Which CW chestnut gets your goat?

[Lillian Thomson]

The Imran Khan fish fingers or cheese burgers debate.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Stats are sueful.

Agreed. Whoever invented the Statsguru should be taken to court and stripped of all assets.

 

[archie mac]

Yea that one is used regularly by technology hating idiots. Such a ridiculous argument.

Welcome back

 

[Langeveldt]

Haha, so I'll just look at cricinfo and decide that becauase he averaged 38 he bowled ****, what dross, and you know it as well

Stats are sueful but you can't use them in isolation to assess individual performances. As Upeprcut said, in Jimmy's case his career stats probably balance out overall at the minute as he had a lot of lucky wickets earlier in his career. But stats alone don't tell you a whole lot.

Thats ridiculous, it's like saying Ganga is a test class batsman because he looks good.. I'd far rather have Mitchell Johnson bowl a load of manure and take a stack of wickets than someone who bowls in the right places and comes back with 1-55 off 20..

Think I also justified my comment by saying taken in the right context.. I know you can't rate someones batting average based on the ARG


Can't wait for Richard to sink his jowlers into this thread

 

[andyc]

Thats ridiculous, it's like saying Ganga is a test class batsman because he looks good.. I'd far rather have Mitchell Johnson bowl a load of manure and take a stack of wickets than someone who bowls in the right places and comes back with 1-55 off 20..

Think I also justified my comment by saying taken in the right context.. I know you can't rate someones batting average based on the ARG


Can't wait for Richard to sink his jowlers into this thread

Then why are you always having a whine over it?

 

[GIMH]

Thats ridiculous, it's like saying Ganga is a test class batsman because he looks good.. I'd far rather have Mitchell Johnson bowl a load of manure and take a stack of wickets than someone who bowls in the right places and comes back with 1-55 off 20..

Think I also justified my comment by saying taken in the right context.. I know you can't rate someones batting average based on the ARG


Can't wait for Richard to sink his jowlers into this thread

Then why watch cricket at all? Of course, the best bowlers will end up with good averages overall, I am not saying they won't. But the line of theory that goes "poor stats=poor performance", over a match or series, is ridiculous.

 

[Uppercut]

Then why watch cricket at all? Of course, the best bowlers will end up with good averages overall, I am not saying they won't. But the line of theory that goes "poor stats=poor performance", over a match or series, is ridiculous.

Not sure that's what he was saying.

 

[Johnners]

Hate all of them equally itbt.

 

[Craig]

For me:

1/ The whole India and Pakistan threads, especially after the tragic events in Lahore, I was following the 'Shootout in Lahore' thread, but gave up as it was going no where, not yet anytime soon.

2/ Harbhajan and Andrew Symonds - Gah.

 

[GIMH]

Not sure that's what he was saying.

Two for me

Stats aren't the most important thing when judging a player - Sorry, but what? If they are used in the correct context, then what else are you going to judge a player on? Deadset the most important thing in the game, and something that cannot be changed

Murali's action is legitimate - Another fact, Abdul Qadir is actually my mother

IMO the bolded part above suggests Hingeh thinks that stats are all should be considered when assessing the quality of a player. I don't agree with this at all.

 

[GIMH]

Craigos is on the money with Ind-Pak, gets silly in OT as well

 

[Matt79]

Yeah, very tedious.

 

[G.I.Joe]

People discussing the next Ashes a year in advance is more tedious IMO.

 

[Jamee999]

*starts 2010-11 Ashes thread*

 

[Matt79]

People discussing the next Ashes a year in advance is more tedious IMO.

Yeah, discussing cricket on a cricket forum

 

[G.I.Joe]

Yeah, discussing cricket on a cricket forum

Since when did one party submitting to a spanking every two years qualify as cricket?

 

[Jono]

For me, the arguments over Murali vs. Warne are easily the most annoying. People roll their eyes when they occur for a reason. That being said, this is a cricket forum, and discussions like that should be permitted. Its just amazing how for the last 5-6 years I've been on this board, it'll pop up. New posters will sign-up, and they'll argue it when the older ones who used to, have left or gotten bored.

It's a never-ending circle.

 

[Jono]

Yeah, discussing cricket on a cricket forum

Haha doesn't that qualify with every cricket topic then?

Let's bring back the quote-fest debates between Richard and TEC... after all they're discussing cricket.

 

[nightprowler10]

I'll take those over the Indo-Pak debates that have been going on these days.

 

[Son Of Coco]

So why in athletics does Scotland compete under Great Britain? It's a dire enough place as it is without having to be in two countries at the same time

Scotland? Far better than England for the independent observer.



Actually, probably not that much difference. It's unfair using Plymouth as a comparison.