Niall
International Coach
Yep for Surrey all formats. one more season after this left on his deal.Great career, great man.
Will he still be playing domestic cricket in England?
Yep for Surrey all formats. one more season after this left on his deal.Great career, great man.
Will he still be playing domestic cricket in England?
Honestly I think he did. For one, he should've played the whole series. For another, he should've played the whole previous series instead of flying out to England to watch Wimbledon. Another thing is that if he hung around for another year or two (as he is obviously good enough to), he would've created some distance between himself and Tendulkar/Lara imo (and been a clear #2 GOAT imo). Now, he's just in the same level as Tendulkar and Lara for me.Tarnished his career in his last few matches etc etc.
Nah, what a player. So sad. Magnificent player and firmly in that "best-after Bradman" tier.
Yep. ***y voice as well. Luckily we've got Kohli to take over the mantle from him.I knew his average was well past 50 but I didn't realise it was 57 plus after 130 odd tests. That's insane! What a great. And, from a female perspective, one of the best looking cricketers to have graced the game.
You just never can tell though. Tendulkar in early 2011 was the best in the world and everyone thought he'd carry on like that till he retired, whenever that would be. But it just does not take too long for a guy in his late 30s to be past it. That's why we kept saying to you that all that talk of Tendulkar tarnishing his legacy because his average dropped by 3-4 points in his last year of cricket was silly. Even if Sanga had carried on averaging 30 till the end of 2016, I wouldn't rate him differently.Honestly I think he did. For one, he should've played the whole series. For another, he should've played the whole previous series instead of flying out to England to watch Wimbledon. Another thing is that if he hung around for another year or two (as he is obviously good enough to), he would've created some distance between himself and Tendulkar/Lara imo (and been a clear #2 GOAT imo). Now, he's just in the same level as Tendulkar and Lara for me.
Um.. this is the SL team where we have a specialist batsman with an average of 18. So yes, he would obviously be good enough to play for 2 more years.You just never can tell though. Tendulkar in early 2011 was the best in the world and everyone thought he'd carry on like that till he retired, whenever that would be. But it just does not take too long for a guy in his late 30s to be past it. That's why we kept saying to you that all that talk of Tendulkar tarnishing his legacy because his average dropped by 3-4 points in his last year of cricket was silly. Even if Sanga had carried on averaging 30 till the end of 2016, I wouldn't rate him differently.
You may not but others would, and I would venture to even use the word "most" instead of "others" in that sentence fragment.You just never can tell though. Tendulkar in early 2011 was the best in the world and everyone thought he'd carry on like that till he retired, whenever that would be. But it just does not take too long for a guy in his late 30s to be past it. That's why we kept saying to you that all that talk of Tendulkar tarnishing his legacy because his average dropped by 3-4 points in his last year of cricket was silly. Even if Sanga had carried on averaging 30 till the end of 2016, I wouldn't rate him differently.
There comes a point in a players' career when many people subconsciously start thinking that even if player X has a bad run of form, he won't be rated lower. If he has another purple patch, would he be rated higher? Yes,possibly.But failures cease to matter as much as before. I don't know where that tipping point comes. For Viv and Sachin, most people's minds were made up on how they'd be rated long before their retirements. I probably need a graph to explain what I feel here:You may not but others would, and I would venture to even use the word "most" instead of "others" in that sentence fragment.
Classy mofo. Should go into politics.
I don't subscribe to this at all.. each match of a player's career is as relevant as the next.There comes a point in a players' career when many people subconsciously start thinking that even if player X has a bad run of form, he won't be rated lower. If he has another purple patch, would he be rated higher? Yes,possibly.But failures cease to matter as much as before. I don't know where that tipping point comes. For Viv and Sachin, most people's minds were made up on how they'd be rated long before their retirements. I probably need a graph to explain what I feel here:
That probably doesn't make much sense but I like graphs