Rajiv Posted March 28, 2010 Share Posted March 28, 2010 We wanna request everyone to debate without any derogatory name calling, a banter is fine ( else whats the point ). Since we all don't have superpowers to scan all posts, if you notice any post like that - kindly report it Link to comment
Gunner_Mania Posted March 28, 2010 Share Posted March 28, 2010 The problem is you have not even showed the patience or will to understand the criteria. Have you ? You are just blindly seeing the numbers. For eff sake..Laxman's knock was on a flat pitch at home and he had massive support from Dravid and din't have to shepherd tailenders. Now read the criteria list again ( 2,4,6,8,9 ) my friend. So what exactly are you saying - Are you saying Azar Mahmood's innings was better than VVS Laxman? Link to comment
vvvslaxman Posted March 28, 2010 Share Posted March 28, 2010 All these are pretty much useless unless you have player vs player stat. You cannot prove anything against a batsman just because a particular bowler was in the opposition. Against Donald.. i know. Tendulkar didn't do well. Donald simply pwned him in majority of the Tests. In the end he started seeing off Donald and trying to score of others. Link to comment
Rajiv Posted March 28, 2010 Share Posted March 28, 2010 Is there anyone who pawned donald? Link to comment
vvvslaxman Posted March 28, 2010 Share Posted March 28, 2010 I am sorry lara never faced dale steyn too. Remove his name also. And when you do head to head record check sachin against (ambrose,walsh) and lara against(zaheer, nehra, munaf patel). Sachin still pwns lara. Madnalal has faced Marshall, Holding, Garner. So i think Madanlal is better than Tendulkar Link to comment
vvvslaxman Posted March 28, 2010 Share Posted March 28, 2010 Is there anyone who pawned donald? Pretty much all the Aussies. One odd performance i remember is Greg Blewett when he made 214 at Jo Burg. He was brilliant with his pull shots. Link to comment
patriot Posted March 29, 2010 Share Posted March 29, 2010 So what exactly are you saying - Are you saying Azar Mahmood's innings was better than VVS Laxman? Where did I say that ? But Azhar's knock ranks so highly because of those criteria. Here is what Wisden hsa to say about that knock: 8. Azhar Mahmood 132 for Pakistan v South Africa at Durban in 1997-98. Wisden Rating: 232.6 South Africa's pace attack had more depth than at any other time in their history: Allan Donald and Shaun Pollock supported by Fanie de Villiers and Lance Klusener. No surprise that Pakistan were put in to bat on a treacherous pitch -- or that they should be reduced to 89 for 5. Salvation came in the form of a 22-year-old allrounder who seemed to be batting too low at No.7: his century was already his third in six Test innings against South Africa. Tucking into a great pace bowler like Donald, he scored 96 runs in boundaries while proving himself an expert shepherd of a tail: he made 90% of Pakistan's last 106 runs. They went on to win a low-scoring match by 29. Link to comment
Guest BossBhai Posted March 29, 2010 Share Posted March 29, 2010 -- Removed on request of the user -- Link to comment
patriot Posted March 29, 2010 Share Posted March 29, 2010 Here comes the resident agent provocateur. This creature comes up with the most ridiculous and atrocious theories and then lets go off a series of subtle but provocative remarks like Lahore logic etc etc... Here is someone who abuses to the hilt freedom of speech with the silliest of theories you will ever hear provoking others to losing their cool. But this is not Indiancricketfans.com apparently. More like tendulkarfanclub.com so you can get away with anything with the mods as long as you are an active member of the flagship club. Link to comment
SRT PWNS Posted March 29, 2010 Share Posted March 29, 2010 Here comes the resident agent provocateur. This creature comes up with the most ridiculous and atrocious theories and then lets go off a series of subtle but provocative remarks like Lahore logic etc etc... Here is someone who abuses to the hilt freedom of speech with the silliest of theories you will ever hear provoking others to losing their cool. Don't disgrace anyone by trying to push that perfect description of yourself onto another. I know Pwting just got out on 6 but you don't have to start another lame rampage here against Sachin for that. Link to comment
vvvslaxman Posted March 29, 2010 Share Posted March 29, 2010 Just because nobody buys your speculative BS theories to prove 55 is greater than 99 you cannot go around accusing other people. Cornered? You were cornered gazillion times in this thread only to come back with more preposterous theories. What we talk is fact. What you talk is fiction. So stop congradulating yourself on "cornering others". Coz you are the cornered one here. Link to comment
