Crim Watch: LdS Lying?
Mad Hamish
cleaning out
(I moved the entire past archive from agent between computers when I
had reason to suspect that my last one was dying)
and I found the following was still present
On Mon, 20 May 2002 17:41:58 +0200 (CEST), Anonymous Coredump
<mixm...@remailer.segfault.net> wrote:
>On 17/5/02 in the thread "Still think that SL can't bat overseas
>Hamish?", LdS responded to an enquiry [Andrew Dunford] as to which
>stand at Lords he was sitting in to be able to pass judgement on the
>conditions at the ground with;
>
>"The BEST seat in the house. In my lounge room watching foxtel!!"
>
>This was odd as I had no recall of any previous indication from LdS of
>him being a Foxtel subscriber. A Google search confirmed this. Since
>this post he has made no reference or inference I can find to him being
>a Foxtel subscriber.
>
>On the contrary; on the same date in the thread "Anybody have a link to
>the SL-Eng commentary?", he was pleading to be informed of any webcast
>commentary. If he had Fox why would he bother?
>Despite producing dozens of posts on the Perera issue not a single one
>contains any statement like "His action looked fine to me when I was
>watching last night...".
>Anyone who was watching Foxtel could not deny Perera's action is
>questionable.
>LdS has avoided answering serveral direct questions such as "When did
>you see him bowl."
>On 19/5 in the thread "Perera" LdS wrote; "What about Murali with his
>sling on in the grandstand?" If LdS had been watching the Foxtel
>coverage immediately prior to this post he would have seen MM sitting
>on the players balcony and obviously not wearing a sling.
>
>
>His Fox claim looks a lie.
>
>
>Crim Watch
Larrys response is found at
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=TlhG8.489%24l62.22208%40ozemail.com.au&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
and contains the following
""Anonymous Coredump" <mixm...@remailer.segfault.net> wrote in
message
news:ecbc4e46c089c7d6...@remailer.segfault.net...
> On 17/5/02 in the thread "Still think that SL can't bat overseas
> Hamish?", LdS responded to an enquiry [Andrew Dunford] as to which
> stand at Lords he was sitting in to be able to pass judgement on the
> conditions at the ground with;
>
> "The BEST seat in the house. In a lounge room watching foxtel!!"
>
> This was odd as I had no recall of any previous indication from LdS of
> him being a Foxtel subscriber. A Google search confirmed this. Since
> this post he has made no reference or inference I can find to him being
> a Foxtel subscriber."
as you can see the quoted section in Larry's response is different
from what I have on my computer, so it does appear that Larry modified
quoted text in his post.
Of course it's also possible that I've modified things to frame Larry
but I think it moves the burdon of proof for claims that people have
lied about Larry to the accuser eh Bob?.
--
"Hope is replaced by fear and dreams by survival, most of us get by."
Stuart Adamson 1958-2001
Mad Hamish
Hamish Laws
h_l...@aardvark.net.au
alvey
snip facts
>
> as you can see the quoted section in Larry's response is different
> from what I have on my computer, so it does appear that Larry modified
> quoted text in his post.
>
> Of course it's also possible that I've modified things to frame Larry
> but I think it moves the burdon of proof for claims that people have
> lied about Larry to the accuser eh Bob?.
I don't know what you hope to achieve here Mad. Those of us who stated
that this actually happened were labelled as liars by Crazy Bob so I
don't see how you expect him to apologise now on the basis of this post.
Still, I eagerly await a response from Bobsie to see if he's got any new
ploys, or whether the old ones are still stinking the place out.
"I don't enjoy doing this." [The Lie. You love it]
"You're twisting words." [I'm Losing Here]
"I've said all I'm going to say on this." [The Weasel]
Oldies, but certainly not goodies.
oty Duberjie
alvey
Mad Hamish
<alvey_digi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Mad Hamish wrote:
>
>snip facts
>>
>> as you can see the quoted section in Larry's response is different
>> from what I have on my computer, so it does appear that Larry modified
>> quoted text in his post.
>>
>> Of course it's also possible that I've modified things to frame Larry
>> but I think it moves the burdon of proof for claims that people have
>> lied about Larry to the accuser eh Bob?.
>
>I don't know what you hope to achieve here Mad. Those of us who stated
>that this actually happened were labelled as liars by Crazy Bob so I
>don't see how you expect him to apologise now on the basis of this post.
Largely I'm wondering how he's going to get past me reposting the
original and accuse me of lying about Larry again.
After all he has no proof that I'm lying so based on his standard of
proof for witnesses as to Larry lying if he's accusing me of lying
then he's lying...
>Still, I eagerly await a response from Bobsie to see if he's got any new
> ploys, or whether the old ones are still stinking the place out.
>
>"I don't enjoy doing this." [The Lie. You love it]
>"You're twisting words." [I'm Losing Here]
>"I've said all I'm going to say on this." [The Weasel]
>
>Oldies, but certainly not goodies.
>
>oty Duberjie
h r i p a t h i k a m a t h @hotmail.com Shripathi Kamath
"Mad Hamish" <h_l...@aardvark.net.au> wrote in message
news:1n0kpv0m3t2js658v...@4ax.com...
<snip>
>
> Largely I'm wondering how he's going to get past me reposting the
> original and accuse me of lying about Larry again.
>
> After all he has no proof that I'm lying so based on his standard of
> proof for witnesses as to Larry lying if he's accusing me of lying
> then he's lying...
>
Not really. All he has to do is continue the game. By posting an email
similar to the following:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mad Hamish" <h_l...@aardvark.net.au>
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 8:59 PM
Subject: Re: Crim Watch: LdS Lying?
Bob, I made up that post just to illustrate a point. Larry never wrote it.
--
"Hope is replaced by fear and dreams by survival, most of us get by."
Stuart Adamson 1958-2001
Mad Hamish
Hamish Laws
h_l...@aardvark.net.au
---
And the burden shifts right back to you.
He does not have to accuse you of lying at all. He just has to express
belief that you sent the above email to him, and he assumed that you meant
it. You can accuse him of making it up (like he can accuse you of making up
that post you recovered). He can respond and deny making it up, you can
accuse him of lying on that, and we are right back where we started.
--
Shripathi Kamath
P.S. Can you please reproduce the entire post you recovered from your
hard-drive? Along with all the NNTP headers and news path, message ID and
everything?
Mad Hamish
h i k a m a t h @ h o t m a i l . c o m> wrote:
>
>"Mad Hamish" <h_l...@aardvark.net.au> wrote in message
>news:1n0kpv0m3t2js658v...@4ax.com...
>
><snip>
>
>>
>> Largely I'm wondering how he's going to get past me reposting the
>> original and accuse me of lying about Larry again.
>>
>> After all he has no proof that I'm lying so based on his standard of
>> proof for witnesses as to Larry lying if he's accusing me of lying
>> then he's lying...
>>
>
>Not really. All he has to do is continue the game. By posting an email
>similar to the following:
>
I wouldn't expect Bob to be dishonest in that fashion.
If Bob did do that then I'll _know_ the levels of dishonesty that he'd
stoop to,
I couldn't prove it but I'd know it.
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Mad Hamish" <h_l...@aardvark.net.au>
>Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
>Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 8:59 PM
>Subject: Re: Crim Watch: LdS Lying?
>
>Bob, I made up that post just to illustrate a point. Larry never wrote it.
>
>
>"Hope is replaced by fear and dreams by survival, most of us get by."
>Stuart Adamson 1958-2001
>
>Mad Hamish
>Hamish Laws
>h_l...@aardvark.net.au
>
>
>And the burden shifts right back to you.
>
>He does not have to accuse you of lying at all.
He has recently accused me of lying about Larry.
> He just has to express
>belief that you sent the above email to him, and he assumed that you meant
>it. You can accuse him of making it up (like he can accuse you of making up
>that post you recovered). He can respond and deny making it up, you can
>accuse him of lying on that, and we are right back where we started.
No, because if he did stoop to that level of dishonesty I'd be
finished with him
P.S. Can you please reproduce the entire post you recovered from your
hard-drive? Along with all the NNTP headers and news path, message ID
and
everything?
"Path:
uni-berlin.de!fu-berlin.de!news.netway.at!newsmaster-01.atnet.at!atnet.at!newsrouter.chello.at!newsfeed.Austria.EU.net!newsfeed.kpnqwest.at!anon.lcs.mit.edu!nym.alias.net!mail2news
From: Anonymous Coredump <mixm...@remailer.segfault.net>
Comments: This message did not originate from the Sender address
above.
It was remailed automatically by anonymizing remailer
software.
Please report problems or inappropriate use to the
remailer administrator at <joc...@segfault.net>.
http://remailer.segfault.net/mixmaster/
X-No-Archive: Yes
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Crim Watch: LdS Lying?
Message-ID: <ecbc4e46c089c7d6...@remailer.segfault.net>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 17:41:58 +0200 (CEST)
Mail-To-News-Contact: postm...@nym.alias.net
Organization: mail...@nym.alias.net
Lines: 33
Xref: uni-berlin.de rec.sport.cricket:507512
Crim Watch"
Cricketislife!
On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 17:13:12 +1100, Mad Hamish
<h_l...@aardvark.net.au> wrote:
>I wouldn't expect Bob to be dishonest in that fashion.
>If Bob did do that then I'll _know_ the levels of dishonesty that he'd
>stoop to,
>I couldn't prove it but I'd know it.
Then may be Bob will jus repost his own post addressed to u earlier, n
ask u to read it again:-)
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=3f8d8d2c.61b6.16838%40opus.randori.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
+++++++++
So now listen to what I have to say, and learn it well. 7
words. Shouldn't tax a man of your intellect very hard, and
you have no excuse for not getting it exactly right in
future. Here they come
<start of the 7 words>
I no longer give a rat's arse
<end of the 7 words>
++++++++++++
CiL
then ofcourse u take it further up, by accusing him a weasel and by
his silence, claim that ur accuastion is proved, valid n nothing but
truth.
Then Ken higgs will get in, Then Larry will come back from fishing and
get onto this and ofcourse never discount the fact that Dunford might
decide to get in
h r i p a t h i k a m a t h @hotmail.com Shripathi Kamath
Thanks, dude
--
Shripathi Kamath
Mad Hamish
<cricke...@rediffmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 17:13:12 +1100, Mad Hamish
><h_l...@aardvark.net.au> wrote:
>
>>I wouldn't expect Bob to be dishonest in that fashion.
>>If Bob did do that then I'll _know_ the levels of dishonesty that he'd
>>stoop to,
>>I couldn't prove it but I'd know it.
>
>Then may be Bob will jus repost his own post addressed to u earlier, n
>ask u to read it again:-)
>
>http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=3f8d8d2c.61b6.16838%40opus.randori.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
>
>+++++++++
>So now listen to what I have to say, and learn it well. 7
>words. Shouldn't tax a man of your intellect very hard, and
>you have no excuse for not getting it exactly right in
>future. Here they come
><start of the 7 words>
>I no longer give a rat's arse
><end of the 7 words>
>++++++++++++
He could, I might be in his killfile.so he might not have seen the
message.
But if he reads the message I think he's honest enough to think about
it and ask himself a couple of questions.
Noticably about whether he can still claim that Alvey, Moby and I lied
about Larry altering quoted text in a post.
Perhaps he can give me the same benefit of the doubt he gave Larry.
>then ofcourse u take it further up, by accusing him a weasel and by
>his silence, claim that ur accuastion is proved, valid n nothing but
>truth.
>Then Ken higgs will get in,
I won't see that
> Then Larry will come back from fishing and
>get onto this and ofcourse never discount the fact that Dunford might
>decide to get in
Well all Larry can do is deny writing it and accuse me of falsifying
the post.
I know I didn't do so ...
Will Sutton
Bob Dubery
> frame Larry but I think it moves the burdon of proof for
> claims that people have lied about Larry to the accuser eh
> Bob?. --
This is hardly the first time you've tried to rekindle some
old flame war. So here's some things for you to consider
before we end up with another unpleasent ending.
Have you derived any satisfaction from the previous
episodes?
Do you think it's going to be any different this time?
How many people do you think actually give a toss?
Mad Hamish
wrote:
>> Of course it's also possible that I've modified things to
>> frame Larry but I think it moves the burdon of proof for
>> claims that people have lied about Larry to the accuser eh
>> Bob?.
>
>This is hardly the first time you've tried to rekindle some
>old flame war. So here's some things for you to consider
>before we end up with another unpleasent ending.
So Bob, you're still going to accuse me of lying about Larry like you
did a week or two back are you?
Because it appears to me that you give Larry and Ken far more slack
than you do me.
>
>Have you derived any satisfaction from the previous
>episodes?
>
>Do you think it's going to be any different this time?
>
>How many people do you think actually give a toss?
Are you going to address the issue or not?
Mad Hamish
wrote:
>> Of course it's also possible that I've modified things to
>> frame Larry but I think it moves the burdon of proof for
>> claims that people have lied about Larry to the accuser eh
>> Bob?. --
>
>This is hardly the first time you've tried to rekindle some
>old flame war. So here's some things for you to consider
>before we end up with another unpleasent ending.
What, you having to admit that you were wrong Bob?.
>
>Have you derived any satisfaction from the previous
>episodes?
>
>Do you think it's going to be any different this time?
Well I hope that you'll display a level of honestly sooner or later.
>
>How many people do you think actually give a toss?
How many people are you calling a liar when they told the truth?
alvey
snip
>
> Largely I'm wondering how he's going to get past me reposting the
> original and accuse me of lying about Larry again.
>
> After all he has no proof that I'm lying so based on his standard of
> proof for witnesses as to Larry lying if he's accusing me of lying
> then he's lying...
I think you're making a mistake by using Bobsie "standards" as a
benchmark. Something rational and realistic and would be a far better
platform.
alvey
in brisbane, hoping that Duberjie hasn't gone on holidays again. Or had
his mail server lose any posts. Again.
Mad Hamish
<alvey_digi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Mad Hamish wrote:
>
>snip
>>
>> Largely I'm wondering how he's going to get past me reposting the
>> original and accuse me of lying about Larry again.
>>
>> After all he has no proof that I'm lying so based on his standard of
>> proof for witnesses as to Larry lying if he's accusing me of lying
>> then he's lying...
>
>I think you're making a mistake by using Bobsie "standards" as a
>benchmark. Something rational and realistic and would be a far better
>platform.
He appears to have refused to comment on the grounds that he'll
incriminate himself.
alvey
> Christ, get a life Hamish
>
>
Not having a brain it's therefore impossible for you to have a concience.
Go away.
alvey
alvey
>
>
snip Avoid #1
>
> How many people do you think actually give a toss?
I do.
So let's have it Dubery. Are you calling Hamish a forger and liar?
alvey
alvey
> On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 18:54:26 +1000, alvey
> <alvey_digi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Mad Hamish wrote:
>>
>>snip
>>
>>>Largely I'm wondering how he's going to get past me reposting the
>>>original and accuse me of lying about Larry again.
>>>
>>>After all he has no proof that I'm lying so based on his standard of
>>>proof for witnesses as to Larry lying if he's accusing me of lying
>>>then he's lying...
>>
>>I think you're making a mistake by using Bobsie "standards" as a
>>benchmark. Something rational and realistic and would be a far better
>>platform.
>
>
> He appears to have refused to comment on the grounds that he'll
> incriminate himself.
Ahhh. Gutless Bob Rides Again. Don't you hate those endless sequels?
Personally I'd be completely unsurprised to soon be reading a
sanctimonious & sniffy Farewell to RSC. It'll be slipping the booties in
for all he's worth (zip), regretfully of course, and he won't be losing
any sleep, and it'll alllll be the fault of people who can't face the
fact that they're worse than Larry de Silva.
alvey
alvey
>
> On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 17:13:12 +1100, Mad Hamish
> <h_l...@aardvark.net.au> wrote:
>
>
>>I wouldn't expect Bob to be dishonest in that fashion.
>>If Bob did do that then I'll _know_ the levels of dishonesty that he'd
>>stoop to,
>>I couldn't prove it but I'd know it.
>
>
> Then may be Bob will jus repost his own post addressed to u earlier, n
> ask u to read it again:-)
>
> http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=3f8d8d2c.61b6.16838%40opus.randori.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
>
> +++++++++
> So now listen to what I have to say, and learn it well. 7
> words. Shouldn't tax a man of your intellect very hard, and
> you have no excuse for not getting it exactly right in
> future. Here they come
> <start of the 7 words>
> I no longer give a rat's arse
> <end of the 7 words>
> ++++++++++++
So if he didn't give a rodent's rectum why then did he reply?
alvey
Bob Dubery
I haven't called Hamish anything in this thread, let alone
addressed his honesty or the provenance of what he's posted.
So that question will go without an answer. It's not an
issue that I raised at all.
What I will do is provide a brief recap: I think Hamish
needs to ask himself how much satisfaction this saga has
produced for him in the past and wether he thinks it'll be
worthwhile for him to rekindle the flames again. That's for
him to answer. And for you too, I guess. I'm not going to
try and ponder what the answer is in either case, or wether
what's posted here reflects the true results of that
reflection (if any time is given for that reflection).
Hamish is seeking to drag me back into the never-ending
flamewar, and for me the answer is no, it's not worth it.
The "revenge", such as it was, has proven most definitely to
be a cold dish. I have no hunger for any more of it.
Of course, this allows you and Hamish to take a large number
of free shots. That, I guess, is the way it has to be, the
price that has to be paid. Not much of a price actually, but
I put it to you that the value of the "prize" that awaits
the "victor" is no greater.
If you want to keep on chasing that particular trophy then
go right ahead. I'm not in the race anymore.
So there you go. Take it or leave it. Make what you want of
it. Make what you want of any word of it.
