How good an ODI batsman was Inzamam?

[Richard]

'Course they are. But what is a real shame is that there appear to be so many of them and so few FRAZ\Fusion\np10\sp713\paksters.

 

[FRAZ]

I certainly am disappointed with the attitude of some of the posters that they never even said one thing in my appreciation . I just can't believe it . I have made tons of fulfilled predictions about the future of the game and some players . I feel so so so so so so so so sad . I mean ...............forget it !!!!!

hmmmm !

 

[shortpitched713]

But both Prince EWS and I admitted that those with unorthodix techniques (Gilly, Hayden) are better players than those with more orthodox. You are confusing the issue.

We like watching proper technique, and while it always helps, it does not necessarily by itself make you a better player. Lara does not have orthodox technique, and yet he is as effective as just about anyone in the history of the game.

Of course I undertand theres a difference between having proper technique and being a good player. However your preference of said players is based purely on their aesthetic appeal. And in that regard I don't see why you can't also appreciate the unique beauty found in players like Jayasuria and Gilchrist.

 

[shortpitched713]

ODIs perhaps, but then I don't consider them proper cricket so the point is moot. As for test cricket, I am not sure that's true, considering the fact that I would doubt someone who was not interested in the finer points of the game would spend all day watching the game to see Afridi come out to bat for 10 minutes.

Well there really seems to be no player who can get Pakistanis in the stadium for a Test match. Evidenced by the fact that Test matches played at many grounds are free admission. A shame really that so few people turn up.

 

[shortpitched713]

It is so ridiculous, too. I mean, people pay a lot of money to see cricket games - it astonishes me that they would leave on account of one player. But it's their money, I guess.

My guess is that those are the same fans who would burn effigies and issue death threats. Same as India.

See above post. They probably didn't waste any money because it is likely they didn't pay anything to begin with.

 

[silentstriker]

Of course I undertand theres a difference between having proper technique and being a good player. However your preference of said players is based purely on their aesthetic appeal. And in that regard I don't see why you can't also appreciate the unique beauty found in players like Jayasuria and Gilchrist.

Whatever else it may be, I would not characterize the games of Dhoni and Afridi as 'beautiful'. In any case, its a different standard. I prefer to see my batsmen minimize risks, instead of blindly (see 3rd Test England vs India, Mumbai, 2006) charging down the track for no reason. If you like the big hits (or stumping) that results from that, then that's good but I just shake my head when I see it.

 

[FRAZ]

Whatever else it may be, I would not characterize the games of Dhoni and Afridi as 'beautiful'. In any case, its a different standard. I prefer to see my batsmen minimize risks, instead of blindly (see 3rd Test England vs India, Mumbai, 2006) charging down the track for no reason. If you like the big hits (or stumping) that results from that, then that's good but I just shake my head when I see it.

And I have also seen you signature saying T20=fun little diversion !
Hipoassy at it's best !

 

[adharcric]

Hipoassy at it's best !

 

[shortpitched713]

Whatever else it may be, I would not characterize the games of Dhoni and Afridi as 'beautiful'. In any case, its a different standard. I prefer to see my batsmen minimize risks, instead of blindly (see 3rd Test England vs India, Mumbai, 2006) charging down the track for no reason. If you like the big hits (or stumping) that results from that, then that's good but I just shake my head when I see it.

Love how I'm talking about Jayasuriya and Gilchrist and you're bringing in Afridi and Dhoni.

 

[shortpitched713]

Hipoassy at it's best !

[Insert Manan fat joke here]

 

[silentstriker]

And I have also seen you signature saying T20=fun little diversion !
Hipoassy at it's best !

Yea, it is a fun little diversion. I don't pretend its real cricket, and I try not to watch some of the shots. Still better than ODI though.

 

[silentstriker]

Love how I'm talking about Jayasuriya and Gilchrist and you're bringing in Afridi and Dhoni.

Just using extreme examples, you can substitute Jayasurya and Gilchrist in there if you like.

 

[FRAZ]

Just using extreme examples, you can substitute Jayasurya and Gilchrist in there if you like.

So you think that these extreme cricketers are also impotent in your book of real cricketers ! or you are just prolonging the discussion ?

 

[FRAZ]

Yea, it is a fun little diversion. I don't pretend its real cricket, and I try not to watch some of the shots. Still better than ODI though.

Prove it
oterwise walk away saying its not the proper thread to do that !

 

[silentstriker]

Prove it
oterwise walk away saying its not the proper thread to do that !

I hate it a little less. Not sure how you expect me to prove a subjective decision.

 

[FRAZ]

I hate it a little less. Not sure how you expect me to prove a subjective decision.

Camouflaging the real issue under the folds of well constructed and rarely used sentences won't make wrong a right !!!!!
I rest my case !!!!!!
Carry on with the normal and prolonged discussions !

 

[haroon510]

Actually, I never made such statements. Of course I agree that Dravid and Kallis win more matches for their team than a batsman like Afridi, and I agree that they are just generally better batsmen. However the value of Afridi is that he will bring many more fans to a stadium than either Dravid or Kallis.

Also I do have a beef when players are simply slagged for being unorthodox like Jayasuria. After all Bradman didn't have the most orthodox of techniques either.

i agree with u
i personaly would never watch kallies and dravid in a studuim. afridi brings excitment which kallis and dravid lacks that.

 

[haroon510]

ODIs perhaps, but then I don't consider them proper cricket so the point is moot. As for test cricket, I am not sure that's true, considering the fact that I would doubt someone who was not interested in the finer points of the game would spend all day watching the game to see Afridi come out to bat for 10 minutes.

i think it was a test match when afridi was out and people left the studium immeditly. plus afridi's record is much better in test than one day so people like to watch him more in test since most of the filders are in circle and it is easy for him to play his shots over the fielders.

it is never shame when people come to see afridi or any aggrassive batsman like him . i think it other way that becuase of kallies and dravid most cricket lovers are turning to baseball and other sports.

 

[haroon510]

A Test!

EDIT: this one, and it's alluded to in the report.

i was refering to this match. there are many other matches out there just like this match. i personally love to see players who take risk and play new shots wether it is tachnically right or wrong. i am tird of seeing kallis and dravid playing thier same shots in every match.

 

[Richard]

Hate to say it, but Afridi plays the same shots, too.

Usually has the same result, as well - one going straight up.