Tony Greig's all time best Indian Test XI

[Richard]

Nah, is just that ss is very fond of saying just about exactly what you said there, TBH.

And yes, we had noticed your reduced activity. Well, I certainly had, anyway.

 

[tooextracool]

Nah, is just that ss is very fond of saying just about exactly what you said there, TBH.

And yes, we had noticed your reduced activity. Well, I certainly had, anyway.

And why in the blue hell do you have Harmison as your avatar?

Guess it still beats the old selfmade multi-colored bar graph, that you had before

 

[Richard]

Kev (Goughy) is to blame for that, a result of a lost avatar-challenge (see the avatar challenge thread if you really want to find-out more). And it was a skin-of-the-teeth affair too.

Don't worry, StevieH will be gone come July 19th, and my usual avatar back. My rating of him hasn't changed one bit, as you can see by the Harmison Ashes 2005 thread just a few down.

Bar-graph?

 

[The Sean]

Not sure how Kirmani > Engineer, TBH. Sure, he was undoubtedly their best wicketkeeper, but Engineer was hardly a slouch with the gloves and, unlike Kirmani, could bat and bat well.

That'd be like picking Bob Taylor or Keith Andrew as an England all-time wicketkeeper ahead of Ames, Knott and Stewart.

Disagree mate - Engineer was the superior batsman but not by as much as you seem to think, Kirmani was certainly no bunny and hit a couple of Test tons. I haven't looked it up but I'm pretty sure Kirmani's average is in the high 20s and Engineer's in the low 30s so it's not a gaping chasm. Particularly given he'll be batting at no.8 in my team I felt his keeping was more important than his batting anyway.

And I rate Kirmani much higher as a keeper - I was always a huge fan of his glovework. He was the best keeper in the world when I was just getting into the game a young'un.

 

[Richard]

Not sure why on Earth this should be, but I'd always thought Kirmani's Test average was something like 15. Wonder who I'm getting him mixed-up with.

It's probably somewhere near even money, then, but I think on balance I'd still go for Engineer.

 

[Swervy]

Not sure why on Earth this should be, but I'd always thought Kirmani's Test average was something like 15. Wonder who I'm getting him mixed-up with.

It's probably somewhere near even money, then, but I think on balance I'd still go for Engineer.

which goes to show you make your mind up about the worth of a player based soley on averages

 

[Richard]

I've read plenty about Engineer and no-one seems to dispute he was a very fine wicketkeeper-batsman.

 

[Sanz]

which goes to show you make your mind up about the worth of a player based soley on averages

And then he will argue endlessly about how good Enginneer was, and how any fool could notice that, and how laughably stupid arguing about that is and blah blah blah.

 

[Richard]

Well... yes, it would indeed take a fool to argue that Engineer was not good. Very good. And yes, I am prepared to argue about how good he is, if someone's stupid enough to argue that he's not.

 

[Swervy]

Well... yes, it would indeed take a fool to argue that Engineer was not good. Very good. And yes, I am prepared to argue about how good he is, if someone's stupid enough to argue that he's not.

Ok, just tell us, why Engineer over Kirmani?

(this should be fun, considering you didnt know Kirmani could hold a bat until half an hour ago)

 

[Sanz]

Well... yes, it would indeed take a fool to argue that Engineer was not good. Very good. And yes, I am prepared to argue about how good he is, if someone's stupid enough to argue that he's not.

That's what I said, you will argue endlessly posting crap after crap without knowing a thing about the subject. Just like in this thread you claimed that Farokh could bat unlike Kirmani. You have no idea about Kirmani, you dont know zlich about him, his wicket keeping and his batting to get into any kind of argument, but you will do just for the heck of it.

If you didn't notice, I picked Farokh ahead of Kirmani too, but I would never say that Kirmani couldn't bat, because I know he could. TBF it was just a coin flip for me. I still cant decide which one to pick as a wicketkeeper batsman.

 

[Sanz]

Ok, just tell us, why Engineer over Kirmani?

(this should be fun, considering you didnt know Kirmani could hold a bat until half an hour ago)

Simple - He will go to Cricinfo, look at his stats, somehow figure out the the pitches Kirmani scored runs were flat, bowlers were either crap or out of form, teams were weak or something like that hence the conclusion that he couldn't bat. I dont remember any another reasoning from him ever.

 

[Richard]

Rubbish. I only say that if it was the case, and I don't know whether it was for Kirmani.

Purely and simply, I will now read-up some more on Kirmani. You're not in a good position to bang-on about arguing endlessly posting crap after crap without knowing a thing about the subject - you thought Alec Stewart was an average wicketkeeper-batsman.

 

[Sanz]

you thought Alec Stewart was an average wicketkeeper-batsman.

I thought he was not in the class of Gilchrist and Sangakkara. You think he is better than them, I dont think he comes close to Gilchrist.

You can revisit the those threads and prove that I said anything otherwise.

 

[Piper]

Ladies.. Move away from the hand bags.. Do you guys always argue like this?

 

[Sanz]

Rubbish. I only say that if it was the case, and I don't know whether it was for Kirmani.

You did say - "Unlike Kirmani Farokh could bat and bat well" without knowing a thing about Kirmani's batting.

And that clearly is not the case.

 

[Richard]

Indeed it's not. But there's no reason on Earth to think I'd "go to Cricinfo, look at his stats, somehow figure out the the pitches Kirmani scored runs were flat, bowlers were either crap or out of form, teams were weak or something like that hence the conclusion that he couldn't bat". I've never done such a thing and never will, it makes no sense.

 

[Sanz]

Read your arguments on - Hayden Vs. Hussain.

 

[Richard]

Err, those have precisely zero relevance.

 

[Swervy]

Err, those have precisely zero relevance.

hehe..you said it bud