- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
Roar Pro
Joined May 2010
0
Views
0
Published
557
Comments
Published
Comments
Bit of a case of “he who pays the piper calls the tune”. If the Russian GP is government sponsored, then its a fairly logical extension for political figures to make appearances at it. Realistically, the only choice the FIA/F1 has is whether or not to put the race on in Russia (or any other location) full stop.
Should Formula One Putin with Vladimir?
The issue of smaller nations getting games against larger ones is the issue in practically every international sport. I suppose it would be fair to say FIFA have come closest here, although I think this is as much to do with greater depth of competition existing somewhat naturally than specific structures.
These Tier 1 vs Tier 2 fixtures need to occur regularly, not just every four years when fundamentally the same predictable results will occur anyway. If I look at the participants in the “Plate” as described above it is really only Georgia and Japan getting games of a standard they wouldn’t otherwise get in the existing arrangements … and one extra game every four years is hardly going to bridge the gap to Tier 1 status.
It will be interesting to see what happens in Super Rugby next year. This has the potential to be a genuine pathway for smaller nations. If Japan and Argentina play as nations and not franchises, a rise towards the top of these competitions would indicate they are ready for the next step. The same could be applied to the likes of Georgia, Canada, various Pacific nations, etc. in relevant competitions. Indeed, if you apply a similar vein of thinking across sports, having smaller nations competing in larger nations’ provincial tournaments provides the blueprint for enabling them to consistently play at a higher standard.
Rugby World Cup should follow the lead of Sevens Rugby
Finals wildcards, eh? I reckon teams 6, 7 and 8 are basically wildcards every year anyway.
The NRL finals need a Semi makeover
What happens if they get rolled by Brisbane and then Melbourne? Will Thurston disappear into the black hole formed by this space/time/non-NSW conspiracy black hole singularity? Beware … this could be the very thing that sparks the collapse of the universe!
Five questions for week one of the NRL finals
The real question is who will North Queensland blame this year for not winning the comp?
Five questions for week one of the NRL finals
It would be awesome to see the offloads made to errors resulting ratio at an individual level. There are any number of “compulsory offloaders” out there who may engineer a freak try once a year, but for the love of God they concede a lot of metres and turn over a lot of ball along the way.
In rugby league, contenders aren't offloaders
Well, that really is that then. There is no way that Perth (or any other Australian city) can support two international standard cricket grounds. So far as I know, London is the only city in the world with this capacity, especially once the requirement for a “modern stadium” is added. It will certainly be sad to see the WACA go, but it sounds as though its death warrant as an international cricket ground has been signed.
Can the WACA survive as a Test venue?
Surely in all of this the real issue is contact with the head/neck … however it occurs. Why then, do we not simply move to a situation where any action (and recognising the need to separate out genuinely accidental contact) that results in contact with the head resulting in very severe sanction? In this way, we can move away from the current ridiculousness of “high contact”, “dangerous throw”, “first point of contact”, “shoulder charge”, etc. and simply introduce a charge of “endangering the head and/or neck of an opponent”. Such a charge could result in immediate referral to the judiciary with very few defences available and very severe penalties. It is only through the simplification of the rules that we will get consistency.
Fifty Shades of the shoulder charge
To be fair, the vast majority of what is written on this site … or any sports media generally … is hypothetical/opinion. If we’d averaged another 50 runs through the middle order … if the Siddle hasn’t benn overlooked … if England had three Mitchells in their team. If you want facts, the facts are lost 3-2 and the rest is padding. But it’s the padding we all actually want to discuss!
Encouraged by the fifth Test? No, it’s the deadest of dead rubbers
I agree Tim. While it is always good to see some genuine application from this batting line up, it is absolutely too little, too late. Obviously more than a few blokes would have copped a major spray after Trent Bridge … or, at least they should have … and have decided to pull their heads in here. What has not been adequately answered by anyone is why this is the case. Everyone knows batting in England is much more an attritional battle than in Australia, there will be more seam and swing, yet it seems as though it takes until the series is lost for the message to get through.
The Ashes: Australia finally show batting patience
The only (I believe) instance of a Test innings being declared at 0/0 was in the infamous England v SA match going back about 15 years ago. The SA captain was one W.J. Cronje.
The Oval toss for Clarke: Egotist or baggy green believer?
The batting has been generally below par on both sides of the ledger in this series. Take out the Lord’s test and the top scores of Rogers, Smith, Warner, Cook and Stokes all go out the window, along with their averages and totals. As much as it pains me, Root is the only batsman who has put any stamp on the series at all with Rogers probably next in line. Others, including some of those I’ve mentioned here, have made solid contributions, but none have dominated.
