One Cloned Player

[marc71178]

if a player from the ROW side was cloned you people do realise that we would be forced to clone an aussie player - imagine 30 straight overs from McGraths, or Gilly or Punter at both ends of the pitch when batting

But you could only clone 1 person to be all 11 - which one would it be?

 

[marc71178]

So Marc, the fact that I think a hypothetical test between 11 Flintoff's and Australia would be a non contest and that i think Flintoff is slightly over-hyped makes me jealous does it??

For a start we're not even talking about Tests.

 

[marc71178]

Oram's better than Flitntoff anyway, just look at the test averages.
Flintoff is very overated and inconsistant. He could never play an innings like oram did vs australia.

And look at the ratings.

That'll be Flintoff 1 in ODI, 2 in Tests, Oram nowhere.

 

[Swervy]

where is psxpro when you want to see him make a fool out of himself

 

[SJS]

where is psxpro when you want to see him make a fool out of himself

Practicing

 

[Zinzan]

For a start we're not even talking about Tests.

Lame response. Obviously couldn't answer my question

 

[chaminda_00]

Oram has played 17 tests, its only fair to compare the two over the last 17 tests they have played.


Unfair you may say...Oram has only played 17 tests since his debut in Dec 2002, Flintoff has played 24 tests since then....

Interesting theories those one i thought it would be more relevent to compare Oram 17 Test performances to Flintoff first 17. As that shows how Oram compared to Flintoff at the same experiece level. We all know that players improve over time so it is unfair for Oram to compare Flintoff's last 17 Test. I know that most Flintoff supporter say he was picked too early so why don't u compare their performance at the same age ?

Jacob made his debut at 24, in the 17 Test after Flintoff was 24 his stats were:
Mat Runs HS BatAv 100 50 W BB BowlAv 5w Ct St
17 1022 142 40.88 2 7 41 5/58 40.24 1 10 0

A more broader view all matches after Flintoff was 24:
Mat Runs HS BatAv 100 50 W BB BowlAv 5w Ct St
27 1695 167 41.34 3 13 82 5/58 32.06 1 19 0

Compare this to Oram Stats:
Mat Runs HS BatAv 100 50 W BB BowlAv 5w Ct St
17 1002 126* 43.56 2 4 35 4/41 36.02 0 12 0

Looking at this more realistic comparision of both players Oram is slighlty better batsmen. Not much but considering Flintoff has hadly scored any runs aganist quality bowlers and Oram has got a hundred aganist the best bowling attack world ans one of the best of all time, he does get the edge over Flintoff in batting.

Bowling, looking at stats along Flintoff is a better bowler but if take in consider that Oram averages 30 with the ball when u don't include his bowling performances aganist Australia, there not that much different. The reason why i took this out was the fact that Flintoff has played Australia and therefore not tested aganist the top batting line on all surfaces (India are the best in the sub-conintent IMO).

All in all if ur talking Test Cricket their pretty even and depending on ur bais u would go one or the other. But this thread is for ODI and in that form Flintoff is better.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Flintoff's performance in the mid-90s is not in the least relevant to who would be the best clone at the current moment in time.

 

[marc71178]

Lame response. Obviously couldn't answer my question

No, I'm just answering the question that was asked and finding you debating it by changing the criteria.

 

[Swervy]

Interesting theories those one i thought it would be more relevent to compare Oram 17 Test performances to Flintoff first 17. As that shows how Oram compared to Flintoff at the same experiece level. We all know that players improve over time so it is unfair for Oram to compare Flintoff's last 17 Test. I know that most Flintoff supporter say he was picked too early so why don't u compare their performance at the same age ?

Jacob made his debut at 24, in the 17 Test after Flintoff was 24 his stats were:
Mat Runs HS BatAv 100 50 W BB BowlAv 5w Ct St
17 1022 142 40.88 2 7 41 5/58 40.24 1 10 0

A more broader view all matches after Flintoff was 24:
Mat Runs HS BatAv 100 50 W BB BowlAv 5w Ct St
27 1695 167 41.34 3 13 82 5/58 32.06 1 19 0

Compare this to Oram Stats:
Mat Runs HS BatAv 100 50 W BB BowlAv 5w Ct St
17 1002 126* 43.56 2 4 35 4/41 36.02 0 12 0

Looking at this more realistic comparision of both players Oram is slighlty better batsmen. Not much but considering Flintoff has hadly scored any runs aganist quality bowlers and Oram has got a hundred aganist the best bowling attack world ans one of the best of all time, he does get the edge over Flintoff in batting.

Bowling, looking at stats along Flintoff is a better bowler but if take in consider that Oram averages 30 with the ball when u don't include his bowling performances aganist Australia, there not that much different. The reason why i took this out was the fact that Flintoff has played Australia and therefore not tested aganist the top batting line on all surfaces (India are the best in the sub-conintent IMO).

All in all if ur talking Test Cricket their pretty even and depending on ur bais u would go one or the other. But this thread is for ODI and in that form Flintoff is better.

we are talking about how the players are now...someone said that Oram was a better player than Flintoff...as of this moment he quite obviously isnt, and to be perfectly honest, I dont think he will ever be a better cricketer than Flintoff

 

[sledger]

we are talking about how the players are now...someone said that Oram was a better player than Flintoff...as of this moment he quite obviously isnt, and to be perfectly honest, I dont think he will ever be a better cricketer than Flintoff

dont think anyone could have put that better, freddie is superior in all aspects of the game, and all forms of it.