Mad Hamish
wrote:
>> Bob Dubery wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> snip Avoid #1
>> >
>> > How many people do you think actually give a toss?
>>
>> I do.
>>
>> So let's have it Dubery. Are you calling Hamish a forger
>> and liar?
>
>I haven't called Hamish anything in this thread, let alone
>addressed his honesty or the provenance of what he's posted.
>So that question will go without an answer. It's not an
>issue that I raised at all.
>
No, you did however post that I'd lied about Larry a week or two back.
Now when confronted with evidence other than eyewitness accounts
you're backing away...
>What I will do is provide a brief recap: I think Hamish
>needs to ask himself how much satisfaction this saga has
>produced for him in the past and wether he thinks it'll be
>worthwhile for him to rekindle the flames again.
Here's a hint Bob, you got up on the moral highhorse and
> That's for
>him to answer. And for you too, I guess. I'm not going to
>try and ponder what the answer is in either case, or wether
>what's posted here reflects the true results of that
>reflection (if any time is given for that reflection).
>
>Hamish is seeking to drag me back into the never-ending
>flamewar, and for me the answer is no, it's not worth it.
Actually Hamish was providing evidence to a disputed point that you
felt quite free to throw allegations about a week or two back.
Now that there's clear evidence as opposed to just eyewitness reports
you're backing off.
>The "revenge", such as it was, has proven most definitely to
>be a cold dish. I have no hunger for any more of it.
Then perhaps you could apologize for stating that I'd lied about it?
>
>Of course, this allows you and Hamish to take a large number
>of free shots. That, I guess, is the way it has to be, the
>price that has to be paid. Not much of a price actually, but
>I put it to you that the value of the "prize" that awaits
>the "victor" is no greater.
Yeah, interesting how you back out of things as soon as there's
evidence against you but don't apologize for your own accusations
which are wrong.
>
>If you want to keep on chasing that particular trophy then
>go right ahead. I'm not in the race anymore.
>
>So there you go. Take it or leave it. Make what you want of
>it. Make what you want of any word of it.
alvey
You are the most pathetic person I've ever read on usenet Dubery.
*plonk*
Aditya Basrur
Wasn't Bob in your killfile?
Aditya
In Auckland, curious.
alvey
> alvey wrote:
>
>>Bob Dubery wrote:
>>
>>>
>>snip Avoid #1
>>
>>>How many people do you think actually give a toss?
>>
>>I do.
>>
>>So let's have it Dubery. Are you calling Hamish a forger and liar?
>>
>>
>>
>>alvey
>
>
> Wasn't Bob in your killfile?
I did a clean install on this notebook a few days ago. Mentioned in a
post too.
"Ahhh. The joys of a clean install. One gets to see how the little
people post all over again (*). <snip>
2003-10-24 13:06:59 PST
Aditya Basrur
>> Wasn't Bob in your killfile?
>
> I did a clean install on this notebook a few days ago. Mentioned in a
> post too.
>
> "Ahhh. The joys of a clean install. One gets to see how the little
> people post all over again (*). <snip>
> 2003-10-24 13:06:59 PST
Right. Now, what do I have to do to make your killfile?
And I thought I'd put down a few thoughts on Australian Cricket. Please let
me know if you agree:
1. It's no coincidence that Bradman, Border, the Waughs, Taylor, Slater,
Benaud, Alan Davidson, Bobby Simpson, O'Reilly, McGrath and a whole host of
others originally hailed from the same state. It's the only state that
continually produces good cricketers, as compared with the
Johnny-come-latelies from across the tweed.
2. Why is Victoria's contribution so continually underrated? Neil Harvey,
Shane Warne, Bill Lawry, Dean Jones, Merv Hughes and Matthew Elliott are
names that roll off the tongue very very well. Far better than any
Queenslanders.
3. Queensland has never really produced a good bowler. Jeff Thomson sprayed
it all over the show and was badly inconsistent - an early day Brett Lee, if
you like. Even Brett Lee is better than Thommo. For one thing, he's faster.
4. Healy was seriously overrated as a keeper. Gilchrist's made it to 200
dismissals in about half the time it took Healy.
5. Even Western Australia produced Lillee and Marsh (?). Tasmania can boast
Ponting and Boon. South Australia has a few good players.
6. So, in sum, is Queensland even pulling its weight in terms of overall
Australian Cricket? Is Hayden the only Queenslander who's ever done
anything? If there is an anti-Queensland conspiracy, on the weight of
history, it's fully justified. Queenslanders had better start pulling their
weight before they expect any selection favours, I think. You can't expect
your players to be picked if they're no damn good.
Thanks,
Aditya
h r i p a t h i k a m a t h @hotmail.com Shripathi Kamath
"alvey" <alvey_digi...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bndikg$vpmsi$3...@ID-155113.news.uni-berlin.de...
Probably to indicate that he didn't give a rodent's rectum.
Kinda like the way you tell people that you are no longer going to read
their stuff by *plonk*ing them. Sometimes on more than one occasion.
--
Shripathi Kamath
alvey
etiquette discussion recently, imo telling people that they're plonked
is just plain good manners. Even if they are a worthless & thoroughly
despicable specimen like Gutless Bob. And my "plonk" is final statement,
finito. I just Googled up Gutless's quote above and lo and behold,
there's another 20 fucking lines from the sanctimonious shit immediately
after saying he doesn't give a rats. lol.
And amazingly, the pathetic creature's very first statement [to Mad] in
this minor opus *after* "not giving a rats" is, "Considering that you've
told lies about Larry...". Pretty straight-forward that. Gutless doesn't
give a rats arse but is perfectly happy to hurl baseless libels around.
Iirc, the story went; Hamish & half a dozen others of us said 'Larry
forged a post'. Gutless says 'The post isn't there. You're all liars.'
Hamish re-produces the missing post. Simple really. You'd think that a
person with *any* concience whatsoever would make *some* response other
than the pathetic and nauseous guilt-avoidance mush that he did. Pathetic.
Oh and if you believe that my failure to leave people in the Bin for all
eternity is some sort of personal failing, then I agree with that entirely.
alvey
h r i p a t h i k a m a t h @hotmail.com Shripathi Kamath
Considering that this is the usenet, Alvey, how far does one go to take
every statement in its literal sense? And only in its literal sense?
> And amazingly, the pathetic creature's very first statement [to Mad] in
> this minor opus *after* "not giving a rats" is, "Considering that you've
> told lies about Larry...". Pretty straight-forward that. Gutless doesn't
> give a rats arse but is perfectly happy to hurl baseless libels around.
> Iirc, the story went; Hamish & half a dozen others of us said 'Larry
> forged a post'. Gutless says 'The post isn't there. You're all liars.'
Maybe he does not want to acknowledge it. Won't be the first time or the
first person to have done it. As for Gutless Bob name-calling Alvey and co.
as liars, why, whoever has heard of someone doing such a thing?
Weren't you the one that offered the peace-pipe on this the last time? How
about doing it the next time he is out of your killfile, dude? Makes for a
more entertaining forum.
Plenty of flame wars to be had on just cricket.
Unless of course, you are just aiming for plain good manners, and don't want
to overshoot.
> Hamish re-produces the missing post. Simple really. You'd think that a
> person with *any* concience whatsoever would make *some* response other
> than the pathetic and nauseous guilt-avoidance mush that he did. Pathetic.
>
> Oh and if you believe that my failure to leave people in the Bin for all
> eternity is some sort of personal failing, then I agree with that
entirely.
>
Not personal failing at all, just human nature. People make 'promises' on
usenet all the time. None are cast in stone.
(PS: I was referring to you plonking the troll of last year Paul Bailey a
few times in rather quick succession.)
Let it go Alvey. It is much better discussing how wimpy or manly Graeme
Smith was or why Katich really deserved the spot over Love.
--
Shripathi Kamath
Moby
> Let it go Alvey. It is much better discussing how wimpy or manly Graeme
> Smith was or why Katich really deserved the spot over Love.
"Let is go"??
That's a rather amusing comment.
Moby
Moby
<snip>
That was pathetic, Bob.
If it's so unimportant, just answer the fucking question.
Moby
alvey
> "alvey" <alvey_digi...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:bnelbg$115ss2$1...@ID-155113.news.uni-berlin.de...
snip
>
> Not personal failing at all, just human nature. People make 'promises' on
> usenet all the time. None are cast in stone.
>
> (PS: I was referring to you plonking the troll of last year Paul Bailey a
> few times in rather quick succession.)
Eh? Not that it's important, but I have no recollection of this at all.
How could I have plonked the same person "a few times in rather quick
succession"? Will go and check.
>
> Let it go Alvey. It is much better discussing how wimpy or manly Graeme
> Smith was or why Katich really deserved the spot over Love.
Can't do that. In my rulebook there's a major difference between
name-calling, as in "You're a stupid shithead." and baselessly calling
people liars. And what's even more repulsive in this case of the
pathetic, hypocritical & sanctimonious wretch Dubery is his complete
refusal to accept engagement. Sling some mud and then piously announce
something like, "I have nothing further to add on the subject." when the
victim responds is truly pathetic.
He owes apologies and if you can't see that then I'd be both surprised
and disappointed.
alvey
in brisbane, noting the similarites between Smith & Dubery. Seperated at
birth?
alvey
> alvey wrote:
>
snip
>
> Right. Now, what do I have to do to make your killfile?
Make some baseless allegations. Libel a few people. Be completely
gormless. Have some sort of weird vendetta against iconic posters.
Refuse to admit error/apologise. Be a hypocrite. Be stupid.
Alternatively, you could save yourself a shitload of effort & typing and
just post, "Bob Dubery is a great bloke and I worship the water he walks
on."
alvey
Cricketislife!
<alvey_digi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Aditya Basrur wrote:
>
>> alvey wrote:
>>
>snip
>>
>> Right. Now, what do I have to do to make your killfile?
>
>Make some baseless allegations. Libel a few people. Be completely
>gormless. Have some sort of weird vendetta against iconic posters.
<snip>
In chennai, raising the eyebrow on the usage 'Iconic posters', hmm...
Aditya Basrur
I think you need to talk to Raghu Jetley about me ...
>
What about my allegations on Queensland Cricket? They weren't baseless, you
know, and I think they deserve a response.
Aditya
In Auckland, and seriously wondering who Queensland's last decent bowler
was. Was McDermott a Queenslander?
h r i p a t h i k a m a t h @hotmail.com Shripathi Kamath
> Shripathi Kamath wrote:
>
> > "alvey" <alvey_digi...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:bnelbg$115ss2$1...@ID-155113.news.uni-berlin.de...
>
> snip
> >
> > Not personal failing at all, just human nature. People make 'promises'
on
> > usenet all the time. None are cast in stone.
> >
> > (PS: I was referring to you plonking the troll of last year Paul Bailey
a
> > few times in rather quick succession.)
>
> Eh? Not that it's important, but I have no recollection of this at all.
> How could I have plonked the same person "a few times in rather quick
> succession"? Will go and check.
Ok, just don't go to town if you find it over a period of a few months. It
is just my recall.
> >
> > Let it go Alvey. It is much better discussing how wimpy or manly Graeme
> > Smith was or why Katich really deserved the spot over Love.
>
> Can't do that. In my rulebook there's a major difference between
> name-calling, as in "You're a stupid shithead." and baselessly calling
> people liars. And what's even more repulsive in this case of the
> pathetic, hypocritical & sanctimonious wretch Dubery is his complete
> refusal to accept engagement. Sling some mud and then piously announce
> something like, "I have nothing further to add on the subject." when the
> victim responds is truly pathetic.
>
> He owes apologies and if you can't see that then I'd be both surprised
> and disappointed.
>
I can understand that you'd be disappointed, but I am surprised that you are
surprised. Shit like this happens all the time. You find accusations of
being called liars repulsive, others probably find being called a stupid
shithead or a fuckwit offensive. With or without baseless
allegations/justification.
I only made a plea, it is, and always was your discretion to take it or
leave it. It is unlikely that you will elicit an apology for anything that
you find repulsive. So your choices are to keep someone out of the killfile
and chase him around when you know you dislike reading what he puts up and
not get an apology, or move on.
If you are really interested in an apology, and I am not about to speak for
Bob, you are more likely to get it if you ask of Bob Dubery than you are to
get it from the pathetic, hypocritical & sanctimonious wretch Dubery or
Gutless Bob.
FWIW, I enjoy reading all you folks on matters of cricket, and often on
other things as well, but more when you do about cricket. This, when
escalated is gonna a bad aftertaste for everyone.
--
Shripathi Kamath
h r i p a t h i k a m a t h @hotmail.com Shripathi Kamath
"Moby" <Mo...@unimail.com.au> wrote in message
news:b4bbf26f.0310...@posting.google.com...
It is indeed. I am ROTFL.
--
Shripathi Kamath
Bob Dubery
This fire is only going to go out if the protagonists stop
chucking petrol on the embers.
alvey
> alvey wrote:
snip
>
>
> What about my allegations on Queensland Cricket? They weren't baseless, you
> know, and I think they deserve a response.
I sure they do. I'll get my people right onto it when they get back from
lunch.
>
> Aditya
> In Auckland, and seriously wondering who Queensland's last decent bowler
> was. Was McDermott a Queenslander?
Define "decent"? (btw JR Thomson wasn't a Qlder. Sydney boy who moved
north after his "real" Test debut in 1974.)
Aditya Basrur
200 test wickets. Average less than 25.
Aditya
In Auckland, thinking Bichel is the T E Srinivasan of fast bowlers ...
alvey
> "alvey" <alvey_digi...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:bnfb9j$10uplq$1...@ID-155113.news.uni-berlin.de...
snip well written and sensible stuff.
And I certainly appreciate that I'm highly unlikely to receive an
apology from someone while I call them sanctimonious shits etc, but
could you let me know why the pious pissant won't apologise to the
recently libelled Mad Hamish?
alvey
Michael Creevey
Not many, I'm afraid.
alvey
alvey
Michael Creevey
"Aditya Basrur" <aditya...@pullyourownfinger.hotmail.com> wrote in
message news:bndo12$22h$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz...
> Right. Now, what do I have to do to make your killfile?
>
> And I thought I'd put down a few thoughts on Australian Cricket. Please
let
> me know if you agree:
No.
But pretty good troll :-)
You said these charges deserved an answer, so I'll give it a go, without any
tongue in cheek, tongue in any cheeks for that matter:
>
> 1. It's no coincidence that Bradman, Border, the Waughs, Taylor, Slater,
> Benaud, Alan Davidson, Bobby Simpson, O'Reilly, McGrath and a whole host
of
> others originally hailed from the same state. It's the only state that
> continually produces good cricketers, as compared with the
> Johnny-come-latelies from across the tweed.
Great record, especially pre- about 1960. Had at least 2 great players in
the 90s.
>
> 2. Why is Victoria's contribution so continually underrated? Neil Harvey,
> Shane Warne, Bill Lawry, Dean Jones, Merv Hughes and Matthew Elliott are
> names that roll off the tongue very very well. Far better than any
> Queenslanders.
Incorrect. Greg Chappell, Border, Thomson, Hayden, Healy, McDermott roll off
the tongue better (but so does olive oil)
>
> 3. Queensland has never really produced a good bowler. Jeff Thomson
sprayed
> it all over the show and was badly inconsistent - an early day Brett Lee,
if
> you like. Even Brett Lee is better than Thommo. For one thing, he's
faster.
Incorrect :-)
Thommo was inconsistent, but not when on song. When on song, the most
frightening bowler ever. Its good for him however that noballs were not
credited to bowlers analyses for the whole of his career.
>
> 4. Healy was seriously overrated as a keeper. Gilchrist's made it to 200
> dismissals in about half the time it took Healy.
Brilliant- but Alvey just wasn't biting.
>
> 5. Even Western Australia produced Lillee and Marsh (?). Tasmania can
boast
> Ponting and Boon. South Australia has a few good players.
Bradman :-)
All the states have produced and featured great players. All the states, bar
Tasmania, could produce all-time XIs better than any test side going.
>
> 6. So, in sum, is Queensland even pulling its weight in terms of overall
> Australian Cricket? Is Hayden the only Queenslander who's ever done
> anything? If there is an anti-Queensland conspiracy, on the weight of
> history, it's fully justified. Queenslanders had better start pulling
their
> weight before they expect any selection favours, I think. You can't expect
> your players to be picked if they're no damn good.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Aditya
Why nit? Mumbai does.
Regards,
Michael Creevey
Aditya Basrur
> "Aditya Basrur" <aditya...@pullyourownfinger.hotmail.com> wrote in
> message news:bndo12$22h$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz...
>
>>
>> 2. Why is Victoria's contribution so continually underrated? Neil
>> Harvey, Shane Warne, Bill Lawry, Dean Jones, Merv Hughes and Matthew
>> Elliott are names that roll off the tongue very very well. Far
>> better than any Queenslanders.
>
> Incorrect. Greg Chappell,
> Border,
NSW
> Thomson,
NSW
> Hayden, Healy,
Not as good as Gilly
> McDermott roll off the tongue better (but so does olive oil)
McDermott: that's one. Average of 25+.
>>
>> 3. Queensland has never really produced a good bowler. Jeff Thomson
>> sprayed it all over the show and was badly inconsistent - an early
>> day Brett Lee, if you like. Even Brett Lee is better than Thommo.
>> For one thing, he's faster.
>
> Incorrect :-)
> Thommo was inconsistent, but not when on song. When on song, the most
> frightening bowler ever. Its good for him however that noballs were
> not credited to bowlers analyses for the whole of his career.
Also, per Alvey's admission, from NSW originally.
Leaving McDermott (?), Hayden and Healy as your only really good players.
I'd probably take Morris and Taylor over Hayden, still.