From a batting perspective, the series has been decided on the basis of which middle order can cobble together more runs than the other. In the great scheme of it, the top order probably goes to Australia, the middle order to England with the bowlers split.
A composite Ashes XI: It's England 7-4 Australia
I agree with Targa, I don’t think it can be said this team has hit “rock bottom”. I’d be prepared to write off the result of the final Test at The Oval, so long as it’s not another total capitulation.
On the other hand, anything other than a 2-0 result in Bangladesh will demonstrate a real slide in the quality of the team.
What is interesting though, is that it appears nothing has been learned since we were last in England and that is what bodes particularly poorly. Since then we got the 5-0 back here against England and a fantastic result in South Africa. Otherwise, it was a very poor result in the Middle East against Pakistan. Then back home for a good, but hardly fantastic performance against India and a smash up of the West Indies who are about one step away from “minnow” status at Test level.
Then back to England and the same old issues apply. A lack of discipline with both bat and ball. While I’m not predicting any significant issues in Bangladesh, it is exactly the place where a lack of discipline (and some luck for Bangladesh) could produce surprising results.
More worrying is what this mentality might mean for upcoming series, especially against quality opposition and/or unfavourable conditions. To me, the issues are not ones of coaching in a technical sense … yes, there are certain skills that other countries have in greater abundance than Australia … but are issues in the sense of discipline. The answer to this is far beyond my comprehension, but I fear until it is found we will find ourselves in the current cycle of winning heavily when things go our way and losing heavily when they don’t.
The only way for the baggy greens is up
I’d agree with this, assuming his former prowess remains. Assuming all the skill remains, surely it’s only match hardness that keeps him out of side?
Burns, Pattinson and Agar to push Test cases in ODIs
I’d be happy for Hazlewood to be rested in order to give Cummins a go, BUT on the proviso that it is a rest. The current mentality seems to be that a “rest”, especially when it comes at the end of tour, is actually treated as being dropped. Hazlewood is absolute star in the making and needs to be given every opportunity to develop to a top line international bowler, not shuffled back in the queue because he’s (1) been forced into a role earlier than planned and (2) had to bowl with village scores on the board.
The Ashes: Rest Hazlewood, play Cummins
I read somewhere else today, that in other words, if our batsman had simply left every ball they faced the innings would have lasted longer than it did. An abomination of a batting performance to gift arguably the most prized trophy in all cricket.
Ashes: Where does arrogance end and stupidity begin?
S. Marsh is in England for the reasons you’ve outlined. He’s in the XI because the captain wanted to drop himself down the order in a desperate attempt to save his own career. Never try to strengthen one position by weakening another. Clarke must go.
What a disaster: There goes the Ashes!
Perhaps Smith’s issue is the same one face by Donald Bradman in the disaster of Lord’s in 1934. With the Australians facing a determined England, he produced innings of 36 and 13 on the road to an innings defeat. The 36 first innings knock was rattling along at a run a ball until and soft caught & bowled looped back to Verity. The second knock (having been forced to follow on) saw a waft edged to through to the ‘keeper, again off the bowling of Verity. Let me be the first to say that it was only a lack of challengers that saw Bradman retain his spot that day and I’m sure the same applies to Smith here!
Steve Smith is the world's best batsman, so what happened at Edgbaston?
Suggest 3 Hats will be rushing out to get a hard earned dollar on it.
How about Manly for the NRL finals?
I reckon you’re being a bit tough on Sagan in particular. Yes, disappointing not to pick up a stage victory (again), but four consecutive green jerseys all while still eligible for the young riders classification is not bad! Throw in the fact that the points system was altered this year in a way that doesn’t favour his way of accumulating points and its pretty much a case of here’s the cake, here’s the icing, I just couldn’t get the cherry on top. Disappointing not to get a stage win yes, but not underachieving.
The underachievers of the Tour de France
If you don’t like batting under cloudy skies, don’t go to England!
Really Clarkey? You wanted to bat in those conditions?
I get the argument, but the problem is determining whether or not the player will return. The benefit of the 18th man approach is it least requires the team of the injured player to make the decision to remove him from the game and use the 18th man. It is then clear cut as to what is going on. I don’t think you can have situations where blokes are removed from the 17 man rotation for perhaps a significant portion of the game but then able to return later once the injured player has recovered. While no system will be perfect, this could very much cause “tactical use” of the 18th man to become rife.
An alternative to the 18th man in rugby league
Urgh … what a limp reply.
This is Test cricket, not a tickling competition. Give it to ’em I say! And if the opposition don’t like it they can cower back home and pick another sport.
Australia need to be hostile in New Zealand Test series