New Feature: Cricketing Myths by Patrick Ferriday

[Howe_zat]

****, you go away for two weeks and trundled is a mod?

 

[Starfighter]

He actually reads cricket chat, unlike most of the actual moderation team, so he might be suited to it.

 

[the big bambino]

No I did not. You did not provide any detail to disambiguate your position until after I had included a detailed response that stated my position.

The sequence goes:

^my noting the absence of head-high balls earlier and noting Lillee's attempt to rationalise his bowling as being the same.

^ Your post. You did not quote the part of mine you were responding to, so it reads as a response to the last stement in the previous post. You did not mention any book title, names or times which would disambiguate it.

^ My response, noting that I relied on visual evidence, not written evidence which can by faulted as I later explained.

^ Your remark in response. Again, no mention of which time period, a book title, or any bowlers' names.

^ My detailed repsonse as to why I believe your previous post to be faulty.

^ The first post in which you actually included any detail, showing that we agree that head-height balls were not used as much earlier on. You did not mention the book title or its contents then either—it could have referred to the 30s or the 70s—and only gave its title in a response to another poster



And stating it's proven without actually proving it is not proof.



When one watches films, one can see what people might mean by the employment of certain words, so that one can see that bowling bumpers at batsmen in the forties was different (in general) to bowling them these days, and one might get a chance to see different tactics in action. Memory may change between witness and writing, and as the top of this thread shows, people writing in retrospect who may be able to check multiple primary sources may not get things right either. Bill Bowes in 1961 stated that Statham leant a very long way back in his bowling action, which is not backed up by film; Malcolm Knox (speaking of agendas) quotes Bradman and Miller giving quite different accounts of certain deliveries Bradman claims to have got out to. After Meckiff was called for throwing in 1963, Australian newspaper reports state that English papers widely quoted Ted Dexter's opinion on the matter, even though he did not see the actual events and how many witnesses found them ambiguous and hence hard to back up Dexter's certain statements.

It is presumptuous to assume that I ignore or have not seen written sources. I know from experience with them that I would prefer to be see visual evidence rather than go solely on written accounts, which furthermore may vary in what details they decide to emphasise.

Oh ffs shut it. (Like being kept awake all night by a barking dog down the street).

 

[Daemon]

cricket: srs bsns

 

[trundler]

****, you go away for two weeks and trundled is a mod?

Citizen's arrest.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

What's happening with the thread?

I read some posts like a dissertation from a failed physicist.