Shoaib Akhtar = awesome

[Scallywag]

how exactly would you define arrogance as, if not a perception of someone's behaviour ?

Your a true diickhead C_C, arrogance is when you exaggerate your own importance and you have yet to show an example of Ponting being arrogant.

If Ponting were to say that the team would not be as good without him or something similar then you could call him arrogant. But all you can come up with is you percieve him to be arrogant even though you dont even know what it means.

And I bet a brick to London you cant give an example of Ponting being condescending.

So get a dictionary and learn what you call people BEFORE you open your big mouth.

 

[C_C]

Your a true diickhead C_C, arrogance is when you exaggerate your own importance and you have yet to show an example of Ponting being arrogant.

not explicitly.
One can imply implicit importance by rubbishing another's chances like Pontind did for the WI.
its arrogant if you are a member of Man.United and you say 'blackburn wont win squat'.

But all you can come up with is you percieve him to be arrogant even though you dont even know what it means.

before you tell me whether i know the meaning of a certain word or not, i would like you to know that i tutor kids in highschool and 1st year english.

and whether one is arrogant or not is based on your perception of that person,unless he/she openly says 'i am arrogant'.

And I bet a brick to London you cant give an example of Ponting being condescending.

i already did.


PS: aussie aussie aussie. oi oi oi

 

[benchmark00]

before you tell me whether i know the meaning of a certain word or not, i would like you to know that i tutor kids in highschool and 1st year english.

Hail the hero

 

[Scallywag]

before you tell me whether i know the meaning of a certain word or not, i would like you to know that i tutor kids in highschool and 1st year english.

Poor kids.

But I must say you are very arrogant when it comes to discussing cricket, plus you have a condescending atttude towards other posters.

After reading some of the posts on ICF I can see why you are so arrogant, it seems to be the same with most posters on there.

 

[Scallywag]

i already did.

No you didnt, just because Ponting thought England would win does not make him arrogant, and if it does then every person alive including the Dali Lama is also arrogant.

 

[C_C]

No you didnt, just because Ponting thought England would win does not make him arrogant, and if it does then every person alive including the Dali Lama is also arrogant.

its the way he dismissed WI's chances in the finals that showed arrogance ( as in no effin way can they win!).....

and dalai lama ? i dunno about you but dalai lama would be the first to tell you that never count anyone out.

 

[C_C]

Poor kids.

But I must say you are very arrogant when it comes to discussing cricket, plus you have a condescending atttude towards other posters.

After reading some of the posts on ICF I can see why you are so arrogant, it seems to be the same with most posters on there.

other posters ?
thats a broad generalisation. I display that side of mine to posters who arnt willing to discuss a point based on reasoning and justifications and show parochial tendencies.

And i would like you to point out which post of mine you found offensive in ICF and why *IN* ICF. dragging some board into the issue while posting somewhere else is poor taste indeed.

 

[Richard Rash]

Same with Ponting, call him arrogant if it helps you to deal with Australia's dominance but give some good examples of Ponting being arrogant.

No..i think he is a different case. Personally i think he comes accross as arrogant.. but not specifically him but the whole Australian setup in general. And it's not a bad thing it just comes from winning the majority of the time.

For example after thrashing NZ in the tests they rested two of their key bowlers who would normally be in their best side clearly underestimating NZ's ability and they got beaten

 

[Gangster]

Gentlemen (and Ladies), let's return to the subject at hand:

Shoaib Akhtar is the man! There is really no two ways about it. He's the coolest guy, the only bad thing about him is that he is Pakistani!

 

[Richard]

Nah! Too late now.
Once a CW thread has gone from it's title-topic, there's no getting it back.
Especially when subcontinent-Australia debates start.

 

[Crazy Sam]

shoaib's an idiot, the way he carries on at the batsmen is ridiculous. he takes 1 minute to bowl a bowl, 1 minute to walk halfway up the pitch to try and stare down the batsman, 2 minutes to walk back to his mark and goes again. no wonder his overs take ages.

