West Indies (70's-80's) vs Australia (2000's)?

[aussie_ben91]

KP you and manee have done their best to educate two know-it-all of cricket. It is offensive for me as a West Indian to read the post of these two: Ben and Cricket God, are you guys in the same room rubbing each other or something, I ask because I just can't understnd how you can come up with the same pathetic bull ****, about our past greats, and I honestly don't care if I get banned from in here, but I will defend our champion cricketers, past and present, so that is something worth getting banned for, our damn pride. I give up on trying to give infromation, links, and all esle to read because KP and manee have gone to lenght to so do and you pair of jackasses just refuse to listen, read and then understand. What the hell do you know of the late Malcolm Denzil Marshall?? I have been for days trying to resist answering to your crap, but I have failed, because you keep running your mouth about our batsmen and bowlers, if you think he was not quick, he was not effective, why not go speak, to many of the past Ausssies and English batsmen that came up against him, since you said stats is not all.
Dread to be honest, its a good thing you are in your comfort and own little world that affords your such luxury to say **** with no concern, I can tell you this, there are many Caribbean countries where you would make such statements and someone would be tempted to knock you on your ass.

Could say the same about King_Pietersen & Manee.

You just can't hack it that someone else has a different opinion and is bringing up some really notiable points that you have no reply to.

I don't know any less then what you do about Malcom Marshall, unless you knew him personally. I've seen him bowl and in cricket, that's enough to form an opinion. Personally, I wouldn't blame people 20 years from now, saying the same thing about Glenn McGrath because I found it amazing how someone bowling at his pace, bowling consistantly on the same line and length could absolutley bamboozle batsman for such a long period of time.

Go have a sook. :

 

[manee]

I don't know any less then what you do about Malcom Marshall, unless you knew him personally. I've seen him bowl and in cricket, that's enough to form an opinion. Personally, I wouldn't blame people 20 years from now, saying the same thing about Glenn McGrath because I found it amazing how someone bowling at his pace, bowling consistantly on the same line and length could absolutley bamboozle batsman for such a long period of time.

The whole point is that Marshall was quick and skiddy. You may think he is bowling slow from the lack of bounce but he was genuinly quick and kept the ball very low which made him a tricky prospect for batsmen.

 

[King Pietersen]

You just can't hack it that someone else has a different opinion and is bringing up some really notiable points that you have no reply to.

It's not the fact that you have differing opinion, it's the way you've put your opinion across. You've come across as incredibly arrogant and think you know everything, without providing any hard evidence, relying on the fact that "you've seen them bowl/bat and that's enough to form an opinion. Well frankly it isn't, seeing someone bowl once or twice doesn't allow you to form a useful opinion which can contribute towards the thread. You need to them use the footage you've seen and then look at the statistics, something that you've failed to do througout this argument, you've purely relied on your own word, failing to back it up with anything other than arrogance.

If you had come back with some telling statistics to back up your argument this would have ended long ago, but you continue to reply in an arrogant and dismissive way, which makes the discussion pointless. You've not taken any of our points on board, and continued to shove your opinion down our throats, without any hard evidence to back your points. I even provided statistics to prove that Pollocks last 2 years in Test Cricket were successful and you just ignored them, saying "Oh come on, you must have seen him being destroyed by Hayden". Then Manee provided the statistics from the 1975 and 1976 Fast Bowler competition, which you again ignored, once your ludicrous question was answered anyway.

If anyone's failing to hack someone else's opinion its you. We've provided the stats, backed up our opinion, yet you choose to ignore it and believe your own biased opinion.

 

[aussie_ben91]

It's not the fact that you have differing opinion, it's the way you've put your opinion across. You've come across as incredibly arrogant and think you know everything, without providing any hard evidence, relying on the fact that "you've seen them bowl/bat and that's enough to form an opinion. Well frankly it isn't, seeing someone bowl once or twice doesn't allow you to form a useful opinion which can contribute towards the thread. You need to them use the footage you've seen and then look at the statistics, something that you've failed to do througout this argument, you've purely relied on your own word, failing to back it up with anything other than arrogance.

If you had come back with some telling statistics to back up your argument this would have ended long ago, but you continue to reply in an arrogant and dismissive way, which makes the discussion pointless. You've not taken any of our points on board, and continued to shove your opinion down our throats, without any hard evidence to back your points. I even provided statistics to prove that Pollocks last 2 years in Test Cricket were successful and you just ignored them, saying "Oh come on, you must have seen him being destroyed by Hayden". Then Manee provided the statistics from the 1975 and 1976 Fast Bowler competition, which you again ignored, once your ludicrous question was answered anyway.

If anyone's failing to hack someone else's opinion its you. We've provided the stats, backed up our opinion, yet you choose to ignore it and believe your own biased opinion.

