zen Posted November 21, 2011 Posted November 21, 2011 But all those traits are found in the "Bradman is greatest / Sachin is not the greatest" group as well. Nope. Many of the 'bradman is the greatest' types are more of Sachin fans, a player from the team they support ... while the opposite group is mainly driven by fanatism
Raghav_12 Posted November 21, 2011 Posted November 21, 2011 That is the biggest reason for which now I have, kind of, stopped getting into debates in online discussions. Once I had got very passionately involved in Bradman vs Sachin debate and I had got positive comments from both the sides of argument, as I wasn't trying to prove my point only. But over a period of time, I realized that in online discussions you would never know if the guy you arguing with even serious about the topic or just baiting you. However, even the bigger problem in being dishonest (that is when in your heart you know you are wrong, but would not admit it in fear that you'll sent further on backfoot) and not owning up to your statements. But if you look at larger picture, I think these are the same problems which we face in real life as well and lead to acrimony within family or friends. On a side note I think, smileys should be banned from the threads where people seemingly engaged in serious discussion. Just my opinion, mods can think over. :hysterical: *who isgoing to define what constitutes as serious as line "Tendulkar is the greatest" itself could count as a joke to many" There are two posts I have quoted here, one is mine and one is yours. Now nobody needs to be Sigmund Freud to figure out which post is aimed at having a serious discussion and which is just to troll. So other than few boundary line cases (where benefit of doubt can be given) there would not be much debate. I know the futility of discussing an argument with you, so this would be my last post in direct response to you. You may continue exhibiting your creativity with varied usage of smileys -which anyways this forum provides in plenty.
akshayxyz Posted November 21, 2011 Posted November 21, 2011 ^Rett Uncle Rett Uncle..Tendulkar ne aapkaa kyaa bigaadaa hai ? Were you in love with Anjali-Ben ? yeh woh insaan hai, jise time-travel karke 30s mein bhejoge to Don kaa jeena haraam kar dega.
akshayxyz Posted November 21, 2011 Posted November 21, 2011 On the whole I think facts are one thing and opinions are another. Opinions are as important as facts and we have evolved to process both of them with our minds. In other words we use both objective and subjective faculties of our minds that evolution has helped us grow. To take the example of Bradman (coz that is the one going on here), it is a fact that he averages 99.94. No one can dispute that. But it is only through subjective understanding of the game of cricket that one can understand that Bradman did not face half the quality of bowlers that someone like Greg Chappell faced for the most part. So the "fact" of 99.94 is in itself bound by those four variables - time, space, perspective, and context. You change the variables and the "meaning/importance" of the "fact" changes. By and large I agree with the quotes in the OP. I also believe that reality is what we choose it to be So for Rett Bradman is the supreme personality of batsmanship while for me Sachin is the Buddha. And hey both of us are equally right (or wrong). This point is easy to counter - in the sense that one can not judge them based on perceived quality of bowlers across era. However, I do not want this thread to turn into SRT vs Don debate. So we will take it some other time and place.
Vijay.Sharma Posted November 21, 2011 Posted November 21, 2011 This point is easy to counter - in the sense that one can not judge them based on perceived quality of bowlers across era. However' date=' I do not want this thread to turn into SRT vs Don debate. So we will take it some other time and place.[/quote']Actually there are people who have seen cricket in both eras to be able to tell the difference
akshayxyz Posted November 21, 2011 Posted November 21, 2011 I will keep it short - difference is immaterial. Will explain someother time/place.
Vijay.Sharma Posted November 21, 2011 Posted November 21, 2011 Nope. Many of the 'bradman is the greatest' types are more of Sachin fans' date=' a player from the team they support ... while the opposite group is mainly driven by fanatism[/quote']How are you sure of that? I can make the argument that many of the "Bradman is the greatest" believers are just holding on to that belief because they have been brought up with that one. In fact many of the "Sachin is the Buddha" believers also were brought up to believe that Bradman is the greatest until evidence of Sachin's career unfolding before their very cricket watching lives convinced them that Sachin is the greatest. And many of them also witnessed ATGs like Gavaskar, Chappell, Richards, Miandad, Sobers, Lara, Inzy, Pawning, and Rahul too. So obviously they would have their own valid reasons to believe that Sachin is the Buddha. Why would you consider any one group of believers to be more right than the other?