He's only taking the wickets because the other bowlers (except, perhaps, Kaneria) are inept.

 

[Richard]

And, of course, he was the only person who did that wasn't he?

Well we know one who didn't, eh?
Even if his only evidence was "they're not a bad bet for the CT".

(Yes, I remember your bit about justifying said bet - but couldn't find the thing)

 

[Richard]

Give me an example of Stephen Flemings arrogance

His tactics to attempt to deal with Graeme Smith.
Fortunately Graeme had the last word as he played the biggest part in his team battering Fleming's.
Shame NZ still somehow managed to draw the series... never mind, eh, they were exposed in the next one.

 

[Richard]

he is very modest is fleming, he must mean something to do with arrogance in stuff he does on the field, i.e the way he bats or tactics in the field - because he is definatley not an arrogant person

Fake modesty is one of the best accompaniments to arrogance.
Goes brilliantly with it.

 

[Richard Rash]

His tactics to attempt to deal with Graeme Smith.
Fortunately Graeme had the last word as he played the biggest part in his team battering Fleming's.
Shame NZ still somehow managed to draw the series... never mind, eh, they were exposed in the next one.

You have got no idea what you are talking about Richo..you are having a shocker son. Fleming sledged Smith in one of the ODI's and flustered him to the point where he charged one of the bowlers and got clean bowled. NZ were dominent in the series and went into the final test match with a 1-0 lead so i don't think that saying 'somehow managed to draw the series' is really appropriate in a series where NZ were dominent..give yourself an uppercut

 

[Richard]

New Zealand should no way have won The Second Test - indeed, New Zealand should never have any remote chance of beating South Africa at present.
Normal order was resumed at Basin Reserve.

 

[Richard Rash]

New Zealand should no way have won The Second Test - indeed, New Zealand should never have any remote chance of beating South Africa at present.
Normal order was resumed at Basin Reserve.

Right... well they did win Richo and they won comprehensively by nine wickets.. You are simply a dropkick. Why shouldn't they have a remote chance of beating SA? They have a chance of beating every test team in the world other than Australia.. You will never go anywhere in life because you are far too pesamistic and need to lighten up big time

 

[Richard]

Yes, here we go - losing the argument so resort to something vaguely resembling insults.
Sorry, New Zealand had no chance against England or Australia, that was shown-up pretty comprehensively, and but for one poor Test South Africa too would have beaten them.
Not to mention the other occasions they escaped series-defeats against superior opposition over the last 3 years thanks to various factors combining in their favour.

 

[Scallywag]

No..i think he is a different case. Personally i think he comes accross as arrogant.. but not specifically him but the whole Australian setup in general. And it's not a bad thing it just comes from winning the majority of the time.

For example after thrashing NZ in the tests they rested two of their key bowlers who would normally be in their best side clearly underestimating NZ's ability and they got beaten

And India resting players against Bangledesh would be considered arrogant also Richard, as you know its something that all teams do but for some reason you think that Australia are arrogant for it.

 

[Richard Rash]

Yes, here we go - losing the argument so resort to something vaguely resembling insults.
Sorry, New Zealand had no chance against England or Australia, that was shown-up pretty comprehensively, and but for one poor Test South Africa too would have beaten them.
Not to mention the other occasions they escaped series-defeats against superior opposition over the last 3 years thanks to various factors combining in their favour.

Why do you talk crap all the time? Honestly i would like to know.. New Zealand had a chance of winning all three test matches against England. They got into winnable positions in all three games but lacked the bowling depth to knock England over. Fair enough. England proved they were the better team. But NZ definetly had their chances. As for Australia yes we had no chance and i already admited in an earlier post that we don't really have much of a chance against them.. And i already won the argument buddy regarding Fleming and NZ being lucky to manage a drawn series when they were on top all summer