Well maybe if I wasn't originally attacked by the likes of you and West Indies supporters, with such quotes as being biased and viciously attacking my opinion then I wouldn't be reteliating back at you like I am.

You're the one who originally said that I look to much into statistics when talking about batsman and now you are saying the complete opposite about bowlers to suit your arguement. :

If you actually go and look at posts earlier in this thread, then my initial post was a theory and I gave an analysis on what I thought of his performance and how I figured they'd perform if this was fact.

You don't even know what you're entirely talking about either. When you did give examples of the 70s & 80s, they were incorrect anyway as some of the players you mentioned hardly had any impact compared to some of the players that you didn't mention (ie. you mentioned an englishmen, Phil de Fraites but didn't mention Sunil Gavaskar) had much more of an effect. It's because of things like this that some of the things you say are completely irrelevant. Cricket_god is making more sense then you and he isn't typing properly and most of other things you say come off the back that Manee's originally said.

You think Owais Shah is a world-class batsman but yet you claim everyone bar Ponting & Tendulkar are world-class batsman of the modern age. Now that's biased.

 

[King Pietersen]

No, I said you look far too much into averages. Averages don't make a player, Matthew Sinclair and Matthew Bell averaged over 100 in New Zealand FC cricket last season but couldn't get the ball off the square in the test match. Proving that averages aren't everything.

I made a mistake mentioning De Freitas, and I've actually edited the post, correcting it with Basil D'Oliveira, got mixed up with names. D'Oliveira was certainly one of the most influential batmsen of his era, failed to get in the South African test team because of South Africa's racist views at the time, so moved to England to play county cricket, scored bag fulls of runs and broke into the England test team, and then having a brilliant record in Test Cricket.

As for the Shah comment, I think you can ignore that one, I'll admit it was a stupid comment, Shah's far from World Class, he is a quality batsman though, there's no doubting that. To be fair though, he had just played a masterful innings, smashing the Kiwi bowlers all over the park, so I was influenced by that. I've been far from biased in this thread though, I'll admit that the Aussie team in the 2000's is a good one, but better than the iconic Windies, I disagree, and have stated my reasons for that.

 

[WestIndian]

Could say the same about King_Pietersen & Manee.

You just can't hack it that someone else has a different opinion and is bringing up some really notiable points that you have no reply to.

I don't know any less then what you do about Malcom Marshall, unless you knew him personally. I've seen him bowl and in cricket, that's enough to form an opinion. Personally, I wouldn't blame people 20 years from now, saying the same thing about Glenn McGrath because I found it amazing how someone bowling at his pace, bowling consistantly on the same line and length could absolutley bamboozle batsman for such a long period of time.

Go have a sook. :

Like I said mr. know-it-all, you would choose your place in the West Indies to run your mouth about Malcolm Marshall, someone would make you eat your words, or WORST. And as for your points to which there is no reply, did you not understand or read what I said?? It is pointless trying to get you to understand or comprehend anything other than what is already concreted in your head, there have been countless tries by two guys to so do and they have not failed, you have FAILED to understand anything. If you are who you claim, then that does not surprise me, its typical of you guys, fans, commentators, players alike, everything yellow and green is beautiful, the best and all else, well no contest.
I mean here you are thrash talking Malcolm Marshall as a fast bowler and then you trying to pacify yourself by saying 20 years from now people will say.....about Glenn McGrath, what utter rubbish, what is the whole discuss about?? Fast bowling or the ability to take wickets?? Glenn was not a fast bowler, but certainly he could take wickets, his record speaks for itself, Malcolm Marshall was BOTH, and I know you as an Australian, is finding that hard to accept, but its a fact and you can get all your scientist and biomechanics and that will not change the reality that the man was quick, accurate and he did hi art, in an era when there were no workout facilities setup and designed to develop fast bowlers, like it or not mate, some of them are born to be fast, period, he was one of them and we had a few back then. And frankly, you don't have to like to hear it or read about it, but when guys like Botham, Boycott, Tony Greig and many others, some that played with him, against and saw him play consider the man a fast bowler and an artist at that, then this is enough for me. You sir, can keep on ranting to no end it changes nothing. Have a blessed day my boy. Jah bless.

