Tendulkar/Hobbs vs Marshall/McGrath

[Johan]

No. You are making a sweeping generalisation of a century of cricket evolution and I am suggesting each era has different qualitative ways of evolution. But we don't need to rehash.

On every single qualitative facet there's a higher difference between Root and Sobers era than between Sobers and Hobbs era, as I said, concede Root>Sobers or drop the evolution nonsense.

 

[subshakerz]

On every single qualitative facet there's a higher difference between Root and Sobers era than between Sobers and Hobbs era, as I said, concede Root>Sobers or drop the evolution nonsense.

Again with the generalisation.

 

[subshakerz]

This also changed more between Sobers era and Root era than between Hobbs era and Sobers era.

And what if there is a minimum threshold for it to have a confidence in transferability that was met in Sobers era and not earlier?

 

[Johan]

And what if there is a minimum threshold for it to have a confidence in transferability that was met in Sobers era and not earlier?

Why would there be a minimum threshold for transferability between Sobers era and Root era (big difference) if the same gap is not enough for transfereabiity between Hobbs era and Sobers era (small gap)? If Sobers era is transferable to Root era then logically Hobbs era is transferable to Sobers era, and indirectly transferable to Root era.

 

[Xix2565]

I mean I'm not sure why ancient fossils not being rated as highly as you believe is such an insult to be honest. If anything you should be grateful that we even care about them.

 

[Johan]

I mean I'm not sure why ancient fossils not being rated as highly as you believe is such an insult to be honest. If anything you should be grateful that we even care about them.

It's actually very good for me, it makes Joe Root the greatest batsmen of all time after Steven Smith, I'm just hammering that in the sadly dysfunctional brains of everyone who believes stuff like this.

 

[Xix2565]

It's actually very good for me, it makes Joe Root the greatest batsmen of all time after Steven Smith, I'm just hammering that in the sadly dysfunctional brains of everyone who believes stuff like this.

The only thing that is dysfunctional at the moment is the massive leaps of logic you keep wanting to take to try and justify your original position. If you want a discussion, stop doing that and actually think for a second to avoid flipping out. And by think I do mean think, not just float around in shock or anger or whatever it is that makes you post like this.

 

[sayon basak]

The only thing that is dysfunctional at the moment is the massive leaps of logic you keep wanting to take to try and justify your original position. If you want a discussion, stop doing that and actually think for a second to avoid flipping out. And by think I do mean think, not just float around in shock or anger or whatever it is that makes you post like this.

 

[Johan]

The only thing that is dysfunctional at the moment is the massive leaps of logic you keep wanting to take to try and justify your original position.

Aw, you said some big words, but infact I'm the only person with any intellectual consistency in this conversation, my original position is already justified considering how badly Subs's argument fell on it's face.

If you want a discussion, stop doing that and actually think for a second to avoid flipping out.

Nobody is flipping out mate, you came here with virtue signaling, you've no point to make so I don't know why you're wasting my time, if you've a point to make then by all means, go ahead.

And by think I do mean think, not just float around in shock or anger or whatever it is that makes you post like this.

No shock from my end, I'm simply debating and you randomly interrupted me for no reason, Rude.

 

[subshakerz]

I mean I'm not sure why ancient fossils not being rated as highly as you believe is such an insult to be honest. If anything you should be grateful that we even care about them.

It's the opposite. We are to believe that there was an era where we had superhumans but since the war they become extinct.

 

[Johan]

It's the opposite. We are to believe that there was an era where we had superhumans but since the war they become extinct.

I'm giving you the option to ignore the entire era of Cricket, if you accept that Steven Smith and Joe Root are the two greatest batsmen of all time, as well as Jasprit Bumrah as the greatest bowler of all time,it's very selfish of you to botch poor Shortpitched's point due to having a Sachin and Imran bias.

 

[subshakerz]

Why would there be a minimum threshold for transferability between Sobers era and Root era (big difference) if the same gap is not enough for transfereabiity between Hobbs era and Sobers era (small gap)? If Sobers era is transferable to Root era then logically Hobbs era is transferable to Sobers era, and indirectly transferable to Root era.

No the idea that by a certain era cricket has professionalised to a critical point where we can have confidence in transferability. And changes beyond that can be accounted for even if you say they are large, whereas prior it simply was not at a level where cricket quality can be taken as seriously.

 

[Johan]

No the idea that by a certain era cricket has professionalised to a critical point where we can have confidence in transferability. And changes beyond that can be accounted for even if you say they are large, whereas prior it simply was not at a level where cricket quality can be taken as seriously.

Why would the professionalisation and growth of the game simply stop? why would the higher volume of changes that come in the next 50 years not actually change the sport? Cricket would either keep developing, or it would stop developing at the Golden Age, it's one of the two, pick one.

 

[subshakerz]

I'm giving you the option to ignore the entire era of Cricket, if you accept that Steven Smith and Joe Root are the two greatest batsmen of all time, as well as Jasprit Bumrah as the greatest bowler of all time,it's very selfish of you to botch poor Shortpitched's point due to having a Sachin and Imran bias.

Strawman again and again as if repeating it makes your argument better.

Just suck it up that many of us will look at the early 20th century as a cricket Wild West especially since we can't watch video of the players playing.

I respect your view even if I feel it is overly nostalgic. Respect ours.

 

[subshakerz]

Why would the professionalisation and growth of the game simply stop?

It wouldnt. But by Sobers era it had hit the critical level of confidence when we can be more assured of player quality based on where the game was.

 

[Johan]

Strawman again and again as if repeating it makes your argument better.

Just suck it up that many of us will look at the early 20th century as a cricket Wild West especially since we can't watch video of the players playing.

I respect your view even if I feel it is overly nostalgic. Respect ours.

I'm not obliged to respect idiotic views, for example, many people are flat earthers, do I respect their views? No, I call it what it is, Stupid.

 

[Johan]

It wouldnt. But by Sobers era it had hit the critical level of confidence when we can be more assured of player quality based on where the game was.

why would the player quality hike between 1920 and 1950 be higher than the player quality hike between 1950 and 2020, speak up.

 

[subshakerz]

I'm not obliged to respect idiotic views, for example, many people are flat earthers, do I respect their views? No, I call it what it is, Stupid.

You are being emotional again, Johan. Please calm down.

 

[Xix2565]

Aw, you said some big words, but infact I'm the only person with any intellectual consistency in this conversation, my original position is already justified considering how badly Subs's argument fell on it's face.


Nobody is flipping out mate, you came here with virtue signaling, you've no point to make so I don't know why you're wasting my time, if you've a point to make then by all means, go ahead.


No shock from my end, I'm simply debating and you randomly interrupted me for no reason, Rude.

You didn't have any intellectual consistency in interpreting arguments, so no, you have to actually justify why you want to be an idiot properly first. I've made my point already, you just have to read it without trying to change my words to something else entirely.

 

[Johan]

You are being emotional again, Johan. Please calm down.

Oh I assure you there's nothing emotional from my end, I'm informing you of my views on your stance as you seemingly care about it, if you think I'm being too heated, you're welcome to leave the debate here.