PAKISTANI FANS ONLY: who do you think better?

[Richard]

It's now a fair way over 10 years since I started following cricket, and honestly - there's but a tiny number of people who have not formed views about players before their time. Almost everyone takes great interest in cricket history, out of those who follow the game closely. To term it arrogance is nothing short of stupid.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Fair enough. In that case, I think it would have been more appropriate for James not to have quoted the post

Originally Posted by KaZoH0lic
I'd love to see Richard tell the likes of Benaud and other cricketing scholars his little theories and opinions. Would be fun to see their reactions.​

But I do agree that the atmosphere was getting a bit "out of hand"

I quite like the Richard/KaZoH0lic exchanges. They go around in circles for about three pages before Richard tells KaZ that he's an unworthy idiot not worth arguing with because he hasn't been swayed toward Richard's opinion. Then Kaz throws a few insults in, only he knows whether he's actually wound up or just taking the p-eye-double-s. "That's Entertainment".

 

[SJS]

I quite like the Richard/KaZoH0lic exchanges. They go around in circles for about three pages before Richard tells KaZ that he's an unworthy idiot not worth arguing with because he hasn't been swayed toward Richard's opinion. Then Kaz throws a few insults in, only he knows whether he's actually wound up or just taking the p-eye-double-s. "That's Entertainment".

 

[Beleg]

ANOTHER thread derailment.

 

[Ikki]

You've been warned in the past, and via email to cut this sort of thing out of your posting.

Anymore of it, and you'll find yourself banned.

I had just read the email Pasag gave earlier and accepted the warning. I understand I've been harsh and so I accepted my part.

I don't see how my post, that you quoted, transgressed that agreement.

I think the implication that how Richard posts is fine and does not affect others, simply because it is not obvious in it's nature, should be addressed also.

 

[PhoenixFire]

I think the implication that how Richard posts is fine and does not affect others, simply because it is not obvious in it's nature, should be addressed also.

And you wouldn't know this because? A lot of things happen without the normal members finding out.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

And you wouldn't know this because? A lot of things happen without the normal members finding out.

NORMAL members.

 

[PhoenixFire]

I thought plebs might be a bit derogatory

Basically people who don't have access to the Mod's Forum.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

I thought plebs might be a bit derogatory

Basically people who don't have access to the Mod's Forum.

Ah, but do all you special beings all have access to the email sent to Kazoholic? There might have been implications in that that you don't know about.

 

[PhoenixFire]

Ah, but do all you special beings all have access to the email sent to Kazoholic? There might have been implications in that that you don't know about.

Yes, we all do.

 

[silentstriker]

I had just read the email Pasag gave earlier and accepted the warning. I understand I've been harsh and so I accepted my part.

I don't see how my post, that you quoted, transgressed that agreement.

I think the implication that how Richard posts is fine and does not affect others, simply because it is not obvious in it's nature, should be addressed also.

Kaz, if you want to discuss what James said and/or the email, please email the moderators. It would be better handled in that way, so we don't derail threads and such.

 

[Richard]

Disappointing lack of Pakistani fans so far - just 4. Can't say it's all that surprising, unfortunately, mind.

Where's np10 and FRAZ? Both disappeared off the planet recently.

 

[Richard]

Interesting that so far this has gone the other way to the previous poll on the same bowlers. Imran 21 (3 Pakistanis), Wasim 12 (1 Pakistani).

Wonder if anyone changed their mind? CBA looking TBH.

 

[BhupinderSingh]

Interesting that so far this has gone the other way to the previous poll on the same bowlers. Imran 21 (3 Pakistanis), Wasim 12 (1 Pakistani).

Wonder if anyone changed their mind? CBA looking TBH.

I remember that when I started Imran vs Miler thread,about half of people voting for Miller did so just to annoy me and same was the case with SJS's Imran vs Wasim thread.

 

[Majin]

Just realised I voted for the wrong option, wanted to put Wasim > Imran tbh.

 

[funnygirl]

Interesting that so far this has gone the other way to the previous poll on the same bowlers. Imran 21 (3 Pakistanis), Wasim 12 (1 Pakistani).

Wonder if anyone changed their mind? CBA looking TBH.

Many might have changed after they had enough time to read cricinfo statsguru and every thing available .If u want much better results ,try to do it after two months.people are getting intelligent every day ,the chances of Imran 40 and Wasim 0 is pretty huge.

 

[Richard]

I remember that when I started Imran vs Miler thread,about half of people voting for Miller did so just to annoy me and same was the case with SJS's Imran vs Wasim thread.

I'm now curious enough to take a look.

On the previous poll, 24 people voted for Wasim, 6 of which might as well be excluded:
ansariaamir_leo - fly-by-night
Austin3169 - fly-by-night
ethos - fly-by-night
haroon510 - only ever votes for people who've played while he's been watching, not a good means of assessment at all
quick4mindia - I think this is a wahindiawah duplicate account
steds - this'll have been purely based on Wasim playing for Lancashire
Of the other 18:
archie mac - Aussie, certainly a general (by no means exclusive) pattern that Aussies think Imran < Wasim
Beleg - his reasons explained earlier in this thread
biased indian - interesting one
Burgey - Aussie, certainly a general (by no means exclusive) pattern that Aussies think Imran < Wasim
Eclipse - Aussie, certainly a general (by no means exclusive) pattern that Aussies think Imran < Wasim
funnygirl - possibly trying to wind Shoaib up
GeraintIsMyHero - not sure of his reasons TBH
grecian - no comment
gunner - too young to appreciate Imran I reckon
James_W - interested to hear the reasoning for that if poss
Matt79 - Aussie, certainly a general (by no means exclusive) pattern that Aussies think Imran < Wasim
Natman20 - very surprised he voted actually
neville cardus - very interesting
PhoenixFire - still don't think he's quite heard enough about Imran's brilliance TBH and honestly hope he might change his mind. Trying not to be patronising there, not meant that way at all.
Sanz - no comment
sledger - interesting one
Turbinator - very surprised he voted, wouldn't be surprised if he was indeed just mischief-making
Unattainableguy - too young to appreciate Imran probably

Trying not to be patronising to the Aussies, I'm well aware there's good reason for the near-universal consensus. And equally aware of those (iamdavid, pasag, The_Bunny) who voted the other way.

But really, I honestly think 8 of the above votes (not including any from Aussies actually) don't have a true appreciation of the game's history and voted Wasim purely because they knew a bit about him and near nothing about Imran. And I'd say there's just 1 who voted Imran who fits into the "not much historical knowledge" category (plus two more fly-by-nights in ashfield and sps).

Thus counting only votes from those who I think have genuine historical knowledge we have a tally:
Imran: 15
Wasim: 9 (4 of whom are Aussies)

There are also 19 votes (14 Imran, 5 Wasim) on this poll that did not appear on the last.

Only 1 person has voted differently on the two polls: Athlai (voted Imran on the first, Wasim on this). Prey, why is this John?

 

[funnygirl]

Wow great job ,Richard almighty. May i know how many of those voted Wasim are under 19 naive kids who don't know a thing about cricket .

I remember that was one of ur reasons for Wasim leading the poll on the previous occasion.

 

[Richard]

Well if it was a reason then (forgot I mentioned it TBH) it's unlikely to have changed now is it?

And no, I won't be naming names - that'd only cause trouble. BTW, being under 19 doesn't make you a naive kid. You can be under 19 and not be a kid, you can be a kid and not be naive, and you can certainly be under 19 and not be naive. Equally, you can be 50 years old and you can be very naive.

 

[funnygirl]

Let us assume that all those voted for Wasim are naive ones .what about that ?