Comments on: Why Australia lost the Ashes

By: batting in ned kelly's helmet

batting in ned kelly's helmet — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 04:06:25 +0000

My theory: a team has six batsman in the hope that each will come off about one in three times, or to put it another way, that two will succeed each innings. One good individual innings can bolster a side, but you need two to post a decent total. This, by my reckoning, would mean that if you are carrying a batsman who you know wouldn’t get the runs in a curry factory, then you are guaranteed to struggle about one in three innings, or, in a five test series, assuming nine or ten at-bats, you are going to suffer, logically, about three batting collapses.

If this premis holds water, could I then suggest that it was Mike Hussey what lost the Ashes?

By: Mahinda

Mahinda — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 12:06:39 +0000

Boycott and Flintoff — the adrenaline-charged Big Ted and Hamble of cricket?

By: Bert

Bert — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 09:25:22 +0000

I based my comment around the Playschool toys! How exactly is that testosterone-charged?

By: Mahinda

Mahinda — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 08:59:41 +0000

Ceci, what the hell is a meat pie floater? Where I come from, you certainly wouldn’t want to eat one.

By: Lemon Bella

Lemon Bella — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 07:25:33 +0000

I can report that StraussCat is as indifferent as ever, but has had to have lots of vet visits recently and I felt guilty making him pose next to pictures of Andrew Strauss holding the Ashes aloft

Meowcus Trescattick is still sadly failing on the indifference front. He was quite annoyed people even thought of asking his namesake to play again.

By: Jonathan

Jonathan — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 23:43:11 +0000

Bert’s on the money

By: wolf

wolf — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 23:42:02 +0000

KC I think some people are confused over whose job it is to troll on this site. :p

Bert has most of the answer there, although Pontings trash talk in the leadup didn’t do us any favours. The selectors should be sacked after such an atrocius series. Some cosmetic surgery for Siddle or some sort of elephant man like sack arrangement should be considered too.

One of Englands strengths is that they rotate the captaincy, allowing them to cover for the fact their captain is a congenital idiot. Strauss, while not in the same league as Ricky in the moron stakes at least had some experience to fall back on when he ran out of ideas. For the future of Australian cricket Ponting should resign as captain and let someone with a clue take over (such as Katich, North or even pup).

But the real unanswered question in this series is how did Meowcus Trescattick feel about his namesakes decision not to answer his nations call?

By: The Australian

The Australian — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 21:57:02 +0000

It was a wonderful series. Cricket was the winner at the end of the day!

P.S. Thank you KC for promoting my attempts to raise money by attempting to play cricket and a big thank you to all who donated!

By: steve

steve — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 21:49:57 +0000

I am not testosterone ridden, thank you, being a girl.

And if the cats are still indifferent, see if this can engage their attention –
http://www.catcerto.com/cat_video.htm

By: Jo Fitz

Jo Fitz — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 19:48:42 +0000

Lemon Bella! Hello!
In amongst all these lads being testosterone ridden, can I ask how Strausscat is these days? How indifferent is he at present?