How do you feel about Shane Warne?

[Richard]

This is the crux of why I think Richard is a hypocrite with his opinions. There are 1001 excuses for someone he adores (seen here) and just none for those he dislikes (see Hayden). Even seemingly the same criteria is used in different ways for different players.

Nonsense, I've explained why it's wrong to suggest that type of case applies to Hayden. In his case it wasn't one of the player getting better but the opposition getting worse.

And the fact that I dislike Hayden has nothing to do with how lowly I rate him. There are several players I ostensibly dislike (not that there's that many that I do dislike) yet rate to different degrees - a few examples being Damien Martyn, Shane Warne and Charl Willoughby. You have to get the stupid notion that I "dislike" players then look for reasons to "dislike" them out of your head. Well, no actually, you don't, as I know there's no hope of you doing so. But it'd help you understand things a bit more if you did.

 

[abhijeet]

This thread is as entertaining, if not more so than Warne's personal life.

 

[Richard]

Maybe it'll win... a Warne.

 

[Ikki]

Nonsense, I've explained why it's wrong to suggest that type of case applies to Hayden. In his case it wasn't one of the player getting better but the opposition getting worse.

And the fact that I dislike Hayden has nothing to do with how lowly I rate him. There are several players I ostensibly dislike (not that there's that many that I do dislike) yet rate to different degrees - a few examples being Damien Martyn, Shane Warne and Charl Willoughby. You have to get the stupid notion that I "dislike" players then look for reasons to "dislike" them out of your head. Well, no actually, you don't, as I know there's no hope of you doing so. But it'd help you understand things a bit more if you did.

You must really dislike him then if Atherton and Hussain > Hayden.

 

[Sanz]

This is the crux of why I think Richard is a hypocrite with his opinions. There are 1001 excuses for someone he adores (seen here) and just none for those he dislikes (see Hayden). Even seemingly the same criteria is used in different ways for different players.

Haha, Dont want to sound as if I am trying to provoke him, because I simply am not but I must say that I haved wanted to say this for quite some time.

Just one thing he will use the same criteria different ways for the same player. If he is arguing in favor of Imran Khan, he will say he should get points for bowling on the flattest decks in Pakistan, If he is arguing against Imran he will argue that he gets no point for all the success in Pakistani condition because it was his home surface, he knew how bowl on those surfaces better than others.

Anyone who thinks Hayden, an alltime great, is <<<< the pedestrians like Hussain and Artherton has very serious credibility issue on this forum and probably outside of it on matters related to cricket.

 

[SJS]

This thread is as entertaining, if not more so than Warne's personal life.

... and as personal ....??

 

[bond21]

Im sorry but if you dont think Hayden is one of the best opening batsman of all time, you have a grudge against him and are unable to rate him fairly.

He averages I think 55 in test matches. When you open the batting and average 55, you are an exceptional batsman.

Opening is without a doubt the hardest position to bat, fresh bowlers, new ball etc.

 

[Richard]

Im sorry but if you dont think Hayden is one of the best opening batsman of all time, you have a grudge against him and are unable to rate him fairly.

Wrong.

Opening is without a doubt the hardest position to bat, fresh bowlers, new ball etc.

Wrong again.

 

[Richard]

Anyone who thinks Hayden, an alltime great, is <<<< the pedestrians like Hussain and Artherton has very serious credibility issue on this forum and probably outside of it on matters related to cricket.

Nah.

 

[Richard]

You must really dislike him then if Atherton and Hussain > Hayden.

Nah.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

Compelling arguments there Richard.

 

[andmark]

I think he is a great exponent for spin bowling

That must have been an irrelevant option.

 

[Richard]

Compelling arguments there Richard.

Only way to rebut nonsense like that TBH.

 

[bond21]

please enlighten us as to which batting position is harder than opening?

I had no idea tired bowlers bowling with an older ball was harder...

 

[bond21]

have you ever opened the batting Richard against a good attack?

Or are you just arguing for the sake of arguing?

 

[Lillian Thomson]

please enlighten us as to which batting position is harder than opening?

I had no idea tired bowlers bowling with an older ball was harder...

have you ever opened the batting Richard against a good attack?

Or are you just arguing for the sake of arguing?

The problem arises with your use of the words "without doubt". It's a statement that can't be made beyond doubt, so therefore in the twilight zone it becomes a "wrong" statement.

 

[bond21]

yack yack yack.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

yack yack yack.

That must the mating call of the Lesser Spotted Troll.

 

[bond21]

shh, be very very quiet....we have spotted this very rare creature who doesnt like loud noises and likes arguing for the sake of arguing....

 

[99*]

I opened the batting when I played for my school, I found it much easier than any other position I've ever batted.
IMO I'd say batting #3 is much harder than opening, you come in after the first wicket so the bowlers are going to be hyped up, if it was a early wicket then you have to basically be another opener, if there was a big partnership then you are expected to carry on with it. #3's have a lot more pressure on them than openers.