Go Back   Cricket Web > Cricket Discussion > Cricket Chat



Finding Seams on Apples - Order Your Copy!


View Poll Results: CW Hall of Fame 2nd Ballot- Vote for 1 Player to be Incucted
WG Grace 16 44.44%
Shane Warne 10 27.78%
Imran Khan 6 16.67%
Jack Hobbs 4 11.11%
Voters: 36. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 22-08-2006, 08:28 PM   #1 (permalink)
International Coach
 
Goughy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: All Over
Posts: 14,638
CW Hall of Fame 2nd Ballot- Top 4 Elimination

Due to no player getting the required %age of the vote, I have taken the top 4 for a further round of voting.

The winner of the vote gets automatic entry into the CW Hall of Fame and if a 2nd player gets over 35% they will be inducted also.

Only change is that you can only cast one vote in this elimination round.
__________________
If I only just posted the above post, please wait 5 mins before replying as there is bound to be edits

West Robham Rabid Wolves Caedere lemma quod eat lemma

Happy Birthday! (easier than using Birthday threads)

Email and MSN- Goughy at cricketmail dot net
Goughy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-08-2006, 08:32 PM   #2 (permalink)
International Coach
 
Goughy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: All Over
Posts: 14,638
Before anyone points out I have spelt inducted wrong in the question, I know already. Its 4:30am and the baby will not sleep but I know thats not a good enough reason
Goughy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-08-2006, 12:19 AM   #3 (permalink)
Cricketer Of The Year
 
JASON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: At Work
Posts: 7,558
Looks like Grace and Warne going through .
JASON is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-08-2006, 08:40 AM   #4 (permalink)
International Debutant
 
aussie tragic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,255
Quote:
Originally Posted by JASON
Looks like Grace and Warne going through .
No, looks like just WG as Warne doesn't have 35% of the votes. IMO, this is the way it should be with the earlier greats (e.g. WG, Hobbs, Hammond, Sutcliffe, Harvey, Miller, Davidson, Benuad, Botham, Lillee, Hadlee, Imran, etc) being inducted before the current greats.
aussie tragic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-08-2006, 11:44 AM   #5 (permalink)
International Vice-Captain
 
open365's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: liverpool
Posts: 4,066
I don't think a hall of fame list should be done by elimination, IMO all 4 of those people deserve to be on that list no question.
open365 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-08-2006, 12:01 PM   #6 (permalink)
Global Moderator
 
Fusion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 10,772
Quote:
Originally Posted by open365
I don't think a hall of fame list should be done by elimination, IMO all 4 of those people deserve to be on that list no question.
I agree. At the very least, we need to lossen the voting criteria. Why not make it to where the top 5 get in every ballot? Because the first few ballots are going to have "no brainer" candidates that deserve to be in. Otherwise people will keep splitting their votes on deserving candidates and we'll drag this out forever.
Fusion is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 24-08-2006, 03:13 PM   #7 (permalink)
International Vice-Captain
 
open365's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: liverpool
Posts: 4,066
I may be alone in thinking this, but i think the first 20 or so entrants into the hall of fame will be complete no brainers and only then should we have a vote to see who else we think deserves to get in.
open365 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-08-2006, 03:21 PM   #8 (permalink)
Global Moderator
 
Fusion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 10,772
Quote:
Originally Posted by open365
I may be alone in thinking this, but i think the first 20 or so entrants into the hall of fame will be complete no brainers and only then should we have a vote to see who else we think deserves to get in.
Probably right, but deciding who the 20 or so "no brainer" candidates are can be tricky. So I think if we just let people vote more liberally at first (like voting for upto 5 candidates at time), all the deserving candidates will get in. Then, clamp down and start debating.
Fusion is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 25-08-2006, 02:26 AM   #9 (permalink)
Cricket Web Staff Member
 
archie mac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: canberra Australia
Posts: 10,668
Or maybe we should do them by era, with more recent eras having more nominations (more Tests played, and more Test players)

Era one from say 1877- 1920

Grace
Fry
MacLaren
Jackson
Barnes
Shrewsbury
Ranji
Rihcardson
Trumper
Hill
Noble
Murdoch
Trumble
Gregory (Syd)
Spofforth
Blackham
Rhodes
Faulkner
Schwarze
Sinclair

Just off the top of my head so sorry if I missed someone important
__________________
You know it makes sense.
archie mac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-08-2006, 02:15 PM   #10 (permalink)
Global Moderator
 
Fusion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 10,772
whatever happened to the Hall of Fame voting thread?
Fusion is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
CW Hall of Fame- 2nd Ballot Goughy Cricket Chat 25 22-08-2006 08:23 PM
CW Hall of Fame and Order of Merit Goughy Cricket Chat 3 12-08-2006 02:00 AM
The Edgebaston Hall of Fame Jamee999 General 9 28-01-2004 12:55 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:26 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Copyright ©2001 - 2011, Cricket Web