What a champ this bloke is. He is continually treated like crap by the selectors. He nevers complains, and then when he does get a dig, he usually makes the most of it. Let's hope he is now there for the long haul. 101* at the time of the post.
I wasn't sure if you were talking about Katich or Kaspa for a while there. Then I realised it really refers to both. D
Kasper gets treated like crap by the slectors?? No that is Lee. 13 appearances as 12th man recently. Kasper has had the backing of the selectors mata - your dribling **** here.
Don't let your bias distort the facts here Fluffy. Kaspa had to wait for years to get his chance whilst blokes like Lee, Nicholson et al watched ball after ball fly to the boundary rope. Kaspa comes into the side on the sub-continent, that hardest place for a fast bowler to ply his trade, has a tendency to win matches for us, and yet gets dropped whenever Weet Bix decide they need to bosst their sales and have their poster boy back in the team. What has Lee's average in Test cricket been over the last four years? You keep dodging that question.
well i know that kasper and lee are both above 30. But to say that im showing bias and your not is crap. Kasper has had the complete backing of the selectors for a while, lee got dropped in the periods your talking about after doing nothing wrong. Lee won the ashes series against england out here when mcgrath and gillepie were injured and was dropped not long after. thats hardly backing. Lee has been great over the last 6 months yet he cant crack it over kasper - thats backing. You keep asking for the stats over the years when the selectors kept dropping lee then reinstating. Its prettu hard to get consitency without a decent chance
Look at it this way. What has Kaspa done wrong to get dropped? Kaspa was given his chance on the Sri Lankan tour because Lee was diabolical against India last summer and did not deserve to be in the side. Are you saying Kaspa or Gillespie do not deserve their spots?
2000 6 games, 35 @ 17 2001 10 games, 30 @ 36 2002 9 games, 25 @ 41 2003 10 games, 38 @ 35 2004 1 game, 4 @ 69 we average 13 - 15 games a season, Lee played 36 of about 75 - about half. hardly being backed Interestingly Dizzy in 2001, 13 games, 47 @ 32 just an interesting note
i figured if mata can claim lee's one game for his arguement then it is fair to point out that kasper hasnt been doing much better this year than lee did last year.
yeah I knew what you were getting at Fluff, I was just taking the piss. I happen to agree with Mata on this particular one, but I reckon you both love taking statistics and making them dance to your own tune, personally I reckon stats are a very narrow view of the whole situation and dont really mean much in this case as a direct comparison can be made between the 2. I think when it comes down to it the only way Lee deserves a spot is if one of the othere 3 does not warrant a position, be it due to poor form or injury, and by poor form I dont mean 1 bad test. Then and only then should Lee be included.
I think much the same but don't let Mata know that - as his QLD bias spills out all over the floor to my disgust.
I think much the same but don't let Mata know that - as his QLD bias spills out all over the floor to my disgust.
If it aint broke don't fix it is the stupidest saying ever. If you can make it better, then you should.
They dropped kasper in the last series because there was a better combination out there. fair enough, their call. on that theory Lee should be the second bowler picked in NZ based on performance on the kiwi wickets. Problem with this is you get back to the stiuation i showed earlier where bowlers end up missing every second game and dont get settled in like Lee had to suffer in the early 2000's
totally agree, but who is to say that putting Lee in would make it better. some say yes some say no, its such a subjective thing and opinions are always going to vary
