Worst Commentators

[zaremba]

Even so, that hardly makes it a 'stupid' question in he first place.

Quite.

 

[Richard]

It had been a while since last I molested myself with Paint's beard-making airbrush, so I went to town.

Aha. I wondered as much.

 

[Richard]

Haha, even so, his bias gets bloody annoying when you aren't English but have to listen to him regularly.

Can certainly understand that.

Heck, it irritates me at times - anyone with a propensity for OTT fanboyness of any one team, regardless of who it is, tends to irritate me.

 

[neville cardus]

He's like a more over the top version of Bill Lawry

A more over-the-top version of Bill Lawry? I was unaware that such a tautology was possible: a hyperbolic hyperbole, if ever I've seen one.

 

[Langeveldt]

Colville starting to piss me off.. A buffoon who should go back to his club boys in Surrey..

CC
"South Africa with all the boxes ticked except spin really"

PA
"They do have Paul Harris who has had a good start to international cricket. At worst he'll hold an end up"

CC
"Haha, Surely not.. Rubbish series in India and has faded away hasn't he?"


Regardless of whether he warrants a place or not, Harris averages 30 with the ball, Panesar averages 32.. I wish Colville would actually watch some cricket

 

[Richard]

Colville should stick to presenting programs and commenting on the latest shot played, and not try and work-out which players are good ones and which ones aren't.

He's actually not too bad at the former, but at the latter he truly is the most fearful amateur I've ever, ever seen and is streets ahead of (behind?) anyone else.

Who's PA BTW?

 

[Langeveldt]

Paul Allott

 

[Richard]

Aha... yes, I often forget one of Sky's best commentators is these days confined exclusively to domestic cricket, while a West Indian who should in theory have little interest in England vs someone-other-than-West Indies maintains a perminant place on the international team.

 

[neville cardus]

Colville starting to piss me off.. A buffoon who should go back to his club boys in Surrey..
CC
"South Africa with all the boxes ticked except spin really"
PA
"They do have Paul Harris who has had a good start to international cricket. At worst he'll hold an end up"
CC
"Haha, Surely not.. Rubbish series in India and has faded away hasn't he?"
Regardless of whether he warrants a place or not, Harris averages 30 with the ball, Panesar averages 32.. I wish Colville would actually watch some cricket

My interest is piqued: how is it that you, a callow South African just out of a university whose reputation for booze and gage is almost equal to its academic standing, has access to the off-pissing Colville and the rest of the English domestic commentariat? If you have some surreptitious online route, please let me in on it: I want to be pissed off, too.

 

[Richard]

Nah, Hingeh is an honourary Brit. He's been over here for as much of his life as he's been in SA. Enough to have met me 4 times anyway.

UIMM, his current location is false too, and has been for much of the past year. It should read "Taunton, UK".

 

[Langeveldt]

Until October at least.. I refuse to put such a scabby, chav infested town on my profile.. Unfortunatly that rules out the rest of the UK too..

I unfortunatly dropped out of said university, not because of it's vice like reputation, but that did help.. Currently languishing with my folks who live in the UK, on a diet of domestic cricket and hard work.. Missing Grahamstown like mad, but not that long until I'm back in the Rat..

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Until October at least.. I refuse to put such a scabby, chav infested town on my profile.. Unfortunatly that rules out the rest of the UK too..

..

You've obviously never been to Sidmouth.

 

[Langeveldt]

You've obviously never been to Sidmouth.

haha, is that sarcastic? No that was tongue in cheek and there are some very nice places in the UK, however Sidmouth is emphatically not one of them..

 

[Perm]

You're right that Vettori is a better one-day bowler than Panesar. How important that fact is is a matter of personal opinion I suppose.

As for Panesar playing a "handful" of games, he has in fact played 29 Tests. More than SF Barnes, Larwood, Lohmann, Adcock, Heine, Peter Pollock, Bruce Reid, and Richard Hadlee. Ok I lied about Hadlee. And I'm not saying he's as good as the others btw - just making the point that 29 Tests is a fair length of time over which to assess someone's ability.

Edit: I've been digging around on statsguru on cricinfo and it's fair to say that Vettori has averaged 28.78 with the ball in his last 29 matches, which is better than Panesar.

Well given how big ODI cricket is in today's game, I'd say being a very succesful limited-overs bowler must count for a fair amount. Especially when Panesar is fairly rubbish. My point about the number of Tests is that Vettori has had a very long career and still has a fair amount of years in him, while in comparison Monty is still emerging into the Test arena and as of yet hasn't had to bowl in some of the same conditions, situations and against the teams Vettori has.

 

[Uppercut]

Ahh i've unintentionally turned this into a Vettori-Panesar comparison thread. As someone before me pointed out, the question was stupid because addressed to Ian Smith it was only ever going to bring one response.

For the record though, i think Vettori's the better bowler by a stretch.

 

[Prince EWS]

Well given how big ODI cricket is in today's game, I'd say being a very succesful limited-overs bowler must count for a fair amount.

It really depends on what you value though. Whilst I enjoy watching ODI cricket to some extent and indeed even enjoy discussion one day cricket theory, selection processes and player comparisons, I don't think it's a particularly reliable arena for the test of I what I consider genuine cricketing aptitude. As such, if you asked me how good a cricketer someone was, I'd consider two-day Grade cricket before I considered ODIs.

If you asked me how good a one day cricketer someone was I'd be happy to have that conversation with you and discuss their ability purely in that format, but in a way I almost consider it a different sport altogether.

 

[Perm]

As such, if you asked me how good a cricketer someone was, I'd consider two-day Grade cricket before I considered ODIs.

Yeah, but you're a moron.

ODI cricket is international cricket, so I'd say it's a fairly reasonable test of how good somebody is as a cricketer. I doubt you'll find too many very good Grade cricketers who would make ODI teams around the the world, so in my mind, there isn't much of a doubt as to what player would be better.

 

[Richard]

I doubt you'll find too many Olympic athletes who'd make good Grand Slam tennis players either.






(Just in case anyone doesn't understand what I'm saying there - the point is that limited-overs and two-innings limitless-over cricket are different things, and no amount of similarity will make them the same)

 

[_Ed_]

I doubt you'll find too many Olympic athletes who'd make good Grand Slam tennis players either.

Not even in the Olympic tennis tournament?

 

[Richard]

I thought it was tennis players who played in the tennis at the Olympics though, not athletes?