***Official*** India in Australia 2011/12

[benchmark00]

yeah...anyone who goes about gloating that they were predicting Ponting would return to form basically has no right to. The fact is his results were **** for at least 2/3 years, despite looking in fairly good nick for large parts of that, and there was no reason to predict his future success other than the feeble hope that 'class is permanent'. Put it this way: would anyone have been genuinely suprised if Ponting continued to fail? I doubt it...the bottom line is the selectors made a gamble, and that's really all it was. Injuries and a relative lack of other options made the decision easier and fortunately the decision paid off anyway. It could easily (and might still, who knows) have gone the other way though.

How about you look through my posts and search for when I made the post about what Ponting was doing wrong and how it was in no way age related, instead technique related.

I then went on to say that obviously he had the desire to continue playing cricket, and he was a good enough to overcome that technical problem.

Having trouble sucking it up are you mate? Don't worry, you're not the only one who was talking out your arse. You had alot of friends who lacked perception, instead choosing just to look at scorecards.

 

[Ruckus]

I can't be assed going through your posts...searching through people's year old posts is a kind of a lame and boring exercise tbh...I don't find your technical argument particularly convincing either. His technical problems have been a relatively new emergence (perhaps the last 6 months to a year). At various times before that he has looked technically basically as good as ever, yet still didn't produce the results. His problems haven't just been technical, they are more complicated than that, and because of that they have made his future very difficult to predict.

 

[Spark]

Read his posts, seriously. benchmark has been pretty clear on this...

 

[Prince EWS]

yeah...anyone who goes about gloating that they were predicting Ponting would return to form basically has no right to. The fact is his results were **** for at least 2/3 years, despite looking in fairly good nick for large parts of that, and there was no reason to predict his future success other than the feeble hope that 'class is permanent'. Put it this way: would anyone have been genuinely suprised if Ponting continued to fail? I doubt it...the bottom line is the selectors made a gamble, and that's really all it was. Injuries and a relative lack of other options made the decision easier and fortunately the decision paid off anyway. It could easily (and might still, who knows) have gone the other way though.

This is a bit of a Richard argument. You say something is really unlikely to happen, then when it happens you defend your opinion by saying that unlikely and impossible aren't the same thing, and that what we've witnessed is is merely the materialisation of an originally unlikely possibility.

And while that's technically possible, it just makes you seem like a huge **** tbh because then you can never ever actually be proven wrong about anything no matter what happens.

I was 50/50 on the Ponting issue; I was open to dropping him if we had a viable replacement in Shield cricket who I rated at the selectors were actually willing to pick (ie. not Katich or Rogers), but we didn't. There was no way that Ponting was less likely to score runs than Hughes, Khawaja, Christian etc IMO. In the end he actually did a fair bit better than I expected though and I was one of the blokes defending his continued his selection - and even I'll admit I was wrong about how quickly and effectively he could turn it around.

 

[Ruckus]

I clearly remember him arguing his problems were technical in nature. I don't need to go over his posts...I completely understand the point he has been/is making but I have never thought it is the full story with Ponting and I completely contest the assumption it somehow magically gave him the prescience to know he would have future success...Hell, even if you accept his problems have only been technical in nature, whose to say at 38 and after 3 years of failure he would have ever rectified them?

 

[Spark]

Because the man has almost boundless willpower and it wasn't actually that big a flaw.

Yes, he's 38, but he's not playing like someone who is 38, frankly.

 

[benchmark00]

I clearly remember him arguing his problems were technical in nature. I don't need to go over his posts...I completely understand the point he has been/is making but I have never thought it is the full story with Ponting and I completely contest the assumption it somehow magically gave him the prescience to know he would have future success...Hell, even if you accept his problems have only been technical in nature, whose to say at 38 and after 3 years of failure he would have ever rectified them?

I was prepared to fall on my sword and say I was wrong if he didn't overcome his problems and look to improve. Now you're not doing the same? Pretty lame if you ask me.

 

[Spikey]

india giving up as soon as a batsman passed 20 really makes it hard for me to decide whether ponting is back or is he'll still be troubled in that 30-70 against a component team. nevertheless i switched to wanting to dump hussey first so i don't care much about ponting right now.

