On Mike Hussey...

[GIMH]

*Smackorthdoxing - getting a bollocking from vic_orthdox

Cribbageing - getting a bollocking from Prince EWS

Gelmaning - getting a bollocking from pasag

Towns-ing - getting kicked in the town halls

 

[Richard]

FTR, Towns-ing is getting a bollocking from Loony_BoB. Hasn't happened for a good couple of years now though, not since The Great Scandal Of The Spring (for antipodeans - who comprised most of the scandalees) Of '06/07. Oft referred to as Wave Of Repression #1.

 

[Richard]

Kneejerk reaction

"jeez that’s a bit rich coming from the bloke who drove that Ja/James/Jamie/Jimmy/Troughton nonsense over at least a dozen posts"

More measured Response

I knew a bloke at Uni who did sociology – couldn’t really see the point myself but I suppose he did get to spend nearly all of his final year doing a dissertation on the role of sport in society – it wasn’t a riveting read but when he asked me to I did him the courtesy of reading it before he submitted it - his conclusion was, surprise surprise, that sport, however hard fought, was the ultimate expression of friendship between the participants extending to it's partisan spectators - he then went on to discuss how the then epidemic of football hooliganism was not therefore related to the game itself and how it could be stopped – I remember telling him I thought his main proposal, all-seater stadia, was total b******* and that it would make the problem worse – I’m sure he’d be pleased to have a debrief with me now

Anyway the point I am laboriously coming to is that friendly banter is part of any game and cricket perhaps more than any other – I am not sure you fully appreciate that Richard as is evidenced by your expressed surprise when you were told recently that Mr Z and I were not being hostile in our exchanges over the Forums - alternatively we are simply on different wavelengths altogether – swapping a few pithy one liners with a “rival” supporter is, I am not ashamed to say, something that appeals to my sense of humour – I presume Mr Z’s as well and, it would seem, at least one of the more distinguished forum members as well.

I carefully read it’s rules when I joined CW and understand what flame wars and trolling are – none of the exchanges that Mr Z and I have had come remotely close to breaking those or any other rules so, although I wouldn't contemplate using it myself, if you don’t like it I presume your remedy lies in the use of the ignore list function?

No, certainly not, that'd deprive me of countless high-quality posts. I myself rather detest ignore-lists as a rule anyway, and only use it on one member currently as per an agreement between the moderators and the two of us.

BTW a few things...
1, never was I suggesting there was any flaming or trolling (hate that word at the best of times, it's poor), merely a little off-topicness. It happens sometimes when two people get in a posting exchange (regardless of whether it be of friendly nature, of unfriendly nature, or of the nature of friendly masquerading as unfriendly) of a short time. The rule I was referring to was the bit about "chatting about nothing".
2, I was always highly sceptical that yourself and "mr z" were actually genuine adversaries. It became very clear you weren't in no time at all. The post where I used the smiley and pretended to be surprised to hear you were actually such chums (which I've just looked for and can't find) was very much in jest.
3, I don't mind friendly banter in the slightest nor feel it's "not part of the game". But it is prohibited on these boards, because they're public message boards and if 2 posters, to use the phrasing of the forum rules "just start chatting about nothing" it bores the crap out of those not involved. You can debate the rights and wrongs of that if you want, and I'm not about to say you two should be stopped immediately and that I'd be coming down hard if I were a Mighty Mod. Yourself and zaremba's exchanges have far more sophistication than the likes of Jakester1288\Spinksy, Fiery\Flem274* and luffy\pinchy81 - to name but three. But that doesn't for mine mean they're any different - they're still totally off-topic. I'm simply surprised they interest anyone other than the two of you.
4, the whole James-derivative name thing was cringeworthy.
5, I'd just like to emphasise again that yourself and zaremba are two of the best posters I've come accross in my 5 years here at CW.n. Whenever you're not indulging in your own "friendly banter" I hang-on to every word of a post from the both of you. But the minute I get a whiff of your "friendly banter", I skip onto the next in-the-game-related posts. And I'm surprised other people who've done the same for other similar exchanges apparently don't do the same when you two are involved.

