**Official** Pakistan v New Zealand in the UAE 2014

[HeathDavisSpeed]

So, to summarise:

Ish Sodhi is a useless, pie throwing, arrogant, protected ****
Martin Guptill is a useless, slow scoring, pie throwing, handy fielding ****
Ross Taylor is a lazy, pie eating, couldn't care less ****

I think that sums it all up. Please feel free to link to this post when you next feel the need to repeat your point ad nauseum about one of these players.

 

[Pratters]

Blocky players are picked on how they might deliver, not domestic stats. Sodhi turned and bounced the ball impressively in the game.

 

[Blocky]

So, to summarise:

Ish Sodhi is a useless, pie throwing, arrogant, protected ****
Martin Guptill is a useless, slow scoring, pie throwing, handy fielding ****
Ross Taylor is a lazy, pie eating, couldn't care less ****

I think that sums it all up. Please feel free to link to this post when you next feel the need to repeat your point ad nauseum about one of these players.

Oh, like you and others don't make the same points about players you either like or dislike.

The difference being when I make posts, generally the results then back them up

 

[Blocky]

Blocky players are picked on how they might deliver, not domestic stats. Sodhi turned and bounced the ball impressively in the game.

Pratters - again, you need to know the NZ domestic cricket scene, Todd Astle gets sharper turn and arguably as much bounce as Sodhi - he'd have bowled better in this match than Sodhi will be bowling in three years time. Also guys like Nethula had more variation and a much more accurate stock bowl.

Again, look at the difference between Yasir who had to build himself into selection contention by bowling and taking near 290 wickets before his first test and Sodhi, who was in the NZ side before he had 20 wickets, who has struggled ever since but now we feel we have to stick with (until ultimately we can't anymore, probably later this season)

NZ has a hard-on for any leg spin bowlers, almost every single leg spinner in the country has been tried at some form or another of international cricket and they don't even need to be good to get there. Ish just seems to be much better at ass kissing than the others to maintain his spot.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

Oh, like you and others don't make the same points about players you either like or dislike.

The difference being when I make posts, generally the results then back them up

You're welcome to your opinion, I may occasionally agree with you on parts. However, you aren't the only person to have met or know these players so I find some of the personal comments you make about individuals to be disingenuous to say the least.

I also find the continual repetition incredibly, incredibly dull.

EDIT: And feel free to find repetition from me on anywhere near the same scale as yours. Other than my professed admiration of Mike Garnham. That, I will concede.

 

[Blocky]

You're welcome to your opinion, I may occasionally agree with you on parts. However, you aren't the only person to have met or know these players so I find some of the personal comments you make about individuals to be disingenuous to say the least.

I also find the continual repetition incredibly, incredibly dull.

As do I, when you attempt to make statements about the cricket to be personal statements and perpetuate this nonsense that me saying "Guptill doesn't deserve his place in the side" is "repetitive" when Guptill continues to play horribly and repetitively show that he doesn't deserve his place in the side.

The difference between you and I is I don't hunt out people to start personal **** with, unlike you. And then when I retort, you go and report me because I'm a bigger (more informed, more seasoned and far more knowledged) dog in the fight.

As for reptition on scale? you're constantly one to interupt conversation on cricket to start this bull****. You're also constantly the one who takes umbrage about any statements made about a player. You're one of the worst for the personal bull**** and you do it in such a passive aggressive way.

Sure, the moderators might prefer passive aggressive people to people who just out and out call a spade a spade, but that doesn't make you any less repetetive in your actions than you accuse me of being.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

As do I, when you attempt to make statements about the cricket to be personal statements and perpetuate this nonsense that me saying "Guptill doesn't deserve his place in the side" is "repetitive" when Guptill continues to play horribly and repetitively show that he doesn't deserve his place in the side.

The difference between you and I is I don't hunt out people to start personal **** with, unlike you. And then when I retort, you go and report me because I'm a bigger (more informed, more seasoned and far more knowledged) dog in the fight.

I wasn't being personal at all. I was giving you a nice succinct summary that you could use in the future. Perhaps you could put it in your signature so we can see your opinion on those three players with every post you make. Might save you a bit of time so you can find another player to post about. The personal comments I was referring to was not related to other posters on here, but all the players you refer to that you've played with, against etc. You're not the only person to know some of these guys, and the fact that other people who have met some of them may have a completely different view on their personality is the point I'm trying to make.

 

[Pratters]

I haven't seen Astle but he might be a better bowler so far at fc level. I do not have any real knowledge of the nz domestic scene.