<snip>
>
> Why nit? Mumbai does.
Mumbai has almost always had the best batsman in India since before
independence. A brief and mildly controversial list would look something
like:
1. C K Nayudu
2. Vijay Merchant
3. Vijay Hazare (Baroda)
4. Vinoo Mankad
5. Polly Umrigar
6. Mansur Ali Khan Pataudi (Hyderabad)
7. Sunil Gavaskar
8. Dilip Vengsarkar
9. Sachin Tendulkar
Note that the universally recognised greats on this lists - Nayudu,
Merchant, Gavaskar, Tendulkar - all come from Bombay.
Can Queensland claim anything similar?
Aditya
In Auckland, off to change his trousers at the suggestion that Queensland
could begin to rival Mumbai as a domestic force.
Paul Robson
I think Murali chucks and Asoka is a rubbish umpire.
Paul Robson
> Make some baseless allegations. Libel a few people. Be completely
> gormless. Have some sort of weird vendetta against iconic posters.
> Refuse to admit error/apologise. Be a hypocrite. Be stupid.
The expert speaks....
Michael Creevey
> Michael Creevey wrote:
> > "Aditya Basrur" <aditya...@pullyourownfinger.hotmail.com> wrote in
> > message news:bndo12$22h$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz...
> >
> <snip>
> >>
> >> 2. Why is Victoria's contribution so continually underrated? Neil
> >> Harvey, Shane Warne, Bill Lawry, Dean Jones, Merv Hughes and Matthew
> >> Elliott are names that roll off the tongue very very well. Far
> >> better than any Queenslanders.
> >
> > Incorrect. Greg Chappell,
> South Australia, I thought
>
> > Border,
> NSW
>
> > Thomson,
> NSW
>
> > Hayden, Healy,
> Not as good as Gilly
>
> > McDermott roll off the tongue better (but so does olive oil)
> McDermott: that's one. Average of 25+.
Averaged 20ish for several years. Had 2 distinct careers; 1 the early
Mcdermott, pretty wild and woolly, and 2 after his recall in 91, where he
was pretty consistent but dogged by injury which finally forced his
retirement. A much better bowler than Hughes at the respective peaks, but
Hughes was a wholehearted trier.
>
> >>
> >> 3. Queensland has never really produced a good bowler. Jeff Thomson
> >> sprayed it all over the show and was badly inconsistent - an early
> >> day Brett Lee, if you like. Even Brett Lee is better than Thommo.
> >> For one thing, he's faster.
> >
> > Incorrect :-)
> > Thommo was inconsistent, but not when on song. When on song, the most
> > frightening bowler ever. Its good for him however that noballs were
> > not credited to bowlers analyses for the whole of his career.
>
> Also, per Alvey's admission, from NSW originally.
True. But that's Alvey's qualifier, not mine. I think its fairer to identify
a player with the team which they played most for. As per such, Gilly is
Westralian and McGill is a New Southern Whale.
>
> Leaving McDermott (?), Hayden and Healy as your only really good players.
> I'd probably take Morris and Taylor over Hayden, still.
You could, but you'd be wrong :-). Taylor is not on the same plane as
Haydos, but Taylor's peak period was quite impressive. Morris may be
seriously underestimated. Same with Barnes- born in Qld, but played for NSW.
>
> <snip>
> >
> > Why nit? Mumbai does.
Why nit?
>
> Mumbai has almost always had the best batsman in India since before
> independence. A brief and mildly controversial list would look something
> like:
>
> 1. C K Nayudu
> 2. Vijay Merchant
> 3. Vijay Hazare (Baroda)
> 4. Vinoo Mankad
> 5. Polly Umrigar
> 6. Mansur Ali Khan Pataudi (Hyderabad)
> 7. Sunil Gavaskar
> 8. Dilip Vengsarkar
> 9. Sachin Tendulkar
>
> Note that the universally recognised greats on this lists - Nayudu,
I wouldn't call Nayudu universally recognized as great.
> Merchant, Gavaskar, Tendulkar - all come from Bombay.
>
> Can Queensland claim anything similar?
This is a legitimate Qld all-time XI (in context of what I said above about
being identified with the team of greatest representation)
Hayden
Brown
GChappell
Border
Burge
Mackay
Ron Archer
Healy
Thomson
McCool
Mcdermott
Qld has 3 of the greatest keepers of all time- Tallon, Grout and Healy (a
superior keeper to Gilly, but no comparison as a batsman). This team would
probably thrash the current Indian side, home or away.Perhaps Ironmonger for
Thommo on a Krumbler.
>
> Aditya
> In Auckland, off to change his trousers at the suggestion that Queensland
> could begin to rival Mumbai as a domestic force.
>
>
Euggh! I hope your floor is of easily wipable material.
Regards,
Michael Creevey
Paul Robson
> And I certainly appreciate that I'm highly unlikely to receive an
> apology from someone while I call them sanctimonious shits etc, but
> could you let me know why the pious pissant won't apologise to the
> recently libelled Mad Hamish?
Subconcious bias.
alvey
>
>
> Mumbai has almost always had the best batsman in India since before
> independence. A brief and mildly controversial list would look something
> like:
>
> 1. C K Nayudu
> 2. Vijay Merchant
> 3. Vijay Hazare (Baroda)
> 4. Vinoo Mankad
> 5. Polly Umrigar
> 6. Mansur Ali Khan Pataudi (Hyderabad)
> 7. Sunil Gavaskar
> 8. Dilip Vengsarkar
> 9. Sachin Tendulkar
>
> Note that the universally recognised greats on this lists - Nayudu,
> Merchant, Gavaskar, Tendulkar - all come from Bombay.
>
> Can Queensland claim anything similar?
Absolutely not. We can't claim one single Flat Track Bully. Let alone
the near full team of 'em you've put forward here. And I'll mention that
it's a tad difficult to have a Good Test Record when you don't get
selected. Why just today I heard the NSV publicity machine describe the
immensely over-rated MEW as, and I kid you not, "one of Australia's
greatest ever players." Blimey! And who knows what sort of record Stewey
Law or Jamie Cox or Jo Angel or Dirk Tazelaar would have had if they'd
got a few Tests.
>
> Aditya
> In Auckland, off to change his trousers at the suggestion that Queensland
> could begin to rival Mumbai as a domestic force.
Whoa there man with trousers around ankles. [And a large box of Kleenex
handy.]
Traditional Wisdom #1: Indians are shit on fast decks.
Traditional Wisdom #2: The Gabba is the second fastest deck in the world.
Traditional Wisdom #3: Qld has an abundance of good fast-meds.
Can you see where I'm going with this?
Michael Creevey
> > > Incorrect. Greg Chappell,
> > South Australia, I thought
> >
> > > Border,
> > NSW
> >
> > > Thomson,
> > NSW
> >
> > > Hayden, Healy,
> > Not as good as Gilly
> Wessels then?
Blasted turncoat.
alvey
Of course you can provide an example of where I've baselessly called
someone a liar.
alvey
Bob Dubery
> South Australia, I thought
>
> > Border,
> NSW
>
> > Thomson,
> NSW
>
> > Hayden, Healy,
> Not as good as Gilly
Aditya Basrur
> Aditya Basrur wrote:
>>
>
>>
>> Mumbai has almost always had the best batsman in India since before
>> independence. A brief and mildly controversial list would look
>> something like:
>>
>> 1. C K Nayudu
>> 2. Vijay Merchant
>> 3. Vijay Hazare (Baroda)
>> 4. Vinoo Mankad
>> 5. Polly Umrigar
>> 6. Mansur Ali Khan Pataudi (Hyderabad)
>> 7. Sunil Gavaskar
>> 8. Dilip Vengsarkar
>> 9. Sachin Tendulkar
>>
>> Note that the universally recognised greats on this lists - Nayudu,
>> Merchant, Gavaskar, Tendulkar - all come from Bombay.
>>
>> Can Queensland claim anything similar?
>
> Absolutely not. We can't claim one single Flat Track Bully. Let alone
> the near full team of 'em you've put forward here.
Considering you're old enough to have watched Merchant, Hazare, Mankad,
Umrigar, and Pataudi, could you tell me the basis on which you'd class them
FTBs? Doesn't Umrigar have a rather good record in NZ?
And as for Gavaskar, Vengsarkar, and Tendulkar, that's a more outlandish
troll than usual.
Q: Who was the last Qlder to make a 100 and a 50 at Headingley, when no
other bat on either side passed 50?
> And I'll mention
> that it's a tad difficult to have a Good Test Record when you don't
> get selected.
It's also pretty difficult to get selected when you're no damn good. (As in,
most Queensland Cricketers.) At least in countries with a good Cricketing
setup, like Australia.
> Why just today I heard the NSV publicity machine
> describe the immensely over-rated MEW as, and I kid you not, "one of
> Australia's greatest ever players."
I wouldn't disagree. How many Qlders have averages above 40? And played spin
as well as MEW? I can think of about 1.
> Blimey! And who knows what sort
> of record Stewey Law or Jamie Cox or Jo Angel or Dirk Tazelaar would
> have had if they'd got a few Tests.
Yes. They're about as good as Tamil Nadu's great T E Srinivasan. Or Michael
Dalvi or Gopal Bose. When other guys from TN got a shot, such as
Venkatraghvan, they ended up looking hopeless. It's better for you that Cox
and Angel (ROLF at these names) didn't get a decent run. It means that you
can harp on about them ad nauseum ad infinitum.
Because, of the Qld players who did get a shot, you have Hayden, Healy and
McDermott (with a Kapil-esque average) who've managed to create any dent in
people's long-term memory.
Great record. Really.
>>
>> Aditya
>> In Auckland, off to change his trousers at the suggestion that
>> Queensland could begin to rival Mumbai as a domestic force.
>
> Whoa there man with trousers around ankles. [And a large box of
> Kleenex handy.]
>
> Traditional Wisdom #1: Indians are shit on fast decks.
> Traditional Wisdom #2: The Gabba is the second fastest deck in the
> world. Traditional Wisdom #3: Qld has an abundance of good fast-meds.
>
> Can you see where I'm going with this?
Yes. Even though the Gabba has the second fastest deck in the world, all but
one of Australia's notable quicks have come from NSW or WA. Your fast deck
has obviously helped a lot. If there's such an abundance, *why* is
Australia's current first choice seam attack McGrath, Gillespie and Lee?
(And don't try and tell me Bichel's better than any of the above. I'll need
to run a laundry load. Again.)
Good fast-meds? Bah. You have McDermott ... daylight ... Bichel ... a summer
... then what? Adam Dale? Kasprowicz? Thomson?
At least the Indian bats are good players of spin. It's what they're used
to, and they play it well. They don't do badly against medium pace either.
It's actually extremely amusing to see you bring this up. It makes
Queensland's lack of quicks even more shameful. Why does a state with an
"abundance" of good fast-meds have to import Imran Khan, then?
--
Aditya
Still ROLFing.
alvey
> alvey wrote:
>
>>Aditya Basrur wrote:
>>
>>>Mumbai has almost always had the best batsman in India since before
>>>independence. A brief and mildly controversial list would look
>>>something like:
>>>
>>>1. C K Nayudu
>>>2. Vijay Merchant
>>>3. Vijay Hazare (Baroda)
>>>4. Vinoo Mankad
>>>5. Polly Umrigar
>>>6. Mansur Ali Khan Pataudi (Hyderabad)
>>>7. Sunil Gavaskar
>>>8. Dilip Vengsarkar
>>>9. Sachin Tendulkar
>>>
>>>Note that the universally recognised greats on this lists - Nayudu,
>>>Merchant, Gavaskar, Tendulkar - all come from Bombay.
>>>
>>>Can Queensland claim anything similar?
>>
>>Absolutely not. We can't claim one single Flat Track Bully. Let alone
>>the near full team of 'em you've put forward here.
>
>
> Considering you're old enough to have watched Merchant, Hazare, Mankad,
> Umrigar, and Pataudi, could you tell me the basis on which you'd class them
> FTBs? Doesn't Umrigar have a rather good record in NZ?
"NZ"? hahahahaha. Was Paddles, or even Danny Morrison playing? [Giggle]
Was the pitch hard and fast? [Gales of laughter. One of your best]
>
> And as for Gavaskar, Vengsarkar, and Tendulkar, that's a more outlandish
> troll than usual.
>
> Q: Who was the last Qlder to make a 100 and a 50 at Headingley, when no
> other bat on either side passed 50?
Who was the last Indian to make 380 on a bouncy track?
>
>
>>And I'll mention
>>that it's a tad difficult to have a Good Test Record when you don't
>>get selected.
>
>
> It's also pretty difficult to get selected when you're no damn good. (As in,
> most Queensland Cricketers.) At least in countries with a good Cricketing
> setup, like Australia.
Well India certainly doesn't. Your list of FTB's posing as 'All Time
Greats' certainly proves that.
>
>
>>Why just today I heard the NSV publicity machine
>>describe the immensely over-rated MEW as, and I kid you not, "one of
>>Australia's greatest ever players."
>
>
> I wouldn't disagree. How many Qlders have averages above 40? And played spin
> as well as MEW? I can think of about 1.
Would this be the MEW who averages 9.0 from 10 innings in Spin Lanka?
And whether there's *any* Qlders with averages > 40 is irrelevant to MEW
being over-rated.
(And you forgot Bill Brown)
>
>>Blimey! And who knows what sort
>>of record Stewey Law or Jamie Cox or Jo Angel or Dirk Tazelaar would
>>have had if they'd got a few Tests.
>
>
> Yes. They're about as good as Tamil Nadu's great T E Srinivasan. Or Michael
> Dalvi or Gopal Bose.
Nahhh. Those jokers were hopeless.
> When other guys from TN got a shot,
[Tamils shoot in India? I thought that was only in SL.)
> such as
> Venkatraghvan, they ended up looking hopeless. It's better for you that Cox
> and Angel (ROLF at these names) didn't get a decent run. It means that you
> can harp on about them ad nauseum ad infinitum.
>
> Because, of the Qld players who did get a shot, you have Hayden, Healy and
> McDermott (with a Kapil-esque average) who've managed to create any dent in
> people's long-term memory.
>
That'd be the non-stop NSV publicity machine at work.
> Great record. Really.
>
Exactly! We've been absolutely gutted by the selectors.
>
>
> Yes. Even though the Gabba has the second fastest deck in the world, all but
> one of Australia's notable quicks have come from NSW or WA. Your fast deck
> has obviously helped a lot. If there's such an abundance, *why* is
> Australia's current first choice seam attack McGrath, Gillespie and Lee?
> (And don't try and tell me Bichel's better than any of the above. I'll need
> to run a laundry load. Again.)
Better put the setting on the Simpson to 'Heavy' then (and for Clang's
sake see a doctor. The neighbors are starting to complain about the
smell) because I'm telling you that Bic > Bung. You've obviously not
been watching recently. Despite getting the new ball *and* favourable
treatment from the captain, who co-incidentally has a 40% share in
Bung's management group, GB's career average is now a massive 0.34 lower
than Bic's. And given their staggeringly varied beginnings (I believe it
was about 100 rpw after a handful of Tests) you should be able to work
out who's been doing rather better recently. And Clang also knows how
Bic would've gone if he gotten the Blue carpet ride in his prime. He's
33 now.
>
> Good fast-meds? Bah. You have McDermott ... daylight ... Bichel ... a summer
> ... then what? Adam Dale? Kasprowicz? Thomson?
How far back do you want to go? Cos there's Peter Allan, Dirk Tazelaar,
the legendary Big Carl Rackeman, Geoff Dymock, Tony Dell and a whole
recent battery of Creevey/Noffke/Dawes/Mueller clones. Your washing
machine would be working overtime if the visiting FTB's were using it
sport. Australian batsmen in India shit themselves because of the
bacteria, Indian batsmen in Australia do it for another reason.
>
> At least the Indian bats are good players of spin. It's what they're used
> to, and they play it well. They don't do badly against medium pace either.
> It's actually extremely amusing to see you bring this up. It makes
> Queensland's lack of quicks even more shameful. Why does a state with an
> "abundance" of good fast-meds have to import Imran Khan, then?
That's a very good question. Perhaps you should ask it of the NSWCA as
they're the ones who employed him.
Alvvvvvvey
Paul Robson
I don't need to, you admit it yourself.
"I've baselessly called someone a liar."
Practicing for debating Creationists.
Aditya Basrur
<snip>
>>> McDermott roll off the tongue better (but so does olive oil)
>> McDermott: that's one. Average of 25+.
>
> Averaged 20ish for several years. Had 2 distinct careers; 1 the early
> Mcdermott, pretty wild and woolly, and 2 after his recall in 91,
> where he was pretty consistent but dogged by injury which finally
> forced his retirement. A much better bowler than Hughes at the
> respective peaks, but Hughes was a wholehearted trier.
Ahh. The Kapil similarities continue. Kapil was great up to about 1984, the
old folks on here tell me, but fairly mediocre after that. Oh, and there's
the slight difference of 140-odd wickets. So is that we have? The best Qld
bowler *ever* is a bit worse than the worst good fast bowler of the 1980s?
Mournful, really ...
<snip>
>> Also, per Alvey's admission, from NSW originally.
> True. But that's Alvey's qualifier, not mine. I think its fairer to
> identify a player with the team which they played most for. As per
> such, Gilly is Westralian and McGill is a New Southern Whale.
I'm afraid I take the Shridhar on this - at least when we're talking about
the player rather than his ancestry or name. I think it's actually a fair
case to make that a player learns his Cricket in the state in which he grows
up. Martin Crowe, Ian Smith, Mark Greatbatch et al all may have gone on to
play for other provinces. They're still rightfully claimed as Aucklanders.
