Which cricket player performs/performed best under pressure?

[cricket player]

Because bad writing gets Neil vehwy vehwy angwy.

i did not say a bad word' if you glence at my post for a second

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

i did not say a bad word' if you glence at my post for a second

Not bad words. Bad writing. ie Grammar and whatnot. He's anal about those sorts of things.

 

[neutralguy]

lets stop this cronje's match fixing episode and only discuss tings related to the topic.

 

[Mr Casson]

Yeah I've been wondering what's up with that..

 

[Richard]

It's called evolution of discussion - title-topics are just a conversation-starter.

 

[neutralguy]

'evolution of discussion'.thats a good one mate.

 

[Richard]

Thanks.
Not like I invented it.

 

[tooextracool]

But this is NOT how it happened. How many times do I have to say the words "repeat offender" for this point to get through to you? According to his own confessions, Cronje was in bookmaker's pockets since '96. He was paid $US50,000 that year - through '97 he was paid $80,000 by Mukesh Gupta for match information. In 1997-99, he received at least three bribes and numerous gifts from bookmakers. In 2000, he took 50,000 rand to contrive a result in the rain-affected fifth test against England (which he achieved, by arranging a double innings forfeit).

All this before the Gibbs/Henry incident, which is just the one he was originally caught for.

Your grouping of all these offences into one crime makes NO SENSE. Not that the constant mistruths and evasions he committed after the 2000 Indian one-day series in order to cover up his crimes does either.

And as for contesting the ban, tough cheese, Hansie. The ban was for a friggin' reason, and he should have respected that. He was exactly the type of guy that needed to be kept AWAY from young cricketers. Don't be so disingenuous with this "if offering to do something for your country is a crime then please tell me what isnt?" rubbish.

if that is indeed the case, ie that cronje had taken money before 2000 and those instance you state have been proven, then you are right, he deserves to be treated the way he has. i wasnt aware of most of those instances and thought that he was dismissed based on one crime.

 

[Jono]

Heh, thanks for trying to bail me out on that one mate, but I'll willingly plead guilty to disrespect when it comes to Cronje.

To be honest, it kinda appalls me the things that can be said about Murali, a player that only ever inadvertently brought himself into question, and yet, Cronje, who deliberately, willingly, corrupted the game and worse still, corrupted others less experienced is still "loved by many".

Absolutely fantastic point. It's so ironic.

Here's an interesting article about it, quoting Gary Kirtsen who I respect very much, so I value what he has to say regarding the issue. The way Cronje acted within the young cricketers around him was nothing short of disgusting.

http://aus.cricinfo.com/link_to_database/ARCHIVE/CRICKET_NEWS/2004/DEC/118985_RSA_03DEC2004.html

 

[Richard]

Must get Gary Kirsten's autobiography.

 

[Link]

Graham Thorpe wins by more than a longshot!!

 

[Langeveldt]

Graham Thorpe wins by more than a longshot!!

Any reason?

 

[Link]

yeah.
the amount of match winning innings he has played, or the amount of crucial partnerships he has played a part in over the years. (200no against N Zealand with Freddie's 137 springs to mind)
Also the hundred in the West Indies last winter, when England scored 226 and he himself scored half of the runs.

 

[twctopcat]

Thorpe averages 65 in 2nd innings when playing to save the match(i.e for a win or draw). When the chips are down he is one of the best to have.

 

[Linda]

Whilst I would have dearly loved to have voted for Martyn, I voted for Steven Waugh.

 

[nookie_lk]

Bevan, Kirsten, sarwan, should also be there

 

[Richard]

(200no against N Zealand with Freddie's 137 springs to mind)

Useful that dropped catch 2nd ball, wasn't it?!

 

[marc71178]

Which of course means that he didn't score the runs under pressure doesn't it?

 

[Langeveldt]

yeah.
the amount of match winning innings he has played, or the amount of crucial partnerships he has played a part in over the years. (200no against N Zealand with Freddie's 137 springs to mind)
Also the hundred in the West Indies last winter, when England scored 226 and he himself scored half of the runs.

Fair enough

 

[Langeveldt]

Useful that dropped catch 2nd ball, wasn't it?!

Shocking innings, rubbish player... Doesnt count (Neither does Lara's 501 for that matter)