punter if u have guts and u wanted to retain symmo then u shud fight with Cricket australia for him. u also wanted him to be out of 11. there are no such hard and fast rules that if u want a player to be played in 11 and board is sending him out of the tournament due to some indiscipline. board can give warning or do some fees cut. u also wanted him to go back otherwise if u really wanted him to be in 11 then u shud fight for him. this is real truth. now u r crying because u r out of T20 otherwise u will say that u can win without symmo.
Re: Symonds' absence cost Australia dear: Ponting
by Casino Royale on Jun 11, 2009 02:51 AM
Australia is definitely far better than WestIndies and SriLanka. Clearly T20 is a gamble.
Yeeha Ghooreey auura Khaaleey gang mein raahatheey hein, leech khaartheey hein Indian talent kooha to thrive and then throw them out after they have leeched it all. Very parasitic holes hein Ghooras. Indian mein bheey current rulers are parasitic in using and killing small parties which they call stability.
This time they did it to Kala named Symonds, their usual gang tactics and got ripped.
Ponting, it is too late before you realised Symonds absence. You and Michael clarke are the two useless players not fit for T20 format. Hope you will not repeat your mistakes in future. Aussie selectors show some guts in team selection to throw Ponting and Micheal Clarke out of T20 team. Considering these two players selection, I feel Andrew Strauss will be considering himself very unlucky of not being selected for T20 in his peak form.
This is the same fate for India when they played regular world cup and all said the way it is formatted is wrong. Once again the management did same thing. Here in this case you cannot have three good teams for prel round in one group and see in India's group except for India no other strong team. If not AUS otherwise it would have been for WI or Pak one of them
