is hayden a slogger with lots of luck or just a very good batsmen

[Langeveldt]

I think the phrase "Lets agree to disagree" could do very well around these here parts...

 

[Rik]

I think the phrase "Lets agree to disagree" could do very well around these here parts...

Very true, but it doesn't happen because certain people need to have the last word, increase their post count, or just have a go at anyone who doesn't share their view if the matter arises again. If an old topic comes up, why not just respect the person has a view which you don't share, and you've already told that person that you don't share it at least 100 times and not say anything?

If I could I'd ban any arguement stemming from Murali, Harmison, Hayden or about weather people really are true to their nationality because they just keep coming back. I know for a fact if I mention Harmison I'm going to get the same arguement using the same stats proving exactly the same thing that they proved before, nothing! I will also get a few people telling me I'm an idiot, a few telling me I never give him any credit and another few agreeing with me. It's so boring and predictible.

 

[marc71178]

It's so boring and predictible.

Well if you don't like it, there's a simple answer...

 

[Rik]

Well if you don't like it, there's a simple answer...

I've got no problems with people posting their views, but people having to reply using the same arguement is the problem I have. Ie, just because I mention Harmison does not mean you have to reply to it, knowing full well all you are doing is trying to start up an old arguement which went nowhere. If you wished to reply then you could, but not using anything trying to lead the other person into another arguement. There's just no point. Why not just take note that the person has a right to state their view, and realise you don't have to reply to it? Especially when there is nothing to be gained from it!

 

[Rik]

So basically what you are saying is, if I say something you don't agree with, you are willing to fill the forum with arguements which have been and gone so many times, just because you can't resist replying? Coming from a staff member, I find this strange to say the least. Please could you explain why you feel you have to comment on something that you know full well is likely to take the thread off topic and waste a lot of people's time? Why do you feel the need to take what seems like a lot of frustration out on people just because of their views on cricket?

 

[krkode]

Gee, just because he gave a couple of chances early on in his mammoth innings doesn't mean he's a mediocre batsman. :rolleyes:

Many people, given the same chances as Hayden could probably never reach 380. Pointing to missed chances in a great innings is a ridiculous argument. Record books don't care about the number of times he was dropped during his 380 and rightly so.

What's stopping the "ifers" from saying if Hayden got out, then Ponting would make that 380, or that Hayden would make a 380 in the next match or that Streat would suddenly come out and take a tenner? We could talk about "ifs" and "buts" all day, but at the end of the day, they're not worth talking about because they don't count.

Hayden is a good batsman and anyone who disagrees is a squirrel.:P

 

[Rik]

Hayden is a good batsman and anyone who disagrees is a squirrel.:P

He is a good batsman, but the weakness of most attacks around the world at the moment, let alone Zimbabwe's, have constituted to a world record and an average of 57. He's a good batsman, but to rate him near Bradman, Lara or Tendulkar is a bit off. He's got a fine record, but people need to look to why it is so good to understand why he's not as highly rated as the names I mentioned.

 

[Rich2001]

I've got no problems with people posting their views, but people having to reply using the same arguement is the problem I have. Ie, just because I mention Harmison does not mean you have to reply to it, knowing full well all you are doing is trying to start up an old arguement which went nowhere. If you wished to reply then you could, but not using anything trying to lead the other person into another arguement. There's just no point. Why not just take note that the person has a right to state their view, and realise you don't have to reply to it? Especially when there is nothing to be gained from it!

Just Remember guys that while I have no problem with the whole same topic keep coming up, you need to understand that everyone is entitled to their own views and are allowed their say, if you don't like what they are saying remember you aren't forced to reply, at the end of the day please don't just agrue for the sake of it.

We all know at the end of the day when you guys agree on Harmy... Hell would have frozen over! :P - agree to disagree sometimes, by all means constructive post are welcome though

 

[krkode]

He is a good batsman, but the weakness of most attacks around the world at the moment, let alone Zimbabwe's, have constituted to a world record and an average of 57. He's a good batsman, but to rate him near Bradman, Lara or Tendulkar is a bit off. He's got a fine record, but people need to look to why it is so good to understand why he's not as highly rated as the names I mentioned.

Agreed.

Those men are great batsmen. Hayden's good.

Perhaps he'll join them one day.

The sad thing is, no bowling attack out there can really test the Aussie batsmen's potential except the Aussies themselves!

This leads us to (rightly so?) judge that Tendulkar and Lara especially, have it *really* difficult playing for their respective teams, especially when against Australia.

 

[marc71178]

I've got no problems with people posting their views, but people having to reply using the same arguement is the problem I have.

I'm not the one who keeps on bringing up a flawed argument, yet you choose to attack me?

 

[marc71178]

Why not just take note that the person has a right to state their view, and realise you don't have to reply to it?

Erm, it's a public forum, and I have much right to post my view as anyone else, so how come you single me out, just because I happen to reply to a view that someone else has?

 

[Rik]

Erm, it's a public forum, and I have much right to post my view as anyone else, so how come you single me out, just because I happen to reply to a view that someone else has?

First of all, I did not single you out, I stated a view that I share about quite a few people who can't resist commenting on posts.

Also I then singled you out afterwards because, unlike most people on this forum, you tend to have to comment on anything you don't agree with, including how stupid the person is in your view.

 

[Rik]

I'm not the one who keeps on bringing up a flawed argument, yet you choose to attack me?

Unsurprisingly I find the only flaw in your arguement. But then, I'm not perfect am I?

 

[Rik]

Agreed.

Those men are great batsmen. Hayden's good.

Perhaps he'll join them one day.

The sad thing is, no bowling attack out there can really test the Aussie batsmen's potential except the Aussies themselves!

This leads us to (rightly so?) judge that Tendulkar and Lara especially, have it *really* difficult playing for their respective teams, especially when against Australia.

Good to see I can allways have a good discussion with you (what's your name ). Allways have, hopefully allways will

Hmmmm, Tendulkar, he does play a lot in the land where batsmen bat on dead pitches, but I would never doubt his ability overseas or in general. A true great

 

[marc71178]

First of all, I did not single you out, I stated a view that I share about quite a few people who can't resist commenting on posts.

But have never posted when others comment - looks like singling out to me.

Also I then singled you out afterwards because, unlike most people on this forum, you tend to have to comment on anything you don't agree with, including how stupid the person is in your view.

So I am an active poster with strong views, since when was that a crime worthy of an active witch-hunt?