• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

Muloghonto

U19 12th Man
I used to think that too. He probably, like me only saw the last 1/3rd or 1/2 of Waugh's career where he cut out a lot of the shots he used to play when he was young. This made it seem that he wasnt a talented batsman and couldn't play all the shots in the book.
Err, i saw Steve Waugh when he toured India in the mid 80s. Didn't have a lot of shots in his armory either. That being said, I will grant you that the first few times I saw Steve Waugh was in India in the mid 80s, vs WI in the late 80s and then his career from early 90s onwards.

I couldn't be arsed to watch the Ashes back then, a contest between two mediocre teams playing mediocre overhyped and one dimensional cricket.
 

Muloghonto

U19 12th Man
I think you've confused his unwillingness to play shots with him having an inability to play them bud. Good effort though, easy enough mistake to make.
For a btasman, unwilling is unable. There is a fine line between 'becoming more sedate in choice', ala Tendulkar, who still unfurled all the shots in the book (just more cautiously so) and never ever playing some shots, even at the cost of physical harm. The latter, cannot be anything but losing the ability to play those shots. Otherwise, it is assinine mindset from the batsman to never ever play a shot he is proficient at, even at the risk of physical harm or failing to maximise on the scoring opportunity.
Some people lose the ability to do certain things early in life, my speculation is, whatever made Steve Waugh stop being a bowler of some use in Test cricket is what also compromised his ability to play certain shots.
 

watson

Banned
The only shot in the book that Steve Waugh stopped playing was the hook-shot. Apart from that, I think he used the full repertiore. Obviously, shots like the late cut don't count because it's not really part of modern cricket anyway.

But now that I think of it, didn't Steve Waugh invent a shot, or at least make it trendy? The so-called 'Slog Sweep'.
 

Muloghonto

U19 12th Man
The only shot in the book that Steve Waugh stopped playing was the hook-shot. Apart from that, I think he used the full repertiore. Obviously, shots like the late cut don't count because it's not really part of modern cricket anyway.

But now that I think of it, didn't Steve Waugh invent a shot, or at least make it trendy? The so-called 'Slog Sweep'.
He did not pull balls more than waist high.
Late cut does count, since in the era Steve Waugh played in, there were several exponents of it ( Tendulkar, Laxman, Lara, Malik, Dravid to name a few played it regularly).
He very rarely cut the spinners either. Not to mention, he did not play against the spin very much at all, unless it was super-short long hop territorry.

The slog-sweep has been around for a while and IIRC Cowdrey made it popular in the 60s.
 

Red

The normal awards that everyone else has
Err, i saw Steve Waugh when he toured India in the mid 80s. Didn't have a lot of shots in his armory either. .
Yeh, just the cover drive, cut shot, on drive, off drive, sweep shot, slog sweep, leg glance...
 

ohnoitsyou

International Regular
He did not pull balls more than waist high.
Late cut does count, since in the era Steve Waugh played in, there were several exponents of it ( Tendulkar, Laxman, Lara, Malik, Dravid to name a few played it regularly).
He very rarely cut the spinners either. Not to mention, he did not play against the spin very much at all, unless it was super-short long hop territorry.

The slog-sweep has been around for a while and IIRC Cowdrey made it popular in the 60s.
So your admitting that Waugh played a high risk, aggressive shot commonly?
 

Red

The normal awards that everyone else has
Beyond the required 'above average hand-eye coordination' that is basic to all successful batsmen (even at FC level), no, i don't think Steve Waugh had much 'natural talent'. His reflexes were not particularly good and he was limited in his shot-play ( a consequence of not excellent ability to pick the line and length early). he didnt play the ball late either. But, he was very good in his shot-selection, a function of practice and had a very disciplined mind. As i said, in many a sport, you don't have to be an outrageous natural talent to succeed. its obviously the most common way to succeed, since cultivating and exercising immense mental fortitude is that much rarer in sport and virtually most non-academic related fields of life.
What the hell point are you even trying to make?
 

fredfertang

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I think he means he doesn't like Steve Waugh - he's probably a lawyer ie why use 10 words to say what you mean when you can use 200 - Burgey to confirm
 

NUFAN

Y no Afghanistan flag
My ATG Skills XI

1. V Sehwag
2. WG Grace
3. D Bradman
4. V Richards
5. Muloghonto
6. K Miller
7. A Gilchrist
8. I Botham
9. S Warne
10. M Marshall
11. S Nawaz
 

Flem274*

123/5
What the hell point are you even trying to make?
A simple but wrong one, which would be fair enough except he has proven several times he can't admit fault. Muloghonto is just another person convinced of his own superiority and that he has the answer to everything. This unfortunate affliction causes him to write with unrestrained arrogance and for several more paragraphs than the norm because he loves the sound of his own voice.
 

the big bambino

International Captain
Are you Hutton's ghost ? If not, Hutton is not the one speaking here, its *YOU* who is presenting anecdotes about Hutton as a counterpoint to me presenting anecdotes from Amre.
If Hutton is more qualified to talk on said matters than me (which he was), so is Amre in comparison to you.
Omg are you actually implying that I am making Hutton's point and Amre is making yours? Until now I thought you obtuse. Now I'll have to add dishonest.
 

Top