Geoffrey Boycott: ICC's Dream XI is a joke - it has no credibility

[Lillian Thomson]

Greg Chappell retired in his mid-30's to protect his batting average?????
Whenever you think this forum has reached it's highest possible level of stupidity there's always something else lurking around the corner.

 

[centurymaker]

Greg Chappell retired in his mid-30's to protect his batting average?????
Whenever you think this forum has reached it's highest possible level of stupidity there's always something else lurking around the corner.

retiring early has helped him being rated a tad higher because his figures look better than they probably would've had he played till the age of 37/38. ( I'm assuming that batsmen don't do as well as before in the last phase of their career)

he has played long enough but not long enough in comparison to other greats of his time.
i've been talking in relative terms.

edit
not only the figures, it has an effect on people's perception as well, as i have said earlier.

 

[Howe_zat]

Centurymaker, this is nonsense, stop it.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Whatever he might or might not have done had he played longer is of no relevance to anything or anyone. The idea that he deliberately retired early so that he'd be rated higher by a bunch of clueless statsmongers 25 years later is about as stupid as it gets.

 

[vcs]

It is absurd that someone would think a highly competitive professional sportsman, leave alone an ATG, would willingly give up competing at the highest level (while they were still more than capable of it), for something as nonsensical as "protecting an average".

 

[centurymaker]

Centurymaker, this is nonsense, stop it.

ponting- if he had listened to chappell
number of australians would've still rated him higher than his contemporaries. however, this late slump has affected, to some extent, people's perception of ponting as a batsman. (numbers have gone down too)

if had retired after the ashes in 09,
they would've said something along the lines
"he was still playing well when he retired prematurely so how can you say player x is now better than him just because he has done well after ponting's retirement"

the stuff i am saying applies to almost player.

And it's almost like investing. there's risk and return. if you carry on at their sort of age, you can really lose quite a bit of ground.

if you don't get what im trying to say now, then fmd don't think i can explain it better.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

No one is struggling to understand what you're saying. The problem is that it's complete bollox that matters only to a handful of the current statsmonger generation.

 

[Sanz]

retiring early has helped him being rated a tad higher because his figures look better than they probably would've had he played till the age of 37/38. ( I'm assuming that batsmen don't do as well as before in the last phase of their career)

he has played long enough but not long enough in comparison to other greats of his time.
i've been talking in relative terms.

edit
not only the figures, it has an effect on people's perception as well, as i have said earlier.

Greg was one of the few batsmen who were successful in almost every condition and almost every type of attack. He was admired universally and I don't remember anyone looking at his average to determine how good he really was as a batsman.

And how long he needed to play before he could be compared to someone like Gavaskar or Richards ? Gavaskar in 1985 (when he was Greg's age) was averaging around 50-51 and at the end of his career ended up with 50-51, why should we assume that Greg would not have scored at the same prolific rate when Gavaskar could.

By 1987 Ricahrds (same age when Chappel Retired) was averaging around 53, and ended up with an average of 50. So even if we assume that Greg would have slowed down with age, just like Richards did (although those who watched Richards and Chappell would tell you that Richards was more likely to decline faster than anyone else) he would still have ended up with an avg. around 50 after 120+ tests.

 

[centurymaker]

It is absurd that someone would think a highly competitive professional sportsman, leave alone an ATG, would willingly give up competing at the highest level (while they were still more than capable of it), for something as nonsensical as "protecting an average".

i retracted that statement i think?
said his avg had helped this generation rate him a tad higher.

pews i think rates him higher than viv (and we know that he's a stats man)

 

[Fusion]

In other news

If my aunty had balls she'd be my uncle
If I had never spent any of my wages ever I'd be filthy ****ing rich
If Britain had never invaded India...

I could go on all day

Come on, would that really be true?

 

[Prince EWS]

i retracted that statement i think?
said his avg had helped this generation rate him a tad higher.

pews i think rates him higher than viv (and we know that he's a stats man)

We also know PEWS doesn't punish a player for playing on when compared to another player. Anderson/Sidebottom post to confirm.

 

[centurymaker]

Greg was one of the few batsmen who were successful in almost every condition and almost every type of attack. He was admired universally and I don't remember anyone looking at his average to determine how good he really was as a batsman.