My provision of no imports stands. Agree to disagree? To my mind, at least,
Thommo isn't a Queenslander. Nor is GSC. Nor is Wessels, nor is IVAR.
>>
>> Leaving McDermott (?), Hayden and Healy as your only really good
>> players. I'd probably take Morris and Taylor over Hayden, still.
>
> You could, but you'd be wrong :-). Taylor is not on the same plane as
> Haydos, but Taylor's peak period was quite impressive. Morris may be
> seriously underestimated. Same with Barnes- born in Qld, but played
> for NSW.
OK, ok :-) No way I'd pick Taylor over Hayden today, even being true to my
preference for women in Sydney over those in Brisbane. (Except for the ones
at King's Cross. But then again, they're not really women anyway, are they?)
You can have Barnes.
Current count: Hayden, Barnes, Healy (not as good as Gilly, as Alv has
conceded), McDermott.
>> Note that the universally recognised greats on this lists - Nayudu,
>
> I wouldn't call Nayudu universally recognized as great.
Depends how universal you want to get. Ranji thought him pretty good, IIRC.
So did a chap named Compton.
<snip a not disgraceful team>
Oh, several can play at that game.
But you've only really added Brown (who probably didn't play that many
tests) and McCool to that list from the others. Chappell, Border and Thomson
disqualified. How many matches did Peter Burge play, anyway? And didn't
Richie Benaud (a New South Welshman) have to *beg* for Slasher Mackay to
play his last test with Richie and Davo (IIRC)? McCool, to be honest for a
moment, probably deserves more props as an all-rounder. His batting and
bowling averages are both very good. Ron Archer didn't play enough Tests for
me to be convinced of his class.
So the list of Qlders who were genuinely pretty good is: Hayden, Brown,
Healy, McCool and McDermott. Still laughing.
>
> Qld has 3 of the greatest keepers of all time- Tallon, Grout and
> Healy (a superior keeper to Gilly, but no comparison as a batsman).
That's subjective. If you want to nitpick, sure, maybe Gilly's work to the
spinners on the leg-side isn't quite as good as Healy's was. Do you see
Shane Warne complaining? And if you ask Alvey, Healy's 161 at the Gabba vs.
the WI (by coincidence, the first test hundred I ever saw, BTW) probably
outclasses Gilly's 200 vs South Africa.
Besides which, doesn't Oldfield have a claim to being the best keeper of all
time?
List is now at Hayden, Brown, Healy, McCool, McDermott, Tallon, Grout.
Queensland has a penchant for producing glovemen, it'd seem, but very little
else.
> This team would probably thrash the current Indian side, home or
> away.Perhaps Ironmonger for Thommo on a Krumbler.
Maybe. I doubt it would help you.
On the subject of all-time provincial teams that could beat current test
teams, how about the following teams vs. the current Australian XI? I think
they'd give them a run for their money ... (Culled from old threads
unashamedly.)
An all-time Bajan XI of
Gordon Greenidge
Desmond Haynes
Frank Worrell
Everton Weekes
Clyde Walcott (wk)
Garfield Sobers
David Holford
Malcolm Marshall
Joel Garner
Wesley Hall
Sylvester Clarke
(Noting the proportionality of populations between Barbados and Australia is
probably not too dissimilar as Queensland to India.)
The following Yorkshire XI:
Herbert Sutcliffe
Geoff Boycott
Len Hutton
Maurice Leyland
Wilfred Rhodes
F.S.Jackson (capt)
George Hirst
Ray Illingworth
Jimmy Binks (wk)
Fred Trueman
Hedley Verity
Bill Bowes
Not to mention how easily an all-time NSW XI would wipe the floor with the
Queensland one you've put together, or even with the current Aus team, IMO.
(Getting McGrath to play against Taylor might be a bit difficult.) The Bajan
example is so much more remarkable because Barbados has been playing for so
much shorter a time than Australia.
And I'd put together an all-time Auckland XI, but I wouldn't want to
embarrass Alvey further ...
Aditya [Don't even start me on an all-time Karnataka XI - no comparison to
the current Aust team ...] Basrur
alvey
snippo
>
> And I'd put together an all-time Auckland XI, but I wouldn't want to
> embarrass Alvey further ...
Hey why should I be embarrased? You're the one with the soiled trousers...
btw. The Toothless Ones usually pick Tallon as the best keeper they saw.
alvey
Bob Dubery
> Hazare, Mankad, Umrigar, and Pataudi, could you tell me
> the basis on which you'd class them FTBs? Doesn't Umrigar
> have a rather good record in NZ?
The game's up AB. We know you're having another bash at
beating VABU.
Aditya Basrur
> Aditya Basrur wrote:
>
> snippo
>>
>> And I'd put together an all-time Auckland XI, but I wouldn't want to
>> embarrass Alvey further ...
>
> Hey why should I be embarrased? You're the one with the soiled
> trousers...
I have no option but to piss myself at your vile contentions. Maybe I should
look at some bladder-controlling underwear. I suppose you're the one to ask
about that.
After all, the mind goes just before the bladder ... so you're on your way,
grandpa ...
>
> btw. The Toothless Ones usually pick Tallon as the best keeper they
> saw.
>
On what basis?
--
Aditya
Aditya Basrur
> Aditya Basrur wrote:
>> Considering you're old enough to have watched Merchant, Hazare,
>> Mankad, Umrigar, and Pataudi, could you tell me the basis on which
>> you'd class them FTBs? Doesn't Umrigar have a rather good record in
>> NZ?
>
> "NZ"? hahahahaha. Was Paddles, or even Danny Morrison playing?
> [Giggle] Was the pitch hard and fast? [Gales of laughter. One of your
> best]
No better than talking up Kasprowicz or Martin Love. I learn from the best,
after all.
Actually, I was wrong. His record in the West Indies is most interesting. 62
average on his first tour there (1952-53, facing King, Gomez, Ramadhin,
Valentine, Stollmeyer, and Worrell) and a 49-average in 1962-63, against a
chap named Wes Hall some of the time. And this was IN THE WEST INDIES. Check
out Gavaskar's record in the WI while you're at it.
>>
>> And as for Gavaskar, Vengsarkar, and Tendulkar, that's a more
>> outlandish troll than usual.
>>
>> Q: Who was the last Qlder to make a 100 and a 50 at Headingley, when
>> no other bat on either side passed 50?
>
> Who was the last Indian to make 380 on a bouncy track?
Who was the last Australian, for that matter? Did you see how slowly the
WACA was playing?
Is this restricted to Tests? FWIW, Nimbalkar's 400 was meant to have been on
a fairly difficult track.
And if we want to compare tall feats, who was the last Australian to hit 281
when following on, to go on to win his side the match? Please don't tell me
about great performances against the odds. Australians can't hold a candle
to India in that regard. Their backs simply haven't been up against the wall
as often.
>>
>>> And I'll mention
>>> that it's a tad difficult to have a Good Test Record when you don't
>>> get selected.
>>
>>
>> It's also pretty difficult to get selected when you're no damn good.
>> (As in, most Queensland Cricketers.) At least in countries with a
>> good Cricketing setup, like Australia.
>
> Well India certainly doesn't. Your list of FTB's posing as 'All Time
> Greats' certainly proves that.
You still haven't proved your case that they're flat track bullies. A bit
like jocking for Love's selection, really. A nice idea, which sounds like
good rhetoric, but in reality, a tale, told by an idiot, full of sound and
fury, signifying nothing ...
I guess I'll wait till tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow to hear why the
above are FTBs.
> Would this be the MEW who averages 9.0 from 10 innings in Spin Lanka?
Yeah, great attack he faced there. A guy you say is a chucker, a half-decent
left-arm quick, and a whole load of others who haven't cemented their
places. It wasn't as if Australia was in any dire trouble there either.
Waugh is probably better than every Queensland bat than Hayden. When you
take ODOs into account, better than every Queensland bat, period. What an
embarrassment.
> And whether there's *any* Qlders with averages > 40 is irrelevant to
> MEW being over-rated.
> (And you forgot Bill Brown)
Overrated compared with New South Welshmen, Victorians, South Australians,
West Australians, and Tasmanians. Not overrated compared to any
Queenslanders. Face it, if MEW were a Queenslander, you'd be as pissed about
his axing as you are about Love's (fully justified) exclusion, or Bichel's
lack of opportunities.
Anthony Stuart impressed me far more than Bichel ever did. So did Simon
Cook. Why did they not get shots? How many Queensland quicks took 5-fers on
their ODI and Test debuts, respectively? And this is from a state with
apparently the second-fastest track, and a predilection for producing
quicks.
You're doing more harm with your friendly fire to Queensland's case than I
ever could ... thanks for your support.
<snip obvious ignorance. The Tamils in SL are from India, originally,
anyway, but we don't want those LTTE guys back here. If you didn't know
something so elementary, no wonder you write off 10 of the best batsmen ever
as FTBs. I couldn't have expected anything more from you.>
>> Because, of the Qld players who did get a shot, you have Hayden,
>> Healy and McDermott (with a Kapil-esque average) who've managed to
>> create any dent in people's long-term memory.
>>
> That'd be the non-stop NSV publicity machine at work.
No. Not at all. If there had been any worthwhile Qld players, we'd have
heard of them. Michael expanded the list to about 7 or 8, of whom 3 were
glorified slip-fieldsmen who wear armour. I think you're better off jocking
for your imports, like Border, G S Chappell, Thommo and Wessels.
I honestly hadn't realised that Queensland's history was quite so shallow
when I'd set off on this crusade. A few comparisons with Bombay, and wham,
you're exposed as the good-for-nothing state you are. I'm fully with the
selectors. On past form, I wouldn't be surprised if Hayden is the last
Queensland selection ever ...
>> Great record. Really.
>>
> Exactly! We've been absolutely gutted by the selectors.
Keep dreaming. If anything, the selectors have already selected too many
Queenslanders ...
>>
>>
>> Yes. Even though the Gabba has the second fastest deck in the world,
>> all but one of Australia's notable quicks have come from NSW or WA.
>> Your fast deck has obviously helped a lot. If there's such an
>> abundance, *why* is Australia's current first choice seam attack
>> McGrath, Gillespie and Lee? (And don't try and tell me Bichel's
>> better than any of the above. I'll need to run a laundry load.
>> Again.)
>
> Better put the setting on the Simpson to 'Heavy' then (and for Clang's
> sake see a doctor. The neighbors are starting to complain about the
> smell) because I'm telling you that Bic > Bung. You've obviously not
> been watching recently. Despite getting the new ball *and* favourable
> treatment from the captain, who co-incidentally has a 40% share in
> Bung's management group, GB's career average is now a massive 0.34
> lower than Bic's.
Still lower. At a faster pace. (BTW, what sort of a battering do you think
Tendulkar and Laxman are giving Bic's ODI figures as we speak?) Ask any
batsman who he fears more, and you'll get laughed at for even bringing Bic
into the equation. In all seriousness, I've always admired Bic as an honest
trier, and I can see a case that he's been shat on by the selectors quite a
bit. But really, with that sort of bowling at Australia's disposal, I'm not
surprised. They've got the mix pretty damn right, as Katich's selection and
success shows.
At the risk of exposing your tomfoolery further, is Ironmonger the best
excuse for a spinner that Queensland has produced?
> And given their staggeringly varied beginnings (I
> believe it was about 100 rpw after a handful of Tests) you should be
> able to work out who's been doing rather better recently. And Clang
> also knows how Bic would've gone if he gotten the Blue carpet ride in
> his prime. He's 33 now.
He wouldn't have been as fast as Lee, and probably wouldn't have been the
token Queensland selection as 12th man that he has been so far. Another
Bracken or Brendan Julien, if you like. Bichel's lucky he's made it this
far, with McGrath, Gillespie, Reiffel, Damien Fleming and Lee.
Not that I wouldn't like him to be a Kiwi. I reckon we'd play him quite
often.
>>
>> Good fast-meds? Bah. You have McDermott ... daylight ... Bichel ...
>> a summer ... then what? Adam Dale? Kasprowicz? Thomson?
>
> How far back do you want to go? Cos there's Peter Allan, Dirk
> Tazelaar, the legendary Big Carl Rackeman,
Oh, look, finally someone we've heard of. And he doesn't even make an
all-time Queensland XI.
> Geoff Dymock, Tony Dell
> and a whole recent battery of Creevey/Noffke/Dawes/Mueller clones.
Yes. I'm sure they were great. Really. Would have won you a whole swag of
Sheffield Shields. Great players, all of them. I laugh at your contention
that the Gabba's the second fastest deck in Australia, because you'd think
that Queensland would have at least produced some half-way decent quicks.
Instead, we get McDermott, Rackemann, Bichel, and Kasprowicz. I see them,
and raise you a Kapil, Srinath, Nissar and Madan Lal. That's how great your
all-time Queensland quicks are - pick four random Indians, and they're as
good as the best Queensland quicks around. (And remember, no Indian track is
the second fastest in the world.)
BTW, Tendulkar and Laxman are both en route to hundreds against Bic. They
liked Kasprowicz's bowling as well. I doubt they'd have been so forthright
if Bung had been bowling ...
> Your washing machine would be working overtime if the visiting FTB's
> were using it sport. Australian batsmen in India shit themselves
> because of the bacteria, Indian batsmen in Australia do it for
> another reason.
Rhetoric is great. Would you like to back it up with hard facts? Checked
Tendulkar's record in Australia? Or Gavaskar's?
>>
>> At least the Indian bats are good players of spin. It's what they're
>> used to, and they play it well. They don't do badly against medium
>> pace either. It's actually extremely amusing to see you bring this
>> up. It makes Queensland's lack of quicks even more shameful. Why
>> does a state with an "abundance" of good fast-meds have to import
>> Imran Khan, then?
>
> That's a very good question. Perhaps you should ask it of the NSWCA as
> they're the ones who employed him.
>
Oh, right, sorry. At least they have an excuse. Their track takes turn. It's
about fair that they import a world-class quick. But nowadays, they don't
have to. They have a few guys named McGrath and Lee who do a better job than
any two Queensland quicks, *ever*, have done. Really ...
This is sad. I was hoping you'd be able to make a better case for Queensland
Cricket. Even making allowances for your senility and obviously rose-tinted
glasses. I actually thought Qld was quite a good side, before you exposed
its sheer pathos. Tragic, really.
Aditya [Even Canterbury could beat Queensland ...] Basrur
alvey
snip fun stuff but it's getting beddy byes times.
>>> Why does a state with an "abundance" of good fast-meds have to import
>>>Imran Khan, then?
>>
>>That's a very good question. Perhaps you should ask it of the NSWCA as
>>they're the ones who employed him.
>>
>
> Oh, right, sorry. At least they have an excuse. Their track takes turn. It's
> about fair that they import a world-class quick.
And it's a little known fact that the NSWCA tried to get the entire WI
pace quartet to play for NSW. It was entirely logical because they had a
low, slow wicket which turned square. Alas, only AME was available.
night night
And do make sure you have the Huggies on when you go to bed.
alvey
Aditya Basrur
> Aditya Basrur wrote:
>
Weak as pis. You can't even defend Queensland Cricket.
I trust this is the end of suggestions that any Queenslander should ever be
picked for Australia again. I'm really surprised at quite how hopeless the
history of Qld Cricket is.
Thanks for being so enlightening. And try pads.
Aditya [Who's finished pissing himself laughing at Qld Cricket - for a while
...] Basrur
kenhiggs8
> Mad Hamish wrote:
>
> snip facts
> >
> > as you can see the quoted section in Larry's response is different
> > from what I have on my computer, so it does appear that Larry modified
> > quoted text in his post.
> >
> > Of course it's also possible that I've modified things to frame Larry
> > but I think it moves the burdon of proof for claims that people have
> > lied about Larry to the accuser eh Bob?.
>
> I don't know what you hope to achieve here Mad. Those of us who stated
> that this actually happened were labelled as liars by Crazy Bob so I
> don't see how you expect him to apologise now on the basis of this post.
> Still, I eagerly await a response from Bobsie to see if he's got any new
> ploys, or whether the old ones are still stinking the place out.
>
> "I don't enjoy doing this." [The Lie. You love it]
> "You're twisting words." [I'm Losing Here]
> "I've said all I'm going to say on this." [The Weasel]
>
> Oldies, but certainly not goodies.
>
> oty Duberjie
>
>
> alvey
Actually, Bob asked you for proof of the allegation, which neither of
you were able to provide.
I don't think he was the one making the accusations of lying, that was
down to you guys.
However, as was previously demonstrated, truthfullness was never high
on your list of priorities, was it.
Boofhead Watch
kenhiggs8
> "Bob Dubery" <mega...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<3f9a236b....@opus.randori.com>...
>
> <snip>
>
> That was pathetic, Bob.
>
> If it's so unimportant, just answer the fucking question.
>
The question that I think is important is why you threatened to sue
Swannie.
A second question I think important is why the 'Larry lying Foxtel'
post has resurfaced just when you get shown up as a small-minded and
sad individual.
Big Hugs
Higgsy
kenhiggs8
Oh piss-poor, Boofhead.
Why don't you give us a difficult one for a change?
---------------------------------------------------------
From: alvey (alvey....@sysfuck.com)
Subject: How's Liar? (Was Vaughan's a rotten cheat or something)
View: Complete Thread (14 articles)
Original Format
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Date: 2002-11-30 14:05:18 PST
"Paul Robson" <auti...@autismuk.srilankanschuck.freeserve.co.uk>
wrote in
message news:asbb0o$a3v$1...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk...
snip
> media to sell papers etc ; and they can do that by appealing to cretinous
> nationalism better than reality.
Speaking of cretinous nationalists (and that's a foine example of
tautology), could you tell me if Liar de Slanda still telling everyone
how
this Ashes series is going to be closer than everyone said before it
started? And, more importantly, has he been reminded of his promise to
fuck
off from rsc if Aust win 5-0?