zen Posted November 21, 2011 Posted November 21, 2011 How are you sure of that? I can make the argument that many of the "Bradman is the greatest" believers are just holding on to that belief because they have been brought up with that one. In fact many of the "Sachin is the Buddha" believers also were brought up to believe that Bradman is the greatest until evidence of Sachin's career unfolding before their very cricket watching lives convinced them that Sachin is the greatest. And many of them also witnessed ATGs like Gavaskar, Chappell, Richards, Miandad, Sobers, Lara, Inzy, Pawning, and Rahul too. So obviously they would have their own valid reasons to believe that Sachin is the Buddha. Why would you consider any one group of believers to be more right than the other? post #43 What motivated someone like you to do all that stats? Wasn't it motivated to show that Tendulkar is the ....
Vijay.Sharma Posted November 21, 2011 Posted November 21, 2011 post #43 What motivated someone like you to do all that stats? Wasn't it motivated to show that Tendulkar is the ....No. The motivation, I can honestly tell, was to see if players formed clusters and see who falls in which cluster. And also it was an exercise for me personally to understand the greatness of some of the older players like the 3 English H's. Until I did those projects I did not really understand that Barrington was the best of the English batsmen in terms of stats. Or for that matter I did not know that Pawning is probably the greatest Aussie batsman ever (yes, better than Bradman and maybe at equal stature with Chappell). My respect for Pawning has grown since I have done those projects. I can also tell that if I were to rank the 3 great WI batsmen I would have both Lara and Sobers ahead of Richards any effing day. Why is it so difficult for you to accept that people who do not consider Bradman's average as indicative of his greatness across all eras can be equally as intelligent as you? I am not putting you down because you consider Bradman greatest. I am only asking you not to put me down because I consider Sachin the greatest. Is it so difficult to respect another human being when you do not agree with his opinion?
zen Posted November 21, 2011 Posted November 21, 2011 No. The motivation, I can honestly tell, was to see if players formed clusters and see who falls in which cluster. And also it was an exercise for me personally to understand the greatness of some of the older players like the 3 English H's. Until I did those projects I did not really understand that Barrington was the best of the English batsmen in terms of stats. Or for that matter I did not know that Pawning is probably the greatest Aussie batsman ever (yes, better than Bradman and maybe at equal stature with Chappell). My respect for Pawning has grown since I have done those projects. I can also tell that if I were to rank the 3 great WI batsmen I would have both Lara and Sobers ahead of Richards any effing day. Why is it so difficult for you to accept that people who do not consider Bradman's average as indicative of his greatness across all eras can be equally as intelligent as you? I am not putting you down because you consider Bradman greatest. I am only asking you not to put me down because I consider Sachin the greatest. Is it so difficult to respect another human being when you do not agree with his opinion? I am sorry, but you as "Nirvanam" came to the threads with the purpose of showing Tendulkar is the greatest. Even in your analysis, you have credited the fanboys I remember when you came to the phorum, you were attacking me and calling me names (chandler or whatever), when I didn't even know who you were .... Based on that it is difficult for me to see that when you came to this place, you had a balanced PoV
zen Posted November 21, 2011 Posted November 21, 2011 every complain box here has some kind of a story but let's not go into that :P
Lurker Posted November 21, 2011 Posted November 21, 2011 Look at all the times you've debated online, notice any similarities... Its not about debating online really. I fail to see personally how debating with someone, say BB, in real life would be any different. Or with Shwetabh. In the end its about people you debate with. Some are open minded others are thick. Simple. Only difference is in online world everybody has an opinion, information democracy if you will. In real life many people choose to look away or not participate as much. Not sure if thats a bad thing..or good.
