• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Richards The Perfectionist - A Genius of His Generation - Imran Khan

Days of Grace

Days of Grace

International Captain
Who can say?

Maybe it would have dropped to be the same as Gayle's?

They are roughly at the same level in ODIs. But Gayle's bowling gives him the edge IMO.
 
Swervy

Swervy

International Captain
Richard said:
Don't pull the ageist crap out.
Click to expand...
I missed this post originally. I feel compelled to respond

What ageist crap? You have basically said that my opinion is knee jerk. I don't see that it is when I have been aware of Richards for as long as you have been alive. Thats a long time for an impulsive opinion to be formed


Richard said:
People on here don't think that, though - at least, most of them don't.
Click to expand...
I get the impression that I am most certainly not the only person who thinks that

Richard said:
But it's not, really, because I don't regret it.
Click to expand...
Which sums up your rather blinkered ways.

Judging by what you say on here, I deffo wouldnt want to follow the game in the way you appear to. No real passion, very sterile, pretty much the antithesis of what the game is for me. So from my perpsective, it is your loss...you just arent aware of the loss
 
archie mac

archie mac

International Coach
Days of Grace said:
Who can say?

Maybe it would have dropped to be the same as Gayle's?

They are roughly at the same level in ODIs. But Gayle's bowling gives him the edge IMO.
Click to expand...
I would tend to agree re- his average dropping, not sure by how much though.

Gayle is quite a useful bowler in ODI.

I would point out that in Greenidge's day the pitches were not as batter friendly and also they used two balls per innings which would allow the bowlers much more swing you would think
 
pasag

pasag

RTDAS
Swervy said:
Judging by what you say on here, I deffo wouldnt want to follow the game in the way you appear to. No real passion, very sterile, pretty much the antithesis of what the game is for me. So from my perpsective, it is your loss...you just arent aware of the loss
Click to expand...
Well tbf I do value Richard's opinion on cricket and other things and I think he is spot on alot of the time, but I just feel he is missing 'it', that little thing that makes cricket great and I think that will always hold him back a little, in cricketing terms anyways.
 
archie mac

archie mac

International Coach
pasag said:
Well tbf I do value Richard's opinion on cricket and other things and I think he is spot on alot of the time, but I just feel he is missing 'it', that little thing that makes cricket great and I think that will always hold him back a little, in cricketing terms anyways.
Click to expand...
Good value imho.

He seems to have done a lot of reading and knows a lot more about the history of the game then he did before his last hiatus. Still though needs to 'give' a little and not think he is always 100% correct:cool:
 
Swervy

Swervy

International Captain
pasag said:
Well tbf I do value Richard's opinion on cricket and other things and I think he is spot on alot of the time, but I just feel he is missing 'it', that little thing that makes cricket great and I think that will always hold him back a little, in cricketing terms anyways.
Click to expand...
Yeah sure, I too think he says some things which are perfectly vaild, but it is that X-factor he misses out on.

He is very scientific with his thought processes, which would be fine with a bit more insight. He is very much 'x average + y strike rate(or whatever) = z player'

where as I feel it is more:

'x' stats multiplied by impact on people (that immeasurable X factor) is approximately equal to 'z' player (or even to stretch is further 'x' stats to the power of impact on people...hehehe)

(hahaha...I hope you get my drift in that one)

Without the X factor in cricket and the ability to pick up on it (and sure, bias etc comes into play, and why not we as a species base our entire lives on judgements which have bias swirling around in there, we are not robots we are emotional, thinking animals) you might as well count shells on a beach and log the results into a book, its just emotionless number crunching....and of all sports, cricket just isnt about that
 
Swervy

Swervy

International Captain
archie mac said:
Good value imho.

He seems to have done a lot of reading and knows a lot more about the history of the game then he did before his last hiatus. Still though needs to 'give' a little and not think he is always 100% correct:cool:
Click to expand...
I wouldnt mind the thinking he is right 100% if he could genuinely debate his point with proper insight.

He infact could well be correct when he says Joel Garner was a better bowler than Dennis Lillee (whatever the definition of 'better' is). But when challenged on why he is better, the answer back is his average and strike rate etc were better.

That of course is not the REASON. If he could actually dig deeper than the stats then I think then he might be onto something more than he is!!!
 
pasag

pasag

RTDAS
Swervy said:
Yeah sure, I too think he says some things which are perfectly vaild, but it is that X-factor he misses out on.

He is very scientific with his thought processes, which would be fine with a bit more insight. He is very much 'x average + y strike rate(or whatever) = z player'

where as I feel it is more:

'x' stats multiplied by impact on people (that immeasurable X factor) is approximately equal to 'z' player (or even to stretch is further 'x' stats to the power of impact on people...hehehe)

(hahaha...I hope you get my drift in that one)

Without the X factor in cricket and the ability to pick up on it (and sure, bias etc comes into play, and why not we as a species base our entire lives on judgements which have bias swirling around in there, we are not robots we are emotional, thinking animals) you might as well count shells on a beach and log the results into a book, its just emotionless number crunching....and of all sports, cricket just isnt about that
Click to expand...
Yeah, agree fully (with apologies to Richard who I don't want it to feel like we're 'picking' (for lack of a better word) on him at all, just stuff that needs to be said, imo).
 
Last edited:
Fiery

Fiery

Banned
I like Richard but he is just plain wrong about a lot of things and excruciatingly refuses to budge on his original idea which makes debating with him a pretty fruitless exercise most of the time. He also pontificates on past players he has never actually seen live to help form an opinion on them, e.g, Lillee.

He's part of the furniture though and good to have around, is our Rich :happy:
 
Swervy

Swervy

International Captain
pasag said:
Yeah, agree fully (with apologies to Richard who I don't want it to fell like we're 'picking' (for lack of a better word) on him at all, just stuff that needs to be said, imo).
Click to expand...
hahaha..yeah felt as though we were talking about him behind his back, and then I realised we are on a public forum:)
 
nightprowler10

nightprowler10

Global Moderator
Getting back on topic of IVAR, I was just looking at his stats and found this interesting tidbit. Out the 112 dismissals:
Code: 
Bowled   	  36   	  (21.2%)
[B]Caught 	71 	(41.8%)[/B]
Caught Behind 	35 	(20.6%)
LBW 	21 	(12.4%)
Stumped 	3 	(1.8%)
Run Out 	4 	(2.4%)
Hit Wicket 	0 	(0.0%)
Handled Ball 	0 	(0.0%)
Obstructed Field  	0 	(0.0%)
Would I be right in saying that most of the times he got out playing a shot rather than getting trapped by the bowler, or is that a false assumption?
 
Swervy

Swervy

International Captain
nightprowler10 said:
Getting back on topic of IVAR, I was just looking at his stats and found this interesting tidbit. Out the 112 dismissals:
Code: 
Bowled   	  36   	  (21.2%)
[B]Caught 	71 	(41.8%)[/B]
Caught Behind 	35 	(20.6%)
LBW 	21 	(12.4%)
Stumped 	3 	(1.8%)
Run Out 	4 	(2.4%)
Hit Wicket 	0 	(0.0%)
Handled Ball 	0 	(0.0%)
Obstructed Field  	0 	(0.0%)
Would I be right in saying that most of the times he got out playing a shot rather than getting trapped by the bowler, or is that a false assumption?
Click to expand...
how does it compare to other batsman?
 
Dasa

Dasa

International Vice-Captain
Does the figure for 'caught' include being caught in the slips (as opposed to outfield catches etc)?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top