You had Sreesanth, which is even more lol-worthy.
You said
and, not or.
Frankly, I'm sick of people's posts in that thread being brought up over and over and over. There was some funny **** in there, mostly from Bun who was adament Sharma was streets ahead of Broad and would be selected ahead of him even allowing for the extra batting Broad would add, and I've admitted I was wrong about some of the stuff I said in there. I've also admitted it looks funny it hindsight. However, all I really did say in there was:
- Sharma, Sreesanth and Broad, up until that moment in time, had all shown signs of being world class bowlers but none of them had managed to do it consistently, and they were therefore fairly equal and unpredictable from that point.
- Their performances had been similar but I rated them Sree > Broad > Sharma in terms of bowling potential and rated Broad the best cricketer of the lot because of his batting.
- That Bun/random other biased Indian members shouldn't get carried away by the fact that Sharma was coming off a good series and Broad a poor one because both those bowlers had been very much rocks or diamonds throughout their careers and that it could easily turn around very quickly.
So I made a comment about their performances up until that point (which is still true) and two predictions (one of which came to fruition and one didn't).
Would you like a big congratulations for successfully thinking Broad was gun before he actually was? If so, congrats.