Semi Finals

[Prince EWS]

You have not heard of Betting agencies employing ex-cricketers then .. Have you no idea about how betting agencies set odds.... Have you heard of Ken Rutherford ... who do you think he works for and why do you think they employ him.... Not for his looks I can assure you.

They'd employ him so they get some cricket expertise, obviously. But they'd use his expertise to predict what odds people would bet at to achieve a profit regardless of the result. You've managed to miss my point by a larger amount every time I've posted.

 

[Flem274*]

You can't say it for me though - as much as JASON wants to believe that I'm a New Zealander. Ironically, Fiery once thought I was an Englishman as well. Perhaps I should make my Australian-ness more obvious.

Yeah thats true, though really there is'nt much between the players. Maybe Fulton has a better temperament. What's your thoughts? How come Fiery thought you ere an englishman?

 

[Prince EWS]

You are a South African living in the outer western bushes of Sydney - Its quite clear .

First time I've been accused of being a South African! That's another one I can add to my profile. For the record, I'm the decendant of a man who played in Australia's first test match - but you're right, it doesn't get much more South African than that.

 

[JASON]

average isnt everything. u can see he's got talent by just looking at him.

Dinu , I hope you will be here tomorrow so that we can analyse the SA -Australia game in depth and see who choked and when.

 

[pasag]

First time I've been accused of being a South African! That's another one I can add to my profile. For the record, I'm the decendant of a man who played in Australia's first test match - but you're right, it doesn't get much more South African than that.

 

[Flem274*]

First time I've been accused of being a South African! That's another one I can add to my profile. For the record, I'm the decendant of a man who played in Australia's first test match - but you're right, it doesn't get much more South African than that.

Just Pakistan, India, Sri Lanka and the windies to go now

 

[Prince EWS]

Yeah thats true, though really there is'nt much between the players. Maybe Fulton has a better temperament. What's your thoughts? How come Fiery thought you ere an englishman?

He thought I was an Englishman because I defended the batting of Paul Collingwood in one of the early CB Series games.

My thoughts on Fulton and Tharanga have been well publicised in this thread so if you want a full idea, I suggest you read my previous posts, but it can probably be summed up by "Fulton is infinitely better than Tharanga at this stage" which I'm sure I've said a few times already.

 

[Dissector]

And again, that is completely besides the point, considering the fact that he averages so poorly against decent attacks. If he did score a hundred against India, then it would have been counted in the above analysis.



The attack England fielded in that series was not any better than what Bangladesh have put out in recent times, IMO. Collingwood and Dalrymple basically led the attack as England's best bowlers - other options to turned to included Tim Bresnan!!

As for Plunkett, you really do like to take one good performance and blow it out of proportion, ignoring all the other rubbish performances a player has put in, don't you? Plunkett bowled well against Australia. It's probably one of the only times he has ever bowled well in his international career though - and he certainly bowled absolutely pies against Sri Lanka, so it was no great achievement to score runs against him. I reckon Plunkett himself would have fancied his own bowling in that series.



Fulton averages 35.48 against ODI-standard bowling attacks, for the record. He averages 52 against Sri Lanka, too, just for a matter of interest...

If you can arbitrarily take England out of the equation, why not take the Chappell-Hadlee games out as well when Australia was bowling complete rubbish on small grounds? For that matter I think the Bangladeshi ODI bowling is quite decent today and I don't think you can take them out of the equation either. Fulton failed in both his innings against Bangladesh while Tharanga has scored against them. Basically you can play around with statistics chopping this team and that but there is no evidence that Fulton is "far better" than Tharanga.

 

[JASON]

They'd employ him so they get some cricket expertise, obviously. But they'd use his expertise to predict what odds people would bet at to achieve a profit regardless of the result. You've managed to miss my point by a larger amount every time I've posted.

You miss my points by even larger amount ...that I am not going to bother replying your posts...besides I have something better to do than replying to some of your repetitive posts... I hope you find someone else to keep you company here ..

 

[Flem274*]

If you can arbitrarily take England out of the equation, why not take the Chappell-Hadlee games out as well when Australia was bowling complete rubbish on small grounds? For that matter I think the Bangladeshi ODI bowling is quite decent today and I don't think you can take them out of the equation either. Fulton failed in both his innings against Bangladesh while Tharanga has scored against them. Basically you can play around with statistics chopping this team and that but there is no evidence that Fulton is "far better" than Tharanga.

Is Tharanga a opener by trade or is he "manufactured" like two metre Peter?

Just wondering because that would make them extremely similar. Fulton usually bats 3-5

 

[JASON]

First time I've been accused of being a South African! That's another one I can add to my profile. For the record, I'm the decendant of a man who played in Australia's first test match - but you're right, it doesn't get much more South African than that.