Alvey
In Brisbane, "You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one"
--
remove thisbit from address to reply
-----------------------------------------------------
Boofhead Watch
looking down into the barrell of fish (queenslandicus hypocriticus),
firing with both eyes closed and getting a strike everytime
Colin Kynoch
> For the interested I was going through old posts on my computer
> cleaning out
> (I moved the entire past archive from agent between computers when I
> had reason to suspect that my last one was dying)
> and I found the following was still present
>
> On Mon, 20 May 2002 17:41:58 +0200 (CEST), Anonymous Coredump
> <mixm...@remailer.segfault.net> wrote:
>
>
>>On 17/5/02 in the thread "Still think that SL can't bat overseas
>>Hamish?", LdS responded to an enquiry [Andrew Dunford] as to which
>>stand at Lords he was sitting in to be able to pass judgement on the
>>conditions at the ground with;
>>
>>"The BEST seat in the house. In my lounge room watching foxtel!!"
>>
>>This was odd as I had no recall of any previous indication from LdS of
>>him being a Foxtel subscriber. A Google search confirmed this. Since
>>this post he has made no reference or inference I can find to him being
>>a Foxtel subscriber.
>>
>>On the contrary; on the same date in the thread "Anybody have a link to
>>the SL-Eng commentary?", he was pleading to be informed of any webcast
>>commentary. If he had Fox why would he bother?
>>Despite producing dozens of posts on the Perera issue not a single one
>>contains any statement like "His action looked fine to me when I was
>>watching last night...".
>>Anyone who was watching Foxtel could not deny Perera's action is
>>questionable.
>>LdS has avoided answering serveral direct questions such as "When did
>>you see him bowl."
>>On 19/5 in the thread "Perera" LdS wrote; "What about Murali with his
>>sling on in the grandstand?" If LdS had been watching the Foxtel
>>coverage immediately prior to this post he would have seen MM sitting
>>on the players balcony and obviously not wearing a sling.
>>
>>
>>His Fox claim looks a lie.
>>
>>
>>Crim Watch
>
>
> Larrys response is found at
> http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=TlhG8.489%24l62.22208%40ozemail.com.au&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
>
> and contains the following
>
> ""Anonymous Coredump" <mixm...@remailer.segfault.net> wrote in
> message
> news:ecbc4e46c089c7d6...@remailer.segfault.net...
>
>>On 17/5/02 in the thread "Still think that SL can't bat overseas
>>Hamish?", LdS responded to an enquiry [Andrew Dunford] as to which
>>stand at Lords he was sitting in to be able to pass judgement on the
>>conditions at the ground with;
>>
>>"The BEST seat in the house. In a lounge room watching foxtel!!"
>>
>>This was odd as I had no recall of any previous indication from LdS of
>>him being a Foxtel subscriber. A Google search confirmed this. Since
>>this post he has made no reference or inference I can find to him being
>>a Foxtel subscriber."
>
>
> as you can see the quoted section in Larry's response is different
> from what I have on my computer, so it does appear that Larry modified
> quoted text in his post.
>
> Of course it's also possible that I've modified things to frame Larry
> but I think it moves the burdon of proof for claims that people have
> lied about Larry to the accuser eh Bob?.
Hamish, considering that Anonymous Coredump was too cowardly to allow
their posts to be archived it is entirely possible that you have
doctored the posts.
Then again you may not have. Yours is hardly an unbiased source.
Colin Kynoch
Spaceman Spiff
Colin Kynoch <kynoch...@bigpond.com> drummed on his chest and bellowed:
>
> Hamish, considering that Anonymous Coredump was too cowardly to allow
> their posts to be archived it is entirely possible that you have
> doctored the posts.
>
> Then again you may not have. Yours is hardly an unbiased source.
>
google as recently as may this year- now it seems to be gone.
google has become very flaky recently- many of my posts are missing as well -
including one in which i provided links to both anonymous coredump's and larry's
posts.
--
stay cool,
Spaceman Spiff
The old home town looks the same as I step off the train
Meeting every train in my mind's eye till the man in mail came
Hair like gold, lips like cherry
It's good to touch the green, green grass of home
Green, green grass of home, green green grass of home.
Colin Kynoch
> Raising himself from all fours,
> Colin Kynoch <kynoch...@bigpond.com> drummed on his chest and bellowed:
>
>>Hamish, considering that Anonymous Coredump was too cowardly to allow
>>their posts to be archived it is entirely possible that you have
>>doctored the posts.
>>
>>Then again you may not have. Yours is hardly an unbiased source.
>>
>
> actually, the anonymous coredump post which hamish quoted was available on
> google as recently as may this year- now it seems to be gone.
> google has become very flaky recently- many of my posts are missing as well -
> including one in which i provided links to both anonymous coredump's and larry's
> posts.
Fair enough, but the point is the original post is no longer available
to verify the veracity of the said claims.
Colin Kynoch
>
Andrew Dunford
> Aditya Basrur wrote:
<snip>
> > Considering you're old enough to have watched Merchant, Hazare, Mankad,
> > Umrigar, and Pataudi, could you tell me the basis on which you'd class
them
> > FTBs? Doesn't Umrigar have a rather good record in NZ?
>
> "NZ"? hahahahaha. Was Paddles, or even Danny Morrison playing? [Giggle]
> Was the pitch hard and fast? [Gales of laughter. One of your best]
No, but as Umrigar never toured NZ I hardly think you're adopting a
reasonable line of argument.
<snip>
Andrew
Michael Creevey
> > Define "decent"? (btw JR Thomson wasn't a Qlder. Sydney boy who moved
> > north after his "real" Test debut in 1974.)
>
> 200 test wickets. Average less than 25.
No Indians fall into that category.
>
> Aditya
> In Auckland, thinking Bichel is the T E Srinivasan of fast bowlers ...
>
No, India and NZ are the TE Srinivasan's of test cricket .......
:-)
regards,
Michael Creevey
Michael Creevey
> >
>
> On what basis?
>
> --
>
> Aditya
Being the best. If you want to read about it, there's plenty out there. Do a
google.
h r i p a t h i k a m a t h @hotmail.com Shripathi Kamath
"Michael Creevey" <snipthis...@mailandnews.com> wrote in message
news:bnkkoa$124kpk$1...@ID-195042.news.uni-berlin.de...
>
> "Aditya Basrur" <aditya...@pullyourownfinger.hotmail.com> wrote in
> message news:bnfo30$iqn$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz...
> > > Define "decent"? (btw JR Thomson wasn't a Qlder. Sydney boy who moved
> > > north after his "real" Test debut in 1974.)
> >
> > 200 test wickets. Average less than 25.
>
> No Indians fall into that category.
Only because they bowled to extensively NSVians.
> >
> > Aditya
> > In Auckland, thinking Bichel is the T E Srinivasan of fast bowlers ...
> >
>
> No, India and NZ are the TE Srinivasan's of test cricket .......
>
As in both of them done in by Gavaskar?
Dude, get real. Bracken *proved* that Bichel's days are numbered. He is
just a seat-warmer for Lee.
--
Shripathi Kamath
Aditya Basrur
> "Aditya Basrur" <aditya...@pullyourownfinger.hotmail.com> wrote in
> message news:bnfo30$iqn$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz...
>>> Define "decent"? (btw JR Thomson wasn't a Qlder. Sydney boy who
>>> moved north after his "real" Test debut in 1974.)
>>
>> 200 test wickets. Average less than 25.
>
> No Indians fall into that category.
Well, no Indian bowlers can claim to have trained on the second fastest
track in Australia (possibly the world) on a regular basis.
Besides, Indian bowling sucks. Why else do you think we've never won abroad
consistently despite the best batting lineup in the world?
Meanwhile, Australia has Lillee, Lindwall, Miller, McGrath, Warne (average
is about there), Gillespie ... not a Queenslander amongst them. It's enough
to wet your pants over really. And people wonder why more Queenslanders
haven't been selected.
And besides, NSW's record for debutant bowlers is awesome. Do the names
Anthony Stuart, Simon Cook, and Simon Katich ring bells?
>>
>> Aditya
>> In Auckland, thinking Bichel is the T E Srinivasan of fast bowlers
>> ...
>>
>
> No, India and NZ are the TE Srinivasan's of test cricket .......
Q: When did Australia ever draw a Test series with WI in the mid- to
late-1980s?
I think there is a parallel. Both are pretty good domestic players who've
never really been given a chance in the big league, much as it's been
deserved. Of course, for the analogy to hold, Bichel has to be Australia's
answer to Gavaskar. Considering Australian bowlers are about as good as
Indian bats, and NSW is Australia's equivalent to Bombay, I suppose it's not
unfair.
> :-)
>
> regards,
> Michael Creevey
Cheers,
Aditya
Michael Creevey
> Michael Creevey wrote:
> <snip>
> >>> McDermott roll off the tongue better (but so does olive oil)
> >> McDermott: that's one. Average of 25+.
> >
> > Averaged 20ish for several years. Had 2 distinct careers; 1 the early
> > Mcdermott, pretty wild and woolly, and 2 after his recall in 91,
> > where he was pretty consistent but dogged by injury which finally
> > forced his retirement. A much better bowler than Hughes at the
> > respective peaks, but Hughes was a wholehearted trier.
>
> Ahh. The Kapil similarities continue. Kapil was great up to about 1984,
the
> old folks on here tell me, but fairly mediocre after that. Oh, and there's
> the slight difference of 140-odd wickets. So is that we have? The best Qld
> bowler *ever* is a bit worse than the worst good fast bowler of the 1980s?
I've got to answer what your saying, before people actually start believing
it. Don't forget, that Kapil was India's greatest ever pace bowler. Not a
fast bowler admittedly. So what you have is Qld's best home produced pace
bowler being better than India's best ever.
This is McDermott's record after his comeback
211 8/97 26.52 11 13 0
Which includes one or 2 very lean series, perhaps due in part to botched
surgery.
In his 1 series played against India during that time, his figures were:
31 5/54 21.61 3
Admittedly he was playing against very weak opposition there. However I like
his figures against WI in WI:
24 5/80 23.50 1- he apparently crapped out and did an Eggy with the bat
in that series, but did okay in the bowling department v the world
champions.
>
> Mournful, really ...
What really is mournful is India's poor production of pace bowlers, and
indeed bowlers generally, however in the spin department Qld cannot compare,
despite Ironmonger and McCool.
>
> <snip>
> >> Also, per Alvey's admission, from NSW originally.
> > True. But that's Alvey's qualifier, not mine. I think its fairer to
> > identify a player with the team which they played most for. As per
> > such, Gilly is Westralian and McGill is a New Southern Whale.
>
> I'm afraid I take the Shridhar on this - at least when we're talking about
> the player rather than his ancestry or name.
Not a good idea, which I will show, hopefully (sic)
I think it's actually a fair
> case to make that a player learns his Cricket in the state in which he
grows
> up. Martin Crowe, Ian Smith, Mark Greatbatch et al all may have gone on to
> play for other provinces. They're still rightfully claimed as Aucklanders.
>
> My provision of no imports stands. Agree to disagree? To my mind, at
least,
> Thommo isn't a Queenslander. Nor is GSC. Nor is Wessels, nor is IVAR.
This doesn't hold water. If we extrapolate this across the test arena, you
will have some very strange anomalies. One can almost accept Grieg, Smith
and Lamb as SAns (although I don't believe that this is right) or Hick as
Rhodesian, it is stupid IMO to call Jardine or Cowdrey Indian, or Hussain
for that matter, Dexter Italian or Freddie Brown Peruvian. Mike Holmans
might get a bit dissed if we start back down that route of the English UN
team.
To whom does Botham belong? Born in Cheshire (I think), played most of his
cricket in Somerset, ended up in Worcestershire after an acrimonious split
with the cornstalks.
>
> >>
> >> Leaving McDermott (?), Hayden and Healy as your only really good
> >> players. I'd probably take Morris and Taylor over Hayden, still.
> >
> > You could, but you'd be wrong :-). Taylor is not on the same plane as
> > Haydos, but Taylor's peak period was quite impressive. Morris may be
> > seriously underestimated. Same with Barnes- born in Qld, but played
> > for NSW.
>
> OK, ok :-) No way I'd pick Taylor over Hayden today,even being true to my
> preference for women in Sydney over those in Brisbane. (Except for the
ones
> at King's Cross. But then again, they're not really women anyway, are
they?)
Depends what your looking for re women in Brisbane and Sydney. If you like
the beach babe type, then the Gold Coast walks all over Sydney. Women of
Sydney are actaully women in some cases, but I find them rather brash at
least in comparison with Brisbanites. Although this is only a matter of
degree, not absolute difference. In other ways I can't see a lot of
difference. After all essentially the same people, just a different
environment (socially, environmentally etc)
>
> You can have Barnes.
>
> Current count: Hayden, Barnes, Healy (not as good as Gilly, as Alv has
> conceded), McDermott.
>
> >> Note that the universally recognised greats on this lists - Nayudu,
> >
> > I wouldn't call Nayudu universally recognized as great.
>
> Depends how universal you want to get. Ranji thought him pretty good,
IIRC.
> So did a chap named Compton.
Bradman thought that Tallon was the greatest keeper ever. Also thought Eddie
Gilbert the fastest bowler he ever faced. Steve Waugh rates Hayden the best
bat he has ever seen. Ron Archer called by Tony Cozier as 'the great Ron
Archer'. etc.
>
> <snip a not disgraceful team>
>
> Oh, several can play at that game.
>
> But you've only really added Brown (who probably didn't play that many
> tests) and McCool to that list from the others. Chappell, Border and
Thomson
> disqualified. How many matches did Peter Burge play, anyway? And didn't
> Richie Benaud (a New South Welshman) have to *beg* for Slasher Mackay to
> play his last test with Richie and Davo (IIRC)?
What? Limited significance, anyway.
McCool, to be honest for a
> moment, probably deserves more props as an all-rounder. His batting and
> bowling averages are both very good. Ron Archer didn't play enough Tests
for
> me to be convinced of his class.
Nayudu? Merchant? etc.
>
> So the list of Qlders who were genuinely pretty good is: Hayden, Brown,
> Healy, McCool and McDermott. Still laughing.
Okay. here is a comparison between all-time Qld side and an all-time Mumbai
side. Don't forget, that usually anything I say that contians the words
Mumbai, bonda, mujra etc is hardly to be taken fully seriously, but lets do
a comparison nonetheless.
For purposes of comparison, I'll include players for Mumbai who weren't
necessarily born there, and for Qld I will nominate a side which was born
there and one which played there primarily.
Mumbai
SM Gavaskar : 125 214 16 10122 236* 51.12 34 45 108
VM Merchant :10 18 0 859 154 47.72 3 3 7
VMH Mankad 44 72 5 2109 231 31.47 5 6 33
14686 777 5236 162 32.32 8-52 8 2 90.6 2.13
50122 2309 19183 782 24.53 8-35 38 9 64.0 2.29
VS Hazare 30 52 6 2192 164* 47.65 7 9 11
38628 1722 14645 595 24.61 8-90 27 3 64.9 2.27
SR Tendulkar 107 173 16 8882 217 56.57 31 36 68
RJ Shastri (just to include some more bowling options) 80 121 14 3830
206 35.79 11 12 36
2625.1 657 6185 151 40.96 5-75 2 0 104.3 2.35
FM Engineer 46 87 3 2611 121 31.08 2 16 66 16
RG Nadkarni 41 67 12 1414 122* 25.70 1 7 22
9165 665 2559 88 29.07 6-43 4 1 104.1 1.67
10686 500 21.37 6-17 19 1
DG Phadkar 31 45 7 1229 123 32.34 2 8 21
5994 277 2285 62 36.85 7-159 3 0 96.6 2.28
SP Gupte 1880.4 608 4403 149 29.55 9-102 12 1 75.7 2.34
KD Ghavri 7036 233 3656 109 33.54 5-33 4 0 64.5 3.11
Qld
ML Hayden 46 77 7 4037 380 57.67 62.02 16 11 49
WA Brown 22 35 1 1592 206* 46.82 4 9 14
GS Chappell 87 151 19 7110 247* 53.86 24 31 122
5327 208 1913 47 40.70 5-61 1 0 113.3 2.15
AR Border 156 265 44 11174 205 50.56 27 63 156
4009 197 1525 39 39.10 7-46 2 1 102.7 2.28
PJP Burge 42 68 8 2290 181 38.16 4 12 23
KD Mackay 37 52 7 1507 89 33.48 0 13 16
5792 267 1721 50 34.42 6-42 2 0 115.8 1.78
IAHealy 119 182 23 4356 161* 27.39 49.72 4 22 366 29
RG Archer 19 30 1 713 128 24.58 1 2 20
3576 160 1318 48 27.45 5-53 1 0 74.5 2.21
CL McCool 14 17 4 459 104* 35.30 1 1 14
2504 44 958 36 26.61 5-41 3 0 69.5 2.29
CJ McDermott 2764.2 579 8332 291 28.63 8-97 14 2 56.9 3.01
JR Thomson 10535 301 5601 200 28.00 6-46 8 0 52.6 3.18
If we can't, for specious reasons, have Chappell, Border and Thomson, we'll
substitute, depending on conditions:
SG Barnes 13 19 2 1072 234 63.05 3 5 14
TR Veivers 21 30 4 813 88 31.26 0 7 7
4191 195 1375 33 41.66 4-68 0 0 127.0 1.96
H Ironmonger 782.3 328 1330 74 17.97 7-23 4 2 63.4 1.69
G Dymock 5545 179 2116 78 27.12 7-67 5 1 71.0 2.28
CG Rackemann 453.1 132 1137 39 29.15 6-86 3 1 69.7 2.50
So on figures alone, Mumbai is slightly ahead in batting, far behind in
bowling. Look at Mumbai's absolutely pathetic pace bowling reserves. In
Australia most fc sides would score 1000 against that kind of attack.