Either way, a throwaway five-liner has escalated into this, which was certainly not by any strech my intention.

 

[GIMH]

I find their exchanges to be much better than some of the spam you have mentioned. They are often cricket-related tbf. I'd be gutted to see them stop, as I said it was the best thing about the English Domestic Season thread. Surely mods have noticed them doing it before now, and not said anything?

 

[Richard]

Yeah I know - my point is that not saying anything is not really fair.

The posting doesn't really bother me - the moment two posters (any two posters) start chatting about nothing, as I say, I just skip past the posts, it's not difficult. What surprises me is that anyone would complain about spamming on some such occasions and say they love it on others.

Me, I have no interest in reading banter between Martin and "mr z" (though, and I'll say it again, I have every interest in reading their posts when not directed at one another). I'm very surprised anyone'd regard it as the highlight of the domestic season thread or love their double-act, much as you might very much like their posts when not involved in the double-act.

 

[GIMH]

Well, the only spam I can recall complaining about myself is Spinks/Jake, that's more because they start having teenage wars than anything else. When it's humorous and relevant as it is with these two, then it's an enjoyable read for mine.

The irony of having a discussion on this topic wouldn't be lost on me, so I guess we can agree to disagree. My opinion, though, is that it ain't spam.

 

[Prince EWS]

I find their exchanges to be much better than some of the spam you have mentioned. They are often cricket-related tbf. I'd be gutted to see them stop, as I said it was the best thing about the English Domestic Season thread. Surely mods have noticed them doing it before now, and not said anything?

Mods have noticed this whole conversation and still not said anything. Silence speaks a thousand words.

 

[GIMH]

Was more talking about real moderators, rather than you

 

[Richard]

Well, the only spam I can recall complaining about myself is Spinks/Jake, that's more because they start having teenage wars than anything else. When it's humorous and relevant as it is with these two, then it's an enjoyable read for mine.

The irony of having a discussion on this topic wouldn't be lost on me, so I guess we can agree to disagree. My opinion, though, is that it ain't spam.

I'm not saying it's neccessarily spam, but it is off-topic and it's something that's of no interest to me, despite the fact that all other posts from the two members are of great interest.

For mine, off-topic is off-topic and should really be treated the same. You can enjoy what you want, as I can enjoy (and not take the slightest interest in) what I want. But as I've said a few times, it does surprise me a little that you enjoy their mini-exchanges as generally all it tends to amount to is "ah you crafty old bugger fertang"; "well mr z, I think you might want to consider revising that statement". I don't really see what there is to enjoy in reading that, but each to their own.

 

[zaremba]

Richard and GIMH thanks for your words (insofar as they were were kind). I'm sure we'd all now be happy to return to the topic - see how we all stray off-topic from time to time? - which was Mike Hussey. My confession about Mike Hussey is that I am far more bothered than any grown man should be by the fact that his Test average is still around 70 . Every time I watch him bat I hope he fails simply so that the average may descend rapidly to the low 50s where I feel it belongs. I know that this is wrong by the way.

 

[GIMH]

An oft-asked question round these parts is whether England would have now gone 21 years without beating ye crims had Hussey been picked in 05. What think you, mr z?

 

[Richard]

Richard and GIMH thanks for your words (insofar as they were were kind). I'm sure we'd all now be happy to return to the topic - see how we all stray off-topic from time to time? - which was Mike Hussey. My confession about Mike Hussey is that I am far more bothered than any grown man should be by the fact that his Test average is still around 70 . Every time I watch him bat I hope he fails simply so that the average may descend rapidly to the low 50s where I feel it belongs. I know that this is wrong by the way.

I don't think it's particularly wrong TBH - I've long felt the exact same way. It's kinda natural. I alluded to it earlier in the thread, and I think it was Fuller who used the best descriptive term: "there's something vaguely surreal" and that inevitably brings in the element of "... how? How does he keep doing it?" and the subsequent desire for him to stop doing it.

 

[zaremba]

I was thinking the same thing myself today and the answer seems disconcertingly obvious with hindsight of his performances since his Test debut.

Assuming that with hindsight he should have played, who would he have replaced in that Aussie team? Maybe Hayden?

