andrew flintoff was a bit **** really

[Lillian Thomson]

So he is crap then.

 

[h_hurricane]

On the other hand, Botham averages 23.74 with the bat when he is not scoring a hundred and 38.83 with ball when not taking a 5 for. Hope LT's world does not come crashing down after reading this.

 

[cnerd123]

So he is crap then.

please thank h_hurricane for the prompt and efficient work

 

[Starfighter]

I must commend these recent threads featuring my two favourite forms of cricket arguments: 'x was crap if you take away all his good performances' and 'x was brilliant if you take away all his bad performances'. You can't go wrong with those.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

On the other hand, Botham averages 23.74 with the bat when he is not scoring a hundred and 38.83 with ball when not taking a 5 for. Hope LT's world does not come crashing down after reading this.

Not at all. We all know Botham is crap if you take out his peak and the good bits.

 

[Gnske]

The classic lynch pin so good even Cricinfo does it.

 

[Adders]

What would Fred average if you took away his arms and legs?

 

[mr_mister]

Michael Bevan scored 82, 0, 70 and 91 in his first 4 test innings against the awesome might of Wasim and Waqar

In his 16th, 17th and 18th test innings he scored 52, 85* and 87* against the awesome might of Ambrose and Walsh


His average in his 23 other test innings between and after these patches was a modest 14.4 against the less than awesome might of Prasad, Ealham and Cronje

 

[h_hurricane]

Jason Gillespie when he gets to a 20 averages higher than Mark Waugh when he gets to a 20. A set Gillespie was a beast !

 

[stephen]

Why did you quote GIMH's post there? Seems to be totally irrelevant to what your answering/saying?

Accidentally multi quoted it.

 

[ImpatientLime]

I tend to agree, given the result in the series. Take away his 3 big tons (177, 145 and 183) and he averaged just 18.3 over his remaining 7 innings.

He also averaged a Bradmanesque 95.6 over his first 5 digs. Their judgement may have been coloured by 3 failures (1, 15 and 2) in his last 3 visits to the crease but he should have been given the honour.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Vaughan deserved that MOTS award. If you're the best player you should get the award IMO. Regardless if your team loses.

Also he was playing against much better bowlers than Hayden.

 

[stephen]

Vaughan deserved that MOTS award. If you're the best player you should get the award IMO. Regardless if your team loses.

Also he was playing against much better bowlers than Hayden.

If Vaughan should have got MotS in 2002/03 then Warne should have in 2005.

 

[ImpatientLime]

flintoff was playing against better players tho....

 

[GIMH]

If Vaughan should have got MotS in 2002/03 then Warne should have in 2005.

Well no, as Flintoff still had the better series.

 

[TheJediBrah]

If Vaughan should have got MotS in 2002/03 then Warne should have in 2005.

Yeah Warne should have in 2005, even disregarding his batting

 

[GIMH]

Lol

 

[TheJediBrah]

flintoff was playing against better players tho....

this is true

 

[harsh.ag]

Imagine having all three of peak Flintoff, Stokes, and Botham in your side. Talisman your way to every win. Get sponsored by the International Heart Foundation.

 

[Line and Length]

Imagine having all three of peak Flintoff, Stokes, and Botham in your side. Talisman your way to every win. Get sponsored by the International Heart Foundation.

There are plenty of cricketing nations that would have loved to have at least one of those named playing for them - though South Africa would be happy just having Kallis.