And how long he needed to play before he could be compared to someone like Gavaskar or Richards ? Gavaskar in 1985 (when he was Greg's age) was averaging around 50-51 and at the end of his career ended up with 50-51, why should we assume that Greg would not have scored at the same prolific rate when Gavaskar could.

By 1987 Ricahrds (same age when Chappel Retired) was averaging around 53, and ended up with an average of 50. So even if we assume that Greg would have slowed down with age, just like Richards did (although those who watched Richards and Chappell would tell you that Richards was more likely to decline faster than anyone else) he would still have ended up with an avg. around 50 after 120+ tests.

yea exactly my point
as then almost everyone would rate viv higher because of his awesome reputaion!!

(since their avgs/figures would almost be the same)

people= current generation who didn't see him play

i'll get back to this later. i need to get ready for uni

 

[Lillian Thomson]

i'll get back to this later

Don't bother, just go to bed you nutter.

 

[Sanz]

yea exactly my point
as then almost everyone would rate viv higher because of his awesome reputaion!!

(since their avgs/figures would almost be the same)

people= current generation who didn't see him play

i'll get back to this later. i need to get ready for uni

Many (if not most ) who watched both Richards and Chapell play, still rate IVAR higher regardless of the stats. IVAR was a freak.

If you didn't see him play, please read and watch before making silly comments that he was selfish or he retired early to protect his average or stuff like that.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Many (if not most ) who watched both Richards and Chapell play, still rate IVAR higher regardless of the stats. IVAR was a freak.

If you didn't see him play, please read and watch before making silly comments that he was selfish or he retired early to protect his average or stuff like that.

What he's trying to say is that people who DIDN'T see them play rate Chappell above Richards because of his higher batting average. It just isn't true save for a few bog-eyed Australians.

 

[oitoitoi]

Boycott's XI is certainly better than the ICC XI, personally would have had Barry Richards and Gavaskar opening as I reckon they'd fair better against the variety of condtions, types of bowlers etc. around today, though it's pretty much impossible to say. At first I thought Gilly ahead of Knott, but then I thought maybe neither of these 2, after all in a team this good the batting of a keeper will probably count for little, so best to go with the best pure keeper ever, and I'm not sure who that is tbh. Murali ahead of Warne (I'm still convinced that much of Warne's legend is thanks to the media, if Murali had been English or Australian or even Indian the general opinion would be very different), and I'm not sure about Lillee, after Marshall there were a lot of quicks that are there or there abouts. I think it's fair to say that Akram's the best left armer ever, but not sure if that's enough to get him into the side. I thought maybe Imran Khan actually, none of those players were particularly great captains, he's one of the very few truly great players that was a great captain too.

I wonder about SF Barnes, I suppose his stats speak for themselves, but if he had played today with all the technology and analysis available to players could he have been worked out like Mendis? Similarly I guess if Mendis had played 100 years ago would anyone have been able to read him? We saw how devastating he was at first against the best players of spin in the world, but he was quickly worked out, I'm sure in part thanks to replays etc. I'm also curious as to how different Barnes was from say an early Kumble.

 

[Burgey]

nah greg chappell is pure!! he wouldn't have just quit because he wanted to finish with a high avg (despite only just turning 35 at that time, and there being no decent replacement for him in aus), he's not the guy who told his brother to bowl under-arm...

you wont find a more cunning person

edit even if this actually wasn't true, it (premature retirement) still helped his avg and that should be taken into account when people rate him.

He quit because he had business interests, including but not limited to setting up a retail store in Sydney and Brisbane.

 

[GIMH]

Come on, would that really be true?

I actually worked it out in my head, how much money I'd have. Depends what you'd class as filthy rich I guess. But believe me, I cried a little when I worked out what I'd earned, and therefore spent.

 

[Fusion]

I actually worked it out in my head, how much money I'd have. Depends what you'd class as filthy rich I guess. But believe me, I cried a little when I worked out what I'd earned, and therefore spent.

Haha, fair enough. Well then, I suggest you don't think about all the future spending you're bound to do as that would push you towards depression!

 

[Top_Cat]

He quit because he had business interests, including but not limited to setting up a retail store in Sydney and Brisbane.

Yeah and coupled with that, I'm led to believe 35 was pretty old for a players to retire back then, especially since players still weren't getting paid megabucks for playing Tests, hence Chappell wanting to maximise business opportunities. This idea he retired to protect his average is a silly thing to say when there's absolutely zero direct or indirect info to suggest it.

(and I can't stand the man)