And for the record I am a descendant of Alfred Mynn (I suspect you may not know or even have heard of this individual .... may be the nearest sports bookshop might help you )

And for the record....SL thrashed NZ by 81 runs[ though the margin could easily have been 130 plus runs....(given the 9th wicket fell around the score of 150) and the game as a contest had ended by about the 25th over of NZ innings)] and the last time SL beat NZ by 6 wickets coasting to a victory with 5 overs to spare .

 

[Prince EWS]

If you can arbitrarily take England out of the equation, why not take the Chappell-Hadlee games out as well when Australia was bowling complete rubbish on small grounds?

Because of an attack of Bracken-Tait-McGrath-Hogg-Watson is clearly ODI standard, while Harmison-Bresnan-Plunkett-Mahmood-Dalrymple isn't. In fact, the former is STILL the Australian attack!

Fulton failed in both his innings against Bangladesh while Tharanga has scored against them.

Yeah, so you've established that Tharanga is better at inflating his average against substandard bowling attacks than Fulton is. I don't see how being able to belt Bangladesh makes you a better player though - rarely will such a feat actually be very useful. Averaging 10 runs higher against good bowling though is something that sets a player apart.

Basically you can play around with statistics chopping this team and that but there is no evidence that Fulton is "far better" than Tharanga.

So if I'm not allowed to use statistics, what other evidence is there available to suggest one player is better than another? Prove to me that 3+3=6 without using maths please. If you can't, there's no evidence of it...

 

[Dissector]

IIRC Tharanga is a regular test opener though not a very successful one.

 

[Prince EWS]

And for the record....SL thrashed NZ by 81 runs[ though the margin could easily have been 130 plus runs....(given the 9th wicket fell around the score of 150) and the game as a contest had ended by about the 25th over of NZ innings)] and the last time SL beat NZ by 6 wickets coasting to a victory with 5 overs to spare .

Yeah, and your point? I never disputed that, nor did I ever say New Zealand deserved to win, nor did I "blame" the loss on anything. Well played Sri Lanka, deserved finalists based on their performances in this World Cup.

 

[Prince EWS]

Is Tharanga a opener by trade or is he "manufactured" like two metre Peter?

Just wondering because that would make them extremely similar. Fulton usually bats 3-5

Fulton and Tharanga are completely dis-similar, actually.

And for the record, Tharanga is a genuine opener. Just a poor one thus far.

 

[Flem274*]

IIRC Tharanga is a regular test opener though not a very successful one.

Ok thanks for that. He seems to have some talent though so he may come good. With any luck we will get rid of Bracewell and our players won't have to play in stupid positions anymore. I still can't believe they tried Fulton as a test opener. They did the same to Matthew Sinclair a few years back also.

Bond was not at the peak of his powers IMO and there is no safety net in terms of seam bowling if he has an off day, which even the best have. Thank god we have some decent spinners in NZ.

 

[Flem274*]

Fulton and Tharanga are completely dis-similar, actually.

And for the record, Tharanga is a genuine opener. Just a poor one thus far.

I meant similar situations. Middle order player asked to open because the proper openers are either injured or useless. Sorry for not being clear about that.

 

[Athlai]

I think that national pride aside. I can safely say, Sri Lanka out played us.
And I hope they do well in their next game against whoever it may be. A well deserved victory.

 

[Dissector]

Because of an attack of Bracken-Tait-McGrath-Hogg-Watson is clearly ODI standard, while Harmison-Bresnan-Plunkett-Mahmood-Dalrymple isn't. In fact, the former is STILL the Australian attack!



Yeah, so you've established that Tharanga is better at inflating his average against substandard bowling attacks than Fulton is. I don't see how being able to belt Bangladesh makes you a better player though - rarely will such a feat actually be very useful. Averaging 10 runs higher against good bowling though is something that sets a player apart.



So if I'm not allowed to use statistics, what other evidence is there available to suggest one player is better than another? Prove to me that 3+3=6 without using maths please. If you can't, there's no evidence of it...

I believe McGrath missed one of those games but anyway the point is that the reputation of the bowling doesn't matter if they are bowling rubbish as Australia was in that series. Personally I would rate runs against BD in this WC higher than runs in the recent Chappell Hadlee.

Really all that Fulton has done in his career are two good series at home in the Chappell Hadlee and a relatively lacklustre SL side ( they were playing quite poorly at that time and it's revealing that Fulton fared much worse against the improved SL side that played recently). His record outside NZ is throughly ordinary.

 

[Flem274*]

I think that national pride aside. I can safely say, Sri Lanka out played us.
And I hope they do well in their next game against whoever it may be. A well deserved victory.

Yeah it's fair to say we were creamed. Now everyone is deciding if Tharanga or Fulton is better. Good debate.