Vijay.Sharma Posted November 22, 2011 Posted November 22, 2011 I am sorry, but you as "Nirvanam" came to the threads with the purpose of showing Tendulkar is the greatest. Even in your analysis, you have credited the fanboys I remember when you came to the phorum, you were attacking me and calling me names (chandler or whatever), when I didn't even know who you were .... Based on that it is difficult for me to see that when you came to this place, you had a balanced PoVLike I said I have been guilty of it too. But I stopped being abusive when I realized better and openly made it mentioned it too when I came back. I had to change my name because I was banned as 'nirvanam'. However, this has nothing to do with my project. If you notice the first project was presented when I was here as nirvanam. The second, much improved version of the project was presented (in fact I took inputs also from here before doing the project) after I came back here. The people I have thanked are - skp, sdavmor, Howzatt, CDK, Bharat Rao, tendulkar.com, jzfredricks, and other cricket fans from the RSC forum. Raghav_12, BossBhai, Akshayxyz, Sachinism, Sree_India, holysmoke, My two cents, and other fans from the ICF forum Why did I thank them? Because they contributed by giving constructive inputs. You have no idea how abusive jzfredricks, and CDK have been towards me (and me towards them). They are from rsc and I don't know if any of those I mentioned from rsc would fall under the "Sachin = Buddha" category except maybe tendulkar.com. Also I believe the guy by name 'Howzatt' is none other than Outsider. Had you bothered to give me any constructive inputs instead of just ridiculing my effort I would have mentioned you too. Anyway, let bygones be bygones. I ask you again, do you think I am any less of an intelligent mind just coz I believe Sachin is the greatest batsman ever? Or for that matter any other individual who holds a similar belief - do you believe they are less intelligent than you or are just plain fanatics? Do you believe we have no intelligible reasons to believe whatever we believe?
Vijay.Sharma Posted November 22, 2011 Posted November 22, 2011 Its not about debating online really. I fail to see personally how debating with someone' date=' say BB, in real life would be any different. Or with Shwetabh. In the end its about people you debate with. Some are open minded others are thick. Simple.[/quote']I believe that the open-mindedness and thickness is determined by the four variables - time, space, perspective, context. In other words, an individual will be very open-minded when the topic is, say XXXX, given he is debating with person Y in an event ZZZ. And the same individual will be thick when the topic is AAA while debating with Y or B under a context CCC
Sachinism Posted November 22, 2011 Author Posted November 22, 2011 Its not about debating online really. I fail to see personally how debating with someone, say BB, in real life would be any different. Or with Shwetabh. In the end its about people you debate with. Some are open minded others are thick. Simple. Only difference is in online world everybody has an opinion, information democracy if you will. In real life many people choose to look away or not participate as much. Not sure if thats a bad thing..or good. Though debating online people are able to let loose a bit more, they can be a lot more patronising
Lurker Posted November 22, 2011 Posted November 22, 2011 Though debating online people are able to let loose a bit more' date=' [b']they can be a lot more patronising That is very true! Wow I never looked at it like that but very true. :hatsoff: Who said Sachin fans are empty heads :hehe:
zen Posted November 22, 2011 Posted November 22, 2011 Anyway, let bygones be bygones. I ask you again, do you think I am any less of an intelligent mind just coz I believe Sachin is the greatest batsman ever? Or for that matter any other individual who holds a similar belief - do you believe they are less intelligent than you or are just plain fanatics? Do you believe we have no intelligible reasons to believe whatever we believe? Ofc, bygones are bygones. In fact I hv nothing against anyone here. Tomm I may stop posting so there is no point in having anything against anyone in the long run Let me answer your question in another way, if you were not from Ind and hadnt grown up admiring Sachin, would you have reasons to believe that Sachin is the greatest batman and that there is no one else with similar skills?
Yoda-esque Posted November 22, 2011 Posted November 22, 2011 Though debating online people are able to let loose a bit more' date=' they can be a lot more patronising[/quote'] Or Condescending in equal measure
Vijay.Sharma Posted November 22, 2011 Posted November 22, 2011 Ofc, bygones are bygones. In fact I hv nothing against anyone here. Tomm I may stop posting so there is no point in having anything against anyone in the long run Let me answer your question in another way, if you were not from Ind and hadnt grown up admiring Sachin, would you have reasons to believe that Sachin is the greatest batman and that there is no one else with similar skills?I cannot answer that question because it is too hypothetical and frankly I have no experience of "not being an Indian" to be able to answer that. However, if you believe that there are only Indians who believe that Sachin = greatest then you are mistaken. Now I am not go around picking non-Indians who believe so just to present in front of you. Also, if I turn around and ask you the question. Supposing you weren't brought up to believe that Bradman was the greatest ever, would you have reasons to believe that he is the greatest ever. Remember you never even seen the man play so that bit of self-witnessing is also not there for you to gauge his greatness. More importantly, you are sidetracking the main question. Does it make people less intelligent if they believe Sachin = greatest? Do all of us have no intelligible reasons to believe whatever we believe? Answer this and please do not evade it.
Recommended Posts