honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
You're proceeding under the mistaken belief HB is posting in good faith. He very, very, very, very rarely does.
You're proceeding under the mistaken belief HB is posting in good faith. He very, very, very, very rarely does.
I didnt mean to imply Warne was at his best and I obviously implied the entire attack with the throwaway "Peak McWarne" line but literally every other post of mine says he was not at his best but was still bowling well enough, not "crap" as you seem to imagine. I find it funny that you find the intransigence so confusing when so much of it is from your own side.How was that not obvious? That was the only thing I was responding to.
That's part of why your intransigence was so confusing, it was still a very strong attack. I didn't get why you were refusing to admit that Warne wasn't at his best because it didn't really change the point. You can edit the post if you want but I don't really see the point
The lack of substantive reply in this instance constitutes an admission.
lawyeredThe lack of substantive reply in this instance constitutes an admission.
Warne's mum drugged him, ever tried bowling after the heartbreak of a family member betraying you? Clearly why Warne became a man of the night and got hammered by India.Warne once had the flu. Every hammering he took since is excused because have you ever tried bowling after the flu?
There have been many attacks as good or even better than peak McWarne.How many home batsman did that against McWarne at their peak like in 99?
These attacks are on par or betterMany?