Roshanrocks Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 wow an epic battle atleast for once tendulkar is not mentioned any where Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 The comparison was with respect to the fighting spirit and how much of a tough team they make themselves out to be to beat once they are on the field. And no point comparing ODIs to T20s. Apples to apples and yes the game is too young to make any comprehensive or sweeping statements - this way or that. My comparison of ODIs and T20s was to highlight the fact that the results and achievements of RR and NZ are not the same. RR have been the best overall IPL team till date. NZ is usually in the middle rungs in ODIs. Was not comparing the formats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 It takes some thick-skull not to realize that Gambhir's comments were limited strictly to the playing 11 RR fielded on that particular day. Bringing in RR's record in the inaugural opener, when they had a completely different look, to "prove" Gambhir wrong reeks of dis-ingenuity. What's next? India's an ordinary team cuz they've lost more matches than they've won. :hysterical: Wow! Gambhir is so prescient that he called his opponents "ordinary" after defeating them. Well, any team which loses was ordinary on that day - that's just a brilliant observation. Sehwag's statement came before the series began, Gambhir was just taking a dig at the opponent after the match. Which would have been fine as well, but for the fact that his own team has never reached the finals, let alone win it, and got pasted in the Champions League as well and the team he is calling ordinary has won an IPL and has a better overall record than his. And what "completely different look" did RR have in the first season? Asnodkar, Tanvir, Kaif, Jadeja? Gambhir's team got pasted by 100 runs in the semi final from these guys. 100 runs is a big margin of defeat in even test cricket.:hysterical: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youngindia Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 tanvir and watson do make a huge difference to their team. without watson, they can lose direction,mostly because of lack of experience in the local batsmen. Actually RR has tried to improve local talents other than yusuf and jadeja. naman ojha and this year fayaz fazal have restored some class in their ranks after their fragile showing last year. its not like yusuf is the end of the game. but they need more experience. some of the batsmen and bowlers are really ordinary and have to be discarded. gambhir was right atleast superficially at the time of the match but he was underestimating the opportunities given to promising players by the RR.they may well star in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 tanvir and watson do make a huge difference to their team. Both Tanvir and Watson were "ordinary" when they were signed on and played the first season. There is no point being a genius in hindsight, is there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vvvslaxman Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 gambhir was right atleast superficially at the time of the match but he was underestimating the opportunities given to promising players by the RR.they may well star in the future. In other words he was deriding local talents. Ojha has scored more runs than any of the delhi daredevils player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teacup Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 If it was about that game and nothing else, the choice of words were astoundingly stupid - even a 5th grader would have come up with a better choice of words to describe an opponent's performance. And people, don't give me the bull on honest opinions and it's virtues. Seriously, is there no other word than 'ordinary' to describe an opponent without sounding like you're patronizing them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vvvslaxman Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 If it was about that game and nothing else, the choice of words were astoundingly stupid - even a 5th grader would have come up with a better choice of words to describe an opponent's performance. And people, don't give me the bull on honest opinions and it's virtues. Seriously, is there no other word than 'ordinary' to describe an opponent without sounding like you're patronizing them? He is justifying that in his column as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teacup Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 He is justifying that in his column as well. Did you notice his vocabulary improving tremendously overnight? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vvvslaxman Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 Did you notice his vocabulary improving tremendously overnight? He is always an articulate guy. I have listened to his interview. That is why some of us were surprised at his dismissive remarks about Royals team. Everyone understood Viru coz he was always like that and also not well versed with cliches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teacup Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 He is always an articulate guy. I have listened to his interview. That is why some of us were surprised at his dismissive remarks about Royals team. Everyone understood Viru coz he was always like that and also not well versed with cliches. He is not a Inzi or Shoaib Malik for sure in fluency (or the lack of) of the English language. I was just taking a dig at those who were attributing the choice of word to his poor vocabulary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 It takes some thick-skull not to realize that Gambhir's comments were limited strictly to the playing 11 RR fielded on that particular day. Bringing in RR's record in the inaugural opener, when they had a completely different look, to "prove" Gambhir wrong reeks of dis-ingenuity. What's next? India's an ordinary team cuz they've lost more matches than they've won. :hysterical: Well if you have some common sense you would think a little before you blurt out those words like "ordinary", you will use a little bit of history and have some perspective before making stupid dumb statements as ordinary based on "that playing XI's" performance on "that particular day". