I must admit, I find lots of very good posters here. A very large proportion of the regulars are very good.
Sometimes, I wish some of them did not allow personal on-forum differences of opinions affect their views about the cricketers supported by their on-forum 'opponents'.
I personally find Top Cat and Slow Love the most rewarding to read and value their opinions.
Would be SJS and Slow Love for me. I'm sure many people are up with them in terms of their understanding of the game, but not many can match the eloquence and lucidity they generally bring to their posts.
It's nice to have an extremely knowledgeable West Indies fan on here as well (Liam/Mr M - obviously).
SJS is always entertaining with his posts and has a great knowledge of the game IMO.
Supporting: NSW & Australia, women's cricket
its all very subjective, most of the people on here seem to be basing their opinion on whos watched more cricket, or who can talk more about what happened 25 years ago. IMO its not whos watched more, its whos watched more closely. people with good understanding of the game should be people who are capable of analysing performances by looking at technique,skill,temperament etc rather than just looking at averages and statistics or people who can just say that so and so player came up with so and so performance on a flat wicket. of course anyone whos watched that would be able to deduce that for himself, certainly it doesnt tell you anything about their knowledge of the game. its almost like a comparison between boycott and cozier. while cozier knows more about cricketing history, and about WI cricket, boycott is much better at analysing players and deciding on his own whether they are good or not. personally i do not respect comments from people who look at stats solely, anyone could do that. equally i dislike people who look at other peoples opinions, so called experts of the game, to decide whether someone is good enough or not. of course its fine to back your opinion occasionally with stats to prove your point, but certainly you've got to base your opinion largely on having watched the game or the player.
using these characteristics, i think i can narrow this list down quite a bit. of course i dont mean for any disrespect for those not on the list, certain mods for example i have hardly heard any off to decided whether they know anything or not. from what ive seen so far swervy seems to fit the categories mentioned above fairly well, in that he bases his analysis of players on watching rather than statistics. luckyeddie, on the rare occasion that he is on topic, has certainly shown that he is capable of analysing player performance based on the situation and conditions. richard occasionally shows that he can evaluate player based on the above characteristics. of course his occasional ridiculous ideas such as mcgrath/pollock getting lucky wickets, richardson struggling on seamer friendly ones, his entire theory about pressure are just annoying. however his theory about first chance averages is one that i like the most, makes plenty of sense to carry it out if it can be done accurately enough. not to forget of course an often forgotten member of the forum anzac, who despite his extremely long posts, usually posts some of the best analysis of batsmen technique and bowlers skill. badgehair, who hasnt been on here for a while, again posts quality information about players that is worth reading. that i think sums it up for my list. again for those not on the list, i do not mean any disrespect, i might just have forgotten to put your name on the list
Tendulkar = the most overated player EVER!!
Beckham = the most overated footballer EVER!!
Vassell = the biggest disgrace since rikki clarke!!
Originally Posted by Jono
"I am very happy and it will allow me to have lot more rice."
Eoin Morgan on being given a rice cooker for being Man of the Match in a Dhaka Premier Division game.
The same thing.Originally Posted by tooextracool
McGrath and Pollock being lucky to get the figures they have on flat wickets is a result of my theory about the presence of pressure being misinterpreted.
Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourthcricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006
(Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.
Which in turn is based on the theory that only androids should be allowed to play international cricket.Originally Posted by Richard
Sreesanth said, "Next ball he was beaten and I said, 'is this the King Charles Lara? Who is this impostor, moving around nervously? I should have kept my mouth shut for the next ball - mind you, it was a length ball - Lara just pulled it over the church beyond the boundary! He is a true legend."
or they could just bowl quite a lot of good balls on any type of wicket......see Adelaide for example.Originally Posted by Richard
To me SJS is the number one pick as the poster with the best understanding of the game on this forum !!
Richard, Neil Pickup, Marc are my next choices !!
(On a personal note I like SJS because of his vast knowledge he brings to my personal favourite thread, the 'Can you beat the Cricket Guru thread' and the new thread that goes with his name 'New Cricket trivia' SJS format - thread !!)
I would also nominate Biased Indian and Tapioca as other posters with a deeper understanding of the game than most !!
Not so, and I've said why not 100 times or more.Originally Posted by Mr Mxyzptlk
Adelaide is an extraordinary exception to the last 3 years - I've never seen McGrath bowl that well on that type of pitch, and I've seen most of his Test-wickets in the last 3 years.Originally Posted by Son Of Coco
I've seen the odd one or two myself, and while I'm not claiming that he bowls that well every time. He seems to do ok on more occasions than not......Originally Posted by Richard
I've seen the odd one or two myself, and while I'm not claiming that he bowls that well every time. He seems to do ok on more occasions than not......I wouldn't go as far as to say that him bowling well on a pitch with little assistance is an 'extraordinary' exception.Originally Posted by Richard
Well clearly our perceptions are different then - or the odd few games I've not seen have been the ones.
Not as impossible as some might think, that.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)