Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
And that really is ridiculous.Swervy said:I know it does...and thats because I know more about what goes on in your brain, just from your posts on here then you actually do![]()
Fortunately by the
![Laugh :laugh: :laugh:](/forum/images/smilies/original/laugh.gif)
![Biggrin :D :D](/forum/images/smilies/original/biggrin.gif)
And that really is ridiculous.Swervy said:I know it does...and thats because I know more about what goes on in your brain, just from your posts on here then you actually do![]()
Of course, that sort of thing is irrelevant when he's bowling isn't it?Richard said:No, you say I'm in a hole.
By bringing-up irrelevant stuff like his mindset upon being about to bowl the delivery you are not going to create one.
No, because you are not Andrew Flintoff, so you cannot know more about him than he himself knows - yet you continue to insist you do.Richard said:Your only defence against this blatant fact has been "you can't know more about Flintoff than he does", despite the fact that I've provided hard evidence as to why I - and anyone else who wants to - can.
But it's not ridiculous for you to say it about someone else.Richard said:And that really is ridiculous.
I do say it is - because as far as anyone who's actually thinking can see, the thoughts of the bowler don't affect how well or poorly the batsman plays the delivery, or how good the delivery is if you don't have the basic techniques to bowl the good balls.marc71178 said:Of course, that sort of thing is irrelevant when he's bowling isn't it?
Because you say it is.
No, it's not - because there are completely different data.marc71178 said:But it's not ridiculous for you to say it about someone else.
I cannot know more about him, no - but I can know his bowling as well, and seemingly better, than he and so many others.marc71178 said:No, because you are not Andrew Flintoff, so you cannot know more about him than he himself knows - yet you continue to insist you do.
Neither is remotely possible, but you've decided that one is, because otherwise everything you've been saying would be wrong.Richard said:No, it's not - because there are completely different data.
Keep using the same irreverant cliché, you'll totally devalue it eventually.marc71178 said:Keep digging, be at the Earth's core soon.
No, you've decided that one isn't, because otherwise everything you've been saying would be wrong.marc71178 said:Neither is remotely possible, but you've decided that one is, because otherwise everything you've been saying would be wrong.
How can you?Richard said:I cannot know more about him, no - but I can know his bowling as well, and seemingly better, than he and so many others.
When you can prove how you can know more about him than he himself does, maybe you'd have a point, but since that is impossible, then you don't.Richard said:No, you've decided that one isn't, because otherwise everything you've been saying would be wrong.
Wrong, I'm not a schoolkid any more.marc71178 said:How can you?
You're not there on the pitch with him.
You're not in the nets with him.
You're just an arrogant little schoolkid who watches him on TV and decide you know more than he himself does.
I can prove quite clearly that I know more about his bowling in Test-match cricket than he does - if indeed he thinks the turnaround happened in the Bridgetown game, and I've done so God-knows-how-many times.marc71178 said:When you can prove how you can know more about him than he himself does, maybe you'd have a point, but since that is impossible, then you don't.
That quote is the absolute pinnacle of arrogance.Richard said:I can prove quite clearly that I know more about his bowling in Test-match cricket than he does - if indeed he thinks the turnaround happened in the Bridgetown game, and I've done so God-knows-how-many times.
But that does not give you more insight into him than he or the coaches have.Richard said:And no, I'm not in the nets or anywhere else; I am, however, watching every ball in the match situation with equal clarity.
No, you have not.Richard said:I can prove quite clearly that I know more about his bowling in Test-match cricket than he does - if indeed he thinks the turnaround happened in the Bridgetown game, and I've done so God-knows-how-many times.
You made it relevant, kiddo.Richard said:All well and good - but not actually relevant to the discussion.