Only just started watching cricket or something? He's been doing it for years. And the one at Lord's wasn't about getting out a tailender, it was for getting his 5fer.
Has occasional hearing issues, tbf
I am not sure if that is completely true though... There have been times in his interviews and just the way he is on the field when I felt he was one of those "self important" types who will be nice as long as everything else goes the way they want to but then turn into something else when things aren't going their way...
This post sounds familiar...
That might matter to fans in India, but in England they very much want their players to get pissed off when they're losing. There's nothing worse than seeing your team bent over royally and the players stand around smiling like they don't give a crap. If Flintoff's got a bit of aggro when things aren't going his way, that's just another reason for his fans to love him.
Either that or Matthew Hayden does.Has occasional hearing issues, tbf
Dunno about inexplicable TBH, fairly irrational maybe, but not I'd say totally inexplicable.
Well to be honest it probably would, arrogance at any level really pisses me off, it's why I worry for the next generation of Indian players who are emerging in the limited overs set up with yuvraj and harbhajan as their role models. Ganguly came accross to many as arrogant, but he had to present himself as an exceptionally strong minded individual to his players, opposition and the indian public given the circumstances of his appointment and his vision for indian cricket. I wouldn't totally mind if Sreesanth walked out in front of a bus tomorrow, the guy's a complete tool, hopefully this county stint might improve his personality. I think Harbhajan has improved but can still be a bit of a ****, but given what he does off the field I tend to give him a bit of leeway. The thing that annoys me so much about flintoff I suppose is that there seems to be so much hype with so few results, and he seems to buy into his own hype as well, I mean just look at the IPL, $1.5m down the tube from Chennai, I was amazed he demanded such a price. I look at the 05 ashes as the jumping off point for the flintoff most people now perceive, but personally I've always seen Hoggard and Jones as being far more important to that victory than flintoff, strauss too, it's just that flintoff's off field shenanigans and working class hero label make him much more marketable to the media men. He must at some point have sat down and thought of this celebration, I mean what kind of person chooses a celebration like that? Admittedly it's a hell of a lot better than Ishant Sharma's increasingly foul mouthed send offs. There are also all these plaudits for his persona when frankly he's done some pretty damn selfish things over the years. Also I just can't get away from the suspicion that he's from the school of drunken football hooligans, maybe I'm too conservative, I still see cricket as a gentleman's game, let's have more Dravids and Knotts!
C'mon, who doesn't love it when someone stands up and dishes it to the Aussies?
Yeah, WAC, should have said to them, "pay me less than you're prepared to you bastards."
Nothing to do with the fact the he averaged 40 with the bat and 27 with the ball, no. I suppose the aussie media that were printing "SOMEBODY STOP HIM" long before the series was won were talking about his forthcoming trip to the bar? Flintoff took more wickets than Jones and Hoggard (and Flintoff was one ahead of Jones after 4 Tests, FTR). He scored more runs than Strauss, and every Australian batsman (the only English batsmen to outscore him were Tresco and Pietersen).oitoitoitoitoitoit said:
Yeah, word on the street was that he spent three hours each evening in the lead-up to the Test practicising his celebrations. There is going to be a reality TV series before the 4th Test where we, the viewers, vote for Flintoff's wicket celebrations to be used in that match. He took his 5fer, and he put his arms in the air, OMG!oitoitoi said:
What are these selfish things you're talking about?oitoitoi said:
Other way around TBH. And it was something like 47 with bat and 21 with ball in the last four Tests - which were the ones England dominated.
Neccessary and makes things much easier plenty of the time, IMO. But I guess it's a discussion for somewhere other than Cricket Chat.
Flintoff took more wickets, but that has more to do with the fact that Vaughan, for whatever bloody reason, had very little faith in Jones even though he was the one with the best SR and average for the series. Flintoff was given more overs, ergo he took more wickets. It would take complete delusion for anyone to conclude that Flintoff bowled better than Jones in that series in almost all of the tests in which they both played in. At Lords, Flintoff was shockingly poor certainly outperformed by Jones. At Edgbaston, Flintoff was better than Jones (although the fact that Jones got 5 overs in the crucial 2nd inning might have something to do with that), and both at OT and Trent Bridge (especially) Jones was considerably superior to Flintoff. Anyone who honestly denies that, just wasn't watching.
getting angry doesn't mean behaving stupid...