• 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.

SS "Most overrated batsmen of all time: All of them"

Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
He (ss) doesn't like batsmen. Take the glory away from the seam-bowlers, see? And their job, compared to that of a seam-bowler, is extremely easy.

It's a tongue-in-cheek comment, though, unlike the Muralitharan and Warne one in the same sig.
 
cover drive man

cover drive man

International Captain
Richard said:
He (ss) doesn't like batsmen. Take the glory away from the seam-bowlers, see? And their job, compared to that of a seam-bowler, is extremely easy.

It's a tongue-in-cheek comment, though, unlike the Muralitharan and Warne one in the same sig.
Click to expand...
How can you say Warne and Muralitharan are overrated? They're the two biggest wicket takers of all time.
 
Last edited:
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Because the fact that they're the two biggest wicket-takers of all-time obscures people to the fact that there are others who have also bowled for extremely long careers (not as long as those two, but I'd say 90 Tests and 130 Tests are both long enough to show endurance and longevity and someone who was more effective over 90 than someone else was over 130 is very definately the better bowler for my money) who have actually had far more going for them as bowlers.

The fact that so many people are willing to suggest Warne and Murali are better than the best 20 or so seamers of all-time is madness, IMO. And suggesting they're better than all bar 2 or 3 seamers as so many do is serious, serious madness, and makes them the two most overrated bowlers of all-time.
 
Last edited:
cover drive man

cover drive man

International Captain
Richard said:
Because the fact that they're the two biggest wicket-takers of all-time obscures people to the fact that there are others who have also bowled for extremely long careers (not as long as those two, but I'd say 90 Tests and 130 Tests are both long enough to show endurance and longevity and someone who was more effective) who have actually had far more going for them as bowlers.

The fact that so many people are willing to suggest Warne and Murali are better than the best 20 or so seamers of all-time is madness, IMO. And suggesting they're better than all bar 2 or 3 seamers as so many do is serious, serious madness, and makes them the two most overrated bowlers of all-time.
Click to expand...
You win.
 
social

social

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Richard said:
Because the fact that they're the two biggest wicket-takers of all-time obscures people to the fact that there are others who have also bowled for extremely long careers (not as long as those two, but I'd say 90 Tests and 130 Tests are both long enough to show endurance and longevity and someone who was more effective over 90 than someone else was over 130 is very definately the better bowler for my money) who have actually had far more going for them as bowlers.

The fact that so many people are willing to suggest Warne and Murali are better than the best 20 or so seamers of all-time is madness, IMO. And suggesting they're better than all bar 2 or 3 seamers as so many do is serious, serious madness, and makes them the two most overrated bowlers of all-time.
Click to expand...
The sentiments of someone that is absolutely clueless when it comes to the skill involved in getting a ball from end of the pitch to the other
 
silentstriker

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
social said:
The sentiments of someone that is absolutely clueless when it comes to the skill involved in getting a ball from end of the pitch to the other
Click to expand...
Haha, what? I am not arguing that (for example) leg spin requires more mastery than fast bowling. I am arguing that fast bowling will win you more matches than spin bowling will. Also, please don't start with insults. If you disagree with something, just say what you disagree with and why - there is no reason to call people names. You're starting the whole discussion off on the wrong foot (it actually prohibits mature discussion).
 
vic_orthdox

vic_orthdox

Global Moderator
social said:
The sentiments of someone that is absolutely clueless when it comes to the skill involved in getting a ball from end of the pitch to the other
Click to expand...
silentstriker said:
Also, please don't start with insults. If you disagree with something, just say what you disagree with and why - there is no reason to call people names.
Click to expand...
Richard said:
And suggesting they're better than all bar 2 or 3 seamers as so many do is serious, serious madness, and makes them the two most overrated bowlers of all-time.
Click to expand...
??
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
vic_orthdox said:
??
Click to expand...
So where exactly was I calling people names? It (And suggesting they're better than all bar 2 or 3 seamers as so many do is serious, serious madness, and makes them the two most overrated bowlers of all-time) is a general comment on the nature of a current problem. Calling people "names" (eg: "****") is a) pointless and b) against forum rules. Making descriptive comments (eg - "it's madness") is nothing of the sort.
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Jono said:
Don't give SS the attention he wants!

Its just him being stupid.
Click to expand...
Well, no, not really. As I said - the batsmen comment is a completely tongue-in-cheek comment - without batsmen, there is no cricket and therefore no seam-bowlers. However, you'd have to really go some to suggest that the job of a batsman isn't far less physically straining than that of a seam-bowler.

And as for the spinners thing - well, as I've said to you before, he's not being stupid at all, he's displaying rare common-sense there that so many others simply refuse to display for whatever reasons. Seam > spin.
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
social said:
The sentiments of someone that is absolutely clueless when it comes to the skill involved in getting a ball from end of the pitch to the other
Click to expand...
No, it's not actually. I know a hell of a lot about getting deliveries from one end of the pitch to the other - and I'd know it even if I didn't do it every summer myself too. However, to make you see such a thing would be near enough impossible, so I won't waste my time.
 
Top_Cat

Top_Cat

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Richard said:
Well, no, not really. As I said - the batsmen comment is a completely tongue-in-cheek comment - without batsmen, there is no cricket and therefore no seam-bowlers. However, you'd have to really go some to suggest that the job of a batsman isn't far less physically straining than that of a seam-bowler.

And as for the spinners thing - well, as I've said to you before, he's not being stupid at all, he's displaying rare common-sense there that so many others simply refuse to display for whatever reasons. Seam > spin.
Click to expand...
Remember when I've said to you before that people might not like what you say and why? Here's an example. The above is your opinion, not a fact. You may argue that it's implict that everything anyone on here says is opinion and it's a reasonable thing to say but when you say stuff like 'anyone who thinks otherwise is [insert synonym for madness/idiocy], you're in vilification town.

You may as well say fact > opinion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top