• 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.

Andrew Symonds in contention for Test squad

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
age_master said:
he got out slogging on 3 or 4 occasions at the end of innings,
On occasion such slogging was completely unnecessary and very nearly caused his side to lose a match they were cruising in...

Just because its near the end, you don't have to slog...
 

Mr Mxyzptlk

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Richard said:
Watson.
Though it was ludicrous that Symonds got all the chances he did. Never anything in his domestic record to suggest it should have been done. Lucky buggers got away with it in the end.
I seriously hope the same thing doesn't happen with Powell.
It simply isn't possible that he actually can play cricket and knows how to score runs. Despite his domestic record, the fact that he's succeeding at international cricket does count for something.

He's not a 'lucky bugger', he's a good player.
 

age_master

Hall of Fame Member
marc71178 said:
On occasion such slogging was completely unnecessary and very nearly caused his side to lose a match they were cruising in...

Just because its near the end, you don't have to slog...

a) its fun

b) its not about winning, its about demoralising



In Australia Batting down the order is called limited oportunity, often these players dont get a chance to build an innings and bat for a long time :)
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
age_master said:
b) its not about winning, its about demoralising
OK then 5 overs to go, 2 to win with the last pair at the wicket.

The established batsman has a swing, misses and is bowled.

That's really demoralising to the fielding side...
 

age_master

Hall of Fame Member
dunno what your on about marc, demoralising would be 360 instead of 320, or winning in 35 overs instead of 48. so your going for boundaries instead of just pushing the ball around.

but overall he did have a pretty dodgy year, only 5th in the ODI player voting when he played less than half the games.
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
I'm pointing out that when chasing you do not have to swing out at all costs (as was the initial criticism)

It is not demoralising to a team who are facing defeat to see a batsman get out playing stupidly - I would say it has the complete opposite effect.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Eclipse said:
What you hope Powell does not finaly live up to his potential??

why do you allways want people to fail?
I don't believe he's got any real potential.
I don't like players I view as totally rubbish succeeding.
People have misjudged that Powell has potential for God knows how long now. I've been proved right until now. I hope that doesn't change.
Surely a logical deduction?
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Mr Mxyzptlk said:
It simply isn't possible that he actually can play cricket and knows how to score runs. Despite his domestic record, the fact that he's succeeding at international cricket does count for something.

He's not a 'lucky bugger', he's a good player.
I was referring to his fans and the selectors as "lucky buggers".
Not Symonds himself. I've never disputed that he's a changed player since the Pakistan game in WC2003.
I still hope the success wanes.
 

Mr Mxyzptlk

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Richard said:
I was referring to his fans and the selectors as "lucky buggers".
Not Symonds himself. I've never disputed that he's a changed player since the Pakistan game in WC2003.
I still hope the success wanes.
That last line contradicts all your attempts to defend your ludicrous attitude towards players and statistics.
 

Langeveldt

Soutie
Richard said:
I don't believe he's got any real potential.
I don't like players I view as totally rubbish succeeding.
People have misjudged that Powell has potential for God knows how long now. I've been proved right until now. I hope that doesn't change.
Surely a logical deduction?

I guess it logical, bit weird though....

Guess I feel the same about Robbie Peterson and Steve Harmison, but its an attiude that isnt great when it comes to enjoyable cricket watching :)
 

Mr Mxyzptlk

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Richard said:
I don't believe he's got any real potential.
I don't like players I view as totally rubbish succeeding.
Interesting... because there are players (or at least one) who the majority of people who have a clue about cricket judge as crap who you seem to think is otherwise.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Mr Mxyzptlk said:
Interesting... because there are players (or at least one) who the majority of people who have a clue about cricket judge as crap who you seem to think is otherwise.
Presuming you are talking about Ramprakash, AFAIAC people who think he's crap are just the victims of the troubles of generalisation.
Simply looking at his Test-average as one thing, rather than bothering to break it down into stages of career, and think about the difference between opening and batting in the middle-order.
It's up to you what you look at but forgive me, I prefer to make my own judgements on what I consider valid, not just think what everyone else thinks.
Anyway, what exactly did your comment have to do with the part of my post you quoted from?
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Langeveldt said:
I guess it logical, bit weird though....

Guess I feel the same about Robbie Peterson and Steve Harmison, but its an attiude that isnt great when it comes to enjoyable cricket watching :)
Well, that's something I have had to give serious thought to.:(
What exactly is enjoyable cricket watching for me?
The answer is, being proved right is satisfying by watching the causes of results, but I don't have to actually enjoy it from a cricketing point of view (for instance, watching Harmison hack a Lee Full-Toss over mid-wicket for four was very satisfying from the POV of Lee going for runs, but didn't offer anything in the way of cricketing aesthetics).
When your attitudes are like mine, cricket watching is far more of a science than for others.:rolleyes:
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Mr Mxyzptlk said:
That last line contradicts all your attempts to defend your ludicrous attitude towards players and statistics.
What, so you are allowed to enjoy Nel's success being reversed and I'm not allowed to enjoy it if the same happens to Symonds? :O :O :O
Where's the equality in that????
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
AFAIK he enjoyed it because he didn't like Nel's attitude.
The fact that it was Chanderpaul and co. doing the slaughtering was a bonus.
 

Mr Mxyzptlk

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Richard said:
What, so you are allowed to enjoy Nel's success being reversed and I'm not allowed to enjoy it if the same happens to Symonds? :O :O :O
Where's the equality in that????
You don't want Symonds to do well because you don't rate him. I rate Nel very highly and I enjoyed him getting hit about, as you say, because of his attitude against us.
 

Rik

Cricketer Of The Year
age_master said:
b) its not about winning, its about demoralising
One of the most insane statements I've ever seen. Cricket is a game, a sport, and as such surely the point of it is to win every time, not to demoralise the opposition by going bonkers and trying to show off when your team needs you to hang in there...
 

Mr Mxyzptlk

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Rik said:
One of the most insane statements I've ever seen. Cricket is a game, a sport, and as such surely the point of it is to win every time, not to demoralise the opposition by going bonkers and trying to show off when your team needs you to hang in there...
The point of sport is neither. The point of sport is to entertain. Everything else, especially commercialism, has crept in to pervert the original meaning of sport.
 

Top