True. Computers are yet to be eaten though...You could go back 2 years later through just about any longish thread and find countless inaccurate predictions, people are too quick to say "this WILL happen" or "they HAVE got no chance" or something similar.
Seriously? If there's one person on the site I'd have expected to defend ultimate statements about players early in their career, I'd have thought it would be you. Couldn't count the number of times you have absolutely written off a player's chances of succeeding, often without even having seen them play.Really, what was the point in digging this thread up?
You could go back 2 years later through just about any longish thread and find countless inaccurate predictions, people are too quick to say "this WILL happen" or "they HAVE got no chance" or something similar.
Something I try to avoid myself, though it's impossible to do with foolproof watertight-ness.
Some very interesting reactions on the thread. My take on it which I have written on Sportolysis
Whatever happens in the drama which ensues at Lord in less than a week’s time, one thing is certain – England have already made a statement which smacks of confidence, the positive and brave attitude it has shown in the past one and half years. There is no Butcher being out with injury, Thorpe – the backbone of the English batting line up in the latter part of the 90s has been omitted and the English test side has younger look than at any point in the past 15 years.
The selectors have shown faith in Pieterson for the beginning of such a crucial Ashes opening test that it totally surprised me. But it was a pleasant surprise. Whether Pieterson fails on succeeds now in the first test, the English team have made the first real statement of the Ashes. The one day games were just mouth candy. The English team have said – we are ready to make things happen rather than wait and merely hope that it happens. We are not going for the safe play. We are gritty, we are raring to go and we are willing to growl and make move. In other words, we just don’t hope to win the Ashes if Australia show some lack of form or if we show some miracle of brilliance. We are coming at you and will do all things to achieve the goal of winning the Ashes.
It may not help in winning the Ashes but it is the perfect attitude. Choose a youngster raring to go rather than a soldier with history of nothing from past Ashes spoils, playing a last battle, having already announced his retirement. I never understand the concept of announcing a retirement before a series or test match or a season or a tournament. It smacks of irresponsibility and shifts, if some times only partly, the attention from the actual battle at hand to a mere soldier. Don’t show a desire to quit before a major battle. There are other players raring to go with more rush in the blood.
In a similar irresponsible act by Steve Waugh before the series against India, the Australian selectors did not show the steel to blood Clarke immediately. It shifted attention of Australia in the series and remember how Clarke rose to the occasion in India when given the opportunity. Going back some time, Remember how Gilchrist rose to the ocassion when Healy was looking for a ‘last test’. Pieterson would try to make the most of the chance he has got. Pieterson is delighted at being selected. It’s a big thing for him. Thorpe is disappointed at not getting selected. He was expecting it. That for me undermines the correctness of the decision and shows how much which player was raring to go.
Should England go back to Thorpe if Pieterson fails in the middle of the Ashes. Or bring back Butcher when he comes out of injury? Not really. Have faith in the young, the new. Bring Key or blood Joyce.
The first blood has been drawn by England and the Ashes and the small battles of the Ashes have now begun in all earnest.
No, you couldn't count the times you'd interpreted me doing such. You might remember a discussion we had where you said something along the lines of "if you say 'he's rubbish' that means you think he'll always be rubbish" and I said "when I say that it means nothing of the sort".Seriously? If there's one person on the site I'd have expected to defend ultimate statements about players early in their career, I'd have thought it would be you. Couldn't count the number of times you have absolutely written off a player's chances of succeeding, often without even having seen them play.
Fair point, but he was Emerging Player of the Year, wasn't he? Must be doing something right.Depends on how you define "some quality" I suppose. He's probably proven he's good enough to play test cricket in a general sense, but I don't think he's really a quality test batsman yet. He's only had two good series in his career after all, and an average of 43 isn't dominant. Take out Bangladesh and it's 37.5, which is lower than the average Michael Clarke had when he was written off and dropped from the side. Just to put it in context.
He's got talent, but he's not really proven yet IMO, compared to someone like Pietersen, who has played fewer tests.
No, I see it every day...still fun to read back and see how wrong TEC is
you'd like that don't you Richard ?
One of India's best batsmen these days.Irfan Pathan...
Well, better than Sehwag maybe...One of India's best batsmen these days.
I tell you what, I'll give you one...True. Computers are yet to be eaten though...
I will go the Camps line of Anderson on Pathan.One of India's best batsmen these days.
Huh?I will go the Camps line of Anderson on Pathan.
As in, saying that he's still young. Like Camps did with Anderson, stating that he's only 24.Huh?
Ah, ok. Pretty obvious TBH. Just ignore me in future.As in, saying that he's still young. Like Camps did with Anderson, stating that he's only 24.
This message is hidden because Barney Rubble is on your ignore listAh, ok. Pretty obvious TBH. Just ignore me in future.