1 great bowling performance after 4 yrs, 0 good batting performance in 4 yrs, Freddie is superman

[Macj]

OP : Surely you havent paid any attention to the ENORMOUS hype perfidious Albion have awarded losers like Tim Henman and other useless English sportsmen made to look like modern day Ulysses.

[patriot]

Just for the record: Harbhajan vs Australia in India: 10 tests: Batting: 232 runs@ 19.33 Bowling: 70 wickets @ 23.11 - SEVEN 5 wicket hauls. Flintoff vs Australia in England: 7 tests Batting: 499 runs @38.38 Bowling: 31 wickets @ 29.09 - TWO 5 wicket hauls.

[King Tendulkar]

what are you guys talking about... The guy has a bowling average of 24 in ODIs and 32 in Tests... Better than any our so much hyped spearhead attack Z.Khan and Ishant... in ODIs' date=' [b']his bowling average is better than any of our legends Kumble, Srinath etc etc... this guy always put his heart out bowling..its tough for a guy with his size and built to come bowl and hit the deck above 90mph..... dont forget his batting which in a way creates a fear in opposition..his batting average in ODIs is close to Sehwag even though Flintoff gets to bat at 6 down... he deserves as much appreciation as he can...

You are comparing Flintoff to a great in Kumble. Don't get me started on a comparison of five wicket hauls and total number of wickets. In fact Kumble is only 4 behind in test tons and not that far behind in volume of runs:--D

[King Tendulkar]

There is a very simple logic behind this. The accolades you get as a player is directly proportional to your performance in a tournament of utmost importance. If Freddie does well in the Ashes - the most important series for both England and Australia, he will be praised and talked about. Even if he was mediocre in most of the previous matches, his brilliant performance in both the Ashes will be considered as very important. If Sharma/Raina win the next WC or any other important series for India, people will go crazy and start treating them like kings. You may question whether this is right or not, but that's the way it is.

So its all about the ashes and nothing else then to judge him then. If we are going to follow this ludicrious rule of logic to judge a player, then his performances in last Ashes tour to oz means he ain't that great then

[rahuliverpool]

So its all about the ashes and nothing else then to judge him then. If we are going to follow this ludicrious rule of logic to judge a player' date=' then his performances in last Ashes tour to oz means he ain't that great then[/quote'] I am not following this logic. It is just an explanation to all the frenzy around Flintoff. He has somewhat repeated his performance of Ashes '05 now, hence the adulation. It does not matter if you or I like it, that's just the way it works.

[rahuliverpool]

So its all about the ashes and nothing else then to judge him then. If we are going to follow this ludicrious rule of logic to judge a player' date= then his performances in last Ashes tour to oz means he ain't that great then

Before this Ashes started, everybody was saying that Freddie just cannot live off Ashes '05 anymore. He got his share of criticism before this series and one can say it is only fair that he is appreciated when he deserves it.

[graphic23]

You are comparing Flintoff to a great in Kumble. Don't get me started on a comparison of five wicket hauls and total number of wickets. In fact Kumble is only 4 behind in test tons:--D

Don't forget to look at the retard's comparison of comparing a fast bowler with a 32+ bowling average to a guy who has over 600 wickets, and someone who was written off by most people when he came in. Flintoff has had nothing but English support and hype throughout his career.

[goose]

He's a great asset to the England side - that's not the same as being a great player though it's easy to see why the British press rates him. If Flintoff is a great player then Andy Flower is the greatest player that ever lived. All this 'when he's on form' is pure rubbish. I can reel off a few hundred players that are great when on top form.

[Max_Cady]

the guy spent most of his career dealing with injuries n **** plus he always liked a drink evrynow and then so this held him back ok, not the gr8est professional ever but still a fantastic all arounder and guy who always gave 100% on the pitch, no lack of intensity all yous nigguhs do him big disservice by judging him on his stats, heis waaay better than the stats suggest . u cant use stats to show the way he could lift his teams morale with his energy and effort.

[rahulrulezz]

Don't forget to look at the retard's comparison of comparing a fast bowler with a 32+ bowling average to a guy who has over 600 wickets' date=' and someone who was written off by most people when he came in. Flintoff has had nothing but English support and hype throughout his career.[/quote'] oye item...I am talking about ODIs where Flintoffs is is way way way better than Kumble. .. and regarding Test matches, Kumble has an average of 29.8 while Flintoff has an average of 32..not much of a differnce.. though Flintoff's strike rate is better than Kumble....in Batting, comparing Kumble with Flintoff is a big JOKE.....in ODIs, Flintoff is better than Kumble in everything... Average 24 while Kumble's is 31... Yes Kumble is one of the legends of India and of our Finest players to step on the field..I would still pick Kumble in Test team over Flintoff if I have to choose one...but calling Flintoff an overhyped is just stupid... some of the Indian fans really need to wake up from dream lalaland where Indian team and players are Number 1 in everything ...

