*Official* South Africa in England Thread

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Yes but....

1/ Bond hasn't been around for as long as Lee at Test level.

and

2/ Bond's support is from Oram, Tuffey and seamer by committee... it's neither established nor is it of the class of the Australian supporting cast- McGrath and Gillespie.

 

[Craig]

Despite the fact that a lot of Test cricket is 3 and a half to 4 an over?

The only reason why a lot of Test cricket goes at 3.5 to 4 runs an over is because the bowlers allow the batsmen too score at that rate. If they were accurate enough, that wouldnt happen.

You know cricket is a simple game to work out (well I do) yet there are people who complictate it (not talking about people on here).

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

The only reason why a lot of Test cricket goes at 3.5 to 4 runs an over is because the bowlers allow the batsmen too score at that rate. If they were accurate enough, that wouldnt happen.

That doesn't change the fact that alot of Test cricket is between 3.5 to 4 RPO. IMO the game heavily favours batsmen these days.

 

[marc71178]

The only reason why a lot of Test cricket goes at 3.5 to 4 runs an over is because the bowlers allow the batsmen too score at that rate. If they were accurate enough, that wouldnt happen.

Give it a rest - Batsman are naturally more aggressive now, the bowling isn't any worse.

And by that token, you've just made Ntini sound like a really good bowler then since he only "allows" batsmen to score at 3.14 per over.

 

[Rik]

You are getting off the topic here...the whole arguement was that Ntini suffers from innacuracy, like any other bowler. So I don't know where you lot have gone off to. Ntini is a fast bowler who trys to get wickets, therefor he will go for a few, just like Anderson.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

This is what I was saying - he's a strike bowler.

 

[Rik]

This is what I was saying - he's a strike bowler.

But the whole arguement started when Marc said he didn't suffer from innaccuracy more than any other bowler, which is not true. Ntini, Brett Lee, Jimmy Anderson, Waqar Younis ect. ect. are all strike bowlers who will go for runs but take wickets. Only Waqar has been able to marry them to low average, therefor his standing as a great bowler.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Only Waqar has been able to marry them to low average, therefor his standing as a great bowler.

Well stated Rik! I'm shocked. That concussion seems to have done you well.

 

[Rik]

Well stated Rik! I'm shocked. That concussion seems to have done you well.

Not in the headache department, but maybe in "can't be arsed to argue about petty things"

 

[marc71178]

Not in the headache department, but maybe in "can't be arsed to argue about petty things"

Hmm, you seem to have used the word petty a lot recently in occasions when you're tending to lose the discussion. Wonder if there's a correlation there?

 

[marc71178]

But the whole arguement started when Marc said he didn't suffer from innaccuracy more than any other bowler, which is not true.

Economy rates of current bowlers:

Bichel - 3.36
Lee - 3.50
Anderson - 3.56
Caddick - 3.09
Gough - 3.30
Bond - 3.46
Tuffey - 3.18
Nehra - 3.14
Khan - 3.20
Sami - 3.20
Shoaib - 3.27
Dillon - 3.05
Lawson - 3.41
Collins - 3.12

Now, the retired Gough apart, how many of those would not play their country's next Test if unfit - all but Bichel I reckon.

 

[Rik]

Economy rates of current bowlers:

Bichel - 3.36
Lee - 3.50
Anderson - 3.56
Caddick - 3.09
Gough - 3.30
Bond - 3.46
Tuffey - 3.18
Nehra - 3.14
Khan - 3.20
Sami - 3.20
Shoaib - 3.27
Dillon - 3.05
Lawson - 3.41
Collins - 3.12

Now, the retired Gough apart, how many of those would not play their country's next Test if unfit - all but Bichel I reckon.

Marc, this is about innacuracy and Ntini so what has this got to do with it?

 

[Rik]

Hmm, you seem to have used the word petty a lot recently in occasions when you're tending to lose the discussion. Wonder if there's a correlation there?

Interisting since I'm not loosing an arguement. Marc, you seem to have forgotten the whole point of the said arguement, namely the fact that Ntini suffers from Innacuracy, which is true of him as well as any other bowler, they are all human remember. So, Marc, please explain why I'm loosing an arguement you can't even keep to the point on?

 

[marc71178]

Marc, this is about innacuracy and Ntini so what has this got to do with it?

Ntinti's eco rate is better than almost everyone on that list, as I said he was no worse than the majority of other bowlers, as shown by this list.

 

[marc71178]

But the whole arguement started when Marc said he didn't suffer from innaccuracy more than any other bowler, which is not true.

. Marc, you seem to have forgotten the whole point of the said arguement, namely the fact that Ntini suffers from Innacuracy, which is true of him as well as any other bowler, they are all human remember.

Rik, which of these points do you want to take - first you attack me for saying something, then you restate the same point.

 

[Rik]

Ntinti's eco rate is better than almost everyone on that list, as I said he was no worse than the majority of other bowlers, as shown by this list.

*Thumps head on table*

Marc! Please someone before I go crazy! I NEVER said Ntini was the only bowler to suffer from innacuracy. Seriously, talk about arguing for the heck of it! The WHOLE arguement started when Craig said Ntini suffered from INNACURACY then you go off and talk about him having an econ rate better than other bowlers' as if he's never bowled a bad ball in his life. Seriously Marc, what on earth are you on about? Ntini has been bowling all-sorts live on TV for the last few weeks, how could you possibly miss that?

 

[Rik]

Rik, which of these points do you want to take - first you attack me for saying something, then you restate the same point.

1st

I did not attack you, attacking someone can quite easily be found in the comment you made about my use of the word "Petty".

2nd

I reinstated the point in the hope it might get through to you, since you cannot seem to grasp it.

 

[marc71178]

I NEVER said Ntini was the only bowler to suffer from innacuracy.

So what did you mean by the comment I have now quoted on more than one occasion saying I'm wrong for saying that very thing?

Seriously, talk about arguing for the heck of it!

You seem to be doing enough of that yourself.

The WHOLE arguement started when Craig said Ntini suffered from INNACURACY then you go off and talk about him having an econ rate better than other bowlers' as if he's never bowled a bad ball in his life.

Where did I say he'd never bowled a bad ball? Oh, that's right I didn't, I just said he was no worse than most other bowlers.

 

[marc71178]

I did not attack you, attacking someone can quite easily be found in the comment you made about my use of the word "Petty".

You said my point was not true, then you made the same point yourself - yet I'm in the wrong. OK....

I reinstated the point in the hope it might get through to you, since you cannot seem to grasp it.

What, you mean the point I made in the first place - no I don't grasp that point that I made because I only said it!

 

[Rik]

So what did you mean by the comment I have now quoted on more than one occasion saying I'm wrong for saying that very thing?




You seem to be doing enough of that yourself.




Where did I say he'd never bowled a bad ball? Oh, that's right I didn't, I just said he was no worse than most other bowlers.

No Marc, let me explain, I said Ntini suffered from Innacuracy, you said he didn't, that's how an arguement works. Now I don't care if you feel you have won or anything else, seriously Marc, if you need the ego rush hell here have this victory on me. I really, quite simply cannot be arsed with arguing with someone who only comes on here to get his daily kick. I have so many more interisting things to do, and I've just realised how much time I've wasted even writing this post.