Fat ****** to lead Lankan cricket

Almost feel sorry for em...

story

Nice to know you love him still. Great man, Ranatunga.

furriner wrote:Nice to know you love him still. Great man, Ranatunga.

What's your poison furry? Alchohol or drugs?

Invader Zim wrote:Almost feel sorry for em...

story

We/they get the dung hill builders we/they deserve.

Mick Sawyer wrote:

furriner wrote:Nice to know you love him still. Great man, Ranatunga.

What's your poison furry? Alchohol or drugs?

Alchohol does me fine Mick.

Ever wonder that Gangers and Ranatunga, the two opposing team captains most disliked by some Australian fans, are also the most successful against your lot in the past 10-15 years?

"Ever wonder "

No

Generally (amongst genuine lovers of the game in Aus) the Indians are highly respected. That might be amplified by or empathy for others in the teams he "led".

I wasn't aware that the Lankan record was that strong. Ranatunga? Heals got it right. The general attitude towards him was flavoured by his behaviour and comments when MuMu was No Balled here. MuMu was (almost) universally considered a chucker at that time. We believed that Hair & Emerson were doing what they were paid to do. Ranatunga carried on like a spoilt little shit tossing out the race cards like they were confetti.

Obviously no team has done all that well against the Australians in a long timee Mick, so the successes I was referring to were relative - Gangers in the Tests a while ago, and for Ranatunga in the 96 WC (finals) before that.

I understand and can empathize with the arguments as to why Ranatunga is disliked by the Australians, Mick. But what fascinates me is as I had said- both were (relatively) the most successful captains against Aus (home and abroad).

I know you don't wonder about it, I do.

furriner wrote:both were (relatively) the most successful captains against Aus (home and abroad).

So why don't we critisise Vaughan, who after all beat us in the only series we really care about?

furriner wrote:Obviously no team has done all that well against the Australians in a long timee Mick, so the successes I was referring to were relative - Gangers in the Tests a while ago, and for Ranatunga in the 96 WC (finals) before that.

I understand and can empathize with the arguments as to why Ranatunga is disliked by the Australians, Mick. But what fascinates me is as I had said- both were (relatively) the most successful captains against Aus (home and abroad).

I know you don't wonder about it, I do.

Cheers mate

Gangles gawwwwwn

Mick Sawyer wrote:Gangles gawwwwwn

Sorry wrong thread

Invader Zim wrote:

furriner wrote:both were (relatively) the most successful captains against Aus (home and abroad).

So why don't we critisise Vaughan, who after all beat us in the only series we really care about?

Fair point. My first reaction is that Ranatunga and Gangers trigger some nerve, something that that essentially and fundamentally irritates the Australian or perhaps the western psyche. It is likely cultural in the same way that sometimes the Australian way of doing things is regarded as arrogance (pushing that dckihead off the stage for example). Gangers and Ranatunga not only got/get under your (collective your) skin but they also - to a limited extent- held their own. Had they did what they did and won nothing they would have been dismissed easily. But they did not, so the irritation lingers.

Vaughan on the other hand does not behave in the same way and/or is percieved not to behave in the same way. Moreover, he comes from a culture whose roots are similar to yours (cue Aussie and English forummers throwing stones at me). The difference in cultural context and environment amplifies the response.

Mick Sawyer wrote:

Mick Sawyer wrote:Gangles gawwwwwn

Sorry wrong thread

Twit.

"The difference in cultural context and environment amplifies the response."

Absolutely!

Invader Zim wrote:

Mick Sawyer wrote:

Mick Sawyer wrote:Gangles gawwwwwn

Sorry wrong thread

Twit.

bah!! - It's worth screaming anyplace

And how long will it be before an experimental law is introduced to SL domestic competitions, whereby a batsman is automatically allowed a runner for being an unfit fat ******?

Zat wrote:And how long will it be before an experimental law is introduced to SL domestic competitions, whereby a batsman is automatically allowed a runner for being an unfit fat ******?

Two too many stars there Zat?

It's an automatic feature if you type ****** or ******.

******?

Oh yeah.

Zat wrote:It's an automatic feature if you type ****** or ******.

arrrghhhhhso!

Didn't think you'd be messin' with an oratorial icon.

Personally, I think it looked a bit ******, but it's Dello's forum, and he sets things like this up...

Ranatunga is the player most responsible (even including Murali) for bringing Sri Lanka up to approximately level terms with the other test nations. For this he deserves thanks.

His single minded captaincy was exactly what they needed and I believe any strong captain would have reacted in a similar way to the Murali/Emerson incident (which is not to say i condone it).

Benaud took Meckiff off, of course. Must have been a weak captain.

ten years after wrote:Ranatunga is the player most responsible (even including Murali) for bringing Sri Lanka up to approximately level terms with the other test nations. For this he deserves thanks.

His single minded captaincy was exactly what they needed and I believe any strong captain would have reacted in a similar way to the Murali/Emerson incident (which is not to say i condone it).

Can't agree with a grain of this.

He was their best captain ever, can't argue with that.