Cricket Chat not as exciting as before

[neville cardus]

Why t' Wes' Ridin' talk?

 

[aussie]

Nah, more like Cryme Tyme.


Anyway, part of the reason why Cricket Chat isn't as good as it used to be is a proliferation of threads that aren't about cricket, such as this one. Suggest we get back to discussing cricket.

Well damn, excuse me giving shedding my opinion on a topic that has definately been a problem on this site.

 

[Craig]

What must the real Neville think?

I thought you were the real Neville Cardus

 

[neville cardus]

I thought you were the real Neville Cardus

I'm schizophrenic.

 

[BoyBrumby]

PEWS's posts make interesting reading, actually. I suppose if one spends any length of time in any society, virtual or otherwise, it will have an effect on one's opinions and it's probably healthy that it does. It's a shame he didn't name any of the particular CW received wisdoms that have a greater currency here than elsewhere tho, no posters' names need to be mentioned.

I don't think CC is perhaps as quite as strong as it has been previously, but that may just be my perception as I've put in a lot of man hours at the coal face, as it were, and it does seem like a lot of the same arguments and ideas come up time and again. They can't possibly have the thrill of the new to me anymore, so it's possibly just me. That said, we have lost some quality CC posters; Slow Love hasn't posted for ages, Faaip is a rare vistor to CW's shores nowadays & lucky eddie is only now dipping a toe in the waters again after a long absence.

 

[tooextracool]

Instead of naming names which would only fuel a feud, I'll use myself as an example. If you got me alone in a corner, I'd tell you that I think, as of right now, Vusi Sibanda is a better opening batsman than Virender Sehwag. It's an "interesting" opinion to say the least which nearly everyone would disagree with, and if I tried to argue it, I'd lose emphatically. Does it mean it's wrong? Well, to be fair, probably. Not certainly though, and such an opinion, void of a true statistical case behind it is something missing from CW completely now. The different criteria people use to analyse how well someone will perform in the future is what makes discussing cricket more interesting than other sport, and I feel we're losing that on CC by dumbing it down into a standard accepted criteria.

I actually posted that Sibanda opinion here about 5 months ago. Would I have done it two weeks ago? Not a chance. It's not really good for the forum, IMO, as everyone thinks the same (or, quite possibly, bases their posts on the same criteria regardless of what they think).

And that is probably the problem. Its that the majority of the new members are far too conventional. Personally, i think a lot of the lack of excitement in CC is due to the newer members being unable to replace the older members that left. When i first joined, there were several members who challenged the norm and posted opinions vastly different from the conventional. To name a few: AMZ, Richard, LuckyEddie, Badgehair, Anzac, Top Cat (later c_C) and several others were more than willing to challenge the norm and they all shared vastly different ideas and personalities. If you go back to a couple of years ago, i wouldn't be surprised if you found threads started by AMZ stating something along the lines of 'Jim laker- the best bowler ever' or by Richard stating that Vaas is a better bowler than Mcgrath and Pollock, even though hes recently shifted gear on that topic (cant blame him though considering it was a stupid argument anyways). The problem with CC nowadays is that too many members merely restate the opinions of commentators and experts alike. What really bothers me is that several members that are often considered knowledgable on this forum merely tell me what i already hear on tv. Im not really interested in hearing how great Brian Lara or Ponting is or how if Hussey bats like he has been over the last 2 years he will be the 2nd best ever, i want to hear about how an average player like Sanath Jayasuriya managed to play over 100 tests or how seriously underrated Craig White was in the 90s because those sorts of arguments actually stimulate the mind. Yes there are probably statistics that go against both of those arguments, but some arguments go beyond plain statistics and are determined by your own understanding of the game based on what you have watched. Your argument that Visu Sibanda is a better player than Sehwag does that, perhaps everyone on the forum may disagree with that, but its your opinion and if you can provide a reason for your argument then Im sure people will at least respect it.

Meh thats just my 2 cents and if anything thats probably as close to off topic as I'll ever go.

 

[TheEpic]

This subject crops up on EVERY internet forum. Its the equivalent of a load of old blokes sitting in a pub saying 'ahh, but it wasn't like this in my day'. Its just a load of rubbish. Things change, sometimes for the better and often not. That doesn't mean this forum is in decline, it just goes through natural phases of lulls and peaks. If another Ashes 2005 happened, this place would be buzzing.

Chill out!

 

[Flem274*]

This subject crops up on EVERY internet forum. Its the equivalent of a load of old blokes sitting in a pub saying 'ahh, but it wasn't like this in my day'. Its just a load of rubbish. Things change, sometimes for the better and often not. That doesn't mean this forum is in decline, it just goes through natural phases of lulls and peaks. If another Ashes 2005 happened, this place would be buzzing.

