Ottis Gibson quits England for Windies role

[WindieWeathers]

What?! No it's not!

It's much worse!

Reality check.

In the last year it could be argued it is couldn't it? my point is he hasn't exactly pulled up any trees at FC level as you keep saying but yet he's got big wickets hauls against England and Australia.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

In the last year it could be argued it is couldn't it? my point is he hasn't exactly pulled up any trees at FC level as you keep saying but yet he's got big wickets hauls against England and Australia.

In the last year where I've stressed over and over that he averages 42. That's still 10 more than his FC average. Take Tests out and it's probably 15 more. It just shows that he's a lot worse in Test cricket than FC cricket, which is the natural order of things.

 

[WindieWeathers]

In the last year where I've stressed over and over that he averages 42. That's still 10 more than his FC average. Take Tests out and it's probably 15 more. It just shows that he's a lot worse in Test cricket than FC cricket, which is the natural order of things.

Everyone has their own personal view Mr M, you claim you'd get Benn out in favor of Miller when Miller hasn't proven himself at test level, i find that just as crazy as you do with me wanting Bravo in the side.

 

[Flem274*]

I really liked what I saw of Nikita Miller down here. When Benn often comes away with awful figures it is interesting that Miller hasn't had much of an opportunity.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Everyone has their own personal view Mr M, you claim you'd get Benn out in favor of Miller when Miller hasn't proven himself at test level, i find that just as crazy as you do with me wanting Bravo in the side.

But what can you disagree with?

- Ramdin scores runs at a low level and does not at a higher level. Understandable.
- Ramdin has scored more runs at that low level than Bravo has.
- Benn averages 27 at a low level and 42 (in the last year) at a higher one.

Is any of that incorrect? No, they're all facts.

Which part of this suggests that Bravo would be able to score significant runs at the higher level- Tests? I'm just trying to wrap my head around your logic. And my last few posts have had nothing to do with Miller. They've just been correcting you on the baffling assertion that Benn has performed better in Tests than at FC level, when it's the exact opposite. Not sure why you're bringing Miller into it.

And for the record, you're the one who brought Ramdin scoring runs at FC level into this. Which proves the difference between performance at the two levels insomuch as it shows that performance at one level does not guarantee it at a more difficult level. It certainly does not suggest that lack of performance at one level would likely breed performance at a more difficult level.

 

[WindieWeathers]

But what can you disagree with?

- Ramdin scores runs at a low level and does not at a higher level. Understandable.
- Ramdin has scored more runs at that low level than Bravo has.
- Benn averages 27 at a low level and 42 (in the last year) at a higher one.

Is any of that incorrect? No, they're all facts.

Which part of this suggests that Bravo would be able to score significant runs at the higher level- Tests? I'm just trying to wrap my head around your logic. And my last few posts have had nothing to do with Miller. They've just been correcting you on the baffling assertion that Benn has performed better in Tests than at FC level, when it's the exact opposite. Not sure why you're bringing Miller into it.

And for the record, you're the one who brought Ramdin scoring runs at FC level into this. Which proves the difference between performance at the two levels insomuch as it shows that performance at one level does not guarantee it at a more difficult level. It certainly does not suggest that lack of performance at one level would likely breed performance at a more difficult level.

Come on now everyone knows Ramdin has been making much more runs at FC level than he does at test level, it's not even about this current domestic season, so my point was you can't always trust what happens at FC level when you look at Ramdin, and to be honest my assertion that Benn has performed better in test than at FC may not have been accurate when it came to the averages, but it's certainly accurate when it comes to the QUALITY OF THE OPPOSITION, and yes i'm bringing Miller into this because you keep saying "you want him to replace Benn", even though Benn's record at test level is MUCH BETTER, so how can you blame me for wanting Bravo to replace Chanders when you are advocating the same thing when it comes to Benn and Miller? sounds like a CONTRADICTION to me .

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Come on now everyone knows Ramdin has been making much more runs at FC level than he does at test level, it's not even about this current domestic season, so my point was you can't always trust what happens at FC level when you look at Ramdin, and to be honest my assertion that Benn has performed better in test than at FC may not have been accurate when it came to the averages, but it's certainly accurate when it comes to the QUALITY OF THE OPPOSITION

Exactly! Because Test cricket is harder than FC cricket, so you're always likely to perform worse at Test level than FC level. How are you not getting this? Bravo averages 33 at FC level. You can see where I'm going here...

and yes i'm bringing Miller into this because you keep saying "you want him to replace Benn", even though Benn's record at test level is MUCH BETTER, so how can you blame me for wanting Bravo to replace Chanders when you are advocating the same thing when it comes to Benn and Miller? sounds like a CONTRADICTION to me .

Because Miller has had a chance at Test level right? It's not a contradiction, because Miller hasn't been given the chance to fail at Test level. That's a fact.

 

[WindieWeathers]

Exactly! Because Test cricket is harder than FC cricket, so you're always likely to perform worse at Test level than FC level. How are you not getting this? Bravo averages 33 at FC level. You can see where I'm going here...

Because Bravo proved himself against INTERNATIONAL CLASS in the ODI and IN THE CHAMPIONS LEAGUE, both are much higher levels than FC,

Because Miller has had a chance at Test level right? It's not a contradiction, because Miller hasn't been given the chance to fail at Test level. That's a fact.

