Guest BossBhai Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 -- Removed on request of the user -- Link to comment
Lurker Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 whether or not it answered my question ... it most certainly will give you your meds ... Would you come to my home and deliver it personally? :secret: And once you reach here should I keep fire brigade at stanby if you go all will burn the house down ??? Link to comment
Guest BossBhai Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 -- Removed on request of the user -- Link to comment
Guest BossBhai Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 -- Removed on request of the user -- Link to comment
vvvslaxman Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 And hopefully by the end of this decade you will come up with a answer that makes cricketing sense when it comes to the question of why the likes of Bill Bowes and Toshack have bowling avgs that only the very best fast bowlers are capable off. You conveniently avoided answering how suddenly 15 tests were enough to judge Bowes but Toshack didnt qualify because he had played in only 12. You think it is easy to average 99 only in the 30s.. here is a guy who averages 99 in 2002. http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/content/player/49767.html Link to comment
Lurker Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 sorry no service to slum dwellers like you But my padosis are Ernie Toshacks's descendants. You dont wanna spend the rest of life with them?? wouldnt that be more expensive than your entire fkin house jhopad patti ? :facepalm: No it wont be. Now if you can throw in a helmet that may just about cut it :hysterical: Link to comment
vvvslaxman Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 But my padosis are Ernie Toshacks's descendants. You dont wanna spend the rest of life with them?? Philander 6th test 41 wickets.. 14.04 avge Dosai's record is in danger. ERnie toshak 47 wickets in 12 tests. Link to comment
Raghav_12 Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 lolz at the people giving Sandeep Patil's evidence to suggest how dangerous this game was in Hobbs time..:cantstop: Patil played some 50 years after Hobbs and Sachin played 5 years after Patil. Should we have a poll to decide which era Sandeep Patil belonged to - Sachin's or Hobbs? Link to comment
vvvslaxman Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 lolz at the people giving Sandeep Patil's evidence to suggest how dangerous this game was in Hobbs time..:cantstop: Patil played some 50 years after Hobbs and Sachin played 5 years after Patil. Should we have a poll to decide which era Sandeep Patil belonged to - Sachin's or Hobbs? Don't think the video was related to Hobbs topic. It is another topic. Link to comment
Lurker Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 lolz at the people giving Sandeep Patil's evidence to suggest how dangerous this game was in Hobbs time..:cantstop: Patil played some 50 years after Hobbs and Sachin played 5 years after Patil. Should we have a poll to decide which era Sandeep Patil belonged to - Sachin's or Hobbs? Yes, you have successfully passed the IQ test with flying colour. Indeed Patil's video was to show how exquisite Hobbs ground strokes were....:hatsoff: Link to comment
Raghav_12 Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 Don't think the video was related to Hobbs topic. It is another topic. Do you post by the name of Lurker as well :winky:? Anyways, I think moot point was to prove that how dangerous is batsman-ship without helmets and that's why Hobbs and Bradmans are greater than current batsmen. If there was any other point, you can enlighten. Link to comment
vvvslaxman Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 Do you post by the name of Lurker as well :winky:? Anyways, I think moot point was to prove that how dangerous is batsman-ship without helmets and that's why Hobbs and Bradmans are greater than current batsmen. If there was any other point, you can enlighten. No.. Sunil Gavaskar was a moron not to wear helmet was the point. Link to comment
Lurker Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 Do you post by the name of Lurker as well :winky:? Anyways, I think moot point was to prove that how dangerous is batsman-ship without helmets and that's why Hobbs and Bradmans are greater than current batsmen. If there was any other point, you can enlighten. The only other point may be that you can perhaps open a poll on whose era Patil belonged to? Sachin or Hobbs? :two_thumbs_up: Link to comment
Raghav_12 Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 No.. Sunil Gavaskar was a moron not to wear helmet was the point. So you think that Sunil Gavaskar belonged to Hobbs era? Anyways, I can take the argument that Sunil Gavaskar and Viv Richards took on fast bowling so they should get some credit for that. But if you say somebody should be given credit for playing without helmet when playing conditions were so easy that player could play cricket until grand-pa-esque of 50, then I can only laugh. In between, Gavaskar had also started wearing a fibre glass skull cap to protect his head towards the later part of his career, which more or less solves the same purpose as helmet. What does that mean, Gavaskar had become bad batsmen then? Link to comment
Guest BossBhai Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 -- Removed on request of the user -- Link to comment
vvvslaxman Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 Dont worry Philanders avg will come back to normal but concentrate on Toshack and Bowes ... how can such trundlers have that sort of an Avg ? Talk about present.. At this point he is better than any fast bowler from any era going by the raw stat. Around 12 tests if his average is above 20 then never ever open a word about dosai and bowels Link to comment
Guest BossBhai Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 -- Removed on request of the user -- Link to comment
vvvslaxman Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 So you think that Sunil Gavaskar belonged to Hobbs era? Anyways, I can take the argument that Sunil Gavaskar and Viv Richards took on fast bowling so they should get some credit for that. But if you say somebody should be given credit for playing without helmet when playing conditions were so easy that player could play cricket until grand-pa-esque of 50, then I can only laugh. In between, Gavaskar had also started wearing a fibre glass skull cap to protect his head towards the later part of his career, which more or less solves the same purpose as helmet. What does that mean, Gavaskar had become bad batsmen then? [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7rybPvBa3Oc]Bodyline!!! - YouTube[/ame] This is what era Link to comment
Guest BossBhai Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 -- Removed on request of the user -- Link to comment
vvvslaxman Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 In present day cricket you need a bare minimum of 200 Test wkts atleast to make the cut but not long ago you proclaimed that Bowes & Co were the greatest. You also have proclaimed that since 99 > 55 Brad is the best ... so it implies that Toshack is about the same level as Akram and Bowes the same level as Donald. Who said 47 wickets are enough to make the cut in the past.. you decided randomly? :cantstop: 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