Greatest left hand bat since Sobers - AB or BCL?

taipan wrote:

PearlJ wrote:He didn't fail in India because of the quality bowling (That Indian attack in 2001 wasn't actually that good). He has faced it in Aus no problem and he has often faced Murali with no problems. He was just a complete drunk on the first tour and was coming back from injury in the 2nd.

Coming from you that means very little.

'Kallis is a really great bowler, honest!'

PearlJ wrote:

taipan wrote:

PearlJ wrote:He didn't fail in India because of the quality bowling (That Indian attack in 2001 wasn't actually that good). He has faced it in Aus no problem and he has often faced Murali with no problems. He was just a complete drunk on the first tour and was coming back from injury in the 2nd.

Coming from you that means very little.

'Kallis is a really great bowler, honest!'

And you you all got your knickers in a twist didn't you?
Actually 225+ test wickets isn't bad in anyone's langauge.
But your excuses there are totally over the top.

PearlJ wrote:And you're not bias at all. You must look at everything from a completely neutral persepctive. Well done you.

And I see you are an advocate of the 'Warnie had a sore toe that day' argument which basically means sweet FA. If you are going to do that to Ponting then at least be consistent and do it to everyone else.

And yes they averaged 50 over that time, but did they ever average 64 over a period of 8 years?

I haven't got carte blanche on bias. I'm simply saying that you're so inordinately biased, it's a bit like talking to a demented parrot.

I'm not an advocate of f*ck all, I'm saying they were all pretty past it when he played against them and in comparison to L,T,W he failed. They need no similar analysis - I'll let you in on why: Waugh debuted in '85, Tendulkar in '89, Lara in '90. They invariably faced the boys at top whack. There is a difference.

taipan wrote:

PearlJ wrote:

taipan wrote:

PearlJ wrote:He didn't fail in India because of the quality bowling (That Indian attack in 2001 wasn't actually that good). He has faced it in Aus no problem and he has often faced Murali with no problems. He was just a complete drunk on the first tour and was coming back from injury in the 2nd.

Coming from you that means very little.

'Kallis is a really great bowler, honest!'

And you you all got your knickers in a twist didn't you?
Actually 225+ test wickets isn't bad in anyone's langauge.
But your excuses there are totally over the top.

According to you he's a better bowler than Harmison and Flintoff.....

I accept that I am one eyed. But other people trying to pretend that they are not is what is annoying....

PearlJ wrote:

taipan wrote:

PearlJ wrote:

taipan wrote:

PearlJ wrote:He didn't fail in India because of the quality bowling (That Indian attack in 2001 wasn't actually that good). He has faced it in Aus no problem and he has often faced Murali with no problems. He was just a complete drunk on the first tour and was coming back from injury in the 2nd.

Coming from you that means very little.

'Kallis is a really great bowler, honest!'

And you you all got your knickers in a twist didn't you?
Actually 225+ test wickets isn't bad in anyone's langauge.
But your excuses there are totally over the top.

According to you he's a better bowler than Harmison and Flintoff.....

I accept that I am one eyed. But other people trying to pretend that they are not is what is annoying....

Danny, in all the years we have forummed together have you ever seen me talk up a SA player or the team. All I was doing was following up on, I think AD's comment that he wouldn't have been picked for SA as a bowler alone. That was on Saturday, and I carried it on on Monday as joke. I must admit you all jumped very nicely.

PearlJ wrote:And yes they averaged 50 over that time, but did they ever average 64 over a period of 8 years?

srt averaged 62 from start 1994 to end 2001

Brass Monkey wrote:

PearlJ wrote:And you're not bias at all. You must look at everything from a completely neutral persepctive. Well done you.

And I see you are an advocate of the 'Warnie had a sore toe that day' argument which basically means sweet FA. If you are going to do that to Ponting then at least be consistent and do it to everyone else.

And yes they averaged 50 over that time, but did they ever average 64 over a period of 8 years?

I haven't got carte blanche on bias. I'm simply saying that you're so inordinately biased, it's a bit like talking to a demented parrot.

I'm not an advocate of f*ck all, I'm saying they were all pretty past it when he played against them and in comparison to L,T,W he failed. They need no similar analysis - I'll let you in on why: Waugh debuted in '85, Tendulkar in '89, Lara in '90. They invariably faced the boys at top whack. There is a difference.

No doubt. But he has faced plenty of quality bowling and his minnow bashing is at the lower end of the scale..... He has scored 33 of his 35 Test tons against the 7 other top nations. And his average does not drop below 48 against any nation.

And accordingly he averages 7 more than Waugh, 6 more than Lara and 3 more than Tendulkar.

And BTW I am not advocating that he is better than any of those mentioned. They are all close so it is more of a subjective thing I suppose. But he is definitely in their class.

Taips in 'only joking' shock? Phurt. You tried your hardest, but in the end Kallis was shown to be unequivocally bollocks as a bowler alone.

Brass Monkey wrote:Taips in 'only joking' shock? Phurt. You tried your hardest, but in the end Kallis was shown to be unequivocally bollocks as a bowler alone.

Sorry, danny as I said have you ever seen me talk a player up?

Of course the fact that I mentioned to taily off board that I was having a laugh doesn't come into play either?