> > Qld has 3 of the greatest keepers of all time- Tallon, Grout and
> > Healy (a superior keeper to Gilly, but no comparison as a batsman).
>
> That's subjective.
No it isn't.
If you want to nitpick, sure, maybe Gilly's work to the
> spinners on the leg-side isn't quite as good as Healy's was. Do you see
> Shane Warne complaining? And if you ask Alvey, Healy's 161 at the Gabba
vs.
> the WI (by coincidence, the first test hundred I ever saw, BTW) probably
> outclasses Gilly's 200 vs South Africa.
No it doesn't, but it was a great innings. OTOH, Gilly v Healy as a batsman
is no comparison.
>
> Besides which, doesn't Oldfield have a claim to being the best keeper of
all
> time?
So do others, but Bradman, Benaud et al plump for Tallon. Oldfield missed
more than Tallon, despite Oldfield's high proportion of stumpings Tallon is
generally rated superior both over the stumps and standing back. In fact
Tallon's non-selection was probably a big factor in A's hammering at the
Oval in 38- Hutton should have been stumped by Barnett less than 3 figures.
>
> List is now at Hayden, Brown, Healy, McCool, McDermott, Tallon, Grout.
> Queensland has a penchant for producing glovemen, it'd seem, but very
little
> else.
Mumbai produces FWB's, but very little else.
Anti-Qld bias has been a long recurring theme.
RK Oxenham tests: 7 10 0 151 48 15.10 0 0 4
300.2 112 522 14 37.28 4-39 0 0 128.7 1.73
fc: 97 166 22 3693 162* 25.64 4 19 45
21769 870 6891 369 18.67 9-18 22 8 58.9 1.89
A Hurwood tests: 86.1 28 170 11 15.45 4-22 0 0 47.0 1.97
fc: 3122 113 27.62 6-80 5 1
FC Thompson tests:0
fc: 58 107 9 4132 275* 42.16 11 17 15
GR Reynolds tests:0
fc: 54 89 9 3693 203* 46.16 12 14 19 1
PJ Allan tests:1- 192 6 83 2 41.50 2-58 0 0 96.0 2.59
fc: 11422 190 5377 206 26.10 10-61 12 3 55.4 2.82
Eddie Gilbert (nominated by Bradman as the fastest bowler he ever saw, and
after breaking his bat and being bowled for 0 described it as the luckiest
duck he ever made)
fc: 2521 87 28.97 6-64 6 0
The reason given for why Gilbert never played tests is that he was thought
to be a chucker. That would be no impediment today.
And if you think that some of those bowling averages are high, they aren't
in the context of the time. Larwood's test average was 28 and Gregory's was
30+.
Oh and a few more stats (isn't this fun ;-))
CG Rackemann v RSA 85-6 3 matches 558 28 19.93
SM Gavaskar v A 80/1 3 118 70 19.66 0 1
v A 71/2 257 28.56
Incorrect. A few decades.
>
> And I'd put together an all-time Auckland XI, but I wouldn't want to
> embarrass Alvey further ...
It would be more of an embarassment to Auckland, unfortunately.
>
> Aditya [Don't even start me on an all-time Karnataka XI - no comparison to
> the current Aust team ...] Basrur
>
>
Unfortunately not. You see you have to have actual pace bowlers in most
conditions. When India had the great spin quartet, they won remarkably few
games and series. The problem: unbalanced attack. There is no doubt that
Barbados and Yorkshire have had great sides, also Surrey would be right up
there. And NSW. Perhaps the greatest of all. However what NSW has done in
the past (quite a few great NSW players are now dead, unfortunately) has
nothing at all to do with current selections.
Regards,
Michael Creevey
Michael Creevey
> Is this restricted to Tests? FWIW, Nimbalkar's 400 was meant to have been
on
> a fairly difficult track.
I think introducing Indian fc cricket is a bit difficult, especially
considering the widely divergent standards involved.
>
> And if we want to compare tall feats, who was the last Australian to hit
281
> when following on, to go on to win his side the match? Please don't tell
me
> about great performances against the odds. Australians can't hold a candle
> to India in that regard. Their backs simply haven't been up against the
wall
> as often.
There is a slight difference between being in awful situations and actually
doing anyhing about it. I think that is the dominant feature of Australian
sport, the never say die attitude. India has often failed in that respect,
IMO.
> You still haven't proved your case that they're flat track bullies.
Vengsarkar was primarily a FWB. Still all were fine players.
A bit
> like jocking for Love's selection, really. A nice idea, which sounds like
> good rhetoric, but in reality, a tale, told by an idiot, full of sound and
> fury, signifying nothing ...
Comparisons between Alvey and Shakespeare (or Hamlet) are a tad
strained.........
>
> I guess I'll wait till tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow to hear why the
> above are FTBs.
>
>
> > Would this be the MEW who averages 9.0 from 10 innings in Spin Lanka?
>
> Yeah, great attack he faced there. A guy you say is a chucker, a
half-decent
> left-arm quick, and a whole load of others who haven't cemented their
> places. It wasn't as if Australia was in any dire trouble there either.
They were.
>
> Waugh is probably better than every Queensland bat than Hayden. When you
> take ODOs into account, better than every Queensland bat, period. What an
> embarrassment.
ODOs don't count.
>
> > And whether there's *any* Qlders with averages > 40 is irrelevant to
> > MEW being over-rated.
> > (And you forgot Bill Brown)
>
> Overrated compared with New South Welshmen, Victorians, South Australians,
> West Australians, and Tasmanians.
Please name 5 Tasmanians who have played tests. Or WAns, SAns,......
Not overrated compared to any
> Queenslanders. Face it, if MEW were a Queenslander, you'd be as pissed
about
> his axing as you are about Love's (fully justified) exclusion, or Bichel's
> lack of opportunities.
>
> Anthony Stuart impressed me far more than Bichel ever did. So did Simon
> Cook. Why did they not get shots? How many Queensland quicks took 5-fers
on
> their ODI and Test debuts, respectively? And this is from a state with
> apparently the second-fastest track, and a predilection for producing
> quicks.
Anthony Stuart became injured and sidelined.
>
> I honestly hadn't realised that Queensland's history was quite so shallow
> when I'd set off on this crusade. A few comparisons with Bombay, and wham,
> you're exposed as the good-for-nothing state you are.
Don't get me talking about NZ, or India for that matter.........
> Still lower. At a faster pace. (BTW, what sort of a battering do you think
> Tendulkar and Laxman are giving Bic's ODI figures as we speak?) Ask any
> batsman who he fears more, and you'll get laughed at for even bringing Bic
> into the equation.
Ask them.
In all seriousness, I've always admired Bic as an honest
> trier, and I can see a case that he's been shat on by the selectors quite
a
> bit. But really, with that sort of bowling at Australia's disposal, I'm
not
> surprised. They've got the mix pretty damn right, as Katich's selection
and
> success shows.
>
> At the risk of exposing your tomfoolery further, is Ironmonger the best
> excuse for a spinner that Queensland has produced?
Check his figures.
>> > How far back do you want to go? Cos there's Peter Allan, Dirk
> > Tazelaar, the legendary Big Carl Rackeman,
>
> Oh, look, finally someone we've heard of. And he doesn't even make an
> all-time Queensland XI.
Good point.
>
> > Geoff Dymock, Tony Dell
> > and a whole recent battery of Creevey/Noffke/Dawes/Mueller clones.
>
> Yes. I'm sure they were great. Really. Would have won you a whole swag of
> Sheffield Shields.
Have won 5 in the last 9 years.
Great players, all of them. I laugh at your contention
> that the Gabba's the second fastest deck in Australia, because you'd think
> that Queensland would have at least produced some half-way decent quicks.
> Instead, we get McDermott, Rackemann, Bichel, and Kasprowicz. I see them,
> and raise you a Kapil, Srinath, Nissar and Madan Lal.
And you lose.
Regards,
Michael Creevey
Michael Creevey
"Shripathi Kamath" <s h r i p a t h i k a m a t h @ h o t m a i l . c o m>
wrote in message news:vprlr1l...@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "Michael Creevey" <snipthis...@mailandnews.com> wrote in message
> news:bnkkoa$124kpk$1...@ID-195042.news.uni-berlin.de...
> >
> > "Aditya Basrur" <aditya...@pullyourownfinger.hotmail.com> wrote in
> > message news:bnfo30$iqn$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz...
> > > > Define "decent"? (btw JR Thomson wasn't a Qlder. Sydney boy who
moved
> > > > north after his "real" Test debut in 1974.)
> > >
> > > 200 test wickets. Average less than 25.
> >
> > No Indians fall into that category.
>
> Only because they bowled to extensively NSVians.
>
> > >
> > > Aditya
> > > In Auckland, thinking Bichel is the T E Srinivasan of fast bowlers ...
> > >
> >
> > No, India and NZ are the TE Srinivasan's of test cricket .......
> >
>
> As in both of them done in by Gavaskar?
Not another Yograj?
>
>
> Dude, get real. Bracken *proved* that Bichel's days are numbered. He is
> just a seat-warmer for Lee.
> --
> Shripathi Kamath
Yeah he did okay, and has done okay in ODOs. Perfectly happy for him to
continue there, but others have to be rated ahead of him as respects tests.
Regards,
Michael Creevey
Michael Creevey
> Michael Creevey wrote:
> > "Aditya Basrur" <aditya...@pullyourownfinger.hotmail.com> wrote in
> > message news:bnfo30$iqn$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz...
> >>> Define "decent"? (btw JR Thomson wasn't a Qlder. Sydney boy who
> >>> moved north after his "real" Test debut in 1974.)
> >>
> >> 200 test wickets. Average less than 25.
> >
> > No Indians fall into that category.
>
> Well, no Indian bowlers can claim to have trained on the second fastest
> track in Australia (possibly the world) on a regular basis.
Is that an excuse?
>
> Besides, Indian bowling sucks. Why else do you think we've never won
abroad
> consistently despite the best batting lineup in the world?
Not correct, although at present India has some terrific players.
>
> Meanwhile, Australia has Lillee, Lindwall, Miller, McGrath, Warne (average
> is about there),
:-)
Gillespie ... not a Queenslander amongst them. It's enough
> to wet your pants over really. And people wonder why more Queenslanders
> haven't been selected.
Umm not all of them were available at the same time.
>
> And besides, NSW's record for debutant bowlers is awesome. Do the names
> Anthony Stuart, Simon Cook, and Simon Katich ring bells?
How about McDermott, Rackemann (2nd and 3rd tests), Ironmonger?
>
> >>
> >> Aditya
> >> In Auckland, thinking Bichel is the T E Srinivasan of fast bowlers
> >> ...
> >>
> >
> > No, India and NZ are the TE Srinivasan's of test cricket .......
>
> Q: When did Australia ever draw a Test series with WI in the mid- to
> late-1980s?
When did India win a series against Australia in the 1890s? The 1940s?
Although Australia did draw a series v WI in 81-2, on pitches that suited WI
far more than Indian ones.
Did India beat WI by an innings twice during the late 80s? May have done,
but couldn't be bothered checking.
>
> I think there is a parallel. Both are pretty good domestic players who've
> never really been given a chance in the big league, much as it's been
> deserved. Of course, for the analogy to hold, Bichel has to be Australia's
> answer to Gavaskar. Considering Australian bowlers are about as good as
> Indian bats, and NSW is Australia's equivalent to Bombay, I suppose it's
not
> unfair.
> Cheers,
>
> Aditya
I think the most pertinent example of selectors leaving a Qlder out with
rightful claims is Hayden. Others deserved more opportunities than they have
had, but there is no guarantee that any would have been a world beater, with
the proviso that Rackemann could have been, but was very injury prone.
Regards,
Michael Creevey
Aditya Basrur
<snip: Now taking things seriously, to reflect the high esteem in which I
hold Qld Cricket ...>
> I've got to answer what your saying, before people actually start
> believing it. Don't forget, that Kapil was India's greatest ever pace
> bowler. Not a fast bowler admittedly. So what you have is Qld's best
> home produced pace bowler being better than India's best ever.
> This is McDermott's record after his comeback
> 211 8/97 26.52 11 13 0
> Which includes one or 2 very lean series, perhaps due in part to
> botched surgery.
McDermott wasn't bad, certainly. I wouldn't restrict a comparison with Kapil
to averages alone. Remember that Kapil was playing the role of both stock
and strike bowler much of the time. Even Imran had Sarfraz, and then Wasim
and Waqar. Kapil's best support for much of the time was Prabhakar, from
what I understand, until Srinath came along.
In seriousness, I'd hold Kapil's greater number of wickets, longevity, and
workload as balancing figures when considering his stats in comparison to
McDermott's. He had an awesome series in Australia in 1991/92, IIRC (saw the
highlights sometime back). Not a bad series in the WI in 1988/89 either.
> In his 1 series played against India during that time, his figures
> were: 31 5/54 21.61 3
>
> Admittedly he was playing against very weak opposition there. However
LOL.
> I like his figures against WI in WI:
> 24 5/80 23.50 1- he apparently crapped out and did an Eggy with
> the bat in that series, but did okay in the bowling department v the
> world champions.
If we're chopping and changing, check Kapil in the WI in 1988/89. Or
1982/83. If he'd been playing on those pitches throughout his career, he'd
have figures like McDermott as well.
It's not an excuse - just a fact. The pitches just weren't as helpful.
>> Mournful, really ...
>
> What really is mournful is India's poor production of pace bowlers,
> and indeed bowlers generally, however in the spin department Qld
> cannot compare, despite Ironmonger and McCool.
Yes, the pace production is pretty abysmal. No qualms from me on that. But I
was genuinely surprised that McDermott, Rakcemann and Thomson were the only
players from Qld who've made a dent in the collective memory. Which is not
to say that they don't have some half-decent players at the moment.
But then again, Australia's talent cup is full-to-brimming. Let them play
for Tamil Nadu, I say.0
<snip>
> it is stupid IMO to call Jardine
> or Cowdrey Indian, or Hussain for that matter, Dexter Italian or
> Freddie Brown Peruvian. Mike Holmans might get a bit dissed if we
> start back down that route of the English UN team.
It's more a question of where they learnt their Cricket, though, and played
most of it. (Not that it should affect their qualification to play, if they
achieve that.) For instance, Jardine and Cowdrey both learnt their Cricket
at their public schools. Gower played for Leicester, but (IIRC) went to
school in Kent and learnt to play there. I'm not focusing on birth, but more
on education etc. Their cricket is English, but I don't think the fact that
Lamb or Greig played for England was particularly hurtful for England. (This
is where I differ from RH, BTW.) I was born in India, and many of my habits
would be in common with Indians. But my education has been exclusively
abroad. I moved from Wellington to Auckland seamlessly, and I daresay I'd
have no problems moving to Sydney tomorrow or New York in five years' time.
It wouldn't change my identification with NZ.
But please note that I'm not querying qualifications. I think it's great for
Queensland that Thomson and IVAR and GSC could play for them. I think it's
great for Wellington and NZ that a player like Roger Twose could play for
us. But it doesn't stop me being peevish when you want to claim Thommo and
Chappell as Queenslanders :-)
<snip: stuff on women in Brisbane vis-a-vis Sydney. I'll email you on that
later ...>
>> Depends how universal you want to get. Ranji thought him pretty
>> good, IIRC. So did a chap named Compton.
>
> Bradman thought that Tallon was the greatest keeper ever. Also
> thought Eddie Gilbert the fastest bowler he ever faced. Steve Waugh
> rates Hayden the best bat he has ever seen. Ron Archer called by Tony
> Cozier as 'the great Ron Archer'. etc.
Steve Waugh rates a different batsman the best bat he's ever seen on a
weekly basis. All I'm saying is that Nayudu's reputation spread beyond
India's shores, which was no mean feat when you weren't related to the
ruling family of Nawanagar, pre-1945.
>>
>> <snip a not disgraceful team>
>>
>> Oh, several can play at that game.
>>
>> But you've only really added Brown (who probably didn't play that
>> many tests) and McCool to that list from the others. Chappell,
>> Border and Thomson disqualified. How many matches did Peter Burge
>> play, anyway? And didn't Richie Benaud (a New South Welshman) have
>> to *beg* for Slasher Mackay to play his last test with Richie and
>> Davo (IIRC)?
>
> What? Limited significance, anyway.
Yeah, just a red herring. Something Richie Benaud wrote about. I can quote
it later if you're interested. Just a suggestion that K D "Slasher" Mackay
wasn't especially good, and had to have favours begged so that he could be
selected for his last test.
> McCool, to be honest for a
>> moment, probably deserves more props as an all-rounder. His batting
>> and bowling averages are both very good. Ron Archer didn't play
>> enough Tests for me to be convinced of his class.
>
> Nayudu? Merchant? etc.
Difference being that those guys simply didn't play while their country
played more Tests. Ron Archer unequivocally did have more tests he could
have played, IIRC.
<snip a pretty good attempt at comparisons>
> So on figures alone, Mumbai is slightly ahead in batting, far behind
> in bowling. Look at Mumbai's absolutely pathetic pace bowling
> reserves. In Australia most fc sides would score 1000 against that
> kind of attack.
Fair enough, but remember that the bowlers from Mumbai didn't grow up on the
same tracks. I could argue a greater difference in batting if you looked at
first-class figures, or brought in guys like Ashok Mankad, etc. Such
comparisons are always somewhat fallacious (speaking seriously for a moment)
as it's difficult to take figures in isolation without looking at those who
played for the same team concurrently, etc.
