Yeah indeed. Like Rob said in his article for the Herald, he would be if it wasn't for balance issues.
Read it again, ****wit. How does this loss make them more like the Gamblers? The Gamblers are yet to lose you dumb ****. I'd say them being our seconds side would make them like us, even them having better batting than bowling makes them similar. But to come and say it after a loss is just dumb...But it is you...
He is more likely to take the spinners spot but on a turning track there is a good chance he would play ahead of me. Obviously it would all depend on form of players, not just me and him.
I'd say given you've got legitimate claims as a batsman or a bowler they'd just drop someone else, and be deeper in another facet if they were to play him. He'd need to be epic and you be shit for him to take your spot (unless it was 1 medium, 1 fast and 10 spin, which it isn't).
Well you have more claim to a spot as a specialist bowler than Tait at this point, and indeed more claim to a spot as a specialist batsman than Harding, Toolman or even Masters. If you get dropped at any point in the foreseeable future it's a farce of the highest order, and I sincerely hope it's against the Ravens.
I'd prefer him as a batsman only over Harding/Masters and over Tait as a bowler. He should be the first down on paper, even on a shit batting & pace bowling track.
AD Culum ct & b Robinson 0 2 0 0 AM Farhat ct Stacker b Hall 106 231 13 0 S Verigotta b Robinson 9 23 0 0 RK Fittaman ct Hall b Robinson 206 315 17 3 M Deane b Stacker 35 54 6 0 IP Tivao ct Spinks b Stacker 9 17 0 0 MJA Johns ct Read b Hall 14 30 1 0 AW George b Crowley 26 34 3 0 JH Ridd not out 17 38 3 0 J McDougal lbw b Spinks 8 15 1 0 JTR Crowther b Crowley 4 10 0 0 absolutley ****ing outstanding from the mighty brumbies, now who said we would lose this game?? come on now, hand your head in shame punters dire as sh1t </pre>