Sodhi took 8 in WI and was expensive but at least he took test wickets. Many bowlers fail to test wickets at afair dab even. Leg spin is a difficult art.

He seemed better than 4.79 runs per over in this test and if he bowls like this, he can have a future. Needs to get more bite off the surface.

I don't believe there is any right age to blood a player either.

 

[Fusion]

I have to think that both Blocky and everyone engaging with him must have tired-head by now. Can we please just stop it and move on?

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

I have to think that both Blocky and everyone engaging with him must have tired-head by now. Can we please just stop it and move on?

That's absolutely fine Fusion, but don't expect the sane on here to be posting in a match thread whilst he keeps hammering his contemptuous agenda.

 

[BackFootPunch]

As do I, when you attempt to make statements about the cricket to be personal statements and perpetuate this nonsense that me saying "Guptill doesn't deserve his place in the side" is "repetitive" when Guptill continues to play horribly and repetitively show that he doesn't deserve his place in the side.

The difference between you and I is I don't hunt out people to start personal **** with, unlike you. And then when I retort, you go and report me because I'm a bigger (more informed, more seasoned and far more knowledged) dog in the fight.

You see, this is the problem most of us have with you Blocky. The part in bold is not some objective truth. It's, like, just your opinion, man. And, like most of what you say, there probably is some truth to it. If everything you've said is true (and we're really just taking you on your word) then you probably are up there in terms of cricketing experience and personal knowledge of these guys. But you're not the only one. Others amongst us have played cricket to a high level, have played with and against the top guys and know their ****. Also, there are plenty of posters who haven't played heaps of cricket and know just as much, if not more.

Just because you've played plenty of cricket doesn't make you an absolute authority. The best example I can come up with to illustrate this point is the huge lack of quality commentators on cricket broadcasts around the world. Most of the guys employed to commentate have played international cricket, but yet they're still prone to talking absolute **** and having completely ridiculous opinions. Just because you have experience or knowledge that others don't have does not mean you're immune to being wrong (or being a ****, for that matter).

 

[Blocky]

I wasn't being personal at all. I was giving you a nice succinct summary that you could use in the future. Perhaps you could put it in your signature so we can see your opinion on those three players with every post you make. Might save you a bit of time so you can find another player to post about. The personal comments I was referring to was not related to other posters on here, but all the players you refer to that you've played with, against etc. You're not the only person to know some of these guys, and the fact that other people who have met some of them may have a completely different view on their personality is the point I'm trying to make.

More passive aggressive bollocks. "I don't start personal ****, every time I make a comment about your posting, it's just to show that others might have a different point of view to you" - if you have a different point of view, state "I disagree, because x, y and z" - that's generally how a non-passive aggressive person does it.

I haven't seen Astle but he might be a better bowler so far at fc level. I do not have any real knowledge of the nz domestic scene.

Sodhi took 8 in WI and was expensive but at least he took test wickets. Many bowlers fail to test wickets at afair dab even. Leg spin is a difficult art.

He seemed better than 4.79 runs per over in this test and if he bowls like this, he can have a future. Needs to get more bite off the surface.

I don't believe there is any right age to blood a player either.

"He seemed better" - no, he really doesn't seem better. At least two balls an over are either dropped short or far too full giving players an easy boundary opportunity. He has the same issue at all levels of cricket and while he may bowl one out of twenty that is a great delivery that beats a batsman, only 1 in 4 of those are actually taking a wicket.

As for "Sodhi took 8 wickets in WI" - go review who those wickets were and where they batted in the order and you'll see my point about him getting confidence boosters at the end of the innings.

I have to think that both Blocky and everyone engaging with him must have tired-head by now. Can we please just stop it and move on?

I really don't mind the argument, because ultimately I just laugh when I get people telling me I know nothing about say, Wagner.... while he goes on to perform his best season yet for NZ... while getting the same about Guptill when he goes on to perform his worst.

There are a lot of passive aggressive personality types in New Zealand, which is why 90% of the posters from New Zealand carry themselves in that manner. Someone who flat out agrees with them and won't just let them slink back into type with their crap will always take this sort of heat, I don't really mind, I find it extremely amusing but the problem is they take it personal, I throw back a retort, they report me, I get infractions - this time around I just won't bother with the bollocks and call them on their **** when they do.

 

[Blocky]

You see, this is the problem most of us have with you Blocky. The part in bold is not some objective truth. It's, like, just your opinion, man. And, like most of what you say, there probably is some truth to it. If everything you've said is true (and we're really just taking you on your word) then you probably are up there in terms of cricketing experience and personal knowledge of these guys. But you're not the only one. Others amongst us have played cricket to a high level, have played with and against the top guys and know their ****. Also, there are plenty of posters who haven't played heaps of cricket and know just as much, if not more.