But I agree with the overall point - Mumbai's bowling doesn't really hold a
candle to Queensland's. And I could nitpick and say that Mumbai's batting,
on-form, is actually far superior to Queensland's, but I'm losing energy. I
may not be as old as uncle alvey, but I do run out of energy fast.
>
>>> Qld has 3 of the greatest keepers of all time- Tallon, Grout and
>>> Healy (a superior keeper to Gilly, but no comparison as a batsman).
>>
>> That's subjective.
>
> No it isn't.
I beg to disagree. On the figures, Gilly is every bit as good a keeper as
Healy, if not better. I remember the hullabaloo when Gilly replaced Healy in
the ODO side. I was sucked in for a while. But seriously, Gilly doesn't
strike me as all that bad a keeper. You could do far worse. I think he's
fairly easily in the top 2 or 3 keepers in the world today. NZ isn't even
sure who its keeper is. Moin and Rashid are pale shadows of their former
selves. England's looking at replacing Alec Stewart with the fairly
inexperienced James Foster. Taibu looks proficient, but not outstanding. Who
is the WI keeper nowadays anyway? Is he all that good? The consistency is a
big thing - and on that basis, I'd say that Gilly, Boucher and Kalu are the
only ones up there. Keeping isn't like batting or bowling; it's not like you
can pull out an average or an aggregate or a number of byes and say this
guy's better than that one. There are other factors at play in conceding
byes - such as a dodgy pitch or a really crap bowler. (I wouldn't blame
Parthiv for all those byes off Balaji, for instance.) It's evidence of the
eyes, primarily. From what I've read, Kirmani was Engineer's superior as a
keeper. But a few months ago, I met a guy who kept for Central Districts and
had played against both of them (IIRC). He rated Engineer as better than
Kirmani. So I do think it's subjective, and I don't think I'm the best judge
...
<snip>
>> Besides which, doesn't Oldfield have a claim to being the best
>> keeper of all time?
>
> So do others, but Bradman, Benaud et al plump for Tallon. Oldfield
> missed more than Tallon, despite Oldfield's high proportion of
> stumpings Tallon is generally rated superior both over the stumps and
> standing back. In fact Tallon's non-selection was probably a big
> factor in A's hammering at the Oval in 38- Hutton should have been
> stumped by Barnett less than 3 figures.
Interesting. Must check him out.
> Mumbai produces FWB's, but very little else.
Gavaskar, Tendulkar. Queensland hasn't home-grown one batsman with 8,000
test runs, let alone 2 ...
<snip interesting players>
But would they really have made it? Where were the Queenslanders from 1984
to 1989, when Australia really sucked? Is Queensland rejection a
fair-weather phenomenon to go with the good times? Isn't this more than a
coincidence? I.e. is it not conceivable that the selectors know what they're
doing?
BTW, I think one guy who was never given a fair shot was Jamie Siddons. He
really missed out.
> Eddie Gilbert (nominated by Bradman as the fastest bowler he ever
> saw, and after breaking his bat and being bowled for 0 described it
> as the luckiest duck he ever made)
> fc: 2521 87 28.97 6-64 6 0
> The reason given for why Gilbert never played tests is that he was
> thought to be a chucker. That would be no impediment today.
> And if you think that some of those bowling averages are high, they
> aren't in the context of the time. Larwood's test average was 28 and
> Gregory's was 30+.
Yes, fully aware of this. Gilbert would have been great to see - but I was
aware of the chucking allegations. An aboriginal, wasn't he? I'm almost
certain his selection would have done much more for Aboriginal Cricket, if
he's the guy of who I'm thinking.
>> Not to mention how easily an all-time NSW XI would wipe the floor
>> with the Queensland one you've put together, or even with the
>> current Aus team, IMO. (Getting McGrath to play against Taylor might
>> be a bit difficult.) The Bajan example is so much more remarkable
>> because Barbados has been playing for so much shorter a time than
>> Australia.
>
> Incorrect. A few decades.
When you're only 20, "A few decades" is certainly "so much shorter" ...
>>
>> And I'd put together an all-time Auckland XI, but I wouldn't want to
>> embarrass Alvey further ...
>
> It would be more of an embarassment to Auckland, unfortunately.
Just you wait :-)
>>
>> Aditya [Don't even start me on an all-time Karnataka XI - no
>> comparison to the current Aust team ...] Basrur
>>
>>
> Unfortunately not. You see you have to have actual pace bowlers in
> most conditions. When India had the great spin quartet, they won
> remarkably few games and series.
1971 in England. Pretty much all comers at home. They'd have been better off
sticking to Bedi, Chandra and Prasanna.
> The problem: unbalanced attack.
> There is no doubt that Barbados and Yorkshire have had great sides,
> also Surrey would be right up there. And NSW. Perhaps the greatest of
> all. However what NSW has done in the past (quite a few great NSW
> players are now dead, unfortunately) has nothing at all to do with
> current selections.
Yeah, yeah, I know. But I do think it's fair to suggest the Australian
selectors know what they're doing. They seem to get it right more often than
not. And I was just having some fun on the weekend. Thinking about it,
Queensland's production of fast bowlers is far lower than I would've
expected, considering the facilities at the Gabba. If I were Australian, or
even a Queenslander, I'd be extremely happy with the shape and progress of
the Australian team, rather than whine about selections.
That's not to say it doesn't provide rsc with a lot of amusement ...
Aditya [Honorary Victorian?] Basrur
Aditya Basrur
> "Aditya Basrur" <aditya...@pullyourownfinger.hotmail.com> wrote in
> message news:bnkq7n$ej3$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz...
>> Michael Creevey wrote:
>>> "Aditya Basrur" <aditya...@pullyourownfinger.hotmail.com> wrote
>>> in message news:bnfo30$iqn$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz...
>>>>> Define "decent"? (btw JR Thomson wasn't a Qlder. Sydney boy who
>>>>> moved north after his "real" Test debut in 1974.)
>>>>
>>>> 200 test wickets. Average less than 25.
>>>
>>> No Indians fall into that category.
>>
>> Well, no Indian bowlers can claim to have trained on the second
>> fastest track in Australia (possibly the world) on a regular basis.
>
> Is that an excuse?
An explanation. It's difficult to produce fast bowlers when the tracks
aren't suitable. I'm sure there have been plenty of chicken and egg
arguments on this. I find Richard Hadlee and Imran Khan most convincing -
Imran attributes his career and desire to be a fast bowler to his time in
the UK. Before Imran, the pitches in Pakistan weren't particularly good for
quicks. I seem to remember a passage in "All Round View" where he basically
says something along these lines. Similarly, RJH believes that quick bowlers
need helpful pitches to prosper, as well as role models. Kapil and Srinath
haven't been sufficiently good role models for India to produce our pace
battery yet, but hope springs eternal. I think faster pitches couldn't hurt.
>>
>> Besides, Indian bowling sucks. Why else do you think we've never won
>> abroad consistently despite the best batting lineup in the world?
>
> Not correct, although at present India has some terrific players.
You fell for it. You should find the logic in the above sentence a little
flawed as well. Despite our awesome batting, they rarely perform abroad.
>> And besides, NSW's record for debutant bowlers is awesome. Do the
>> names Anthony Stuart, Simon Cook, and Simon Katich ring bells?
>
> How about McDermott, Rackemann (2nd and 3rd tests), Ironmonger?
None of them took a 5-fer on ODI debut ... How'd Craig do on debut? And
Ironmonger's a spinner, FFS. Don't mix disciplines.
<snip>
>>> No, India and NZ are the TE Srinivasan's of test cricket .......
>>
>> Q: When did Australia ever draw a Test series with WI in the mid- to
>> late-1980s?
>
> When did India win a series against Australia in the 1890s? The 1940s?
> Although Australia did draw a series v WI in 81-2, on pitches that
> suited WI far more than Indian ones.
I was talking about NZ. And the 1890s and 1940s are hardly relevant. Let's
not talk about NZ's record vs. Australia in the mid-1980s. For your sake.
> Did India beat WI by an innings twice during the late 80s? May have
> done, but couldn't be bothered checking.
Me neither.
> I think the most pertinent example of selectors leaving a Qlder out
> with rightful claims is Hayden. Others deserved more opportunities
> than they have had, but there is no guarantee that any would have
> been a world beater, with the proviso that Rackemann could have been,
> but was very injury prone.
Exactly. Carping about a genuine bias vs. Queensland is difficult to back
up, although it's nice in theory. The selectors do get it right more often
than not. (Although Stewie Law should have been given an extended run. And
Jamie Siddons at least a shot.)
And I'm more inclined to take the Wog on Hayden. I saw his ton vs. WI in
1996/97 (125, IIRC). It was a nice knock, but it certainly didn't have the
dominance of say, Hayden against England last year. (Admittedly, he was up
against bowling not quite at the quality of the 2 Cs, but still ...) I'd
still like to see Hayden against some class bowling. Unfortunately, there's
very little around.
--
Aditya
Michael Creevey
> Michael Creevey wrote:
> <snip: Now taking things seriously, to reflect the high esteem in which I
> hold Qld Cricket ...>
Thanks. I was doing the same for your post, since quite a lot of what you
wrote did require a response. Nobody can deny that Qld's record in state
cricket is sometimes embarassing-however in the last decade things have
really turned around. Prior to that Qld did produce some excellent players.
>
> > I've got to answer what your saying, before people actually start
> > believing it. Don't forget, that Kapil was India's greatest ever pace
> > bowler. Not a fast bowler admittedly. So what you have is Qld's best
> > home produced pace bowler being better than India's best ever.
> > This is McDermott's record after his comeback
> > 211 8/97 26.52 11 13 0
> > Which includes one or 2 very lean series, perhaps due in part to
> > botched surgery.
>
> McDermott wasn't bad, certainly. I wouldn't restrict a comparison with
Kapil
> to averages alone. Remember that Kapil was playing the role of both stock
> and strike bowler much of the time. Even Imran had Sarfraz, and then Wasim
> and Waqar. Kapil's best support for much of the time was Prabhakar, from
> what I understand, until Srinath came along.
>
> In seriousness, I'd hold Kapil's greater number of wickets, longevity, and
> workload as balancing figures when considering his stats in comparison to
> McDermott's. He had an awesome series in Australia in 1991/92, IIRC (saw
the
> highlights sometime back). Not a bad series in the WI in 1988/89 either.
Kapil was a fine bowler and a terrific all rounder. Still in most conditions
I'd prefer post 1990 McDermott to him any day, without sophistry or
anything, I don't see any close comparison as a bowler.
>
> > In his 1 series played against India during that time, his figures
> > were: 31 5/54 21.61 3
> >
> > Admittedly he was playing against very weak opposition there. However
>
> LOL.
Same for Tendulkar in 97/8 :-)
>
> > I like his figures against WI in WI:
> > 24 5/80 23.50 1- he apparently crapped out and did an Eggy with
> > the bat in that series, but did okay in the bowling department v the
> > world champions.
>
> If we're chopping and changing, check Kapil in the WI in 1988/89. Or
> 1982/83. If he'd been playing on those pitches throughout his career, he'd
> have figures like McDermott as well.
But the conditions in which McDermott starred were not anything unusual.
Pretty flat, really. During the 2 years between late 90 and early 92
McDermott was IMO the world's best bowler.
> > What really is mournful is India's poor production of pace bowlers,
> > and indeed bowlers generally, however in the spin department Qld
> > cannot compare, despite Ironmonger and McCool.
>
> Yes, the pace production is pretty abysmal. No qualms from me on that. But
I
> was genuinely surprised that McDermott, Rakcemann and Thomson were the
only
> players from Qld who've made a dent in the collective memory. Which is not
> to say that they don't have some half-decent players at the moment.
I hate to sound Alveyish, but its hard when they aren't picked.
Nevertheless, the only bowlers IMO of the last 25 years or so who could be
considered better than Srinath is not large. Probably add Dymock to the
above list. Probably Bichel as well.
>
> But then again, Australia's talent cup is full-to-brimming. Let them play
> for Tamil Nadu, I say.0
You are just a bonda bosad
:-)
>
> <snip>
> > it is stupid IMO to call Jardine
> > or Cowdrey Indian, or Hussain for that matter, Dexter Italian or
> > Freddie Brown Peruvian. Mike Holmans might get a bit dissed if we
> > start back down that route of the English UN team.
>
> It's more a question of where they learnt their Cricket, though, and
played
> most of it. (Not that it should affect their qualification to play, if
they
> achieve that.) For instance, Jardine and Cowdrey both learnt their Cricket
> at their public schools. Gower played for Leicester, but (IIRC) went to
> school in Kent and learnt to play there. I'm not focusing on birth, but
more
> on education etc. Their cricket is English, but I don't think the fact
that
> Lamb or Greig played for England was particularly hurtful for England.
(This
> is where I differ from RH, BTW.) I was born in India, and many of my
habits
> would be in common with Indians. But my education has been exclusively
> abroad. I moved from Wellington to Auckland seamlessly, and I daresay I'd
> have no problems moving to Sydney tomorrow or New York in five years'
time.
> It wouldn't change my identification with NZ.
All true. But its a bit of a minefield when you are identifying a particular
player with a particular place.
OTOH Thommo totally identifies with Qld, and so does Border in what he says.
Also Border's virtual deification hasn't been rescinded, because the fact he
guided Qld to their 1st ever Shield cannot be forgotten.
>
> But please note that I'm not querying qualifications. I think it's great
for
> Queensland that Thomson and IVAR and GSC could play for them. I think it's
> great for Wellington and NZ that a player like Roger Twose could play for
> us. But it doesn't stop me being peevish when you want to claim Thommo and
> Chappell as Queenslanders :-)
Again I take your point, but please duck when you say to Mike Holmans that
Caddick and Hussain aren't English :-)
If we are talking all-time XIs, however, I am hardline on the view that a
player should be identified with the test team or region with which he
played the most, unless there is some overarching reason why not ie changed
countries due to country bans (ie SA) or political reasons etc.
Also
> > thought Eddie Gilbert the fastest bowler he ever faced. Steve Waugh
> > rates Hayden the best bat he has ever seen. Ron Archer called by Tony
> > Cozier as 'the great Ron Archer'. etc.
>
> Steve Waugh rates a different batsman the best bat he's ever seen on a
> weekly basis.
Not actually :-)
All I'm saying is that Nayudu's reputation spread beyond
> India's shores, which was no mean feat when you weren't related to the
> ruling family of Nawanagar, pre-1945.
Same with Alan Marshal, although I doubt whether his fame spread across
India's shores. To say that Nayudu was a famous player would be correct.
> >> But you've only really added Brown (who probably didn't play that
> >> many tests) and McCool to that list from the others. Chappell,
> >> Border and Thomson disqualified. How many matches did Peter Burge
> >> play, anyway? And didn't Richie Benaud (a New South Welshman) have
> >> to *beg* for Slasher Mackay to play his last test with Richie and
> >> Davo (IIRC)?
> >
> > What? Limited significance, anyway.
>
> Yeah, just a red herring. Something Richie Benaud wrote about. I can quote
> it later if you're interested.
Sure.
Just a suggestion that K D "Slasher" Mackay
> wasn't especially good, and had to have favours begged so that he could be
> selected for his last test.
A fine player, worth his weight in gold for the team. Not a Sobers or
Miller, but saved (and won) Aust a series or 2. Did rather well on the
subcontinent. Not afraid of taking Wes Hall bumpers in the chest.
>
> > McCool, to be honest for a
> >> moment, probably deserves more props as an all-rounder. His batting
> >> and bowling averages are both very good. Ron Archer didn't play
> >> enough Tests for me to be convinced of his class.
> >
> > Nayudu? Merchant? etc.
>
> Difference being that those guys simply didn't play while their country
> played more Tests. Ron Archer unequivocally did have more tests he could
> have played, IIRC.
Got injured, unfortunately.
>
> <snip a pretty good attempt at comparisons>
> > So on figures alone, Mumbai is slightly ahead in batting, far behind
> > in bowling. Look at Mumbai's absolutely pathetic pace bowling
> > reserves. In Australia most fc sides would score 1000 against that
> > kind of attack.
>
> Fair enough, but remember that the bowlers from Mumbai didn't grow up on
the
> same tracks. I could argue a greater difference in batting if you looked
at
> first-class figures, or brought in guys like Ashok Mankad, etc. Such
> comparisons are always somewhat fallacious (speaking seriously for a
moment)
> as it's difficult to take figures in isolation without looking at those
who
> played for the same team concurrently, etc.
Indian fc cricket will not compare with Australian. You have too many teams
of the Railways, J&K, Assam ilk.
>
> But I agree with the overall point - Mumbai's bowling doesn't really hold
a
> candle to Queensland's. And I could nitpick and say that Mumbai's batting,
> on-form, is actually far superior to Queensland's,
Superior, yes.
but I'm losing energy. I
> may not be as old as uncle alvey, but I do run out of energy fast.
The Kama Sutra has some interesting suggestions along those lines.
>
> >
> >>> Qld has 3 of the greatest keepers of all time- Tallon, Grout and
> >>> Healy (a superior keeper to Gilly, but no comparison as a batsman).
> >>
> >> That's subjective.
> >
> > No it isn't.
>
> I beg to disagree. On the figures, Gilly is every bit as good a keeper as
> Healy, if not better.
snip
And you know, I agree. On the figures. However I will state it as a bald
fact that Gilly is significantly inferior to Healy as a keeper, just as
Healy is significantly inferior to Gilly as a batsman. Nevertheless I agree
with your contention that Gilly is one of the best int'l keepers today.
> <snip>
> >> Besides which, doesn't Oldfield have a claim to being the best
> >> keeper of all time?
