|
|
Post by dirtgirl on Feb 6, 2002 15:12:44 GMT 10
What's happened to your kiwi solidarity, Spongeboy? And as for hiring sfk for birthday parties, I think you'd better keep adding zeros to your quote (they're filthy rich now, remember? Anything less than $50K per show won't get a look in...) Happy birthday Dazza for whenever it is  |
|
|
|
Post by Dazza on Feb 6, 2002 19:02:22 GMT 10
My Bday is a long way away......Dec 31st!
|
|
|
|
Post by spongeboy on Feb 7, 2002 9:10:52 GMT 10
<quote> Anything less than $50K per show won't get a look in </quote>
....how about clint solo then?
|
|
|
|
Post by dirtgirl on Feb 7, 2002 14:39:46 GMT 10
Or maybe just steph singing...  What about the weather in Syd-er-ney hey? |
|
|
|
Post by Captain BJ on Feb 7, 2002 17:46:12 GMT 10
I have to distinguish between the Kiwis and Proteas this summer and us in the World Cup.
WE PLAYED TO WIN!
New Zealand stopped trying and deliberately lost.
South Africa never started trying to do anything other than keep us out of the finals.
Australia on the other hand went slowly, but it was always our intention to win the match first, and keeping New Zealand out second.
That's the difference.
I'm not in baggygreen cricket but I wish I was.
|
|
|
|
Post by dirtgirl on Feb 7, 2002 22:26:48 GMT 10
Take heart captain bj, i'm sure the aussies will give the Proteas a lesson in sportsmanship when they tour SA in the not so distant future...
|
|
sTuDiO_DeSiGn
beautiful shark
He who laughs last doesn't get the joke
Posts: 64
|
Post by sTuDiO_DeSiGn on Feb 8, 2002 7:31:47 GMT 10
When the Kiwis lost, I started to think that they were trying to get SA into the finals with a bonus point........
|
|
|
|
Post by Captain BJ on Feb 9, 2002 11:51:38 GMT 10
Still, the other odd scenario was if New Zealand had not given up the bonus point, that would have meant that if Australia beat SA then it was Aus v NZ based on run rate, but if Australia won with a bonus point then it was Aus v SA based on head-to-head. So that would have created another farce. Stupid system. Still doesn't excuse South Africa for not even trying to win against us. Nor does it excuse New Zealand because they avoided a farce by creating another and paving the way for a second. We're gonna thrash the pricks in South Africa. Hopefully |
|
|
|
Post by spongeboy on Feb 12, 2002 9:34:17 GMT 10
you've gotta ask yourself what would steve waugh have done if he'd been in flemmings shoes. I think he would have done something similar.
But i think it is very similar to what happened at the world cup. Sure, we played to win, but we didn't play to win as quick as we could. We didn't play to the best of our ability. Very similar if you ask me.
I think we're going to see some interesting changes to the sides, esp. the 1 day side, in the next few months.
australia forever.
|
|
|
|
Post by Captain BJ on Feb 12, 2002 23:04:18 GMT 10
I have less of an issue with New Zealand because they did try to win the match. That said, they still predetermined the match's outcome...
But Fleming's hands were tied, so I don't have too much of an issue. And Waugh may have done the same as Fleming. So I'm over that.
But still, South Africa is gutless. No denying that.
I don't feel that us going slow in the World Cup is counted as not to the best of our ability. It's over-cautious... The distinction I make is our priorities. We played:
1. To win
2. To keep New Zealand out
South Africa played:
1. To keep Australia out
2. To win
That is unforgivable.
|
|
|
|
Post by dirtgirl on Feb 13, 2002 20:10:09 GMT 10
What do people think of the Steve Waugh debarkle?  I'm lost for words... |
|
|
|
Post by Captain BJ on Feb 14, 2002 9:32:21 GMT 10
Big news... but not entirely unexpected... Refer to my earlier posts... I love being right.  And now we get a chance to see that Steve Waugh fighting spirit once more. Nobody was better over the last 15 years at coming back from adversity and breaking back into a strong (albeit out-of-form) Australian lineup at age 36 could be his strongest challenge yet. |
|
|
|
Post by dirtgirl on Feb 14, 2002 18:53:58 GMT 10
If he is anything like "Plugger" (sydney swans, fyi to all the people who follow the WRONG code of football ;D ), Waughy WILL be back! Sportsman's bet on this one |
|
|
|
Post by larry emdur is my hero! on Feb 14, 2002 19:07:37 GMT 10
but is his brother going to follow?
an aussie side without either waughs would be very strange indeed....
plugger's comeback is nothing special...now paul salmon, that's gonna be the comeback of the century!
|
|
|
|
Post by Captain BJ on Feb 15, 2002 22:00:20 GMT 10
Vedder, you're a fucking legend (provided you go for Essendon - I made the assumption based on the Salmon comment.
Bets for the one-day skipper? I'd like to see Ponts get it but I think Gilly, with Warne as VC.
Predicted one-day side without Waughs:
Hayden
Martyn
Ponting
Lehmann
Gilchrist
Bevan
Watson
Warne
Bichel
Lee
McGrath
|
|
