Andrew Symonds in contention for Test squad

[marc71178]

he got out slogging on 3 or 4 occasions at the end of innings,

On occasion such slogging was completely unnecessary and very nearly caused his side to lose a match they were cruising in...

Just because its near the end, you don't have to slog...

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Watson.
Though it was ludicrous that Symonds got all the chances he did. Never anything in his domestic record to suggest it should have been done. Lucky buggers got away with it in the end.
I seriously hope the same thing doesn't happen with Powell.

It simply isn't possible that he actually can play cricket and knows how to score runs. Despite his domestic record, the fact that he's succeeding at international cricket does count for something.

He's not a 'lucky bugger', he's a good player.

 

[age_master]

On occasion such slogging was completely unnecessary and very nearly caused his side to lose a match they were cruising in...

Just because its near the end, you don't have to slog...

a) its fun

b) its not about winning, its about demoralising



In Australia Batting down the order is called limited oportunity, often these players dont get a chance to build an innings and bat for a long time

 

[marc71178]

b) its not about winning, its about demoralising

OK then 5 overs to go, 2 to win with the last pair at the wicket.

The established batsman has a swing, misses and is bowled.

That's really demoralising to the fielding side...

 

[age_master]

dunno what your on about marc, demoralising would be 360 instead of 320, or winning in 35 overs instead of 48. so your going for boundaries instead of just pushing the ball around.

but overall he did have a pretty dodgy year, only 5th in the ODI player voting when he played less than half the games.

 

[marc71178]

I'm pointing out that when chasing you do not have to swing out at all costs (as was the initial criticism)

It is not demoralising to a team who are facing defeat to see a batsman get out playing stupidly - I would say it has the complete opposite effect.

 

[Richard]

What you hope Powell does not finaly live up to his potential??

why do you allways want people to fail?

I don't believe he's got any real potential.
I don't like players I view as totally rubbish succeeding.
People have misjudged that Powell has potential for God knows how long now. I've been proved right until now. I hope that doesn't change.
Surely a logical deduction?

 

[Richard]

It simply isn't possible that he actually can play cricket and knows how to score runs. Despite his domestic record, the fact that he's succeeding at international cricket does count for something.

He's not a 'lucky bugger', he's a good player.

I was referring to his fans and the selectors as "lucky buggers".
Not Symonds himself. I've never disputed that he's a changed player since the Pakistan game in WC2003.
I still hope the success wanes.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

I was referring to his fans and the selectors as "lucky buggers".
Not Symonds himself. I've never disputed that he's a changed player since the Pakistan game in WC2003.
I still hope the success wanes.

That last line contradicts all your attempts to defend your ludicrous attitude towards players and statistics.

 

[Langeveldt]

I don't believe he's got any real potential.
I don't like players I view as totally rubbish succeeding.
People have misjudged that Powell has potential for God knows how long now. I've been proved right until now. I hope that doesn't change.
Surely a logical deduction?

I guess it logical, bit weird though....

Guess I feel the same about Robbie Peterson and Steve Harmison, but its an attiude that isnt great when it comes to enjoyable cricket watching

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

I don't believe he's got any real potential.
I don't like players I view as totally rubbish succeeding.

Interesting... because there are players (or at least one) who the majority of people who have a clue about cricket judge as crap who you seem to think is otherwise.

 

[Richard]

Interesting... because there are players (or at least one) who the majority of people who have a clue about cricket judge as crap who you seem to think is otherwise.

Presuming you are talking about Ramprakash, AFAIAC people who think he's crap are just the victims of the troubles of generalisation.
Simply looking at his Test-average as one thing, rather than bothering to break it down into stages of career, and think about the difference between opening and batting in the middle-order.
It's up to you what you look at but forgive me, I prefer to make my own judgements on what I consider valid, not just think what everyone else thinks.
Anyway, what exactly did your comment have to do with the part of my post you quoted from?

 

[Richard]

I guess it logical, bit weird though....

Guess I feel the same about Robbie Peterson and Steve Harmison, but its an attiude that isnt great when it comes to enjoyable cricket watching

Well, that's something I have had to give serious thought to.
What exactly is enjoyable cricket watching for me?
The answer is, being proved right is satisfying by watching the causes of results, but I don't have to actually enjoy it from a cricketing point of view (for instance, watching Harmison hack a Lee Full-Toss over mid-wicket for four was very satisfying from the POV of Lee going for runs, but didn't offer anything in the way of cricketing aesthetics).
When your attitudes are like mine, cricket watching is far more of a science than for others.:rolleyes:

 

[Richard]

That last line contradicts all your attempts to defend your ludicrous attitude towards players and statistics.

What, so you are allowed to enjoy Nel's success being reversed and I'm not allowed to enjoy it if the same happens to Symonds? :O :O :O
Where's the equality in that????

 

[marc71178]

Erm, didn't Liam enjoy it because it was him team having the success though.

 

[Richard]

AFAIK he enjoyed it because he didn't like Nel's attitude.
The fact that it was Chanderpaul and co. doing the slaughtering was a bonus.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

What, so you are allowed to enjoy Nel's success being reversed and I'm not allowed to enjoy it if the same happens to Symonds? :O :O :O
Where's the equality in that????

You don't want Symonds to do well because you don't rate him. I rate Nel very highly and I enjoyed him getting hit about, as you say, because of his attitude against us.

 

[Rik]

b) its not about winning, its about demoralising

One of the most insane statements I've ever seen. Cricket is a game, a sport, and as such surely the point of it is to win every time, not to demoralise the opposition by going bonkers and trying to show off when your team needs you to hang in there...

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

One of the most insane statements I've ever seen. Cricket is a game, a sport, and as such surely the point of it is to win every time, not to demoralise the opposition by going bonkers and trying to show off when your team needs you to hang in there...

The point of sport is neither. The point of sport is to entertain. Everything else, especially commercialism, has crept in to pervert the original meaning of sport.

 

[Neil Pickup]

For a pro sportsman, the focus is victory. Period.