• 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.

The Unpopular Opinions Thread

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Unpopular opinion: Not sure how many would agree but Shoaib Akhtar at his peak looked more fearsome than Michael Holding at his peak.
I think that’s probably because he charged in whereas Holding loped. Also more/ better camera angles and footage helps. Both scary bowlers though
 

trundler

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Here's an opinion that's bound to be unpopular. Steyn despite being the best bowler I've seen had a tendency to go missing and choke when things went down to the wire. I recall Philander generally doing better in such instances. I suppose that's bit like saying Hammond was better on sticky wickets in that it still means he was vastly inferior to Braddles, although obviously not to that extent.

Also, Eoin Morgan is a legit ODI ATG imo.
 

vcs

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Here's an opinion that's bound to be unpopular. Steyn despite being the best bowler I've seen had a tendency to go missing and choke when things went down to the wire. I recall Philander generally doing better in such instances. I suppose that's bit like saying Hammond was better on sticky wickets in that it still means he was vastly inferior to Braddles, although obviously not to that extent.

Also, Eoin Morgan is a legit ODI ATG imo.
I think this comes from that one over in the WC 2015 semifinal.
 

trundler

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I think this comes from that one over in the WC 2015 semifinal.
This happened in several close tests too. Like the Perera one, the test against England after which SA rose to #1, the Philander series in Australia. I'm just going by memory here. Steyn was unparalleled at singlehandedly giving his team the upper hand but I think Philander was better at regaining momentum, at least in favourable conditions.
 

Starfighter

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Thought it would be worth reviving this thread for an apparently unpopular opinion, in light of Joel Wilson's bringing his form with bad decisions into the third umpires box.

A large proportion of the times when it is declared 'the player has their fingers underneath the ball', the catch has in fact been grassed.
 

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Shouldn't be. Several of England's top footballers are Irish/have Irish roots/links
Obviously there’s a lot of folk with Irish DNA in Britain, for all sorts of reasons, but I’m not sure this is true about top footballers? It feels like it’s been more of an accurate statement the other way round?
 

cnerd123

likes this
I can get on board with that – however, to me it often feels like those catches should be legal, even if it touches the ground a bit. BTW, is the ground defined as blades of grass or dirt? Or is it not defined at all, because it feels like it should be?
Yea the issue is that you can both have fingers under the ball and also have the ball touch the grass, so we end up in this grey area.

Standard practice atm is to follow the on field single (usually out) unless there is an obvious bounces off the surface. Idm that as long as it is applied consistently. Wherever you draw the line it will be arbitrary, and before the tech existed these would be out anyways so why change that.

Not sure Pope had fingers under the ball today tho tbf
 

thierry henry

International Coach
Thought it would be worth reviving this thread for an apparently unpopular opinion, in light of Joel Wilson's bringing his form with bad decisions into the third umpires box.

A large proportion of the times when it is declared 'the player has their fingers underneath the ball', the catch has in fact been grassed.
My unpopular opinion is that those contentious catches are basically always out (haven’t seen the latest contentious one though so not commenting on that).

I acknowledge though that it’s entirely possible that a player can catch the ball ‘cleanly’ i.e. with his fingers entirely under the ball and with full control of the ball, yet the ball might incidentally have brushed grass or even dirt between the fingers. I just don’t think this is actually relevant to the concept of catching a ball as we know it…I also know it’s probably impossible to draft a rule that covers this. I think the current “fingers are under the ball” interpretation is actually great and probably the best we can do.
 

Coronis

International Coach
Yeah players shouldn’t be representing multiple countries in internationals.

edit: Except I think there was that bloke who represented SA pre apartheid and then Zimbabwe when they came in.
 
Last edited:

Top