***Official*** Australia in England (The Ashes)

[marc71178]

Learn what mediocre means.

I think maybe you need to.

If they were so mediocre and Ramprakash and Hick weren't, how come the selectors kept picking them?

 

[LongHopCassidy]

Learn what mediocre means.

This is the same no contest as last time, people making utterly irrelevant comments, ignoring the context or not knowing what mediocre means.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=mediocre

"Moderate to inferior in quality; ordinary."

At Test level Ramprakash and Hick certainly were. I don't think insulting people's intelligence will justify your argument. Or win you many allies.

 

[Scaly piscine]

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=mediocre

"Moderate to inferior in quality; ordinary."

At Test level Ramprakash and Hick certainly were. I don't think insulting people's intelligence will justify your argument. Or win you many allies.

Ramprakash and Hick were not moderate or inferior in quality compared to Atherton/Hussain. They were both merely poor performers for reasons outside of their actual quality of their play, they still had the quality they just didn't always display it in Tests, it makes them poor Test players not mediocre - which as I keep saying relates to their quality of shots, defence, technique etc.

 

[Dasa]

Main Entry: me·di·o·cre
Pronunciation: "mE-dE-'O-k&r
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French, from Latin mediocris, from medius middle + Old Latin ocris stony mountain; akin to Latin acer sharp -- more at EDGE
: of moderate or low quality, value, ability, or performance

They were both merely poor performers

I think I posted this in the previous thread as well...

 

[Scaly piscine]

Main Entry: me·di·o·cre
Pronunciation: "mE-dE-'O-k&r
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French, from Latin mediocris, from medius middle + Old Latin ocris stony mountain; akin to Latin acer sharp -- more at EDGE
: of moderate or low quality, value, ability, or performance



I think I posted this in the previous thread as well...

OR performance and as I said last time dictionaries tend to waffle so they cover all the bases, including incorrect ones. Most dictionaries do not include performance in the definition

 

[Barney Rubble]

no iam not a muppet.......the english muppets are tec, richard, marc, scaly piscine, superkingdave, hinton, rubble, swervy, spacemonkey, halsey.
The nonsense posted by these guys is appalling.
the quality posters are people like Scallywag.

I'm flattered.

What exactly qualifies me for "muppet" status? I don't remember posting anything controversial enough on this board - ever - for anyone to disagree with strongly. Most of what I post is for my own personal gratification - I don't add much to the quality of this board. I know there are people who know more about the game than I do on here, so I try not to get into arguments - I just state my opinion and leave it at that. Isn't that what forums are for?

On a totally unrelated note........"I am" is two words - or one word with an apostrophe. Muppet.

 

[marc71178]

So you know more than the dictionary, right...

 

[Scaly piscine]

So you know more than the dictionary, right...

As I said some of them waffle on like thesauri and only a complete idiot would readily use/accept EVERY alternative definition or word listed. Also as I said before most dictionaries do not mention performance at all.

 

[marc71178]

So in spite of a dictionary defining something, it's still wrong.

We're also all complete idiots for daring to use a definition from the dictionary.

 

[Scaly piscine]

So in spite of a dictionary defining something, it's still wrong.

Look at a range of dictionaries and you'll get dictionaries defining the same word differently, they can't all be right. The majority don't mention performance because it's naff all to do with performance.

 

[tooextracool]

You don't honestly expect anyone to believe that any Test side would drop 90% of the slips catches that come their way, do you?.

hmm, i should have made myself clearer. i meant that out of 17 dropped catches in 5 tests, 15 came in the slip cordon.

And considering Warne generally bowls 20-odd overs in a Test day, his catching rate is pretty solid.

hes decent, but hes definetly not as great as he was made out to be.

 

[tooextracool]

I'm pretty sure that he was referring to the 03/04 series in Australia, when Warne was missing.

bit strange then that the 15 dropped catches in 5 tests, included the series in india where warne did play then.

 

[tooextracool]

The context was England players with 50 Tests since 1990ish, the fact that no-one managed a decent argument against Atherton & Hussain being the most mediocre in that bracket escapes the witless waffler. Still he spends every conscious moment trying to outpost Motson with equally nonsensical brain-dead tripe, so you wouldn't expect him to even manage to come up with one single point.

oh really?
its simply brilliant that you think that players like butcher, trescothick,ramprakash and hick all had more skill than those 2. but of course mental ability isnt a skill at all, hence we can now claim that yasir hameed is of a better quality than steve waugh.
and maybe just maybe the only reason why "no one managed a decent argument" against your insane post, is because of your utter childishness of putting almost everyone your ignore list.

 

[tooextracool]

Nope, Ramprakash had far more shots, class etc. than Hussain & Atherton - mediocre is not a measure of performance remember. Butcher is closer but I'd say he had more shots and class than Hussain & Atherton.

of course sherlock, so please, tell me how atherton who could play almost every shot in the book had less shots than butcher who only drives, cuts and flicks?
and since number of shots is now the benchmark for who is less mediocre, we can now claim that darren ganga is less mediocre than mark richardson.

 

[tooextracool]

Ramprakash and Hick were not moderate or inferior in quality compared to Atherton/Hussain. They were both merely poor performers for reasons outside of their actual quality of their play, they still had the quality they just didn't always display it in Tests, it makes them poor Test players not mediocre - which as I keep saying relates to their quality of shots, defence, technique etc.

and of course mental ability and shot selection has no relation to quality. pure genius

 

[LongHopCassidy]

Look at a range of dictionaries and you'll get dictionaries defining the same word differently, they can't all be right. The majority don't mention performance because it's naff all to do with performance.

So, the few definitions that match your context are to be taken as gospel truth, then?

 

[Scaly piscine]

So, the few definitions that match your context are to be taken as gospel truth, then?

The vast majority of definitions actually, if not all, relate mediocre to class or quality

 

[Scaly piscine]

Anyway getting back to the thread, England play their first Twenty20 international against Australia in 8 days time, seems like the Rose Bowl is still a somewhat bowler friendly, but even so there might be some high scores if the batsmen get going. I presume England's team will come from their squad of 14 named earlier and hopefully Australia will play a fairly typical Australian ODI side.

 

[King_Ponting]

i think the aussies will give tait a run in the 20/20 and rest mcgrath

 

[King_Ponting]

post 1000 on this thread YAY!!!!!!!!!!