patriot Posted March 29, 2010 Share Posted March 29, 2010 I hope the mods are taking note of the agent provocateurs latest maneuvers. Link to comment
patriot Posted March 29, 2010 Share Posted March 29, 2010 Just because nobody buys your speculative BS theories to prove 55 is greater than 99 you cannot go around accusing other people. Cornered? You were cornered gazillion times in this thread only to come back with more preposterous theories. What we talk is fact. What you talk is fiction. So stop congradulating yourself on "cornering others". Coz you are the cornered one here. Good one Laxy. This guy just comes across as an utterly dishonest manipulator. Dhondy has confirmed the same as has Shwetabh. I guess you and I always knew it. He then pretends to be a really old man, because he feels that will save some of the ridiculous theories he is trying to peddle of much ridicule. Disgusting. Link to comment
SRT PWNS Posted March 29, 2010 Share Posted March 29, 2010 Just because nobody buys your speculative BS theories to prove 55 is greater than 99 you cannot go around accusing other people. Cornered? You were cornered gazillion times in this thread only to come back with more preposterous theories. What we talk is fact. What you talk is fiction. So stop congradulating yourself on "cornering others". Coz you are the cornered one here. 55 is not greater than 99. but... 13447* runs > 6996 runs 47* 100's > 29 100's You can only assume that a 99 avg would have carried Don further than God over the same amount of matches but it isn't a fact. It hasn't been done, Don doesn't have any other numbers to back him up. You can all sit here and whine all day, but you can't bring anything else to the table except 99 > 55. Well no sh!t 99 > 55 people, but 13447* runs > 6996 runs and 47* 100's > 29 100's. Folks with near zero IQ level and who don't have the ability to string together a decent sentence are not worthy of engaging at any level let alone debating. Find some place else' date=' dear.[/quote'] Exactly so get out. Link to comment
Guest BossBhai Posted March 29, 2010 Share Posted March 29, 2010 -- Removed on request of the user -- Link to comment
Guest BossBhai Posted March 29, 2010 Share Posted March 29, 2010 -- Removed on request of the user -- Link to comment
vvvslaxman Posted March 29, 2010 Share Posted March 29, 2010 55 is not greater than 99. but... 13447* runs > 6996 runs 47* 100's > 29 100's You can only assume that a 99 avg would have carried Don further than God over the same amount of matches but it isn't a fact. It hasn't been done, Don doesn't have any other numbers to back him up. You can all sit here and whine all day, but you can't bring anything else to the table except 99 > 55. Well no sh!t 99 > 55 people, but 13447* runs > 6996 runs and 47* 100's > 29 100's. Exactly so get out. Everything comes after average !! : If i start going in your way 2 - 300s > 0 - 300s 6 times 600 plus runs in a series > 0 times 334 > 248* 974 > 494 Link to comment
vvvslaxman Posted March 29, 2010 Share Posted March 29, 2010 I opened two polls ... last time I checked majority that voted agreed with me on those 10 pts. Yea.. right.. that was more like Indian press questions. Link to comment
patriot Posted March 29, 2010 Share Posted March 29, 2010 55 is not greater than 99. but... 13447* runs > 6996 runs 47* 100's > 29 100's You can only assume that a 99 avg would have carried Don further than God over the same amount of matches but it isn't a fact. It hasn't been done, Don doesn't have any other numbers to back him up. You can all sit here and whine all day, but you can't bring anything else to the table except 99 > 55. Well no sh!t 99 > 55 people, but 13447* runs > 6996 runs and 47* 100's > 29 100's. Wow ..I must have had some seriously high hopes when I said nearly zero IQ. This is IQ deep inside negative territory. :cantstop: Never mind that fact that had bradman played 166 tests he would have scored 93 test tons at his rate and over 22,000 runs. :hysterical: Link to comment
vvvslaxman Posted March 29, 2010 Share Posted March 29, 2010 heres the first post where the term Lahori Logic was used ... in response to vvs using Anti-stupid-logic .... what goes around comes around .... FWIW i respectfully asked vvs to not troll and post in a mature way befor that. Just as I did for you in your last episode. When nothing works I tell the mods to step in failing which I proceed to rape the online happiness of trolls in a language that works with trolls. It will happen again today with you. Oh really if you can't come up with a decent answer that is called troll ! Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now