SJS50 Posted April 3, 2010 Posted April 3, 2010 Given that it is almost impossible these days for someone to play test cricket or even FC cricket past 40 never mind be as prolific as these guys and keep doing it till mid 40s and beyond .... we either say that these guys in the DGB era were superhuman or that the current lot is highly unfit or that the standards back in the 30s were so low that even older players could make the cut. I know where I stand but will be interesting to see your take on this. Thats better :) I promise I will come back with a detailed reply :)
Ram Posted June 22, 2011 Posted June 22, 2011 BUMP For the anti-stats nazi's that have begun to vomit in various threads today. I believe that is a very appropriate comparison. Fans of the game of cricket who question the increasingly annoying interplay of stats in the game are definitely comparable to the group that was responsible for one THE biggest human rights atrocities of the previous century! :hatsoff: :hysterical:
Ram Posted June 22, 2011 Posted June 22, 2011 You might want to send that to the England Cricket Board and see what they think of your opinion on hiring and promoting cricket nazism ... :hysterical: Huh WTF! What’s ECB doing in here! Btw, if you call us – the fans who’re rightfully peeved at this ‘your lollypop is bigger than mine’ silly approach to comparing players across eras and team using numbers that add no value to the discussion apart from feeding the jingoistic trolls on both sides, ‘Nazis’, what would you call the actual perpetrators of human rights violations like genocide and mass murder? :hysterical:
Ram Posted June 22, 2011 Posted June 22, 2011 Read post#183 Again feel free to send in your "invaluable" opinion to ECB and save them some money WTF! the ECB’s full time statisticians dont spend all their time doing ‘my candy is sweeter than your candy' analysis, comparing Sachin’s average from the 2000s to Bradman’s average from the 40s. :hysterical: You havent answered my question - If we are Nazis, then what would you call real Nazis? :hysterical:
Ram Posted June 22, 2011 Posted June 22, 2011 WTF ... I thought that you and your type had proclaimed that stats are all meaningless in this sport ehh? Climbing down from that stance ehh ? And before you decide to spew more bakwas and sprinkle more smilies go read my first 2-3 posts in this thread as to where I stand. . I dare you - Find a post of mine where i said 'stats are meaningless in this sport'! anti-stats 'Nazis':hysterical:
Roshanrocks Posted June 23, 2011 Posted June 23, 2011 Thats better :) I promise I will come back with a detailed reply :) :nervous: The reply must be incredibly detailed to be still under construction
mishra Posted June 23, 2011 Posted June 23, 2011 Agree 100 percent with SJS50 and MTC, Bossbhai and allmost every post on this thread... Despit all the stats we make our opinion about a cricketer based on what we see. Stats are just bi product. There could be several thousands or may be more stats based on single inning of a cricketer. Subset or no set of anyone likes or sees is actually recorded by statistician. For me, Batting and bowling is a art. I do not doubt capability of Mathematics to capture that, I do not doubt mathematicians who try their best despite data constraints. Its excel sheet warriors i hate, who have their view purely out of hate(not love) or craziness and then find stats for that
Ram Posted June 23, 2011 Posted June 23, 2011 then stop cackling and getting bent out of shape :cantstop: Ummm- I dunno if you heard me right. So here we go, one more time; Please find a post of mine, where as you have claimed, I said ‘'stats are meaningless in this sport'’
Ram Posted June 23, 2011 Posted June 23, 2011 Is this a joke ? If not then feel free to PM me and promise to conduct a discussion with courtesy towards others even if you don't agree with the other guys opinion and i will explain my position. You tell me if there is ANY relation between what I am asking and what you’re saying. You bought up the word ‘Courtesy’ right? Now, why don’t you do the courteous/honorable thing and find me a post of mine, where you claimed, I said ‘'stats are meaningless in this sport'’. This is the 3rd time I am asking this question and every single time, you have skirted around the question. I doubt I can possibly be more courteous than this. Thank you.
Crookbond Posted July 11, 2011 Posted July 11, 2011 I didn't realize that Morris was really serious about this so here ... I will take your word that you never said all stats are meaningless and I don't have a problem retracting/editing that post. But you do say things like these : If you even bothered to read my posts on SRT vs Bradman I have consistently said that you cant simply take runs scored from that ERA as being of the same value as today's and I backed it by video evidence. Now the Bradman supporters are getting hostile resorting to juvenile shouting matches to shout down those who are rightly calling the standards visible in those videos as appalling. But something tells me you will never take these guys on and lecture them likewise. And you are not alone in saying such things and my comment about anti-stats Nazis is in response to such posts by people. The irony is almost all of them can be found using stats at some point. And regarding the term anti-stats Nazis" it is similar to grammar Nazi or on the other side : Cricket Pundit. It is a way of expression meant to imply the intolerance of people towards those who use stats. I have no idea why you took it quite literally and decided to remind us of the human rights atrocities committed by the original Nazis. PS: And pls let me know if you need answers to anything else that I said in the past ...I'am not sure but I think you want an explanation to my stance regarding abuses by the poster THX_1138 and his subsequent banning. Let me know. The video evidence is great, fantastic and is the best in the world. ICF'ers are probably more knowledgeable than the Benaud's, Chappell's, Lillee's, Hobbs' of the world. ICF'ers can prove that Lindwall was slow by some arcane video analysis which the best in the business feel otherwise. Definitely, one can't directly take stats from that era into the current. Bradman himself said he would average round about in the 60s in this era and Tendulkar is quite close to that ain't it? What I am particularly disappointed is about the smear campaign using non-state-of-the-art video analytics to prove Lindwall as not fast contrary to fact.
The Outsider Posted July 11, 2011 Posted July 11, 2011 The video evidence is great, fantastic and is the best in the world. ICF'ers are probably more knowledgeable than the Benaud's, Chappell's, Lillee's, Hobbs' of the world. ICF'ers can prove that Lindwall was slow by some arcane video analysis which the best in the business feel otherwise. Definitely, one can't directly take stats from that era into the current. Bradman himself said he would average round about in the 60s in this era and Tendulkar is quite close to that ain't it? What I am particularly disappointed is about the smear campaign using non-state-of-the-art video analytics to prove Lindwall as not fast contrary to fact. Oh he will never accept it - once he denies that his name is BossBhai, even if you come up 15,000 posts to the contrary he will spin some sophistry - didn't you see the latest sophistry where I produced a delivery neither close to bat or pad, but all this character was capable of was personal attacks - not that they are wrong as long as backed up by facts?
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