PearlJ wrote:
No doubt. But he has faced plenty of quality bowling and his minnow bashing is at the lower end of the scale..... He has scored 33 of his 35 Test tons against the 7 other top nations. And his average does not drop below 48 against any nation.

And accordingly he averages 7 more than Waugh, 6 more than Lara and 3 more than Tendulkar.

And BTW I am not advocating that he is better than any of those mentioned. They are all close so it is more of a subjective thing I suppose. But he is definitely in their class.

No doubt he's in their class. He's just not as good as any of them. Hence, to me, he's as near Kallis and Dravid as he is LTW.

I never segregated any of them. They'd all be in the same echelon. Just at the middle/lower end.

The One wrote:

PearlJ wrote:And yes they averaged 50 over that time, but did they ever average 64 over a period of 8 years?

srt averaged 62 from start 1994 to end 2001

That's not 64 though....

Brass Monkey wrote:

PearlJ wrote:
No doubt. But he has faced plenty of quality bowling and his minnow bashing is at the lower end of the scale..... He has scored 33 of his 35 Test tons against the 7 other top nations. And his average does not drop below 48 against any nation.

And accordingly he averages 7 more than Waugh, 6 more than Lara and 3 more than Tendulkar.

And BTW I am not advocating that he is better than any of those mentioned. They are all close so it is more of a subjective thing I suppose. But he is definitely in their class.

No doubt he's in their class. He's just not as good as any of them. Hence, to me, he's as near Kallis and Dravid as he is LTW.

I never segregated any of them. They'd all be in the same echelon. Just at the middle/lower end.

Good, we're agreed.

taipan wrote:
Sorry, danny as I said have you ever seen me talk a player up?

Of course the fact that I mentioned to taily off board that I was having a laugh doesn't come into play either?

I've seen you talk up players, yes.

And no, it doesn't matter if you told Tails you were joking - it was just so succinct that Kallis is a mediocre bowler that you had to stop bigging him up and take a different stance. If it was jovial, either this whole 'you don't get NSR' thing is apparent in the whole board OR you need to work on your prose.

Brass Monkey wrote:

taipan wrote:
Sorry, danny as I said have you ever seen me talk a player up?

Of course the fact that I mentioned to taily off board that I was having a laugh doesn't come into play either?

I've seen you talk up players, yes.

And no, it doesn't matter if you told Tails you were joking - it was just so succinct that Kallis is a mediocre bowler that you had to stop bigging him up and take a different stance. If it was jovial, either this whole 'you don't get NSR' thing is apparent in the whole board OR you need to work on your prose.

Name them.

Okay if you need a forum "win" so badly you can have it.

PearlJ wrote:
Good, we're agreed.

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.


Ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

No.

No, we're not.

Augustus: He's every bit as good if not better than Lara and Tendulkar. He mightn't be orgasmic in the same way, but he's the man I'd want in my team if choosing between the three.

PearlJ: I totally agree with you

Brass Monkey: No doubt he's in their class. He's just not as good as any of them.

There you go champ - outlined for you.

taipan wrote:
Name them.

Okay if you need a froum "win" so badly you can have it.

**snigger** OK taips - reel out the forum win artillery. Makes you feel better.

Smith and Pollock - against the best - is a recent big up of yours.

PearlJ wrote:

The One wrote:

PearlJ wrote:And yes they averaged 50 over that time, but did they ever average 64 over a period of 8 years?

srt averaged 62 from start 1994 to end 2001

That's not 64 though....

lol!

64 from 1993 to 2001

62 from 1993 to 2004

Brass Monkey wrote:

taipan wrote:
Name them.

Okay if you need a froum "win" so badly you can have it.

**snigger** OK taips - reel out the forum win artillery. Makes you feel better.

Smith and Pollock - against the best - is a recent big up of yours.

Asi said if you want it.

Yep, I said Smith did well in IPL which a number of Indian forummers agreed with.

And yes, we did debate, I thought in a civilised manner, Pollock v Flintoff. Funnily enough a number of poms agreed with me.

If having a sensible debate on the merits of various players is bigging it up, so be it.

Blimey, BM is really missing tac big time isn't he.

Brass Monkey wrote:

PearlJ wrote:
Good, we're agreed.

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.


Ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

No.

No, we're not.

Augustus: He's every bit as good if not better than Lara and Tendulkar. He mightn't be orgasmic in the same way, but he's the man I'd want in my team if choosing between the three.

PearlJ: I totally agree with you

Brass Monkey: No doubt he's in their class. He's just not as good as any of them.

There you go champ - outlined for you.

So he's in their class, just not as good as them?

You're a very special person......

Demelza wrote:Blimey, BM is really missing tac big time isn't he.

Whoopsie, here comes the yapping lapdog. He's doin alright darlin, he doesn't need your (non)input.

Just don't hurt him or I'll 'av ya, darlin.

PearlJ wrote:

So he's in their class, just not as good as them?

You're a very special person......

Aww. Hello

Class isn't total equality. It distinguishes between groups rather than absolute individuals. Yes, he's in their class. He just isn't as good, in that class, as them.

Danny, I think you need a good seeing to.

Demelza wrote:Just don't hurt him or I'll 'av ya, darlin.

No, I won't. In fact, you're probably hurting him more - because it's a total embarassment when you jump in like this.