Flintoff out until at least 2008 with another ankle problem.

Batfink Begins wrote:What, Kallis-not-a-front-line-bowler-at-all-and-loves-bowling-at-Zimbabwe or Pollock-not-a-front-line-batsman-at-all-and-2-tons-in-107-matches?


Was funny a year ago at the ICCCCCTTTT when Sivaramakrishnan said Flints was currently the best all-rounder in the world and Cullinan got all sooky.


Deja Vu.

Compare Kallis to Sobers figures.

taipan wrote:
Compare Kallis to Sobers figures.

Matey, I know all too well the value of Kallis. I just thought I'd dig, as you're getting your c0ck out about the Saffie boys on a Flintoff thread. Surely he's worth a couple of pages first. I mean, he flayed your bullyboy bowlers in '03 and shat all over your batting '04. You could talk about that if you wanted to be Saffie-centric.

Batfink Begins wrote:

taipan wrote:
Compare Kallis to Sobers figures.

Matey, I know all too well the value of Kallis. I just thought I'd dig, as you're getting your c0ck out about the Saffie boys on a Flintoff thread. Surely he's worth a couple of pages first. I mean, he flayed your bullyboy bowlers in '03 and shat all over your batting '04. You could talk about that if you wanted to be Saffie-centric.

Danny, don't get your knickers in a twist. I was replying to LLL's assertion that Freddie was a great. I merely used 2 players whose stats I am familiar with to compare him to. That they are saffies is merely co-incidental.

BTW i hate selective stats. I can remember Mercenary using them over and over to browbeat us into believing that Figjam was a great.

Spelling edit

Well, the whole difference was his fitness, maturity and marriage. That signifies the end of childish, fat Fred. That I agree, selective stats are pretty sh!t. Scrap them. Fact is, he was a massive influence in every series he played from that period until his shattering. That's world class enough for me. We actually beat the best over a long series. Was due to him being the crux. He actually performed. The other two didn't.

No one has disputed Freddie's influence on those series.

MY point is that he didn't do enough over a longer period to be considered an all time great,

No, I totally agree. He should be considered 'was a great for a while' and nothing else at this stage.

Hopefully he recovers. No one wants to see great characters forced out of the game this way.

If he recovers and has another 3 or so years like he ahd at his peak then you would count him as an all time great.

He's only 29 isn't he?

More than enough time to do that.

Yeah, don't hold out much hope though. Just wished they knew the problem. Would be a McMillan, Cairns or Wasim retired. Obviously through age more than injury.

In a way I'm more worried about his batting. It is wholeheartedly shot to ribbons. Nothing like his peak, where he was assured and got runs before being a d!ckhead and giving it away. Now he looks like a number 9.

Looks like his ankle and career are totally FARKED!!!!!!

Batfink Begins wrote:In a way I'm more worried about his batting. It is wholeheartedly shot to ribbons. Nothing like his peak, where he was assured and got runs before being a d!ckhead and giving it away. Now he looks like a number 9.

I don't know, looked very useful in a few of the T20 matches.

In addition I might add that Fred was one of the few I would consider a true allrounder. IE one worthy of being picked for either his batting or his bowling. To my mind there are far too many bits and pieces players dignified with the title of allrounder.