 

[aussie_ben91]

Like I said mr. know-it-all, you would choose your place in the West Indies to run your mouth about Malcolm Marshall, someone would make you eat your words, or WORST. And as for your points to which there is no reply, did you not understand or read what I said?? It is pointless trying to get you to understand or comprehend anything other than what is already concreted in your head, there have been countless tries by two guys to so do and they have not failed, you have FAILED to understand anything. If you are who you claim, then that does not surprise me, its typical of you guys, fans, commentators, players alike, everything yellow and green is beautiful, the best and all else, well no contest.
I mean here you are thrash talking Malcolm Marshall as a fast bowler and then you trying to pacify yourself by saying 20 years from now people will say.....about Glenn McGrath, what utter rubbish, what is the whole discuss about?? Fast bowling or the ability to take wickets?? Glenn was not a fast bowler, but certainly he could take wickets, his record speaks for itself, Malcolm Marshall was BOTH, and I know you as an Australian, is finding that hard to accept, but its a fact and you can get all your scientist and biomechanics and that will not change the reality that the man was quick, accurate and he did hi art, in an era when there were no workout facilities setup and designed to develop fast bowlers, like it or not mate, some of them are born to be fast, period, he was one of them and we had a few back then. And frankly, you don't have to like to hear it or read about it, but when guys like Botham, Boycott, Tony Greig and many others, some that played with him, against and saw him play consider the man a fast bowler and an artist at that, then this is enough for me. You sir, can keep on ranting to no end it changes nothing. Have a blessed day my boy. Jah bless.

You sound like you're trying to convince yourself more then you're trying to convince me.

I've already justifyed myself earlier in the thread. You're just rambling on for the hell of it because you refuse to believe that your beloved West Indies wouldn't be as dominant in the modern day if they come up to sides like Australia of the last several years.

Can't handle someone elses opinion then don't read it.

 

[WestIndian]

You sound like you're trying to convince yourself more then you're trying to convince me.

I've already justifyed myself earlier in the thread. You're just rambling on for the hell of it because you refuse to believe that your beloved West Indies wouldn't be as dominant in the modern day if they come up to sides like Australia of the last several years.

Can't handle someone elses opinion then don't read it.

lol, you mean after countless, nonsensical post of your ranting and self profess, proficiency of fast bowling and bowlers, more so West Indian bowlers, that is all you have left in the bag of wind?? Come on you can do better than that. Oh, and yes "beloved West Indies" indeed.

 

[manee]

Let's keep this debate civil, its been good so far.

 

[WestIndian]

Let's keep this debate civil, its been good so far.

I agree, my apologies. As a matter of fact, I will cease from making any additional post to this thread. Many thanks nevertheless, information was good, while it lasted :hpraise.

 

[Harrypotter_fan]

as it reads the speed from the hand if you see the video

zaheer got overwieght due to his own fault,its not to due with injury,i do
not see thant happenning with ishant atleast for 5-6 years

nehra was bowling fast for 1-2 series but r.p sreesanth have been bowling well over 140 for 2 years

he did not get injured till south africa,if you had watched some first class games or the games he played his first test agaisnt england,he was fast
you never lose pace its confidence ,greg and frazer wanted him to be mcgrath now look at him he is nobody.dhoni needs to bring him back to right track also i see as he got so much money he lacks that passion thats why i always will support sreesanth for the passion he brings.

why pathan lost his swing and speed,why munaf lost 10 km of pace.

biomechanist is useless as your natural bowling action is the best ian frazer
tried to get in to thier mind to bowl line and length thats the difference between prasad he has played cricket so he knows pace is important also.

I don't know where did you see the video 'read' the speed off the hand. Just because they stopped a bit at that instant? And I think you are assuming too much and think that you knew everything beforehand.

And, I'm finding it difficult to control -ve repping ben as he gets involved in too many debates, and baselessly and arrogantly 'tries' to get his point across.

 

[manee]

I agree, my apologies. As a matter of fact, I will cease from making any additional post to this thread. Many thanks nevertheless, information was good, while it lasted :hpraise.

I didn't mean to offend you. The post was just general, not directed at you whatsoever.

 

[WestIndian]

I didn't mean to offend you. The post was just general, not directed at you whatsoever.

No, no, no my brother, none taken. I just feel that there are some points that needs to come to a point and when that is not possible or in sight then, just let go.

 

[Dare]

lol Ben you can try to justify yourself all you want and try to prove that Marshall isn't a great fast bowler but I know that 90% of people on this forum and everyone who thinks reasonably in Australia knows how great Marshall was and what he did on pitches that didn't even favor him.
You can try to prove points from Australia's point of view but don't even think that you know anything about West Indies cricket or their past players to even try to make points against them. I'm fine with you making points for Australia because you do know about them but bring me a stat that proves that Marshall struggled on pitches that didn't favor him, why is it that some of the best scores by WI batsman came in England, Australia because they were just that damn good.

I know that most people here would take Sobers over any Australian player from the 90s, I know I would without a doubt.

And we all know that Ponting, Hayden, Warne, Mcgrath and the Waugh brothers greats and we don't deny that, so you shouldn't deny that the West Indies bowlers and batsman from the 70s-80s are greats because anyone with proper cricket knowledge knows that they are.

 

[manee]

I know that most people here would take Sobers over any Australian player from the 90s, I know I would without a doubt.

Please find me one person who wouldn't.