• 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.

Players living rent free in people's minds

Daemon

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Incredible how people don't understand you aren't imprisoned for a not guilty verdict. Good job none of the people who bang on about it work in the legal profession
The point is he should've been found guilty for shattering a dude's eye socket over some name calling.

Hales as well.

Eng team would be in tatters atm if that had happened.

Unfortunately as it stands the ***** are now practicing this ahead of a Test match.

 

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
The point is he should've been found guilty for shattering a dude's eye socket over some name calling.

Hales as well.

Eng team would be in tatters atm if that had happened.

Unfortunately as it stands the ****s are now practicing this ahead of a Test match.

He wasn’t even tried for assault.
 

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
He should’ve been though, no?
The article I posted suggests there's a strong argument for it but that given the self-defence verdict was accepted for Affray it's not unreasonable to think it could well have been for assault (though not definite).

I'm no legal expert but the fact the blokes he injured were tried alongside him for affray weakens the argument for an assault charge in my book as it suggests a fight moreso than a one-sided attack.
 

Daemon

Request Your Custom Title Now!
This IMO is a good breakdown of the Stokes trial, pretty balanced:


If you read it you'll say they have no idea why Hales wasn't charged, something I couldn't answer when recently discussed.
That's nicely explained, thanks.

So with a bit more fairness and less incompetency, both Stokes and Hales would've been charged and potentially convicted of assault. Instead they're ruining Test cricket and winning world cups.
 

Shri

Mr. Glass
Anderson been mentioned but he’s been rent free in Shri’s mind so long he’s claimed squatters rights
He's at least in a good place in my head. Would have had to move if he lived in the crumbling head of Trott or Swann during an away ashes?
 

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
Yeah I am not a huge fan of Kallis and on top of that he gets overrated here too which is doubly annoying.

Though the SA team with Smith et all was my favorite to watch.
 

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
if people think Kallis is overrated on here wait till they go on to r/cricket which thinks Kallis is the equivalent of a Tendulkar talent with the bat and a 3rd/4th pacer with the ball and the greatest all rounder of all time
Kallis' case on this forum and even outside is pretty much based on raw batting and bowling averages only.
 

ataraxia

International Coach
Kallis' case on this forum and even outside is pretty much based on raw batting and bowling averages only.
Isn't it based a significant proportion on his prolificness. i.e., he has a very similar number of runs to Ponting/Dravid but also 300 wickets to boot.
 

Bolo.

International Captain
Kallis' case on this forum and even outside is pretty much based on raw batting and bowling averages only.
There have been plenty of different arguments made in the last few months besides his averages, made by people who know a lot about him. You have just chosen to disregard them.
 

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
There have been plenty of different arguments made in the last few months besides his averages, made by people who know a lot about him. You have just chosen to disregard them.
I responded to a lot of arguments as you are aware.

I should say that primary argument has always been his raw averages which to me is a silly one. There were secondary arguments, like him batting at no.4 versus no.5 compared Waugh, but other arguments like him batting for a fragile top order were used to defend him rather than present his case.
 

Top