Chill out!

AWTA. I said the same thing, ableit angrier.

 

[Richard]

If you go back to a couple of years ago, i wouldn't be surprised if you found threads started by Richard stating that Vaas is a better bowler than Mcgrath and Pollock, even though hes recently shifted gear on that topic (cant blame him though considering it was a stupid argument anyways).

Well I hope I never actually said that, because it would indeed have been a stupid thing to say, and all I ever said was that Vaas had skills McGrath and Pollock never did, and could (and often enough did) bowl better than either ever have, but also often enough bowled about as unpenetratively as anyone could ever bowl too.

Meh thats just my 2 cents and if anything thats probably as close to off topic as I'll ever go.

Don't miss this while you're here though.

 

[tooextracool]

Well I hope I never actually said that, because it would indeed have been a stupid thing to say, and all I ever said was that Vaas had skills McGrath and Pollock never did, and could (and often enough did) bowl better than either ever have, but also often enough bowled about as unpenetratively as anyone could ever bowl too.

Don't miss this while you're here though.

Thanks for the wishes, Im glad you got the date right this time

 

[vic_orthdox]

One thing that I don't really like is when a "Ricky Ponting vs Lara" type thread starts up (for example), you can get older members come in and say "How boring/been there done that" type of statements which stifle discussion for those who may well want to discuss it. Something I've noticed, and probably done before, and think should be avoided. Just because you've discussed it doesn't mean that everyone posting has.

 

[Jono]

Definitely agree with vic there.

 

[Smudge]

One thing that I don't really like is when a "Ricky Ponting vs Lara" type thread starts up (for example), you can get older members come in and say "How boring/been there done that" type of statements which stifle discussion for those who may well want to discuss it. Something I've noticed, and probably done before, and think should be avoided. Just because you've discussed it doesn't mean that everyone posting has.

Totally agree.


Anyway, I can't believe we're having another one of these threads. How boring, we've been there done that.

 

[Richard]

One thing that I don't really like is when a "Ricky Ponting vs Lara" type thread starts up (for example), you can get older members come in and say "How boring/been there done that" type of statements which stifle discussion for those who may well want to discuss it. Something I've noticed, and probably done before, and think should be avoided. Just because you've discussed it doesn't mean that everyone posting has.

Obviously not, but there are some things that get repeated too often (worse than ever the "your country's all-time XI" sort of stuff). Obviously, someone like myself has probably discussed many things, and some things I'm more than happy to do multiple times (especially if the last time was 2 years ago). But sometimes I think "this gets done too often" is a fair comment.

Never really been a huge fan of "player D vs player J" threads ITFP though.

 

[TheEpic]

Don't post in them then. Let people who enjoy those types of threads talk about it all they want. Sounds nice to me.

 

[Richard]

More often than not, I do that. I would, however, much prefer it if the minute the 1,482nd thread of that nature was created, it were to be merged with previous ones.

That'd mean repetition didn't need to be overdone, and would also mean needless posts were avoided.

It'd also emphasise "this is a pretty common topic" too.

 

[Prince EWS]

More often than not, I do that. I would, however, much prefer it if the minute the 1,482nd thread of that nature was created, it were to be merged with previous ones.

That'd mean repetition didn't need to be overdone, and would also mean needless posts were avoided.

It'd also emphasise "this is a pretty common topic" too.

Perhaps using the report button rather than the post button would achieve that a bit better, not to mention avoid discouraging the conversation just because you've already had it.

If something has been done to death already and no-one wants to discuss it, then no-one will reply and the thread will die. If people do want to discuss it again (or for the first time, if they are new), then they should be able to. You don't need to read every thread, much less post in every thread giving your opinion on it.

 

[Richard]

Perhaps using the report button rather than the post button would achieve that a bit better

Perhaps. May give it a try.

 

[aussie tragic]

Im not really interested in hearing how great Brian Lara or Ponting is or how if Hussey bats like he has been over the last 2 years he will be the 2nd best ever, i want to hear about how an average player like Sanath Jayasuriya managed to play over 100 tests or how seriously underrated Craig White was in the 90s because those sorts of arguments actually stimulate the mind.

Okay, I'll try not to post such dribble in future...but it has had over 1000 views so some people are obviously interested

Seriously though, when I posted it I thought people would instantly recognise that it was because Hussey was 30 at debut and that he had made a zillion runs in 1st class cricket, so therefore age of debut, players rushed in too early, etc, etc could have been discussed.....I was a little surprised it took until the 59th post for someone to mention it....I guess CC is not what it used to be when I joined way back in 2006

Oh yeah, my 2 cents....seeing fiery banned is not a good move.....

 

[SJS]

CC is not what it was when I was last here last Christmas