• 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.

Greatest keeper batsman - Gilchrist or Sangakkara?

aussie

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
Pratters said:
South Africa has also produced many legendary batsmen buddy.

Also you are saying people would pick Richards. I doubt most would. Maybe a portion but put it on poll on cw and you might be surprised. Or maybe we lack imagination. You can't win it both ways.
Click to expand...
Top class opener SA produced are Smith, Barlow, Mitchell, Gibbs, that is far less than the amount of very good/great/legendary batsman AUS produced in Ponting, Harvey, G Chappell, Border, Waugh, McCabe, Boon, Junior Waugh, Hassett, Clarke, Walters for considerations for Jackson being picked an unnecessary stretch.

Been around CW long enough & I've never seen a SA ATXI picked by anyone & Barry not included, if someone did it was certainly in minority & similar outside the CW world.
 
Pratters

Pratters

Cricket, Lovely Cricket
I have seen at least a few people here say they wouldn't want Richards in the test XI as he didn't play too many tests. I think OS mentioned it once.
 
cnerd123

cnerd123

likes this
Furball said:
Picking a guy who played 4 Tests in an all time XI is ridiculous.
Click to expand...
I agree, but tbf to Aussie he isnt the only person who would pick Richards in an ATG XI. It really depends on how much importance you give to FC cricket and longevity. Its not as ridiculous a view as believing Knott was a better batsman than Gilly, or that Craig White was a test-standard allrounder.
 
aussie

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
Pratters said:
Best to ignore such posters. My only point to you is you should make your point, defend it a bit and then move away from it. If you have expressed it in 2-3 posts, surely 100 posts on it aren't necessary most of the times. You don't have to prove any one right or wrong. After you have made your point, you can relax and have a nice ice cream instead.
Click to expand...
Except the eating of ice cream that's essentially what I do, I probably have close to a CW world record by now reporting posts haha. But i take your point vs 2-3 posts and stop etc.
 
aussie

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
***** said:
I agree, but tbf to Aussie he isnt the only person who would pick Richards in an ATG XI. It really depends on how much importance you give to FC cricket and longevity. Its not as ridiculous a view as believing Knott was a better batsman than Gilly, or that Craig White was a test-standard allrounder.
Click to expand...
Which is essentially my point to characters like you, be consistent with your criticism to other posters who make post that may me considered outside the norm IYO. Grow up, stop exhibiting low testosterone levels and self esteem by jumping on me when I say such things, due to whatever personal internet beef you and others holding against me dating back more than 5 years. That's the essentially problem with you and others posting,& I seeing through the BS which is start up and issue with me first - not to actually talk about cricket.

And in taking up Pratters advice wont say anything about Gilly, White.
 
G.I.Joe

G.I.Joe

International Coach
***** said:
I agree, but tbf to Aussie he isnt the only person who would pick Richards in an ATG XI. It really depends on how much importance you give to FC cricket and longevity. Its not as ridiculous a view as believing Knott was a better batsman than Gilly, or that Craig White was a test-standard allrounder.
Click to expand...
That's hardly an endorsement of the view, *****. Every idiot who picks Barry in an all time XI has also unfailingly had poor opinions on other topics indicative of a diminished intellect, severe character deficiencies and weakness of moral fibre. Every single one of them.
 
Victor Ian

Victor Ian

International Coach
aussie said:
Ha good dig, even though you may brought up a good cricket point - just sticking to cricket instead resorting to insults whether small, sly or whatever other crap is certainly not a capable trait of you posters. Yet I'm the one that is accused of being a bad poster #bias continues....I eagerly await *****'s pro tip point for this one.
Click to expand...
Yeah, cheap shot. It was funny, so drawn into temptation. It could have used a smiley at the end, but you seem to have understood.
 
D

Dan

Hall of Fame Member
G.I.Joe said:
That's hardly an endorsement of the view, *****. Every idiot who picks Barry in an all time XI has also unfailingly had poor opinions on other topics indicative of a diminished intellect, severe character deficiencies and weakness of moral fibre. Every single one of them.
Click to expand...
Takes one to know one etc. etc.
 
D

Dan

Hall of Fame Member
Fitting, given I'm closer to being a Test-standard opening batsman than the real Vijay.
 
harsh.ag

harsh.ag

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Prince EWS said:
Nah in a world where Dan is Vijay, I'm John Maynard and you're Milton.

Actually I'd probably be Thomas and Ikki would be John Maynard.
Click to expand...
Prince EWS said:
Honestly I think even Marx was less wrong than Malthus. Marx's followers... perhaps not.
Click to expand...
Actually, I would probably be Lucas.

The best thing about Malthus is that he probably would have said completely different things if you bring him back today, while Karl would probably have a hard time, given the rising inequality. Marx's followers, though, **** them. You know you're in trouble the moment the word "dialectic" comes up.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top