• 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**** Sri Lanka in New Zealand 2014/2015

Blocky

Blocky

Banned
Jono said:
This is massively under-selling Waugh, who was well and truly in the argument of best batsman in the world during 90s with Lara and Sachin. He was definitely the best bat for Australia from 97-2000.
Click to expand...
Waugh was a master and probably my favorite all time cricketer, but I dare say he profited quite a bit by having Ponting and Boon at 3 and while he was consistent through both of their careers you'd have to say Boon was the better batsman during the years they played together and Ponting became one of Australia's all time greats under Waugh.

This isn't to lessen anything but I do dare say had Waugh not had Ponting and Boon in the side, he'd probably have moved himself to #3.

The Australian batting order during his captaincy was probably the strongest it's ever been though.
 
Last edited:
Blocky

Blocky

Banned
jcas0167 said:
tbf, what kind of citation do you expect? It's an online forum, you take what people say with a grain of salt. It would be nice if you all could chill out and talk about the test.
Click to expand...
Don't mind Dan, he sometimes forgets he's meant to be an impartial moderator and not take sides of his online friends in pointless arguments that are perpetuated through groups of people responding to what I say, getting more and more frustrated that I simply don't get frustrated by them.
 
D

Dan

Hall of Fame Member
Blocky said:
See, this would require me to care what you and Flem274 think about what I post and whether or not I care to argue anything other than fact with you.

Kind of similar to the Hendrix "You don't watch test cricket, while you make blatantly true statements that I disagree with and then you prove me wrong over" - the way I post about technique, style and team selections before they're made and make predictions such as Wagner being amazing, Taylor being rubbish due to no training and such coming true are more than enough validation for me and should be more than enough for you.

If not? Too bad, so sad, there is an ignore feature on the forum.
Click to expand...
Really makes me question why you're on the forum in the first place if you have no intention of actually discussing anything.
 
Blocky

Blocky

Banned
Dan said:
Really makes me question why you're on the forum in the first place if you have no intention of actually discussing anything.
Click to expand...
Says the guy who's only post in the thread in the last couple of pages has been calling me out on something said two to four pages ago while I continue to discuss cricket. It makes me question why you're in a cricket forum and not an off-topic forum.
 
hendrix

hendrix

Hall of Fame Member
Blocky said:
The whole "You don't watch test cricket" when you state an easily countered point makes me laugh.

According to Cricinfo Match Centre - in the first innings, Boult bowled a total of 23 full balls to left handed batsman, 12 of which were outside off. He went for 23 runs off those balls. He bowled 58 balls on a good length, 33 of them outside off, he went for 21 runs, he bowled 29 balls short and went for 19 runs... remind me again how he was milked for bowling too short? ps - 38 of the 51 runs that Sangakarra scored from Boult came front of square. Remind me again how he was milked for bowling too short?
Click to expand...
Thankyou for illustrating that he did not pitch it up enough.
 
Blocky

Blocky

Banned
hendrix said:
Thankyou for illustrating that he did not pitch it up enough.
Click to expand...
You do realise on the virtue of "Full" means hitting near the base of the stumps and "Good" means hitting the top of off stump, right? I guess you don't, it doesn't suit your world view.

ps.
Great review by Sri Lanka, you'd never have got those wickets before DRS.
 
Zinzan

Zinzan

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Oh well, Neesham was never going to last long against Pradeep, looked like a walking wicket. No surprise there.
 
NZTailender

NZTailender

I can't believe I ate the whole thing
Neesh really didn't have an answer for that around the wicket angle did he? Pradeep has been gun.
 
Flem274*

Flem274*

123/5
watling and kane centuries or bust for new zealand

this will be our worst loss in years. capitulating to broad/anderson and steyn/philander/morkel is one thing, but getting walked over by sri lankan pacers...

unacceptable.
 
Last edited:
Cabinet96

Cabinet96

Hall of Fame Member
Blocky said:
You do realise on the virtue of "Full" means hitting near the base of the stumps and "Good" means hitting the top of off stump, right? I guess you don't, it doesn't suit your world view.

ps.
Great review by Sri Lanka, you'd never have got those wickets before DRS.
Click to expand...
Isn't full usually six meters and less away from the crease (or is it sumps)?. Not really that close the base if you're pitching it 5 and half meters away from the batsman.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top