade? Baggers interacted well with all of these cricket mates - regardless of cricket knowledge differential amongst any of the TCA Members.

FWIW I don't think you are as biased a Queenslander as you've been accused of, but you seem to have an obsession with trying to stir Baggers up, or, get his attention. Particularly since returning.

Remember I started a thread on this site a while back lauding the high quality of this forum, with you being one of a number of key contributors to the quality of it.