 

[Zinzan]

No, I'm just answering the question that was asked and finding you debating it by changing the criteria.

The thread doesn't say "one cloned oneday player" does it? I assumed it was in a test match and my question was simply why does it make me jealous of Flintoff just because I think hypothetically that this great australian side would win?

Or does an objectionable view on a player suggest jealously does it??

 

[Neil Pickup]

The thread doesn't say "one cloned oneday player" does it? I assumed it was in a test match and my question was simply why does it make me jealous of Flintoff just because I think hypothetically that this great australian side would win?

Or does an objectionable view on a player suggest jealously does it??

The opening post says "if you could clone any player currently playing in world cricket to clone and have 11 of him. to play and beat aussie in an odi who would it be??"

So, yes, it does mention ODIs.

 

[age_master]

But you could only clone 1 person to be all 11 - which one would it be?

depends who against - vs NZ it would be McGrath cause the cant face him or bowl to him

vs the rest probably Punter or Warnie

 

[chaminda_00]

we are talking about how the players are now...someone said that Oram was a better player than Flintoff...as of this moment he quite obviously isnt, and to be perfectly honest, I dont think he will ever be a better cricketer than Flintoff

What makes you think he will not be better the fact that he had greater success at the same satge of his career or the fact that Flintoff greater technical faults in his batting then what Oram will ever have. This technical faults are clearly shown by his inability to play quailty bowlers like Pollock and Murali, whereas Oram scored one of the best hundred aganist Australia in recent times. Flintoff has done nothing with the bat in Test aganist any bowling attack of any note. He only scored runs aganist the Windies who are so good they let two Bangladeshis score hundreds aganist and he scored runs injury hit Kiwi bowling attack. Outside those two team who he scored runs aganist, no one. When it comes to his batting in Test Cricket he is a minnow and flat wicket specialist specialist and nothing else.

If u look at both their bowling at the same time in their careers Oram by far a better bowler and by the time that he get more experience at the highest level (same experience as Flintoff now) their no doubt he will be a better bowler. The fact that he averages 36 which is 10 times better then what Flintoff did at the same time shows that he will be allot better bowler then Flintoff.

The only thing that gets Flintoff close to Oram is that all Flintoff supporters want us to forget that he played Test Cricket from 1998 to 2003. It wasn't Andrew Flintoff that played it was his twin "Freddie Flintoff." If we did something simliar to players like Martyn, Langer, Hayden, Jaysuriya and Atapattu you could argue they are all time greats, which their not outside maybe Langer. If you take out the first half of these players career it is amazing what stats you would come up with, simliar if not better then the stats you come with for Flintoff when you take out the first five years of his career.

 

[Zinzan]

The opening post says "if you could clone any player currently playing in world cricket to clone and have 11 of him. to play and beat aussie in an odi who would it be??"

So, yes, it does mention ODIs.

Right you are

 

[Swervy]

What makes you think he will not be better the fact that he had greater success at the same satge of his career or the fact that Flintoff greater technical faults in his batting then what Oram will ever have. This technical faults are clearly shown by his inability to play quailty bowlers like Pollock and Murali, whereas Oram scored one of the best hundred aganist Australia in recent times. Flintoff has done nothing with the bat in Test aganist any bowling attack of any note. He only scored runs aganist the Windies who are so good they let two Bangladeshis score hundreds aganist and he scored runs injury hit Kiwi bowling attack. Outside those two team who he scored runs aganist, no one. When it comes to his batting in Test Cricket he is a minnow and flat wicket specialist specialist and nothing else.

If u look at both their bowling at the same time in their careers Oram by far a better bowler and by the time that he get more experience at the highest level (same experience as Flintoff now) their no doubt he will be a better bowler. The fact that he averages 36 which is 10 times better then what Flintoff did at the same time shows that he will be allot better bowler then Flintoff.

The only thing that gets Flintoff close to Oram is that all Flintoff supporters want us to forget that he played Test Cricket from 1998 to 2003. It wasn't Andrew Flintoff that played it was his twin "Freddie Flintoff." If we did something simliar to players like Martyn, Langer, Hayden, Jaysuriya and Atapattu you could argue they are all time greats, which their not outside maybe Langer. If you take out the first half of these players career it is amazing what stats you would come up with, simliar if not better then the stats you come with for Flintoff when you take out the first five years of his career.

how wrong you are

 

[chaminda_00]

how wrong you are

Is that all you have to say, shows that you know im right just can't face the truth

 

[marc71178]

The thread doesn't say "one cloned oneday player" does it?

Yes, it does actually, but why let the facts spoil your argument - you never normally do.

 

[marc71178]

depends who against - vs NZ it would be McGrath cause the cant face him or bowl to him

vs the rest probably Punter or Warnie

In all 3 cases you're weak in 1 or other of the forms, although it would allow Warne to extend his batting record for most runs without a ton!