>Here are some of the funny statements I read in this newsgroup. Enjoy!
>1. "Kapil is a pathetic bowler by international standards"
>I thought he played international cricket and got highest number
>of wickets in international cricket matches.
Highest number of wkts after playing LOT LOT more than any other bowler,
at a pathetic strike rate.
>2. "Since GRV, MA sucked, so what if SMG sucked? I rate SMG as the
> best in the world.
>Best batsman in the world can be excused if his teammates are not good.
Very clever of you to completely twist the meaning. I said that why blame
SMG when GRV , MA also sucked in ODI. This is not to excuse SMG but to
point out the bias.
>3. "Barry Richards??, who, the man who played only 4 test matches"
>For you to be great, you need to play a lot of games eventhough your
>country is banned from playing international cricket.
>FYI, the same Gary Sobers who listed top ten batsmen at that time (not all
>time great list) in 1975, listed Barry Richards as the number one best
1979. It came in the cover of Illustrated weekly of India during the world
>followed by Vivian, Zaheer, Greg, and Gordon, and then Sunil in his list.
Wrong. SMG was fourth in that list behind VivR , Ian Chappel , Barry Richards
(or Grep Chappel). Zaheer, Greenidge were there in the 10 but behind SMG.
Anyone can verify this. You sure have the knack of twisting facts.
>Sunil Gavaskar wrote an article about that removing himself from that list
>and placing Vishvanath in the top ten. It was published in The Illustrated
Perhaps you indulge in self boasting (I am the greatest) which idiot SMG
needs to learn from you.
>Weekly of India. Sobers was full of praise for Barry Richards and
>considered him to be the best among the ten.
Yes I know that Barry R is rated very high and SMG himself rates BR very very
high. ( mentioned in his book).
But the fact remains that BR played only 4 tests and it is unfair to
compare him with others who played more than 100 tests.
It's not BR's fault to not play in test cricket but when comparing test
cricketers only those who played should be taken into account.
>Ravi Krishna need to know more about Barry Richards and his performance in
>England and Australia.
In test cricket or that Kerry Packer circus, where seriousness was very
doubtful. You know something. When India went to Aus in 1977-78 , at the same
time Kerry Packer circus was going on. More crowd came to watch Ind-Aus
test series than watching some pyjama cricket , despite the fact that KP circus
had world's best cricketers. This was told by Asif Iqbal who was also in the
KP circus. Asif Iqbal also told that SMG's batting impressed a lot.
>4. "Vivian Richards is the only batsman I rate as great as SMG"
>This is my favorite joke.
Read what I wrote before hitting the followup key. I said "I rate". I am
entitiled to my views.
And I find your constant hero worshipping of GRV a BIG JOKE.
>5. "Kapil took 27 wickets in 1992 Aus series. India lost 4-0. One
> more series of useless bowling by Kapil"
>I thought cricket is played by eleven players and it is team effort that
>brings success. I should know more about this game.
Once again you cleverly snipped out the rest of that post. I clearly mentioned
that inspite of Kapil's 26 wkts in that series India could not bowl out
Australia cheaply (except Adealaide first innings where Aus were bowled
out for 145). How come when Imran,Hadlee,Marshall bowl well they bowl
out the opposition for low runs while our own Kapil despite taking 5 ( with
analysis of 5 for 120) allows opposition to score around 350-400 runs.
Perhaps in your cricket runs do not matter only wkts matter. That explains
why india does not win despite 'oh-so-great' bowling by Kapil.
For a change instead of hero worshipping Kapil try to go thru the scorecard
of other test matches and see how other great bowlers demolish opposing side
which your idol clearly clearly lacks.
Strangly the argument "cricket-is-a-team-game" never applies while bashing
SMG for indian defeats. Double standards.
>6. "I kept a lenient definition keeping in mind Kapil's standards"
>What more can I say.
Well said. Pity that you didn't keep quiet in other points. Having a strike
rate of 3.5 to 4 wkts per match may be good by Kapil's standards , not by
Hadlee's standards. That's what I meant.
>7. "Gavaskar is the only player from India who can come out with
> flying colors in international standards.
>Gone are the likes of Ranjitsinhji, CK Naidu, Prasanna, Bedi,
>Chandrasekhar, and many more other stars. Memory must have faded but what
>about Sachin Tendulkar. I think he is good enough only by Indian
Here I admit I should have been clearer. I was talking about batsmen only.
I have high respect for Bedi,Prasanna,Chandra.
Regarding Sachin time only will tell where he ends up. It's bit premature now.
>For some, who never played cricket or can never understand what it is like
>playing a ball which was coming to you at a reasonable speed, it is
Oh, did you play for India or Karnataka.
>difficult for them to see the difference between a batsman who waits for
>only a loose ball to make runs and a batsman who has a stroke for every
Looks like you know a lot about cricket. If that statement was directed
against SMG he really haven't seen him. SMG can keep the scoreboard
tickling without resorting to breathtaking shots. I would anyday prefer
to watch fascinating duel(s) between SMG and great bowlers to some so called
stroke maker who will score some 30 odd runs and return to pavilion.
If you get a chance see his 127 not out against Pak in faisalabad ,
specifically his duel with Imran.
>ball bowled at him.
>For them, to differentiate between Sachin Tendulkar, Aravinda De Silva,
>Brian Lara and other batsmen, they use statistics.
>For these people, cricket is nothing but "statistics." They can never
>appreciate anything else.
Like appreciating GRV's string of failures or MA's binary digit scores.