Atherton on Lara

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/serialisations/article3694486.ece

Real quality cricket writer, is Athers. The best in the business at the moment, imo.

Only one reason prevents this observer from placing Lara at the apex of modern West Indian batsmen. Against extreme pace he got hit too often, and he could seem extraordinarily jumpy at the crease. I’ve often wondered what kind of effect removing helmets would have on modern-day players, a hypothetical that doesn’t apply to Vivian Richards.

Well said Athers.

And thats why I said IVA was the best batsman i've ever seen on the other thread.

JKLever wrote:

Only one reason prevents this observer from placing Lara at the apex of modern West Indian batsmen. Against extreme pace he got hit too often, and he could seem extraordinarily jumpy at the crease. I’ve often wondered what kind of effect removing helmets would have on modern-day players, a hypothetical that doesn’t apply to Vivian Richards.

Well said Athers.

And thats why I said IVA was the best batsman i've ever seen on the other thread.

And Bradman compared to the likes of SRT.

Yeah, a good article. However, it's a little trite for me as is always the case with Atherton. He seems to feel that if he denigrates himself he can say what he likes as matter of fact as he wishes. It's a bit: "Yeah, I see what you're saying Athers, now f*ck off you c*nt".

JKLever wrote:

Only one reason prevents this observer from placing Lara at the apex of modern West Indian batsmen. Against extreme pace he got hit too often, and he could seem extraordinarily jumpy at the crease. I’ve often wondered what kind of effect removing helmets would have on modern-day players, a hypothetical that doesn’t apply to Vivian Richards.

Well said Athers.

And thats why I said IVA was the best batsman i've ever seen on the other thread.

Rubbish. Not your preference for Viv, but the "I’ve often wondered what kind of effect removing helmets would have on modern-day players.." $hit.

Oh yeah? I wonder what would have been the affect of playing non stop Tests, ODI and now 20:20 cricket on Bradman.

The answer is the same both ways. The great players would have adjusted fine. The rest would have coped. So f*ck off.

Disagree there Furry.

Sure they would have adapted but the way modern players can plant their foot down the wicket at ease these days is a joke...

furriner wrote:

JKLever wrote:

Only one reason prevents this observer from placing Lara at the apex of modern West Indian batsmen. Against extreme pace he got hit too often, and he could seem extraordinarily jumpy at the crease. I’ve often wondered what kind of effect removing helmets would have on modern-day players, a hypothetical that doesn’t apply to Vivian Richards.

Well said Athers.

And thats why I said IVA was the best batsman i've ever seen on the other thread.

Rubbish. Not your preference for Viv, but the "I’ve often wondered what kind of effect removing helmets would have on modern-day players.." $hit.

Oh yeah? I wonder what would have been the affect of playing non stop Tests, ODI and now 20:20 cricket on Bradman.

The answer is the same both ways. The great players would have adjusted fine. The rest would have coped. So f*ck off.

So what would SRT have averaged against bodyline?

taipan wrote:

furriner wrote:

JKLever wrote:

Only one reason prevents this observer from placing Lara at the apex of modern West Indian batsmen. Against extreme pace he got hit too often, and he could seem extraordinarily jumpy at the crease. I’ve often wondered what kind of effect removing helmets would have on modern-day players, a hypothetical that doesn’t apply to Vivian Richards.

Well said Athers.

And thats why I said IVA was the best batsman i've ever seen on the other thread.

Rubbish. Not your preference for Viv, but the "I’ve often wondered what kind of effect removing helmets would have on modern-day players.." $hit.

Oh yeah? I wonder what would have been the affect of playing non stop Tests, ODI and now 20:20 cricket on Bradman.

The answer is the same both ways. The great players would have adjusted fine. The rest would have coped. So f*ck off.

So what would SRT have averaged against bodyline?

Possibly 45.56.

JKLever wrote:Disagree there Furry.

Sure they would have adapted but the way modern players can plant their foot down the wicket at ease these days is a joke...

Fair point. But good and great players adjust. Had the modern players been born in that era they too would have adjusted. That is why they are good at what they do.

taipan wrote:

furriner wrote:

JKLever wrote:

Only one reason prevents this observer from placing Lara at the apex of modern West Indian batsmen. Against extreme pace he got hit too often, and he could seem extraordinarily jumpy at the crease. I’ve often wondered what kind of effect removing helmets would have on modern-day players, a hypothetical that doesn’t apply to Vivian Richards.

Well said Athers.

And thats why I said IVA was the best batsman i've ever seen on the other thread.

Rubbish. Not your preference for Viv, but the "I’ve often wondered what kind of effect removing helmets would have on modern-day players.." $hit.

Oh yeah? I wonder what would have been the affect of playing non stop Tests, ODI and now 20:20 cricket on Bradman.

The answer is the same both ways. The great players would have adjusted fine. The rest would have coped. So f*ck off.

So what would SRT have averaged against bodyline?

I'll answer that if you tell me how long would Bradman have lasted playing the virtual 24/7/365 cricket of these days? How long before someone worked him out via video analysis?

