sanjaykumar
Cricket Spectator
Kallis it is...He is not onla good batsman but a good bowler in the critical conditions..
How is that relevant when we are comparing them as batsmen?Kallis it is...He is not onla good batsman but a good bowler in the critical conditions..
Tbh, I think you are completely wrong on the IPL point.tbh, the fanboyism does get irritating for me too... But then there are quite a few irritating things about CW that we all get used too, and this is one of them for me.. I have my views on Sachin and always had them... Even he doesn't think his T20 success is any big news, coz he always was a great batsman and it was only a matter of adjusting to the format. But a LOT of his fans are going to say that he is a great BECAUSE he also succeeded in T20.. IMO, any all time great once given enough time to adjust to the format will stamp his authority on whatever brand of cricket he is asked to play. So him succeeding this IPL is not exactly a big thing to me coz I kinda expected it. But I know and expect that there will posts, articles and blogs outlining exactly why Sachin is the best since Bradman because of his success in IPL is some kind of a clincher... My advise is, they exist everywhere.. Get used to ignoring them.
nah, I did not mean here at CW at all mate.. But try reading some pieces and listening to some of my friends/colleagues/cousins here.. They will all declare that Sachin is the best since Bradman (and in some cases, the best ever) because he has now proved he is awesome in T20s too....Tbh, I think you are completely wrong on the IPL point.
They aren't saying it because he did well in the IPL.
It's because in 12 months he has dominated test, ODI and now T20 cricket. All after playing 20 years of international cricket!
That's not fanboyism, that's appreciating a ****ing fantastic player!
Ah okay.nah, I did not mean here at CW at all mate.. But try reading some pieces and listening to some of my friends/colleagues/cousins here.. They will all declare that Sachin is the best since Bradman (and in some cases, the best ever) because he has now proved he is awesome in T20s too....
I really dunno, Prince.. I mean, with 115 in each innings, there is a good chance the opposition may still draw or win the game but a 230 generally really sets you up to dominate the whole game.
I would take a player who can make his good form count a lot more than someone who cannot... Failures are common and it doesn't matter to me if you can get 20 runs more when you are in bad nick. The best batsmen producing 20 extra runs doesn't really change anything.. But between a 130 and a 210, there is a BIG difference..
ftfyI once called PEWS Prince.. ewwwwwwwwwwwws