The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread (white ball edition)

[honestbharani]

So suddenly you're the authority on what's acceptable in ATG teams, cos you say so. Ok.

When only two of you keep reinventing reasons to include a guy who was obviously not at this level, it is clear. And you don't need to be an authority to state a fact.

 

[harsh.ag]

Nope. Not luck. Skill execution.

The whole conversation is about the different levels of skills and the marginal differences between different players. If Gibbs didn't hold on to a catch and Bevan got a run out, and you are going to put it down to skill and not luck, then the whole Symonds/Ponting/Jonty save you 20 more runs than some other good fielder becomes even more of a joke

 

[Burgey]

[passive-aggressive insult disguised with:



to make it seem like you aren't being a **** when you always are, in the hope no one notices*]

*we've all noticed

 

[TheJediBrah]

Pretty bizarre to call a dropped catch or well-executed run-out "luck", just because it's not common practice for the player doing it

It's nothing to do with luck, it's an error. If I usually hit my hook shots for 6 and then one day I mistime it and get caught on the boundary I'm not "unlucky". I ****ed up.

 

[harsh.ag]

Pretty bizarre to call a dropped catch or well-executed run-out "luck", just because it's not common practice for the player doing it

It's nothing to do with luck, it's an error. If I usually hit my hook shots for 6 and then one day I mistime it and get caught on the boundary I'm not "unlucky". I ****ed up.

Your whole argument has been that great fielders have higher skill level. That means they have lower chances of ****ing up. Gibbs is a great fielder. Bevan not as good as him. On a day, if the player with the lower chance of ****ing up ****s up, and the player with the lower chance of making that run out makes it, and you won't agree that means some luck is involved rather than just skill, then your whole arguments crumbles down.

Everyone understands that dropped catches and run-outs involve luck.

 

[Migara]

Fielding is important when they work as a team. A team of 3 outstanding fielders + 8 ordinary ones is inferior to a team of 11 above average fielders (who are not in the outstanding league)

 

[honestbharani]

[passive-aggressive insult disguised with:



to make it seem like you aren't being a **** when you always are, in the hope no one notices*]

*we've all noticed

 

[mr_mister]

Fielding is important when they work as a team. A team of 3 outstanding fielders + 8 ordinary ones is inferior to a team of 11 above average fielders (who are not in the outstanding league)

Well duh.

 

[stephen]

The whole conversation is about the different levels of skills and the marginal differences between different players. If Gibbs didn't hold on to a catch and Bevan got a run out, and you are going to put it down to skill and not luck, then the whole Symonds/Ponting/Jonty save you 20 more runs than some other good fielder becomes even more of a joke

Not really.

There are such a thing as averages, and then there's what happens in games, which is why averages don't tell the whole story.

Ponting and Symonds averaged a run out one every four games between them. That's going to impact a lot of results.

 

[h_hurricane]

Over the past fortnight, Symonds has become the most discussed cricketer in CW. Love him or hate him, you just can't ignore him.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Your whole argument has been that great fielders have higher skill level. That means they have lower chances of ****ing up. Gibbs is a great fielder. Bevan not as good as him. On a day, if the player with the lower chance of ****ing up ****s up, and the player with the lower chance of making that run out makes it, and you won't agree that means some luck is involved rather than just skill, then your whole arguments crumbles down.

Everyone understands that dropped catches and run-outs involve luck.

So this is a language issue. What you mean to say is that if you are a selector of a team and a player has an out of character fielding incident that affects the match you are unlucky as a selector?
Not that dropping a catch is unlucky or getting a run out is due entirely to luck, which is what it sounded like you were saying.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Over the past fortnight, Symonds has become the most discussed cricketer in CW. Love him or hate him, you just can't ignore him.

Why do I only remember him for that WC ton in 2003?

 

[Burgey]

Over the past fortnight, Symonds has become the most discussed cricketer in CW. Love him or hate him, you just can't ignore him.

CA threw him under a bus. Was never the same after that.

 

[harsh.ag]

So this is a language issue. What you mean to say is that if you are a selector of a team and a player has an out of character fielding incident that affects the match you are unlucky as a selector?
Not that a) dropping a catch is unlucky or b) getting a run out is due entirely to luck, which is what it sounded like you were saying.

a) It can be unlucky, certainly the Gibbs one was in that match, since he had cleanly caught it and then the ball got away from him when trying to start the celebration
b) Not entirely down to luck, of course. Why would I say dumb **** like that. It's all in the context of the bigger conversation

 

[TheJediBrah]

Why would I say dumb **** like that

Well yeah that's what I was wondering lol but it makes a bit more sense know that we've clarified

Still not sure you can call the Gibbs one unlucky in any way. It was a **** up that was entirely his own fault. It's not like he tripped on a bottle that was thrown onto the field or someone yelled in his ear just as he caught it.

 

[ankitj]

When was the last time an Aussie poster here talked up a non-Aussie player, save may be the West Indians like Viv Richards? (not counting PEWS as an Aussie poster)

 

[jimmy101]

That'd probably be me, if anyone.

 

[ankitj]

Yes, that'd be you

 

[stephen]

When was the last time an Aussie poster here talked up a non-Aussie player, save may be the West Indians like Viv Richards? (not counting PEWS as an Aussie poster)

Well right before he came to play for the Heat I was talking up de Villiers a ton. Probably why he only had two decent innings'.

 

[jimmy101]

Yes, that'd be you

mr_mister is also rather unbiased, and Burgey sometimes gives credit where credit is due (unless it's Sachin being spoken about, of course).