And Bravo has been given a chance right? you can't have it both ways, and according to the "facts" he had his test chance against Bangladesh, and still he didn't impress .

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Because Bravo proved himself against INTERNATIONAL CLASS in the ODI and IN THE CHAMPIONS LEAGUE, both are much higher levels than FC,

Are you serious? Scoring 19 in an ODI doesn't even prove he can play ODI cricket, let alone Test cricket. And the Champions League is a club competition. It's not an international competition. Oh, and it's T20 cricket, which is the furthest cry from Test cricket AND he did nothing of note anyway.

This may be your most bizarre theory yet.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Seriously man, using your argument, Pollard deserves a chance more. He averages more in FC cricket, has been much better in T20, and has scored more than 19 (shock! awe!) in an ODI. In fact, he's scored more than twice as much in an ODI.

Yes. It's true. Mindblown?

 

[roseboy64]

Some warped logic here.You'd be a much worse selector than the Pakisttani or WIndin ones.

 

[WindieWeathers]

Are you serious? Scoring 19 in an ODI doesn't even prove he can play ODI cricket, let alone Test cricket. And the Champions League is a club competition. It's not an international competition. Oh, and it's T20 cricket, which is the furthest cry from Test cricket AND he did nothing of note anyway.

This may be your most bizarre theory yet.

Clearly you missed the part where i said both those forms are HIGHER LEVELS than FC , and again i'll ask what is more impressive hitting 50 against leewards or hitting 19 runs off 16 balls against INDIA in an ODI? you know damn well it's the latter, and yes the champions league was a club competition but he was playing for Trinidad was he not? alongside the likes of his brother and Ramdin, and he certainly didn't look out of place

 

[WindieWeathers]

Seriously man, using your argument, Pollard deserves a chance more. He averages more in FC cricket, has been much better in T20, and has scored more than 19 (shock! awe!) in an ODI. In fact, he's scored more than twice as much in an ODI.

Yes. It's true. Mindblown?

Well i've been a big fan of Pollard too actually, but no doubt you'd try to shut down that idea and still contradict yourself when it comes to Miller!! .

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Clearly you missed the part where i said both those forms are HIGHER LEVELS than FC , and again i'll ask what is more impressive hitting 50 against leewards or hitting 19 runs off 16 balls against INDIA in an ODI? you know damn well it's the latter, and yes the champions league was a club competition but he was playing for Trinidad was he not? alongside the likes of his brother and Ramdin, and he certainly didn't look out of place

Just to summarize:

- 19 in an ODI is a failure. How is it anything but a failure?
- ODI has nothing to do with FC cricket or Test cricket or T20 cricket. FC cricket has far more relevance to Test cricket than ODI cricket. And it always will. And it definitely has nothing to do with Test cricket. The number of good ODI batsmen who couldn't cut it in Tests prove that. And then there are those who are the opposite. Two different formats.
- 19 in an ODI is a failure!

I'm done.

 

[WindieWeathers]

Some warped logic here.You'd be a much worse selector than the Pakisttani or WIndin ones.

I'm not begging you to agree with my views am i? .

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Well i've been a big fan of Pollard too actually, but no doubt you'd try to shut down that idea and still contradict yourself when it comes to Miller!! .

No, because Miller is much better than Benn in domestic cricket, whereas Pollard is marginally better than Bravo. Though I suppose because he's scored 42 to Bravo's 19, he's more than twice as good. Ah well. Take off the tinted glasses and be sensible.

Now I'm done.

 

[WindieWeathers]

Just to summarize:

- 19 in an ODI is a failure. How is it anything but a failure?
- ODI has nothing to do with FC cricket or Test cricket or T20 cricket. FC cricket has far more relevance to Test cricket than ODI cricket. And it always will. And it definitely has nothing to do with Test cricket. The number of good ODI batsmen who couldn't cut it in Tests prove that. And then there are those who are the opposite. Two different formats.
- 19 in an ODI is a failure!

I'm done.

Wasn't Kevin Pieterson a one day specialist at one stage? anyway you said you were "done" yesterday so needless to say i won't be holding my breath.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Wasn't Kevin Pieterson a one day specialist at one stage? anyway you said you were "done" yesterday so needless to say i won't be holding my breath.

Kevin Pietersen started in ODI cricket but he had already proven himself by scoring a lot of runs at a high average in first-class cricket. And an average of 19 doesn't make you a good ODI specialist either. Honestly...

 

[WindieWeathers]

No, because Miller is much better than Benn in domestic cricket, whereas Pollard is marginally better than Bravo. Though I suppose because he's scored 42 to Bravo's 19, he's more than twice as good. Ah well. Take off the tinted glasses and be sensible.

Now I'm done.

And Odean Brown was better than Miller at domestic cricket last year, it's not about Domestic cricket it's about Test cricket and the facts state Benn >>>>>>>>Miller it's as simple as that.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

And Odean Brown was better than Miller at domestic cricket last year, it's not about Domestic cricket it's about Test cricket and the facts state Benn >>>>>>>>Miller it's as simple as that.

Hey, Benn's also a better West Indian cricketer than Shane Warne.