[graphic23]

oye item...I am talking about ODIs where Flintoffs is is way way way better than Kumble. .. and regarding Test matches' date=' Kumble has an average of 29.8 while Flintoff has an average of 32..not much of a differnce.. though Flintoff's strike rate is better than Kumble....in Batting, comparing Kumble with Flintoff is a big JOKE.....in ODIs, Flintoff is better than Kumble in everything... Average 24 while Kumble's is 31... Yes Kumble is one of the legends of India and of our Finest players to step on the field..I would still pick Kumble in Test team over Flintoff if I have to choose one...but calling Flintoff an overhyped is just stupid... some of the Indian fans really need to wake up from dream lalaland where Indian team and players are Number 1 in everything ...[/quote'] Thats because you're comparing a legspinner with a fast-bowling allrounder. As a bowler, as a human being, as a cricketer, Kumble is so far ahead of Flintoff that its not even funny.

[patriot]

oye item...I am talking about ODIs where Flintoffs is is way way way better than Kumble. .. and regarding Test matches' date=' Kumble has an average of 29.8 while Flintoff has an average of 32..not much of a differnce.. though Flintoff's strike rate is better than Kumble....in Batting, comparing Kumble with Flintoff is a big JOKE.....in ODIs, Flintoff is better than Kumble in everything... Average 24 while Kumble's is 31... Yes Kumble is one of the legends of India and of our Finest players to step on the field..I would still pick Kumble in Test team over Flintoff if I have to choose one...but calling Flintoff an overhyped is just stupid... some of the Indian fans really need to wake up from dream lalaland where Indian team and players are Number 1 in everything ...[/quote'] If you have watched a bit of cricket, you would know that you spinners always average more than fast bowlers. There are more than 30 fast bowlers who have averaged below 25 in test cricket, but only 2 spinners who have a bowling average of 25 or less - Murali and Jim laker. Not even Shane Warne averages below 25.

[vvvslaxman]

Freddie is one of those bowlers who creates enormous pressure at one end. In the recent interview Anderson said the same thing. He said Flintoff can take credit take for all my wickets. Awesome bowler when on song.

[DomainK]

Freddie has been inconsistent.....but that does not in any way belittle the brilliance has has shown in some matches. And if you have seen closely, he has given enough evidence of being a cricketer of a very high class. That, again, does not change the fact that he has been quite inconsistent. Personally, I loved watching him. Some cricketers are above statistics. You just wish that they click so that you could enjoy some great cricket. Freddie has been one like that for me.

[Lord]

Freddis is not about stats.he is a wicket maker rather than wicket taker.batsman look to play him safely n get runs from other end,creating wickets for othershe is the only bowler right now who induces the fear of injury in batsmen's minds..make,no mistake,he'll be missed .England will be a crappy side without him

[DomainK]

Freddis is not about stats.he is a wicket maker rather than wicket taker.batsman look to play him safely n get runs from other end' date=creating wickets for othershe is the only bowler right now who induces the fear of injury in batsmen's minds..make,no mistake,he'll be missed .England will be a crappy side without him

That reminds me of a comment from Sehwag. He said after a match that he was looking to play Freddie off safely so that he could score off the rest of the bowlers. That, I think, is a huge compliment.

[Lord]

That reminds me of a comment from Sehwag. He said after a match that he was looking to play Freddie off safely so that he could score off the rest of the bowlers. That' date=' I think, is a huge compliment.[/quote'] yeah,specially coming from someone like Sehwag,who rarely thinks like that

[King Tendulkar]

Freddis is not about stats.he is a wicket maker rather than wicket taker.batsman look to play him safely n get runs from other end' date='creating wickets for othershe is the only bowler right now who induces the fear of injury in batsmen's minds..make,no mistake,he'll be missed .England will be a crappy side without him[/quote'] Seems like a weak excuse to me for not taking wickets. Why doesn't he take the wickets himself?

[King Tendulkar]

Nope he just consistenyl bowls too short. Thus gets a lot of beating of the bat and ducking but often not a big haul of wickets. He does not pitch the ball up enough and bring in to play bowled and lbw. Basically he is not willing to gamble pitching up and thus trade a few boundaries for wickets.

As I posted earlier this is the reason he does not take loads of wickets!

[Lord]

Seems like a weak excuse to me for not taking wickets. Why doesn't he take the wickets himself?

because thats not his role.his role is to tie up one end,bowl fast n accurate consistently,make the batsmen uncomfortable,so that others can take wickets too.bowling is all about building pressure.if he takes wickets in the process,fantastic.