The Greatest ODI Batsman: Tendulkar vs Richards

[King Pietersen]

Ever thought it might be down to him just bowling poorly, and not because he'd been found out? Think people seem to jump to that reasoning quite a lot, it happened with Panesar. The reason Panesar stopped taking wickets, is because he was bowling poorly. When he was bowling well he'd get sharp turn and bounce, that disappeared when he was bowling poorly, and he was just dropping the ball down at the same pace time and time again, he wasn't found out, just started bowling badly. Same happened with Mendis AFAIC. He doesn't help himself by not having a stock ball, but I think it's more a matter of him bowling poorly than getting found out.

 

[ballers101]

The only thing that proves is that some job-seeking IT geek managed to find a job.

TumTum added 9 Minutes and 11 Seconds later...



You wouldn't believe the things some people spend money on these days

....READ! That's all im going to say...there is no one in the world who will agree with you that technology has no impact on the game itself. We are providing proofs and you dismiss them without reading it, I hate how your trying to act all condesceding towardws us like we have no point whatsoever. When you have been proven wrong by many different sources, you do not read what we state and attack one sentence and even that rebuttal you make is entirely false. You ask us to give you proofs to prove this being right....give me one source that states technology has not affected the game of cricket. If you cannot then its clear that your entirely wrong.

 

[TumTum]

....READ! That's all im going to say...there is no one in the world who will agree with you that technology has no impact on the game itself. We are providing proofs and you dismiss them without reading it, I hate how your trying to act all condesceding towardws us like we have no point whatsoever. When you have been proven wrong by many different sources, you do not read what we state and attack one sentence and even that rebuttal you make is entirely false. You ask us to give you proofs to prove this being right....give me one source that states technology has not affected the game of cricket. If you cannot then its clear that your entirely wrong.

You know nothing about being condescending, I am being nice compared to the things I have to put up at uni.

You guys need to learn what a "proof" is. Just because a cricket board is using the technology, it doesn't mean it effects what happens in the field, even if they say it does.

Let's get real, nobody is going to say "oh we developed an awesome system, unfortunately it won't really help you guys".

OH BTW ballers you just make yourself look desperate when you make up a 10 line sentence just to say something, if you make your points brief it would help everyone.

TumTum added 4 Minutes and 47 Seconds later...

You mean how did India figure him out. Because he played them so much it was like he was a member of their team.

Spot on. So why haven't other cricketing nations figured him out yet? Not good enough technology eh?

 

[ballers101]

You know nothing about being condescending, I am being nice compared to the things I have to put up at uni.

You guys need to learn what a "proof" is. Just because a cricket board is using the technology, it doesn't mean it effects what happens in the field, even if they say it does.

Let's get real, nobody is going to say "oh we developed an awesome system, unfortunately it won't really help you guys".

OH BTW ballers you just make yourself look desperate when you make up a 10 line sentence just to say something, if you make your points brief it would help everyone.

TumTum added 4 Minutes and 47 Seconds later...

Spot on. So why haven't other cricketing nations figured him out yet? Not good enough technology eh?

First off, how did you get into University....oh sorry my bad for going off topic. Thank you for making a very interesting statement there TumTum. So, if the entire team states "technology has helped our team during games", it doesn't necessarily mean that it effects what happens on the field.

How do you know? Have you tried this method...no. These players have tried this method and if they say that it helps what would be the possible reason to lie about that. If the method doesn't work why would they spend hours and hours studying a player’s weakness if the method doesn't work? I just want to understand your logic here; you seem to be contradicting yourself on many different levels here.

I love the whole thing about how you think I am desperate....no I am not. I am just annoyed, I post something and you ignore it I don't know why but you do. Or you say I don't understand what you mean, so I have to spend maybe 3 more sentences on every single post because you don't understand one of the simplest concepts.

 

[shravi]

Whatever man, leave it. No point wasting this much time on lesser minds (or non-existent ones in the case on DumDum).

 

[TumTum]

Opinions are not "proof". Just because someone says it has helped them, it doesn't make it true, even if that person believes he is saying the truth.

Pitch conditions - Proven
Ground sizes - Proven
Bat models - Proven
Protective equipment - Proven
Player statistics - Proven
Affect of pressure - Not Proven
Affect of technology - Not Proven
Era with better bowlers - Not Proven
Era with better batsmen - Not Proven
Era with better bowling averages - Proven
Era with better batting averages - Proven

 

[drainpipe32]

1, 2, 3, 4, I declare a flame war.

Funny how I picked this

 

[shravi]

Opinions are not "proof". Just because someone says it has helped them, it doesn't make it true, even if that person believes he is saying the truth.

Pitch conditions - Proven
Ground sizes - Proven
Bat models - Proven
Protective equipment - Proven
Player statistics - Proven
Affect of pressure - Not Proven
Affect of technology - Not Proven
Era with better bowlers - Not Proven
Era with better batsmen - Not Proven
Era with better bowling averages - Proven
Era with better batting averages - Proven

TumTum Cannot Spell Effect- Proven.

 

[TumTum]

TumTum Cannot Spell Effect- Proven.

WikiAnswers - Can you give me a sentence using the word affect

:doh

 

[King Pietersen]

Opinions are not "proof". Just because someone says it has helped them, it doesn't make it true, even if that person believes he is saying the truth.

Pitch conditions - Proven
Ground sizes - Proven
Bat models - Proven
Protective equipment - Proven
Player statistics - Proven
Affect of pressure - Not Proven
Affect of technology - Not Proven
Era with better bowlers - Not Proven
Era with better batsmen - Not Proven
Era with better bowling averages - Proven
Era with better batting averages - Proven

I actually happen to agree with that. There is no way you can undeniably prove that technology has had an impact on the cricket in the modern era. All conjecture really.

 

[Robelinda]

He actually said 'forget ball tampering', in regards to Afridi???

I have to say Tum Tum, I do agree with a bit of what you are saying mate. There's no real way to prove technology has had an impact.

 

[Gurjot95]

I have not watched cricket in olden times so I don't know how umpire gives decision to close run outs without 3rd umpire.

 

[drainpipe32]

TumTum Cannot Spell Effect- Proven.

Low blow mate, I must admit it looks a bit desperate.

 

[TumTum]

I have not watched cricket in olden times so I don't know how umpire gives decision to close run outs without 3rd umpire.

They are pretty accurate to be honest. But again that is not the "technology" we are talking about. We are talking about data collection, video replays etc.

TumTum added 3 Minutes and 54 Seconds later...

Low blow mate, I must admit it looks a bit desperate.

Check and mate.

I am sure ballers will come up with another huge paragraph, but I can dismiss it all with my sig quote.

 

[AkshayS]

negative reps to the man who created this thread.:doh