Players who 'over-performed' internationally

[OverratedSanity]

It's so obvious that the "Kiwaahh" meme has got under Zinzan's skin so bad.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Cyril Walters has the biggest difference between FC and test average ever. Averaged only 30 in FC and 52 in 11 tests. FS Jackson not behind with 33 in FC and 48 in tests.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Andrew Jones - was a NZ provincial journeyman when he debuted in the late 80s aged 28, but was one of the top batsmen in the world in his era and NZ's best ever no3 until Kane Williamson usurped him a couple of years ago.

 

[The Hutt Rec]

Andrew Jones - was a NZ provincial journeyman when he debuted in the late 80s aged 28, but was one of the top batsmen in the world in his era and NZ's best ever no3 until Kane Williamson usurped him a couple of years ago.

I was thinking about him myself, but did he have a great run of domestic form before making the test side? I genuinely don't know ... what an inspired selection if not.

My favourite NZ cricketer ever, so I should know ... wish he'd written a book, he's a bit of an enigma.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

I was thinking about him myself, but did he have a great run of domestic form before making the test side? I genuinely don't know ... what an inspired selection if not.

My favourite NZ cricketer ever, so I should know ... wish he'd written a book, he's a bit of an enigma.

Averaged over 60 in the Shell Trophy in the season before he debuted


Seasons

1986/87 Shell Trophy batting

 

[honestbharani]

I only remember Jones for some seriously slow knocks in the 92 WC, unlike his namesake from Oz.

 

[Gob]

Zinzank redemption

 

[mr_mister]

Cyril Walters has the biggest difference between FC and test average ever. Averaged only 30 in FC and 52 in 11 tests. FS Jackson not behind with 33 in FC and 48 in tests.

couple of more interesting ones


alan fairfax 28 in FC, 51 from 10 tests

alan melville 37 in FC and 52 from 11 tests

 

[Zinzan]

It's so obvious that the "Kiwaahh" meme has got under Zinzan's skin so bad.

So obvious bro cool one.

 

[Zinzan]

Zinzank redemption

Yup, what a nerve that guy has.

First part of my redemption is acknowledging Jadeja is the world's best bowler.

 

[Shri]

You aren't Bradman ffs. Who gives a ****?

 

[honestbharani]

Z, take a chill pill. I am as fed up with the groupism and bullying that goes on here but you got a bit of Richard-itis about you right now. You cant post the same thing over and over at every thread mate. We get your opinions about Jadeja being the #1 ranked bowler in the world. I am sure many in this forum see it the way you do, but then there are those who do not as well and it has really zero relevance to the topic being discussed. Heck, if you had just posted "Jadeja is a good example of this type of player, even though I have my disagreements about his ICC ranking as a bowler", I dont think anyone would have taken issue. Its just frustrating to read what you think of a player every time his name is brought up in a thread, in any context.

 

[Shri]

We are in the wrong place if we don't dig repetitive arguments.

 

[Zinzan]

See Zinzan, what you fail to see is that you're the one who feels the need to bring up irrelevant points on a topic. Things that had no reason to be said. You just felt an burning urge to say it. That's what reflects so poorly onto you, Thats why people go 'Zinzan, wtf is wrong with you'. Because for some reason, you're the only person in the entire conversation who felt it absolutely necessary to point out that Jadeja's rise to number 1 is based on home performances, or how Sachin didn't help Akhtar up when he collided into him way back when, or how you won't be convinced of a player/team's quality unless they meet arbitrary criteria you set.

None of these things were relevant points to the conversation at hand, but you just felt such a strong desire to say them, and then when people point out to you how there is no reason to be saying that, you accuse them of being sensitive/aggressive/blah blah blah, when really the truth of the matter is the only reason you said those things is because you are the one with a huge chip on your shoulder that you are trying to pretend isn't there. You need to say those things because they bother you, deep to your core, and not because they're valid points to the discussion.

And hey, you know what, we all do it. I do it when I rant about pitches. Burgey does it about Allan Border not being called AB. OS has this weird thing with 50s and 100s. But the difference is we all recognise that these things are our problems, not everyone elses, and thus we don't need to stink up every single thread in the forum talking about it. We don't need to hijack any loosely related discussion to talk about what bothers us all the time -like you did just here. And even if we did do that, we don't need to attack those who call us out on having a chip on our shoulders. **** I've been called out being obsessed and not letting go of certain topics loads and when I do, I drop it. Everyone does. We recognise when we're being a broken record, and we stop and we move on.

You don't tho.

Haha, What a joker you are. Utterly laughable that you don't stink up threads around here, so gotta love the hypocrisy, You've spend half your existent on the forum doing exactly that, including proudly joking around about trolling & about how you've driven some top ex-posters like Heef away from the site. The reason why you're probably banned every other month,

Seriously mate, some of the ghambiring performances by yourself and OS mid the Indian/Aust series was some of the most diabolical & cringeworthy in CW history, and really devalued what was in the main a great series thread, I think I mentioned this at the time too. Don't underestimate how cringeworthy some of that constant ghambiring becomes, but unlike you, I'll only speak for myself on this issue and won't pretend to speak for everyone else.