And who, again with the benefit of hindsight, should he have replaced? Perhaps Damien Martyn purely for calling Ricky P for a quick single at Trent Bridge?

 

[Richard]

An oft-asked question round these parts is whether England would have now gone 21 years without beating ye crims had Hussey been picked in 05. What think you, mr z?

Well aware that I'm not mr z... I've always thought that it's certainly possible (though far from certain given the fabulous quality of bowling if not catching on display from England that series), but that it was never, ever going to happen as Hussey was in 2004/05 regarded, rightly, as an opener, and the six batsmen in the Australian side (especially both openers) were regarded, rightly, as undroppable having established their calibre.

However, an(other) interesting question would be had Hayden not scored at The Oval and had Langer been fit for the opening game of 2005/06, would Hayden's Test career have been over? And would Hussey have been in for a long, prosperous stint in the opener's role, and no-one been any the wiser about his possible middle-order surreal-scoring?

 

[zaremba]

I don't think it's particularly wrong TBH - I've long felt the exact same way. It's kinda natural. I alluded to it earlier in the thread, and I think it was Fuller who used the best descriptive term: "there's something vaguely surreal" and that inevitably brings in the element of "... how? How does he keep doing it?" and the subsequent desire for him to stop doing it.

I also keep thinking that I hope he doesn't get killed in a traffic accident, not because that would be a bad thing, but to avoid him taking The Batting Average of an Immortal to the grave with him. I hope he plays for too long into a sad decline, a la Botham.

 

[Furball]

I was thinking the same thing myself today and the answer seems disconcertingly obvious with hindsight of his performances since his Test debut.

Assuming that with hindsight he should have played, who would he have replaced in that Aussie team? Maybe Hayden?

And who, again with the benefit of hindsight, should he have replaced? Perhaps Damien Martyn purely for calling Ricky P for a quick single at Trent Bridge?

Katich or Hayden.

Hayden not only had a poor series, but also had been shocking in the 18 months prior to the Ashes.

Had Langer not been injured and Hayden not tonned up at the Oval, then it's quite conceivable that Hayden's career would have been over at the International level.

 

[Richard]

There is absolutely no way that Hussey ever had the slightest of cases to play ahead of Katich that series.

Katich had already been dumped from the Test team on 2 (maybe 3) occasions for precisely no good reason. For it to happen for a third time would have been too much.

No-one questioned Katich's place coming into that series, and no-one had any right to question his place coming into that series. Like the Thorpe-Bell case, people advocating Hussey's inclusion ahead of Katich are acting 100% with hindsight, which as we know anyone can do.

This in addition to the fact that no-one had ever seriously considered Hussey as anything but an opener until 2005/06. He only ended-up in the middle-order by chance - Langer returned to fitness and both Langer and Hussey had an irrefutable case to play while a middle-order player (Clarke) had exhausted all the case he had left. Clarke had to go, Hussey had to stay.

Had Clarke's form been better (or, let's say, had Martyn never been dropped ridiculously as he was), we'll never know what would've happened with Hussey.

 

[GIMH]

Richard makes a good point, in that the way England bowled means there is no guarantee that Hussey would have made his dream start had he played in 05. Particularly given that Flintoff took 14 wickets from lefties in that series.

 

[zaremba]

There is absolutely no way that Hussey ever had the slightest of cases to play ahead of Katich that series.

Katich had already been dumped from the Test team on 2 (maybe 3) occasions for precisely no good reason. For it to happen for a third time would have been too much.

No-one questioned Katich's place coming into that series, and no-one had any right to question his place coming into that series. Like the Thorpe-Bell case, people advocating Hussey's inclusion ahead of Katich are acting 100% with hindsight, which as we know anyone can do.

IIRC before the series Katich being talked up by Steve Waugh as either the best batsman in the world or the likely top runscorer in the series (possibly both). He looked out of his depth in the Ashes which was extremely surprising.

 

[GIMH]

Wow, even if he had been dismissed in all of his Test innings he'd still average 56.86. Someone's probs already said this in the thread, but I was just looking at his profile on cricinfo and decided to work it out.