Swervy
International Captain
I shouldn't bite....but how wrong can a person be!!!!Anything Swervy can do, I can do better.
I shouldn't bite....but how wrong can a person be!!!!Anything Swervy can do, I can do better.
Can only presume you've never seen Tendulkar or Lara then.
.
I would put Viv ahead of both Sachin and Lara for play against the quicks too but overall, they have had stronger careers and are far better players of spin than Viv ever was.Imo Richards was a better player of quicks than either Lara or Tendulkar, though I would have the others ahead of him re spin.
To answer the question in the thread, he was a master batsman imo, certainly no myth.
Agreed but I would be stronger in my praise of Viv's play against quicks - he simply destroyed many of themI would put Viv ahead of both Sachin and Lara for play against the quicks too but overall, they have had stronger careers and are far better players of spin than Viv ever was.
Fair point. Any bloke who can hook Sylvester Clark like he's a medium-pacer without wearing a lid.......Agreed but I would be stronger in my praise of Viv's play against quicks - he simply destroyed many of them
Better at playing the quicksBetter at what? Scoring runs? No way.
Better at making the odd knock look sensational, or better at playing more good knocks that looked less sensational but were every bit as effective?Better at playing the quicks
Why on Earth does it matter where someone batted? A player is every bit as good for the results he gets regardless of what batting position he got them from.He also gets points from me for batting number 3, which Lara also did for much of his career. Shame Sachin didn't bat there as well imo, despite how good Dravid has been for India.
Why on Earth does it matter where someone batted? A player is every bit as good for the results he gets regardless of what batting position he got them from.
You couldn't make that up for an episode of Monty Python. Of course they should be praised for taking on the most difficult role in the team.So those who chose to bat at three (could have batted lower if they wanted) are to be praised for doing something that essentially makes life more difficult for them?
Brilliant.
Fantastic. So by specifically disadvantaging themselves, and doing something they know is likely to reduce their performance, they should be praised.You couldn't make that up for an episode of Monty Python. Of course they should be praised for taking on the most difficult role in the team.
I'm not sure if this is funny or just plain sad that someone who spends half their life on a cricket forum doesn't understand something as basic as the Number 3 batting position.Fantastic. So by specifically disadvantaging themselves, and doing something they know is likely to reduce their performance, they should be praised.
Brilliant.