Tour threads

[Prince EWS]

See I always thought flag waving was against the rules. If you take the India-Pakistan rivalry, a quick look at a YouTube comments section, or even cricinfo shows how dire that particular rivalry can get, but posters who have tried to bring that mentality to here have always been given pretty short shrift. There was a poster called Umar Akmal IIRC who got banned pretty quickly when it was clear he had no intention of being anything other than a boring anti-India troll.

Trolling and flag-waving aren't the same thing. They aren't mutually exclusive, but they aren't the same. Trolling is done with the explicit intent to get a negative reaction from your target audience; Umar Akmal was actually more of a flag-burner than anything.

Flag-waving isn't even always bad. GIMH in many respects is a flag-waver but he does it in such a good natured, non-serious manner (issues with one or two posters over the years aside) that it usually just adds joviality to the thread rather than making it cringe-worthy.

The flag-waving that has become a problem across the forum lies somewhere between Umar Akmal and GIMH - not posted with the intent to rile up other posters as such, but posted just to prove a point as to how good the poster's country's best players are, usually by jumping at any little chance to tear down quality opposition players.

 

[uvelocity]

hey just for laughs, if I've made a bad one, pls linky.

 

[Daemon]

the problem is that cricketweb has too many rules.

 

[Cevno]

The Srilanka vs India tour thread seems pretty good.

Seriously, ****ing quiet in there.

 

[Cevno]

so i guess amla is still in

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Presuming this has been started because I don't rate Philanderer. Ban me then.

 

[Jono]

So basically, some people have made claims about cricketers or teams, which no matter how wrong or uninformed, they have the right to do. Others have responded to those claims by mocking them as they've been proven wrong, which they also have the right to do?

Sounds like the India in England thread. Why wasn't this thread made 12 months ago?

This has been the nature of tour threads for ages. There's always been people trying to prove how their opinion on a team or player is right, and they'll pop up when it goes their way, and others will pop up when it goes against that person.

 

[GIMH]

Nah that's not really what's happened at all Jono.

 

[fredfertang]

The only trouble with the tour threads, and indeed a lot of the threads on CW, is that some people take things far too seriously - idiots can be funny, or at least entertaining, and when they're neither they are easy to ignore.

There are still plenty of decent posters making decent posts, which are always worth reading, and then sometimes the decent posters make **** posts, and that's usually amusing, particularly when they intend their **** posts to be good ones

 

[benchmark00]

So basically, some people have made claims about cricketers or teams, which no matter how wrong or uninformed, they have the right to do. Others have responded to those claims by mocking them as they've been proven wrong, which they also have the right to do?

Sounds like the India in England thread. Why wasn't this thread made 12 months ago?

This has been the nature of tour threads for ages. There's always been people trying to prove how their opinion on a team or player is right, and they'll pop up when it goes their way, and others will pop up when it goes against that person.

Spot on.

 

[Jono]

Nah that's not really what's happened at all Jono.

Well what is it then? I've seen comments regarding flag waving and trolling. Are we honestly going to say such things weren't occurring previously?

England cop it because they are the best team in the world and have been for a while. Generally that results in other people wanting you to lose. Happened to India and Australia before that, for a long time.

If posters come out and blatantly troll, they should be reported/warned/banned. But if someone is saying Philander sucks, and another guy mocks him by saying Broad sucks because he performs just like Philander did, is that new to CW tour threads?

 

[Howe_zat]

I think there's been more of it, and so more likeable posters have been avoiding tour threads, which is adding to the problem.

 

[Uppercut]

Well what is it then? I've seen comments regarding flag waving and trolling. Are we honestly going to say such things weren't occurring previously?

England cop it because they are the best team in the world and have been for a while. Generally that results in other people wanting you to lose. Happened to India and Australia before that, for a long time.

If posters come out and blatantly troll, they should be reported/warned/banned. But if someone is saying Philander sucks, and another guy mocks him by saying Broad sucks because he performs just like Philander did, is that new to CW tour threads?

AFAIK everyone that's posted in this thread was already making these complaints before England fell apart in this match.

 

[GIMH]

True true true

But as one of my favourite albums says

Don't Believe The Truth

The first step to recovery is admitting you have a problem. But that step is very difficult when you have the self-awareness of a lost swan.

 

[benchmark00]

Well what is it then? I've seen comments regarding flag waving and trolling. Are we honestly going to say such things weren't occurring previously?

England cop it because they are the best team in the world and have been for a while. Generally that results in other people wanting you to lose. Happened to India and Australia before that, for a long time.

If posters come out and blatantly troll, they should be reported/warned/banned. But if someone is saying Philander sucks, and another guy mocks him by saying Broad sucks because he performs just like Philander did, is that new to CW tour threads?