PearlJ wrote:

taipan wrote:

furriner wrote:

JKLever wrote:

Only one reason prevents this observer from placing Lara at the apex of modern West Indian batsmen. Against extreme pace he got hit too often, and he could seem extraordinarily jumpy at the crease. I’ve often wondered what kind of effect removing helmets would have on modern-day players, a hypothetical that doesn’t apply to Vivian Richards.

Well said Athers.

And thats why I said IVA was the best batsman i've ever seen on the other thread.

Rubbish. Not your preference for Viv, but the "I’ve often wondered what kind of effect removing helmets would have on modern-day players.." $hit.

Oh yeah? I wonder what would have been the affect of playing non stop Tests, ODI and now 20:20 cricket on Bradman.

The answer is the same both ways. The great players would have adjusted fine. The rest would have coped. So f*ck off.

So what would SRT have averaged against bodyline?

Possibly 45.56.

Disagree. 51.22. I am certain of it.

Personally I loathe this "Oohh, they play SO much cricket these days". Bullshit. They play more international cricket, certainly. Not more cricket though, IMO.

furriner wrote:
Disagree. 51.22. I am certain of it.

I'm think more along the lines of 25.67.

Brass Monkey wrote:Personally I loathe this "Oohh, they play SO much cricket these days". Bullshit. They play more international cricket, certainly. Not more cricket though, IMO.

Personally I loathe this "Oooh, cricketers in 't'old days wuz giants walking the earth, mun, not the pansies you see today".

Bradman aside, they're the same.

Brass Monkey wrote:

furriner wrote:
Disagree. 51.22. I am certain of it.

I'm think more along the lines of 25.67.

You missed a couple of not outs. That changed the average a fair bit.

PearlJ wrote:

taipan wrote:

furriner wrote:

JKLever wrote:

Only one reason prevents this observer from placing Lara at the apex of modern West Indian batsmen. Against extreme pace he got hit too often, and he could seem extraordinarily jumpy at the crease. I’ve often wondered what kind of effect removing helmets would have on modern-day players, a hypothetical that doesn’t apply to Vivian Richards.

Well said Athers.

And thats why I said IVA was the best batsman i've ever seen on the other thread.

Rubbish. Not your preference for Viv, but the "I’ve often wondered what kind of effect removing helmets would have on modern-day players.." $hit.

Oh yeah? I wonder what would have been the affect of playing non stop Tests, ODI and now 20:20 cricket on Bradman.

The answer is the same both ways. The great players would have adjusted fine. The rest would have coped. So f*ck off.

So what would SRT have averaged against bodyline?

Possibly 45.56.

Does he even average that against SA?

furriner wrote:
Personally I loathe this "Oooh, cricketers in 't'old days wuz giants walking the earth, mun, not the pansies you see today".

Bradman aside, they're the same.

I'm not from Yorkshire, you Delhi c*nt.

You only have to look at the inordinate amount of overs bowled or batting innings faced to see how much they played.

furriner wrote:
You missed a couple of not outs. That changed the average a fair bit.

Retired hurts. You're right.

Brass Monkey wrote:

furriner wrote:
Personally I loathe this "Oooh, cricketers in 't'old days wuz giants walking the earth, mun, not the pansies you see today".

Bradman aside, they're the same.

I'm not from Yorkshire, you Delhi c*nt.

You only have to look at the inordinate amount of overs bowled or batting innings faced to see how much they played.

I'm not from Delhi, you which -city- were- you- from- again c*nt.

Brass Monkey wrote:

furriner wrote:
Disagree. 51.22. I am certain of it.

I'm think more along the lines of 25.67.

18.25 is my calculation ... 8 innings, 8 not outs.

furriner wrote:
I'm not from Delhi, you which -city- were- you- from- again c*nt.

I didn't think you were. I just wanted to show you the pain it causes when you get accused of being some **** from some ****hole.

My personal experience has been that I played fast bowling better without a helmet. Never got hit, except when the helmet sucked me into playing lazy shots.

Of course, the bowlers were not Wasim Akram or Allan Donald! So the comparison hardly applies, but I'm not necessarily sure a helmet is an unalloyed plus. It might mean slower reactions against a spinner, for example.

Leo wrote:My personal experience has been that I played fast bowling better without a helmet. Never got hit, except when the helmet sucked me into playing lazy shots.

Of course, the bowlers were not Wasim Akram or Allan Donald! So the comparison hardly applies, but I'm not necessarily sure a helmet is an unalloyed plus. It might mean slower reactions against a spinner, for example.

Depends on the standard. Personally I never even wore a thigh pad.

Brass Monkey wrote:

furriner wrote:
I'm not from Delhi, you which -city- were- you- from- again c*nt.

I didn't think you were. I just wanted to show you the pain it causes when you get accused of being some **** from some ****hole.

It only hurts when I larf.

What's the situation these days regarding helmets? How frequently are they used in various grades of cricket?

I think I had retired before they were invented.