 

[Ruckus]

I was prepared to fall on my sword and say I was wrong if he didn't overcome his problems and look to improve. Now you're not doing the same? Pretty lame if you ask me.

Huh? I am perfectly fine with admitting I was wrong about him. Perfectly fine to accept I was wrong about someone like Hilf too. That being said, I'm not going to go to the effort of quoting people's old posts to gets some internet kickz over a highly contentious issue if I turn out to be right.

 

[Prince EWS]

Huh? I am perfectly fine with admitting I was wrong about him. Perfectly fine to accept I was wrong about someone like Hilf too. That being said, I'm not going to go to the effort of quoting people's old posts to gets some internet kickz over a highly contentious issue if I turn out to be right.

Benchy was just pointing out that Furball's post was really hypocritical.

 

[benchmark00]

Benchy was just pointing out that Furball's post was really hypocritical.

Yes exactly. He was calling someone ******** for having the exact same thoughts he had a matter of weeks ago.

 

[Ruckus]

Benchy was just pointing out that Furball's post was really hypocritical.

I really don't see how he was being hypocritical. He said "giving him the tap on the shoulder now when the top 3 is still pretty unconvincing is ********". He is right. What he said in the past about how he should be dropped is irrelevant to what he said above. The context was different in the past...he wasn't making runs, and his position in the team was in question. He has just made a pile of runs so his opinion on the issue has changed. 'When the facts change I change my mind etc. etc.'

 

[Prince EWS]

Yes exactly. He was calling someone ******** for having the exact same thoughts he had a matter of weeks ago.

Howardj eat your heart out.

 

[benchmark00]

I really don't see how he was being hypocritical. He said "giving him the tap on the shoulder now when the top 3 is still pretty unconvincing is ********". He is right. What he said in the past about how he should be dropped is irrelevant to what he said above. The context was different in the past...he wasn't making runs, and his position in the team was in question. He has just made a pile of runs so his opinion on the issue has changed. 'When the facts change I change my mind etc. etc.'

Now being a time with an unsettled top three, and when he made those posts we also had an unsettled top three!!

Seriously, you're being ridiculous and sour because you've had to eat humble pie.

Cribb, check him to see if it's an IP match with a certain poster with 50,000+ posts on here.

 

[Prince EWS]

Cribb, check him to see if it's an IP match with a certain poster with 50,000+ posts on here.

Don't steal my comparison, ****.

 

[Ruckus]

Now being a time with an unsettled top three, and when he made those posts we also had an unsettled top three!!

Seriously, you're being ridiculous and sour because you've had to eat humble pie.

Cribb, check him to see if it's an IP match with a certain poster with 50,000+ posts on here.

Except he wasn't making runs back then.

 

[benchmark00]

Don't steal my comparison, ****.

I'll steal what I wanna steal, ****.

 

[benchmark00]

Except he wasn't making runs back then.

Which comes back to my point that Ponting was always likely to score runs again! fmd, are you even reading what's being posted?

 

[uvelocity]

How about you look through my posts and search for when I made the post about what Ponting was doing wrong and how it was in no way age related, instead technique related.

I then went on to say that obviously he had the desire to continue playing cricket, and he was a good enough to overcome that technical problem.

Having trouble sucking it up are you mate? Don't worry, you're not the only one who was talking out your arse. You had alot of friends who lacked perception, instead choosing just to look at scorecards.

talent manger job resume coverletter imo

 

[Ruckus]

Which comes back to my point that Ponting was always likely to score runs again! fmd, are you even reading what's being posted?

Which I'm arguing was contentious to say the least, and by no means warrants gloating when you turned out to be right.

Let's have a look at facts pre-return to form.

Against your argument:

Poor form, averaging 30 odd for about 3 years. Some technical issues, perhaps some mental/concentration issues as well. Age of 37, and showing little to no sign of improvement for a large period of the time, up until a few half centuries very recently.

For your argument:

Champion player. Perhaps problem has been because of some failry minor technical issues which could be rectified at some point, yet hadn't been for a good few years.

Fail to see how that means he was always very likely to score runs again. The issue was completely up in the air...just ****ing admit it.