• 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.

*Official* West Indies In Australia

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
You forgot to add DUE TO HIS POOR FORM FOR OVER A YEAR!!, but needless to say i'm not surprised you left that part out 8-) .
Maybe because his form isn't poor by any stretch of the imagination (unless you were expecting him to maintain his 2007 and 2008 averages ad infinitum)?

What Craig forgot to add was that you want to replace him with Darren Bravo because Bravo scored, wait for it, 19 off 16 in an ODI.
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
I'm still waiting for you to prove my notion about Bollinger and Watson wrong!! :unsure: ,

BTW if i was doing anything wrong here i'm sure the mods would have let me know by now, if sticking to my opinion means i'm "trolling" then so be it.
If you're sticking to your opinion then why do you keep referring to things as facts?

Need to make your mind up IMO.
 

dikinee

School Boy/Girl Cricketer
P.S. thank god certain posters on this thread aren't mods, as having a different opinion would be a banning offence apparently.
I never once even suggested that you could not express your opinion just that most of the things you had to say were crap. The whole reason for posting on a forum is to discuss and debate. I dont have a problem with you having your say but apparantly you do have a problem with any opinion that does not concur with your own.
 

wood-e

Cricket Spectator
If you're sticking to your opinion then why do you keep referring to things as facts?

Need to make your mind up IMO.
Like I hate Watson and i don't like Doug Bollinger, but you cant argue with the fact the Doughy is has been unplayable at times, there is no way the likes of T Dowlin and R Morton are going to survive for long against that quality bowling hes been producing at the top of the innings.

As for Watson seriously how good is he. Top run scorer and top wicket taker for australia in ODI's over the last year and he has been so successfull since taking over the openers role in Tests.

He will win the Allan Border Medal next monday night, guaranteed.
 

WindieWeathers

International Regular
Maybe because his form isn't poor by any stretch of the imagination (unless you were expecting him to maintain his 2007 and 2008 averages ad infinitum)?

What Craig forgot to add was that you want to replace him with Darren Bravo because Bravo scored, wait for it, 19 off 16 in an ODI.
So you didn't see Chanders performances against England away and the recent Aussie tests? CLEARLY YOU DIDN'T!!!.
 

WindieWeathers

International Regular
If you're sticking to your opinion then why do you keep referring to things as facts?

Need to make your mind up IMO.
So it's not a damn fact that both Bollinger and Watson haven't hit the heights they've hit this summer against the other top sides? even some of the Aussies agree with that notion, evidently you haven't read this thread properly 8-) .
 
Last edited:

vic_orthdox

Global Moderator
So it's not a damn fact that both Bollinger and Watson haven't hit the heights they've hit this summer against the other top sides? even some the Aussies agree with that notion, evidently you haven't read this thread properly 8-) .
It depends on your definition of facts.

In Test cricket, Watson hasn't hit those heights against quality opposition in the past, but that was when he was batting in the middle order. He did perform reasonably well when batting against a quality bowling line-up in the Ashes though.

Bollinger, obviously, hasn't had the opportunity, outside of one test vs South Africa where he was widely seen as having bowled well and was rather unlucky.

In One Day cricket, where Watson is currently Australia's best player, and Bollinger has wickets against India on a number of occassions, it's fair to say that neither of them are flat track bullies.
 

WindieWeathers

International Regular
I never once even suggested that you could not express your opinion just that most of the things you had to say were crap. The whole reason for posting on a forum is to discuss and debate. I dont have a problem with you having your say but apparantly you do have a problem with any opinion that does not concur with your own.
Erm did that quote have your name on it? i think your views are a load of garbage too, but you don't have people going around calling you "troll" do you? and who said i have a problem with anyone stating a different view to mine? most of the heated exchanges have arisen from others challenging my views, not the other way around.
 
Last edited:

WindieWeathers

International Regular
It depends on your definition of facts.

In Test cricket, Watson hasn't hit those heights against quality opposition in the past, but that was when he was batting in the middle order. He did perform reasonably well when batting against a quality bowling line-up in the Ashes though.

Bollinger, obviously, hasn't had the opportunity, outside of one test vs South Africa where he was widely seen as having bowled well and was rather unlucky.

In One Day cricket, where Watson is currently Australia's best player, and Bollinger has wickets against India on a number of occassions, it's fair to say that neither of them are flat track bullies.
Yeah i've been talking about their test records, for me that's where the top guys stand up and make their names.
 

inbox24

International Debutant
Isn't it strange, Gayle has struggle against many lefties, Bollinger, Bracken and Vaas. I wonder who else.
 

WindieWeathers

International Regular
Looks like Gayle is blaming everyone but himself for the recent shambles HERE , btw didn't a few people ridicule my notion that Gayle could influence the selectors? LOL i hope that humble pie tastes good.
 

shivfan

Banned
When you read the story, Windie, if you read between the lines, you can see that Gayle wanted to have both Hinds and Nash in the side for the second ODI, and is clearly upset about that....
:cool:
He clearly didn't like the side that the selectors (Williams and Springer?) picked for him in the second ODI. And if he's referring to Morton and Dowlin, I agree with him.....

So, in essence, Gayle is not currently having a sole influence on selection, which is what the discussion was all about. Humble pie, Windie?
:dry:
 

WindieWeathers

International Regular
When you read the story, Windie, if you read between the lines, you can see that Gayle wanted to have both Hinds and Nash in the side for the second ODI, and is clearly upset about that....
:cool:
He clearly didn't like the side that the selectors (Williams and Springer?) picked for him in the second ODI. And if he's referring to Morton and Dowlin, I agree with him.....

So, in essence, Gayle is not currently having a sole influence on selection, which is what the discussion was all about. Humble pie, Windie?
:dry:
You're merely speculating Mike, Gayle said with his own words when he made the toss in the 2nd ODI that "we want to give the players a chance", now he's saying "i don't have to inform the selectors, i'm gonna make changes", which suggests his say counts, so yes Mike, humble pie indeed :cool: .
 
You're merely speculating Mike, Gayle said with his own words when he made the toss in the 2nd ODI that "we want to give the players a chance", now he's saying "i don't have to inform the selectors, i'm gonna make changes", which suggests his say counts, so yes Mike, humble pie indeed :cool: .
Gayle said WI would win 4-1 but we know thats not true. Just cos Gayle says so does not mean it is so.
 

Top