Beige Brigade Interview

[Swervy]

Somone's a touch hypersensitive...

I care when it's the same old discussions taking over a thread that started out as something totally different - while some posters may be common villains (and it may come as some surprise to you that I wasn't thinking of you when I posted the message), my message goes out to anyone who is regurgitating the same old topics.

I've never said I was a mod, and if I was, wouldn't I have moved/closed the discussion, rather than asking nicely for it to move?



See?

guilty as charged..sorry and all that

 

[marc71178]

Yes, but had they played to their potential they would beyond all question have both won the series and exposed more of England's players as substandard.

In spite of the fact they weren't obviously underperforming, England were and England still won 2-1?

Your obsession with the so-called brilliant South Africans (which ironically is countered by you dismissing their best bowler as lucky) is appearing more and more to be fanciable.

 

[Richard]

Only a complete fruitcake could think a team that had recently lost to India and Pakistan and only scraped a draw with NZ could possibly be better than a team that had just won 10 out of the last 11 Tests.

No, only a complete dumbaess could think that these results mean much at all.

 

[Richard]

In spite of the fact they weren't obviously underperforming, England were and England still won 2-1?

Your obsession with the so-called brilliant South Africans (which ironically is countered by you dismissing their best bowler as lucky) is appearing more and more to be fanciable.

No, it's not obvious at all - people just had an inflated opinion of some players so got the misleading impression that they were underperforming.
And instead it was the South Africans who were underperforming, and as a result some England players (Simon Jones; Flintoff the bowler; Giles to an extent and with the bat, too) got flattering figures.
Yes, some England players underperformed (Vaughan, Butcher, and G. Jones hopefully) but not the number that most have suggested.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Oh no, I'm being called a 'dumbaess', oh the pain... the pain...

He is so smart - he has gone and used an American insult and typoed it to further hammer the point home. Next thing this genius will come up with a stripey avatar, get it to appear repeatedly and hope that this effect can hypnotize someone into actually thinking some of the stuff he comes up with is the work of an analytical maestro.

 

[Blaze]

Oh no, I'm being called a 'dumbaess', oh the pain... the pain...

He is so smart - he has gone and used an American insult and typoed it to further hammer the point home. Next thing this genius will come up with a stripey avatar, get it to appear repeatedly and hope that this effect can hypnotize someone into actually thinking some of the stuff he comes up with is the work of an analytical maestro.

go play some scrabble

 

[marc71178]

Yes, some England players underperformed (Vaughan, Butcher, and G. Jones hopefully) but not the number that most have suggested.

About the only ones who didn't underperform were Strauss, Hoggard and Flintoff (with the ball(

 

[Richard]

No, Strauss overperformed - no-one could possibly have expected him to do as well as he did; certain others were exposed as substandard (Key, Harmison, Anderson) and certain others were flattered by their figures (S Jones most so).

 

[Richard]

Oh no, I'm being called a 'dumbaess', oh the pain... the pain...

He is so smart - he has gone and used an American insult and typoed it to further hammer the point home. Next thing this genius will come up with a stripey avatar, get it to appear repeatedly and hope that this effect can hypnotize someone into actually thinking some of the stuff he comes up with is the work of an analytical maestro.

As opposed to using an ugly great owl, of course, and delighting in being called a scrabble-obsessive and trying to get more and more people to call him it...