> >
> > So do others, but Bradman, Benaud et al plump for Tallon. Oldfield
> > missed more than Tallon, despite Oldfield's high proportion of
> > stumpings Tallon is generally rated superior both over the stumps and
> > standing back. In fact Tallon's non-selection was probably a big
> > factor in A's hammering at the Oval in 38- Hutton should have been
> > stumped by Barnett less than 3 figures.
>
> Interesting. Must check him out.
>
> > Mumbai produces FWB's, but very little else.
>
> Gavaskar, Tendulkar. Queensland hasn't home-grown one batsman with 8,000
> test runs, let alone 2 ...
Umm...perhaps if I said that Mumbai is a bunch of tatti beef eating fwbs
with no fire in their eyes, my actual meaning may be clearer.
>
> <snip interesting players>
>
> But would they really have made it? Where were the Queenslanders from 1984
> to 1989, when Australia really sucked?
Some were in SA. Qld were in the shield final most of those years, so a good
case for more Qlders could have been made. Just a small list off the top of
my head would be, Border, Wessels, Kerr, Maguire, Rackemann, McDermott,
Thomson, Chappell, Hohns, Healy, Ritchie, Glenn Trimble (who sucked
admittedly). Pretty good really.
I think Australia really sucked from 84 to early 87.
Is Queensland rejection a
> fair-weather phenomenon to go with the good times? Isn't this more than a
> coincidence? I.e. is it not conceivable that the selectors know what
they're
> doing?
They are making mistakes, and unfairly ending careers. OTOH Australia has an
abundance of talent at the moment, but will it last. OTOH again Qlders were
given a better shot IMO in the 80s, when A's cricket was significantly
weaker. During the early 80s, there was no pro-NSV bias whatever.
>
> BTW, I think one guy who was never given a fair shot was Jamie Siddons. He
> really missed out.
Agreed totally. Law missed out unfortunately too, so did Martyn and Langer.
And Krapich until now. Interesting how he had to move to NSW to press his
claims to the selectors!
It always disappointed me to see the demise of Dean Jones- an 'NSV' player,
apparently, but was axed very brutally. To make way for...you guessed
it....Steve Waugh! :-)
>
> > Eddie Gilbert (nominated by Bradman as the fastest bowler he ever
> > saw, and after breaking his bat and being bowled for 0 described it
> > as the luckiest duck he ever made)
> > fc: 2521 87 28.97 6-64 6 0
> > The reason given for why Gilbert never played tests is that he was
> > thought to be a chucker. That would be no impediment today.
> > And if you think that some of those bowling averages are high, they
> > aren't in the context of the time. Larwood's test average was 28 and
> > Gregory's was 30+.
>
> Yes, fully aware of this. Gilbert would have been great to see - but I was
> aware of the chucking allegations. An aboriginal, wasn't he? I'm almost
> certain his selection would have done much more for Aboriginal Cricket, if
> he's the guy of who I'm thinking.
Yes, on the money.
>
> >> Not to mention how easily an all-time NSW XI would wipe the floor
> >> with the Queensland one you've put together, or even with the
> >> current Aus team, IMO. (Getting McGrath to play against Taylor might
> >> be a bit difficult.) The Bajan example is so much more remarkable
> >> because Barbados has been playing for so much shorter a time than
> >> Australia.
> >
> > Incorrect. A few decades.
>
> When you're only 20, "A few decades" is certainly "so much shorter" ...
well, I'm *much* older than you.......
>
> >>
> >> And I'd put together an all-time Auckland XI, but I wouldn't want to
> >> embarrass Alvey further ...
> >
> > It would be more of an embarassment to Auckland, unfortunately.
>
> Just you wait :-)
Waiting with trepidation.......
A Canterbury side would be interesting, with all their Hadlees. I could do
one if you like, probably have something like that floating around on a bit
of paper somewhere.
>
> >>
> >> Aditya [Don't even start me on an all-time Karnataka XI - no
> >> comparison to the current Aust team ...] Basrur
> >>
> >>
> > Unfortunately not. You see you have to have actual pace bowlers in
> > most conditions. When India had the great spin quartet, they won
> > remarkably few games and series.
>
> 1971 in England. Pretty much all comers at home.
Not true, really, for quite a long time. England has done well there, and
WI. The 90s record is quite outstanding though.
Don't forget that India couldn't even win in 86-7 against a very weak
Australian side.
They'd have been better off
> sticking to Bedi, Chandra and Prasanna.
Yes, Venkat was a bit of overkill.
>
> > The problem: unbalanced attack.
> > There is no doubt that Barbados and Yorkshire have had great sides,
> > also Surrey would be right up there. And NSW. Perhaps the greatest of
> > all. However what NSW has done in the past (quite a few great NSW
> > players are now dead, unfortunately) has nothing at all to do with
> > current selections.
>
> Yeah, yeah, I know. But I do think it's fair to suggest the Australian
> selectors know what they're doing. They seem to get it right more often
than
> not. And I was just having some fun on the weekend. Thinking about it,
> Queensland's production of fast bowlers is far lower than I would've
> expected, considering the facilities at the Gabba.
Don't forget, that few Qld cricketers play on the Gabba. Cricketer
production relies less on fc conditions than schools, grade cricket etc.
If I were Australian, or
> even a Queenslander, I'd be extremely happy with the shape and progress of
> the Australian team, rather than whine about selections.
Qlders have a long collective memory. And its important to preserve the
superiority of A by having a good selectorial policy into the future,
especially as these purple patches never go on forever.
>
> That's not to say it doesn't provide rsc with a lot of amusement ...
>
> Aditya [Honorary Victorian?] Basrur
>
>
Regards,
Michael [got him] Creevey
[its all happening here]
Michael Creevey
Really, Aditya, this isn't working. Just you and I debating this point isn't
enough. Perhaps try and say something about Smith being a sook, or vegan
diets, or say Murali is a chucker and crosspost to
rec.sport.football.australian. At this rate, we'll never get near to vabu.
Regards,
Michael Creevey
Aditya Basrur
snip pathetic weasel
Weak as pis again. What is it with you Qlders? It's like you know 2/3 of 3/5
of piss about your own team, let alone be capable of defending it. See alvey
for instance - unable to name 5 decent fast bowlers from Queensland.
Anyway, I'm off to watch Australian Idol. A crate of VBs says the winner
will be from Sydney or Melbourne.
--
Aditya
h r i p a t h i k a m a t h @hotmail.com Shripathi Kamath
> snip
> Really, Aditya, this isn't working. Just you and I debating this point
isn't
> enough.
You call that debating? Lobotomized lab rats on steroids, sliding down a
banister, laced with spermicidal jelly, would generate more friction*
> Perhaps try and say something about Smith being a sook,
Smith *is* a sook. And Gilly is a wuss.
> or vegan diets
I bet Gilly's a vegan.
> or say Murali is a chucker
Only works when Larry's around. Speaking of which, where's he gone?
> and crosspost to rec.sport.football.australian.
Trolling is a gift, do not waste it on pretend-sports.
> At this rate, we'll never get near to vabu.
>
'We' will, if we 'tried'! Sheesh!
Ok, maybe you folks can do something useful. Upon advice of counsel, I am
considering wimping out for a while, and finally adopting a new nick.
The artist formerly known as Shripathi Kamath is considering metamorphosing
into one of the following:
1. Glasnost DMC
2. my Daddy
3. swimmingly
4. McBubba
5. Da Hoochie
6. Luigi Luigi
Help me pick out the name that does justice to my former nick. Indicate
your choice by the number. I'll be the final judge in all cases. And no
thinking of any new cool nicks either. It must be one of the above.
--
Shripathi Kamath
* only a rough translation from Yiddish
Moby
> > "Bob Dubery" <mega...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:<3f9a236b....@opus.randori.com>...
> > <snip>
> >
> > That was pathetic, Bob.
> >
> > If it's so unimportant, just answer the fucking question.
> And you really think that would be the end of it?
It would really be the end of the question, yes.
> This fire is only going to go out if the protagonists stop
> chucking petrol on the embers.
Amazing how you're taking this line now.
Moby
Paul Robson
>> or say Murali is a chucker
>
> Only works when Larry's around. Speaking of which, where's he gone?
He's still trying to figure out how to play "Super Muralio Bros" :)
Mike Holmans
<snipthis...@mailandnews.com> tapped the keyboard and brought
forth:
>I think the most pertinent example of selectors leaving a Qlder out with
>rightful claims is Hayden. Others deserved more opportunities than they have
>had, but there is no guarantee that any would have been a world beater, with
>the proviso that Rackemann could have been, but was very injury prone.
Nor was there any guarantee that Hayden would have been a
world-beater, given his previous record on his previous spell in the
Test side. It turned out, once Hayden had been selected again, that he
wasn't all that bad, but I vivdly remember the couple of years before
in which the QCCC were having to come up with ingenious explanations
of why, despite the fact that he had previously shown himself
incompetent at Test level, he should be picked again. What it actually
came down to was whether even Hayden could be any worse than Blewett,
and when people considered that, it was time to pick Hatden again.
Cheers,
Mike
Mike Holmans
>For purposes of comparison, I'll include players for Mumbai who weren't
>necessarily born there, and for Qld I will nominate a side which was born
>there and one which played there primarily.
>
>Mumbai
>
>SM Gavaskar : 125 214 16 10122 236* 51.12 34 45 108
>VM Merchant :10 18 0 859 154 47.72 3 3 7
>VMH Mankad 44 72 5 2109 231 31.47 5 6 33
>14686 777 5236 162 32.32 8-52 8 2 90.6 2.13
>50122 2309 19183 782 24.53 8-35 38 9 64.0 2.29
>VS Hazare 30 52 6 2192 164* 47.65 7 9 11
>38628 1722 14645 595 24.61 8-90 27 3 64.9 2.27
>SR Tendulkar 107 173 16 8882 217 56.57 31 36 68
>RJ Shastri (just to include some more bowling options) 80 121 14 3830
>206 35.79 11 12 36
> 2625.1 657 6185 151 40.96 5-75 2 0 104.3 2.35
>FM Engineer 46 87 3 2611 121 31.08 2 16 66 16
>RG Nadkarni 41 67 12 1414 122* 25.70 1 7 22
>9165 665 2559 88 29.07 6-43 4 1 104.1 1.67
>10686 500 21.37 6-17 19 1
>DG Phadkar 31 45 7 1229 123 32.34 2 8 21
>5994 277 2285 62 36.85 7-159 3 0 96.6 2.28
>SP Gupte 1880.4 608 4403 149 29.55 9-102 12 1 75.7 2.34
>KD Ghavri 7036 233 3656 109 33.54 5-33 4 0 64.5 3.11
Wot, no Aggy? Shame.
Cheers,
Mike
Bob Dubery
> > > news:<3f9b5ad1....@opus.randori.com>... "Bob
> > > Dubery" <mega...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > news:<3f9a236b....@opus.randori.com>... <snip>
> > >
> > > That was pathetic, Bob.
> > >
> > > If it's so unimportant, just answer the fucking
> question.
> > And you really think that would be the end of it?
>
> It would really be the end of the question, yes.
one specific point. But the bile would continue to flow, the
insults would still be chucked around, people would still be
thirsting for whatever kind of revenge they think they can
obtain.
>
> > This fire is only going to go out if the protagonists
> > stop chucking petrol on the embers.
>
> Amazing how you're taking this line now.
Depends on how you define "now". After the last broadside I
fired at Hamish (and you might recall that I posted that I
hadn't derived any pleasure from it) I decided that, for me,
that was now enough.
You can take that or leave it. You can make what you want of
it. Like Hamish, I know what is in my own heart and head.
Mad Hamish
wrote:
>> "Bob Dubery" <mega...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> > > news:<3f9b5ad1....@opus.randori.com>... "Bob
>> > > Dubery" <mega...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> > > news:<3f9a236b....@opus.randori.com>... <snip>
>> > >
>> > > That was pathetic, Bob.
>> > >
>> > > If it's so unimportant, just answer the fucking
>> question.
>> > And you really think that would be the end of it?
>>
>> It would really be the end of the question, yes.
>I doubt it. It MIGHT (depending on the answer I give) settle
>one specific point. But the bile would continue to flow, the
>insults would still be chucked around, people would still be
>thirsting for whatever kind of revenge they think they can
>obtain.
>
Isn't it interesting that you are unwilling to apologise when shown
wrong in accusations
>>
>> > This fire is only going to go out if the protagonists
>> > stop chucking petrol on the embers.
>>
>> Amazing how you're taking this line now.
>Depends on how you define "now". After the last broadside I
>fired at Hamish (and you might recall that I posted that I
>hadn't derived any pleasure from it) I decided that, for me,
>that was now enough.
>
>You can take that or leave it. You can make what you want of
>it. Like Hamish, I know what is in my own heart and head.
and how do you feel about your accusations of lying now Bob?
--
"Hope is replaced by fear and dreams by survival, most of us get by."
Stuart Adamson 1958-2001
Mad Hamish
Hamish Laws
h_l...@aardvark.net.au
Bob Dubery
> Bob? --
awake at night (or not, as the case may be), not you or
anybody else.
Mad Hamish
wrote:
>> and how do you feel about your accusations of lying now
So you rate Larry by his apoligies but don't consider them relevant to
you?
Bob Dubery
> So you rate Larry by his apoligies but don't consider them
> relevant to you?
But I'm discussing MY conscience here, and MY conscience is
only troubled by what I did do, didn't do, should have done
and could have done. And it's MY conscience and it will keep
me awake at night, nobody else.
And if I'm driven to drink or drugs or end up with
depression or doing a Lady Macbeth then that will be my
burden to bear.
And that is IT.
You can hypothesize all you like about my need for sleeping
pills. But you can do it without me.
Mad Hamish
wrote:
>
>> So you rate Larry by his apoligies but don't consider them
>> relevant to you?
>I don't understand the question.
>
>But I'm discussing MY conscience here, and MY conscience is
>only troubled by what I did do, didn't do, should have done
>and could have done. And it's MY conscience and it will keep
>me awake at night, nobody else.
>
So let's get this straight.
You've accused me, Alvey, Moby etc of lying about Larry changing the
post.
You dragged it out a week or two (or somewhere between 1 and 14 days)
ago and threw it out again.
Now you can either have the guts to accuse me of making up the post on
the hard-drive or else you can admit that you were wrong.
You said that Larry was good because he apologised yet you don't seem
to think that you should do so...
>And if I'm driven to drink or drugs or end up with
>depression or doing a Lady Macbeth then that will be my
>burden to bear.
Bob Dubery
>So let's get this straight.
I am not agreeing with it, disagreeing with it or even going to comment on it.
Ditto any further conclusions you might draw. They are yours. Not mine.
Personally I'd appreciate it if you phrased them more directly so that we know
that these are the conclusions that you have arrived at all by yourself, but
it's not for me to control your posting.
<snip>
xss
> >
> >You can take that or leave it. You can make what you want of
> >it. Like Hamish, I know what is in my own heart and head.
>
> and how do you feel about your accusations of lying now Bob?
I've been reading rsc for a few years now, and know Bob to
be among the more reasonable fellows, certainly not a liar.
s.
Bob Dubery
> his mail server lose any posts. Again.
No idea what that last comment is about, and I'm not too troubled by
that. But the SPELLING... that's inexcusable
Now please pay attention: It's DUBYAERY JI.
Thanks.
Paul Robson
> On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 12:57:16 GMT, "Bob Dubery" <mega...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>> and how do you feel about your accusations of lying now
>>> Bob? --
>>It's a matter for my conscience. My conscience will keep me
>>awake at night (or not, as the case may be), not you or
>>anybody else.
>
>
> So you rate Larry by his apoligies but don't consider them relevant to
> you?
"I apologize you fat racist Australian bastard dude".....
Aditya Basrur
"Paul Robson" <auti...@autismuk.muralichucks.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in
message
news:pan.2003.10.29....@autismuk.muralichucks.freeserve.co.uk...
Or even "I'm sorry you're a fat racist Australian bastard dude" ...
Michael Creevey
"Shripathi Kamath" <s h r i p a t h i k a m a t h @ h o t m a i l . c o m>
>
> "Michael Creevey" <snipthis...@mailandnews.com> wrote in message
> news:bnl5dg$1225jk$1...@ID-195042.news.uni-berlin.de...
> > snip
> > Really, Aditya, this isn't working. Just you and I debating this point
> isn't
> > enough.
>
> You call that debating? Lobotomized lab rats on steroids, sliding down a
> banister, laced with spermicidal jelly, would generate more friction*
Never seen it, but it sounds like fun!
> Trolling is a gift, do not waste it on pretend-sports.
>
> > At this rate, we'll never get near to vabu.
> >
>
> 'We' will, if we 'tried'! Sheesh!
>
>
> Ok, maybe you folks can do something useful. Upon advice of counsel, I
am
> considering wimping out for a while, and finally adopting a new nick.
>
> The artist formerly known as Shripathi Kamath is considering
metamorphosing
> into one of the following:
>
> 1. Glasnost DMC
> 2. my Daddy
> 3. swimmingly
> 4. McBubba
> 5. Da Hoochie
> 6. Luigi Luigi
>
> Help me pick out the name that does justice to my former nick. Indicate
> your choice by the number. I'll be the final judge in all cases. And no
> thinking of any new cool nicks either. It must be one of the above.
>
> --
> Shripathi Kamath
>
> * only a rough translation from Yiddish
I like Luigi luigi. It seems to go well with your personality. Just a trace,
not too much; of the circus.
regards,
Michael Creevey
Michael Creevey
Michael Creevey
"Aditya Basrur" <aditya...@pullyorownfinger.hotmail.com> wrote in
message news:bnpqpi$5io$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz...
Rumours of my retirement from rsc are greatly exaggerated.
Regards,
Michael Creevey
[sorry dude]