Ofcourse it's not, you're right. The people complaining just can't accept it when it comes their way, but they're more than happy to dish it out like everyone saw during the Indian series. Same complaints were made during the tour to the UAE, and surprise surprise it was a series where England got smashed. The same people go around making snide remarks and patting themselves on the back, but when it comes back they cry foul.

Grow a set of balls.

 

[Furball]

Well what is it then? I've seen comments regarding flag waving and trolling. Are we honestly going to say such things weren't occurring previously?

England cop it because they are the best team in the world and have been for a while. Generally that results in other people wanting you to lose. Happened to India and Australia before that, for a long time.

If posters come out and blatantly troll, they should be reported/warned/banned. But if someone is saying Philander sucks, and another guy mocks him by saying Broad sucks because he performs just like Philander did, is that new to CW tour threads?

The South Africa tour thread has been dross since before this match started. My problem with it has absolutely nothing to do with what's been happening on the cricket field and everything to do with how utterly crap the standard of discussion has been.

The West Indies tour thread was exactly the same. Thankfully, the main problem in that thread has been dealt with.

The England-Pakistan thread was actually pretty decent until the final day of the series, when a bunch of posters who'd barely been in the thread came into the thread and started trolling. It ruined what up until then had been a pretty good thread, and the trolling that went on took the moment away from our Pakistani contingent.

edit: with regard to the England-India subforum, it's hard for me to be objective because I was a large part of that subforum being **** at times. But I certainly didn't think the actual match discussion was anywhere near as bad as what the tour threads recently have turned into.

 

[Prince EWS]

So basically, some people have made claims about cricketers or teams, which no matter how wrong or uninformed, they have the right to do.

I think that's getting towards the crux of the matter. I'm posting in here as a mod, agreeing with the complaints - if this was about people doing things they didn't have the right to, I'd be fixing it. The posting in question isn't against the rules though; it's just poor. The level of good analytical discussion and light-hearted banter is at an all-time low, and any that remains has been drowned out by warmongering rubbish; specifically knee-jerk reactions to any small segment of play, extrapolating events to claim high-quality opposition players are in fact ****. This isn't against the rules, it's just poor posting, and while it's not something I'd say was completely new to CricketWeb, it's certainly something that has gone through the roof in recent times. People don't seem to be forming opinions based on following a player's career; they seem to be forming them almost tactically to indirectly make they players from their own country look better - again, not a "new" thing to the forum, but something that has been in record supply of late.

England cop it because they are the best team in the world and have been for a while. Generally that results in other people wanting you to lose. Happened to India and Australia before that, for a long time.

It should be noted that this discussion started between two Australians on MSN after Day 1. England were 267/3 and a lot of the "problem" posters we identified were in fact English fans. It certainly isn't reserved to English fans, but this isn't a complaint that's come from their inability to accept that they're hated or that they're losing this game or whatever. People can assume all they like about the nature of this thread because Furball started it, but that's not where this is coming from. You yourself noted, just before seeing this thread, that the posting on Day 1 was very poor. I think what we saw on Day 1 in that thread was has been an increasing trend and it's made the quality of the threads much worse.

 

[benchmark00]

I think that's getting towards the crux of the matter. I'm posting in here as a mod, agreeing with the complaints - if this was about people doing things they didn't have the right to, I'd be fixing it. The posting in question isn't against the rules though; it's just poor. The level of good analytical discussion and light-hearted banter is at an all-time low, and any that remains has been drowned out by warmongering rubbish; specifically knee-jerk reactions to any small segment of play, extrapolating events to claim high-quality opposition players are in fact ****. This isn't against the rules, it's just poor posting, and while it's not something I'd say was completely new to CricketWeb, it's certainly something that has gone through the roof in recent times. People don't seem to be forming opinions based on following a player's career; they seem to be forming them almost tactically to indirectly make they players from their own country look better - again, not a "new" thing to the forum, but something that has been in record supply of late.



It should be noted that this discussion started between two Australians on MSN after Day 1. England were 267/3 and a lot of the "problem" posters we identified were in fact English fans. It certainly isn't reserved to English fans, but this isn't a complaint that's come from their inability to accept that they're hated or that they're losing this game or whatever. People can assume all they like about the nature of this thread because Furball started it, but that's not where this is coming from. You yourself noted, just before seeing this thread, that the posting on Day 1 was very poor. I think what we saw on Day 1 in that thread was has been an increasing trend and it's made the quality of the threads much worse.

What did you find poor about the posting on Day 4?

 

[Prince EWS]

What did you find poor about the posting on Day 4?

I actually thought the posting on Day 4 was absolutely fine. Make of that what you will.

 

[benchmark00]

I actually thought the posting on Day 4 was absolutely fine. Make of that what you will.

Exactly. I'm making of it this way:

- There was one poster who was absent from the discussion on day 4 who wasn't absent the other days.
- This is an overreaction