In regards to irrelevant topics, hate to break it to you and burst your egos, but you 3-4 posters who continuously freak out at the slightly criticism of Indian cricket don't get to decide what's relevant or not. Just because 3-4 of you follow one another around, constantly like one another's posts and generally form up together in most debates here recently (I see RH made a similar observation in another thread recently), doesn't mean your opinion of what's relevant are any more correct than anyone else here.

In regards to my post in question about Jadeja being a good pick for this thread, but not really being the world's number 1 bowler, I actually expected some would have agreed that while he's outperformed expectations, the number 1 rating is somewhat misleading.

I didn't expect it to blow the thread up for the next 2-3 pages with the same 3-4 people all jumping in together with the usual performances & outrage, but in hindsight, I think the takeaway is there's one team it's just not worth mentioning anything but great things about.

I'll criticise players from others countries when I think it's warranted too, but never receive outrage quite like I do from you lot, and all in unison. Example, I was one of a few who was unconvinced Steve Smith was above the other 2-3 prior to his tour to India, and while some argued the point with me, there wasn't near the level of outrage I get from another certain group of fans, saying nothing about the slightest criticism of Tendulkar, which even most Indian fans will concede is met with the craziest outrage one could imagine.

In terms of this strong desire you allude to, I actually agree with that, only I call it 'telling it how it is', I quite clearly explained that It doesn't sit comfortably with me that Jadeja's ranked no 1, since he's only performed at home, so I felt it was perfectly relevant to mention it in that context of the post I replied to.

Now to this non-Indian agenda/bias you imply, the interesting thing is if you look back a couple of months ago, nobody gushed over the Indian Test side more than I did after their demolishment job on NZ & Eng. However after the Aust series I wrote that I don't think the gap is nearly as large as I'd previously thought, and that with a bit of luck and better application, Aust could have drawn or even won that series & for that reason India went down slightly in my estimations (since I think Aust would dominate India more at home than India did to them), although I did say India would still probably be the best Test side currently..... and even that was met with this typically defensive reaction. I don't recall you calling me out for overly praising India those months ago... I guess you only pick up on the criticisms huh?

The great thing about this forum is that it's very much based on opinions & we all have very different ones, so it does come off as unbelievably arrogant when you reply to me in the manner you did above as if your opinion is representative of the forum in it's entirety, when in fact it's actually representative of the same crew of 3-4 posters.

So if you have an issue with my opinions/posts, critique them all you like, but critique them as yourself and don't attempt to talk on everyone else's behalf. Others can speak for themselves.

Sorry to others if this reply is derailing the thread further, but I'm entitled to defend myself, especially when the person who's doing the lecturing about stinking up threads has conducted themselves the way they have in the last 6-12 months in particular... Too rich.

 

[cnerd123]

Ok

 

[OverratedSanity]

The groupism does happen.

But saying we all agree with each other constantly is not true at all. If you think me, *****, Daemon, Shri and hb agree on everything when it comes to cricket, or to be more specific, Indian cricket, then you haven't read enough of our posts. There's probably more shitfights between us than circlejerk liking.

I also think that because we're all prolific posters and are extremely generous with likes (seriously, me, ***** and indiaholic have given out more likes than any other posters in CW's history) it can feel like everyone's ganging up on you when we all agree on something. That's not the intention, atleast from me.

 

[Zinzan]

Z, take a chill pill. I am as fed up with the groupism and bullying that goes on here but you got a bit of Richard-itis about you right now. You cant post the same thing over and over at every thread mate. We get your opinions about Jadeja being the #1 ranked bowler in the world. I am sure many in this forum see it the way you do, but then there are those who do not as well and it has really zero relevance to the topic being discussed. Heck, if you had just posted "Jadeja is a good example of this type of player, even though I have my disagreements about his ICC ranking as a bowler", I dont think anyone would have taken issue. Its just frustrating to read what you think of a player every time his name is brought up in a thread, in any context.

I really don't want to keep this thing going, and was going to let this slide, but where have I constantly posted about Jadeja not being deserving of the number 1 ranking outside my post in this thread? At best I may have mentioned it on one other occasion, with several others comments about his over the top screaming when appealing, although I should add that wasn't nearly as bad under DRS.

 

[AndrewB]

couple of more interesting ones


alan fairfax 28 in FC, 51 from 10 tests

alan melville 37 in FC and 52 from 11 tests

Allen Hill, who bowled for Yorkshire in the 1870s, never made a first-class 50 and had a batting average of 8.94.
In the only Tests he played in (the first two of all) he scored 35*, 0, 49 and 17 for a Test batting average of 50.50.

 

[vcs]

@Zinzan, please name these 3-4 Indian posters who you think are ganging up on you. It's better to get it out in the open.

As for the like function, it's there for a purpose FFS. It avoids the unnecessary "This" or "AWTA" type posts. Or just something to click instinctively if something about the post makes you chuckle, or whatever. No idea why people read so much into it.

 

[mr_mister]

Allen Hill, who bowled for Yorkshire in the 1870s, never made a first-class 50 and had a batting average of 8.94.
In the only Tests he played in (the first two of all) he scored 35*, 0, 49 and 17 for a Test batting average of 50.50.

well yeah that is cool, but i find fairfax's situation a little more fascinating because it was less flukey and happened over 10 tests