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vvvslaxman Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 Dinda will say" DD batsmen were ordinary. They needed umpire's help. Still they couldn't win" based on the last match :cantstop: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 Tanvir, Watson, Kamran Akmal, Smith and Jadeja. 5 of the best T20 players around. Atleast get your f'king facts right before you pretend to "argue". Tanivr and Watson were not even sold in the first auction and were bought for a $100k, Jadeja only had U-19 credentials with him. Smith was sold for $200k. They become the best T20 players around. Facts!! :hysterical: Tait is one of the best T20 players in the world. Voges is one of the best T20 players in Aussie domestic circuit, teams from which blanked out Gambhir's team a few months back. What of Warne? RR had the worst odds going into the first IPL and now idiots like you are trying to make it sound as if they were some tournament favorites and world beaters going into the first season. You are making a bigger fool yourself than Gambhir did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
veer Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 more power to gambhir man!!.. this is freaking rediculous to stop players speaking freely.. and let abusers on field go free.. what a circus.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 Chal, ek aur try. Lesson no. 1 = Size of IPL contract is not how you assess a player's worth. Watson sold for 100K and Ishant went for a million Lesson no. 2 = RR's performance in previous edition of IPL has zero relevance vis-a-vis Gambhir's assessment of their team's performance that particular evening. As a corollary, the Indian test team cannot be termed ordinary today for their performance 30 years ago. There are more but let's see if you can internalize these two first. Don't disappoint me 1. Show me some posts of yours before the first IPL where you branded Tanvir, Watson, Smith, and Jadeja as the best T20 players in the world? Were their credentials much better than Tait, Voges, Lumb, and Ojha? 2. So Gambhir's assessment of a team changes on a daily basis? That he was talking about the team in general and not on that day's performance is obvious from the fact that he made an exception to Pathan, who did jack in the match. If Gambhir's statement was about RR's performance just that evening why did he mark out Pathan as an exception? And if he brands teams on the basis of one day's performance he is a bigger fool than I thought. Probably too much of logical thinking for you in a day, you should go back to designing Guardian's opinion polls.:nervous: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 Maaf kar do Hujoor Meri fitrat hi hai kutte ki dum ki tarah chewtiyapa karne ki. Koi nahi yaar. Intenet hai, ban le shaana. Aa gaye apni aukaad pe miyan! :hysterical: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thevortex Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 My comparison of ODIs and T20s was to highlight the fact that the results and achievements of RR and NZ are not the same. RR have been the best overall IPL team till date. NZ is usually in the middle rungs in ODIs. Was not comparing the formats. Even still I thought those two formats dont really lend themselves to a comparison. And RR is the best overall IPL team???? I wonder how many think that way, Outsider. I know I dont. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 Even still I thought those two formats dont really lend themselves to a comparison. And RR is the best overall IPL team???? I wonder how many think that way' date=' Outsider. I know I dont. :)[/quote'] Well, which side has been the best overall according to you? RR has won an edition and have the best W/L ratio. Purely on the basis of results they have been the best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 To be fair to Gautam, Rajasthan did have a seemingly ordinary looking batting order, at least in the initial part of the tournament after they lost Graeme Smith. For a while, they had guys like Asnodkar, Dogra, Jhunjunwala, Ojha and Lumb (both relative unknowns to the Indian audience), forming the bulk of their batting and it looked ridiculously inadequate. It got so bad that they even resorted to the desperate tactic of playing Damien Martyn in one of the matches. In fact, after one their initial losses to BRC, there was an article on cricinfo, describing how other teams have guys like Sachin, Hayden, Kallis opening their batting while Rajasthan has someone like Lumb (who looked all at sea against Steyn in that match). But, Ojha and Lumb have proven to be a revelation at the top and they now have Watson as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts