Cricket - 1st Test Aust vs S.Af

[Sportz]

Got on South Africa at $6.25. Now going to try to get a reasonable price on Australia and ensure a handy profit. I see the bookies are taking the draw out of the equation a bit these days. Makes it trickier to get a price about Australia.

What a shocking shot from Hayden. :rolleyes:

[discipline pays]

good price south africa.... not sure if they can win, but you get the feeling that aussies can lose wickets quickly in middle order

[Sportz]

good price south africa

Geez, they're $8.50 on IAS now!!! :(

Australia weren't scoring much quicker than this in the one-dayers last week!!! :eek:

Anyway, I agree with you about Australia's middle order, but I thought that Ponting looked in very good form early on, so I decided not to wait and I simply took the $1.44 on offer about Australia there and then. They're $1.36 now.

[discipline pays]

Im sure you are experiencing that sinking feeling sportz !!! surely the aussies are too short though !! IMO market over adjusts to match situation !!

[Sportz]

Hmmm yeah. I'm normally very patient when it comes to betting on Cricket, but for some reason, I've jumped the gun here and backed Australia way too soon!!!

Oh well, never mind. As long as it's not a draw!!! (surely it won't be a draw)

[Sportz]

Okay 6-199 and the price out to $1.60. Now is the time I would normally have backed Australia.

Anyway, Australia's under real pressure now. Let's see how they go.

[Sportz]

you get the feeling that aussies can lose wickets quickly in middle order

Spot on there.

Some of the shots today were horrible (not just the middle order though). Once again, the Australians looked very complacent. As for Symonds, well surely this MUST be his last test!!! Quite simply, he is a one-day player, not a test player and that's the way it's always going to be.

[discipline pays]

First wicket is important, think that the aussies are always short based on history rather than form . might be chance to back against them in future for profits

[Sportz]

Oh well, never mind. As long as it's not a draw!!! (surely it won't be a draw)

:o C'mon, we need a wicket bad!!!

[Mr J]

Dunno what Ponting waited so long to declare. I know he woulda wanted Hodge to get his double, but he seriously reduced our chance to win it.

By making such a large target, we force SA to play defensive which makes wickets harder to come by, and obviously he's relying on our bowlers for the win.

If he had declared giving them 400 to chase, SA probally would've gone for it, make wickets easier to come by, and we'd still be relying on the bowlers.

Take a bit of a gamble for a much greater chance of winning or take a safe result probally a draw, a win with luck. Shame he chose the latter.

[Sportz]

Yep. Again, I think that's a bit of that arrogance that the Australians have been guilty of. Probably should have declared when Hodge reached 150 instead of waiting till he made 200.

[discipline pays]

As boring as Ponting's captaincy is i think that 4 sessions is enough time to bowl SA out . But he shows no flair with bowling changes... just let Warne bowl half the overs and rotate quicks at other end .

Have been impressed by SA character today

[Mr J]

" i think that 4 sessions is enough time to bowl SA out"

To bowl out a team who's only goal is to not get bowled out?

Declaring earlier would've given them a bit more time to bowl them out, and a better chance of taking wickets (since SA would've been playing shots).

Maybe he did make the right decision and it just didn't play our way. Pretty easy to be critical when we didn't win.

[Neil]

In my opinion Ponting is a very ordinary captain.

Steve Waugh at times made declarations where it was just possible to lose in order to win.

If Ponting had declared with a lead of just over 400 there would have been much more time to bowl. In addition South Africa, after plenty of time in the field, would have had to face more overs on Monday when they were likely to lose wickets. They lost two in the last session Monday, but only three the whole of Tuesday.

Why wasn't Symonds bowled? Why did Warne bowl over after over from the one end? What was Ponting doing with just a couple of attacking fieldsman when Hodge was bowling?