Think about that for a second. How can he not be a great pressure player when hes performed so well in tests while being the teams backbone for well over a decade?C_C said:mmm
i dont think he is a great pressure player in tests.
He has a few pressure knocks i grant and is a good pressure player in tests....but not the grandaddy of pressure players as some make him to be.
Well...when you play for such a hopeless team like the WI of the last 4-5 years, comming in at the wicket with the scores at 10/2 isnt really pressure.....you just do your best and go on with it.Think about that for a second. How can he not be a great pressure player when hes performed so well in tests while being the teams backbone for well over a decade?
How many times has lara come in early when the windies are in trouble?
I dont understand your reasoning there. If the team sucks a bit, there is more pressure because there is still a chance for a win? but because windies suck so much it doesnt really matter anymore? lolC_C said:Well...when you play for such a hopeless team like the WI of the last 4-5 years, comming in at the wicket with the scores at 10/2 isnt really pressure.....you just do your best and go on with it.
Whats the pressure when you are starin down the barrel with snowball's chance in hell to win or draw ?
Pressure is when you can make or break the result......
Come up with some examples for waugh, border and gavasker. I bet i could beat you two to one with laras.C_C said:Lara, for all his toutings of pressure playing( i am not saying that he isnt a pressure player...he is a good pressure player in tests but not as good as some make him to be), fails more often than the likes of Waugh/Border/Gavaskar etc. when the match is on the line.
People remember his successes but dont really remember his failures....
its like for every pressure situation(where match result can be affected), lara comes in and flops like two-thirds of the time......he pulls off some blinders but i am not the kind to harp on successes and forget the failures...one must balance them to get the whole picture.
Just because its a final doesnt automatically mean there is pressure. How can ponting be under pressure in that australian side?Scallywag said:Just had a look at Ponting in grand finals.
A pretty impressive record
M--runs--hs----ave
28 1017 140* 44.21
A champion of champions.
Pardon!Arrow said:Just because its a final doesnt automatically mean there is pressure. How can ponting be under pressure in that australian side?
He comes in at 1/100 after the bowlers have been demoralized by hayden and gilchrist.
Why are you posting in this ****en thread then?Scallywag said:Pardon!
Who mentioned pressure?
Arrow said:Why are you posting in this ****en thread then?
Every player that walks out onto the field is playing under pressure, just because your team is 1/100 you are still under as much pressure as you would be if they were 1/10 because you still need to score runs against the bowlers. Most people would think a winning team is under more pressure to keep winning than a team that normally would not be expected to win. So I'm not really interested in discussing who is under more pressure, as far as I'm concerned every player is under pressure.Arrow said:I mean why post pontings record here? You must be implying he excells under pressure.
I actually think he does but i dont beleive hes under nearly the same amount as lara.
Your totally wrong there. There is more risk of failure at 1/10 than 1/100 is there not?? How can there not be more pressure?Scallywag said:Every player that walks out onto the field is playing under pressure, just because your team is 1/100 you are still under as much pressure as you would be if they were 1/10 because you still need to score runs against the bowlers. Most people would think a winning team is under more pressure to keep winning than a team that normally would not be expected to win. So I'm not really interested in discussing who is under more pressure, as far as I'm concerned every player is under pressure..
So you conceeded the challenge. Thats fair enough, but im sure we were talking about test pressure not one day.Scallywag said:And why did I post Pontings stats,
guess who posted "Come up with some examples for waugh, border and gavasker. I bet i could beat you two to one with laras." so I gave Pontings.
Not really when you come in you are allways on a duck regardless of the team score.Arrow said:Your totally wrong there. There is more risk of failure at 1/10 than 1/100 is there not?? How can there not be more pressure?
Its like saying there is no more fear getting a loaded gun pointed at you than an empty one..
Finals in test matches, thats a new one for me.Arrow said:So you conceeded the challenge. Thats fair enough, but im sure we were talking about test pressure not one day.
Maybe you missed my first post when i said lara wasnt that good in OD finals but was great in test pressure situations.Scallywag said:Finals in test matches, thats a new one for me.
So what you would be saying is a batsman who gets a good score in a loosing team is better than a batsman who gets a good score in a winning team when in fact they both just got a good score.Arrow said:Maybe you missed my first post when i said lara wasnt that good in OD finals but was great in test pressure situations.