Crap Innings thread

[halba]

roscoe so far

 

[OverratedSanity]

Charles. Holy **** that shot.

 

[Hurricane]

Martin Guptill vs the West Indies as he probably only would have made 30-40 if his bat wasn't so big.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Martin Guptill vs the West Indies as he probably only would have made 30-40 if his bat wasn't so big.

I'm sure the whole of CW agrees. He was absolute rubbish.

 

[Hurricane]

Haha

 

[OverratedSanity]

Haha but seriously, mate I think it's a bit rubbish that I'm not allowed to make a point that bats and fielding restrictions have a big role in making these kind of innings possible. It's incredibly annoying that whenever I say something like that, I need to qualify my argument by saying 10 times that Guptill played the innings of his life (which he absolutely did). It infuriates me when posters here are unable to be a bit objective about debates like this and somehow make me out to be someone who isn't giving credit to the batsmen.

It's just the worst sort of strawman argument when someone comes and makes a long post about how bats and powerplays are irrelevant and why Guptills and Sharmas and Sehwags and Gayle score 200s is because they've played well. Of course they ****ing played brilliantly you ****wits, me saying that the environment and rules of today make fast and big scoring easier than before doesn't somehow mean I'm saying they played crap and were lucky.

/sillyrant

 

[Hurricane]

Haha but seriously, mate I think it's a bit rubbish that I'm not allowed to make a point that bats and fielding restrictions have a big role in making these kind of innings possible. It's incredibly annoying that whenever I say something like that, I need to qualify my argument by saying 10 times that Guptill played the innings of his life (which he absolutely did). It infuriates me when posters here are unable to be a bit objective about debates like this and somehow make me out to be someone who isn't giving credit to the batsmen.

It's just the worst sort of strawman argument when someone comes and makes a long post about how bats and powerplays are irrelevant and why Guptills and Sharmas and Sehwags and Gayle score 200s is because they've played well. Of course they ****ing played brilliantly you ****wits, me saying that the environment and rules of today make fast and big scoring easier than before doesn't somehow mean I'm saying they played crap and were lucky.

/sillyrant

Good on you for saying this and I respect you for saying that - but just as some food for thought...possibly the frequency with which you made the point took the gloss of his innings.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Good on you for saying this and I respect you for saying that - but just as some food for thought...possibly the frequency with which you made the point took the gloss of his innings.

Could be looked at that way, but it shouldn't imo. It's a debate that's relevant and even then, I balanced it out by mentioning in every single post that Guptill was incredible, specifically to try ensure the shine wouldn't be taken off the innings. And it still wasn't enough somehow

I've been guilt of reacting like that too. The timing makes it seem as though you're dismissing the performance, but I just hope we (me included) could all be a little more objective instead of saying "Leave my player alone he did well" even though no one says otherwise.

 

[Athlai]

Haha but seriously, mate I think it's a bit rubbish that I'm not allowed to make a point that bats and fielding restrictions have a big role in making these kind of innings possible. It's incredibly annoying that whenever I say something like that, I need to qualify my argument by saying 10 times that Guptill played the innings of his life (which he absolutely did). It infuriates me when posters here are unable to be a bit objective about debates like this and somehow make me out to be someone who isn't giving credit to the batsmen.

It's just the worst sort of strawman argument when someone comes and makes a long post about how bats and powerplays are irrelevant and why Guptills and Sharmas and Sehwags and Gayle score 200s is because they've played well. Of course they ****ing played brilliantly you ****wits, me saying that the environment and rules of today make fast and big scoring easier than before doesn't somehow mean I'm saying they played crap and were lucky.

/sillyrant

Bugger off.

Show some tact.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Well I tried.

 

[Athlai]

Calling me a ****wit in an offhanded manner doesn't give you the moral high ground even if you feel slighted by my poorly constructed argument. You can have divisive opinions on CW without being rude or trying to call someone out to "win" an argument. Poor form, but I won't hold it against you down the road. But as DingDong would say "pull your head in" for next time eh?

 

[OverratedSanity]

Calling me a ****wit in an offhanded manner doesn't give you the moral high ground even if you feel slighted by my poorly constructed argument. You can have divisive opinions on CW without being rude or trying to call someone out to "win" an argument. Poor form, but I won't hold it against you down the road. But as DingDong would say "pull your head in" for next time eh?

Ok I was annoyed by the strawman and I apologize for the unnecessary ****wit comment. Seriously.

I just thought the two of us could be ****wits together

 

[Shri]

Where is Dingdong anyway?

 

[Athlai]

Ok I was annoyed by the strawman and I apologize for the unnecessary ****wit comment. Seriously.

I just thought the two of us could be ****wits together

We're good.

And today was just my day I think.

 

[Daemon]

That time of the month again OS? #bleedblue

 

[Shri]

 

[OverratedSanity]

That time of the month again OS? #bleedblue

Took me a while to get this

 

[Shady Slim]

if somehow the kiwis lost then taylor would get several nominations imo

 

[hendrix]

That time of the month again OS? #bleedblue

omg

 

[Dan]

I shouldn't be laughing, but that is brilliant.