Just because you've played plenty of cricket doesn't make you an absolute authority. The best example I can come up with to illustrate this point is the huge lack of quality commentators on cricket broadcasts around the world. Most of the guys employed to commentate have played international cricket, but yet they're still prone to talking absolute **** and having completely ridiculous opinions. Just because you have experience or knowledge that others don't have does not mean you're immune to being wrong (or being a ****, for that matter).

Passive aggressive again.. "The part in bold is not some objective truth" - sorry, but it is. The fact that you continue to argue this idea that you have that somehow I'm not extremely well informed about the NZ Cricket scene and that pretty much every statement I make has a tendency of becoming truth is just you having tall poppy syndrome and not liking people who aren't afraid of stating a full blooded opinion even if it flies in the face of others.

Now, you can keep up this bull**** of "The problem we have with you is that any time we get annoyed by what you tell us about the cricket, we insult you only to find that you remind us that we've been wrong on most of the **** we've stated while you've been right" and do the whole passive aggressive spin off that you've got a tendency of doing, but all that does is continue the bull**** chat where I feel it's pertinent to point out that you don't really know much about cricket which seems to offend you.

 

[Blocky]

In Summary - feel free to link back to this post whenever we get high horse middle aged woman "you hit a cricket ball into my back yard" style debates that seem to be perpetuated by three or four NZ posters.

Blocky makes a cricket point
Someone gets offended at the cricket point
Blocky reiterates the cricket point with more information as to why
Someone gets offended that Blocky points out he has more knowledge
Someone throws an insult at Blocky

Repetitive.

 

[Blocky]

Oh, just to point out a difference too.

WindiesWeather and I had major disagreements during the WI vs NZ cricket series, I even gave him a huge serving about why NZ would beat them and it would take a very poor effort in discipline for NZ not to. He disagreed vehemently, made his own points and statements. A few of you, being passive aggressive types, seem to think that we were going to somehow end up in a flame war because we had different opinions, yet we continue to treat each other with respect and don't get offended when the other makes statements on cricket.

Why? Because we're not passive aggressive. WW can talk cricket, give as good as he gets and not feel the need to go into the same prototypical crap that quite a few of you do. And then because there are a few of you doing it, you throw enough **** out that eventually WW or I will throw something back and suddenly the moderators have four different reports about it. - Fact.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

I personally know one of the players that you've made personal points about and which I fundamentally disagree with, that's my problem with your posts. My experience of that person is completely different from yours, but as he's a personal acquaintance, I don't want to go into specifics - unlike you, obviously - so I'll leave it at that.

You stick to making your points "cricket points" as you call it, and we'll have no problems.

 

[Adders]

@Blocky FFS put a sock it in it man......this has been going on for 12 hours now, enough already.

 

[Blocky]

I personally know one of the players that you've made personal points about and which I fundamentally disagree with, that's my problem with your posts. My experience of that person is completely different from yours, but as he's a personal acquaintance, I don't want to go into specifics - unlike you, obviously - so I'll leave it at that.

You stick to making your points "cricket points" as you call it, and we'll have no problems.

"He's a personal acquaintance" - so basically proving what I said before, you take it personally when I make a statement about that persons cricket and feel the need to defend him, not because he's any good at cricket but more so because you have some false sense of duty to protect a friend online.

I'm guessing it's likely Guptill, in which case you really can't defend the way in which he's been playing his cricket, nor the fact that 99% of his issues are mental ones.

 

[Blocky]

@Blocky FFS put a sock it in it man......this has been going on for 12 hours now, enough already.

@Adders - takes more than one dog to have a dog fight, sir... you're getting angry at me because I refuse to lay down and let passive aggressive people shame me into not posting?

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

"He's a personal acquaintance" - so basically proving what I said before, you take it personally when I make a statement about that persons cricket and feel the need to defend him, not because he's any good at cricket but more so because you have some false sense of duty to protect a friend online.

I'm guessing it's likely Guptill, in which case you really can't defend the way in which he's been playing his cricket, nor the fact that 99% of his issues are mental ones.

FFS. No, you can make whatever statements about cricket, but you made personal comments about his personality that I cannot in any way link to the guy. It seems you know a completely different person. You are completely welcome to your views on his cricket and if you look back at my posts about Sodhi or Guptill, you will even see that I agree with you about them. This isn't about the player's cricket abilities FFS. Christ, I give up.