FIXTURESNo upcoming fixtures — check back soon.
FORUM / CRICKET /  The Dunces attacked Dave - when he said

The Dunces attacked Dave - when he said

Started by clevermike40 REPLIES2,431 VIEWS· 18 Mar 2015, 08:23
SHAREXFACEBOOKWHATSAPPTELEGRAMREDDITLINKEDIN
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
18 Mar 2015, 08:23
#1
18 Mar 2015, 08:23#1

Duminy is not suitable as the fifth bowler and they MUST bring in a fifth bowler and get rid of De Kock.


Duminy - 9 overs - 29 runs and the first hattrick any SA bowler ever took in any WC match.   That must be upsetting our two dunces massively.    


So what do Mozart and Ceradyne know about cricket?  I think less than they know about rugby and their knowledge of rugby is so far sub-standard - it is unbelievable. 

RO
RooinekCaptain18,117 posts
18 Mar 2015, 08:42
#2
18 Mar 2015, 08:42#2
I think it's safe to say that what Moffie and Ceradunce know about cricket (and rugby for that matter) can be written in big block capitals on the back of the smallest postage stamp using a very thick felt pen.

Wehe . . . imagine being the egg-faced half-wit who's been slagging off JP Duminy's bowling for the past few weeks . . . just before he takes a hat-trick in the quarter-final!

LMAO!
3K
3ku1Pro2,580 posts
18 Mar 2015, 08:51
#3
18 Mar 2015, 08:51#3
 sr lanka may bowl you out yet. Reminds me of nz Aus game. Boult and Southee teared aussie to threads. But starch brought then close to win. Sr lankas bowling not as strong though.
RO
RooinekCaptain18,117 posts
18 Mar 2015, 09:03
#4
18 Mar 2015, 09:03#4
Sounds like the Kiwis are getting a bit anxious . . .
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
18 Mar 2015, 09:27
#5
18 Mar 2015, 09:27#5
40/1 with Amla out and De Kock doing just fine - more and more egg is all over the dunces faces.    How can we evr believe what they s ay!!!!
GE
generaltitPro3,164 posts
18 Mar 2015, 09:57
#6
18 Mar 2015, 09:57#6
 
Just caution...hat tricks happen in cricket...wet wicket, Malinga, worthy of great respect...just ease your way around this one
CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
18 Mar 2015, 10:40
#7
18 Mar 2015, 10:40#7
Ou Maaikie has just made an ass of himself again. Run us through the "fifth bowler" concept first. I just need to make sure that you actually understand that before I show you were you went wrong in judging my argument with Dave.  
3K
3ku1Pro2,580 posts
18 Mar 2015, 10:53
#8
18 Mar 2015, 10:53#8
 Kiwis get anxious? Never . 
DE
DennyCaptain12,893 posts
18 Mar 2015, 12:19
#9
18 Mar 2015, 12:19#9

 Mike


You might not be aware of Duminy doing an interview during the break and in that interview he made mention of the fact that his bowling had been poor up until today's game.....but I reckon you would have known that???


In my reckoning Duminy was stating the obvious...dontcha think Hmmm?

CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
18 Mar 2015, 12:51
#10
18 Mar 2015, 12:51#10
Denny
The problem is that what AB said is very true - cricketers like any sportsman loses form - but they can as easily regain form.   One who lose sight of that can easily judge only on form and not on class.
Mozart and Ceradunce have lost the plot - since they could not distinguish between class and form.  The more we said De Kock is a classy player - the more they slagged them off in posting after posting.
The fact is clear - in the process they made utter fools of themselves and the sudden innocence of Ceradunce is amazing - with Mozart not showing his face.

The main problem is that Mozart cannot see any younger rugby player doing well and he would always found an excuse to slag such a player off.   Seb is 100% correct about him.  
DE
DennyCaptain12,893 posts
18 Mar 2015, 13:02
#11
18 Mar 2015, 13:02#11

Mike you are laboring your point.....it's like your life depends on me believing you.



Tell you what, take a break from the board.....try to lose the obsession.......it will do you the world of good.


Don't expect any changes on your return.

CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
18 Mar 2015, 13:07
#12
18 Mar 2015, 13:07#12
 
CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
18 Mar 2015, 13:17
#13
18 Mar 2015, 13:17#13
@Ou Maaikie. Were we the only ones who said anything about QDK? Nope. Then again. There was no pressure on  the lad in this game. All that was needed for him to do was to canter along at just more than two runs per over. Good  on the him  to start playing his shots as soon as he was comfortable . Now, let's hope that he can emulate this performance in the next match where there could well be more pressure on him. I honestly hope  that he does not fail in his next innings because that would leave a serious dent in his confidence but, should he come off again in the next stage, I would say that we can safely say that he is back on track, which I hope will happen. 
When others said that he should bat down the order at 7, I kept on saying that that was the wrong thing to do because that would/could have put more pressure on him. Go check. I think I was the only one who said that he should not bat at no 7. Oneperson agreed with me. 

BTW, how is your reply about the fifth bowler going?
BE
Beeno1Captain40,032 posts
18 Mar 2015, 13:28
#14
18 Mar 2015, 13:28#14
 Cerudunce windpomp allow me to assist you - the most difficult job for a batsman is opening the innings where the new ball is helping the bowlers. Its the most pressurised position. Batting at seven is easier in most cases.Take it from Beeno who knows.
Something was postied about the necessity of batting first. Not necessarily so of course.
So are Sri Lankans chokers or not - wonder if ther fans are having a full go at the side. BwahahahahahhahahaAnything can happen in the semis so once again I appeal to the Ptotea fans to take any losses on the chin without going into meltdown.
As for yours truly I didnt even see the game as I was out at a meeting this morning and my TV decoder seems at odds with itself so bring in the techies to fix it!!!!


BL
BlikkiesPro1,526 posts
18 Mar 2015, 13:43
#15
18 Mar 2015, 13:43#15

 I am very happy with the unexpected performance from De Kock. Hope he can continue with this, otherwise today's performance would be seen as a flash in the pan effort.


CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
18 Mar 2015, 13:50
#16
18 Mar 2015, 13:50#16
 Ceradunce
There were others who doubted about DE Kock as well, but in the main they said he is a classy player - who is out of form.   You and Mozart just slagged him off without regard to his proven abilities.
There is a huge diifference between what you and Mozart said and what others said about both Duminy and De Kock.   Mozart especially has been slagging De Kock off for months now and it got worse during the tournament.        
CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
18 Mar 2015, 13:51
#17
18 Mar 2015, 13:51#17
@Beeno, You are preaching to the converted, Beeno. I had many a argument with Mike on the openers. I know about the pressure on the openers but my argument was not against letting QDK bat down the order. I was questioning the idea of batting him as low down as no7.
My reasoning was that, if he was battling to find form at the top of the order, imagine what would have happened if he was batting at no 7. Imagine this scenario. It is over no 40 and we are 6 batsmen down and he has to come in. We need 8 or 9 runs per over to win the match. The opposition bowlers are on fire and the pitch is deteriorating. What are the chances of him finding his form and confidence under those circumstances?
My suggestion was to either drop him totally or bat him at 4. I even posted a comparison between his ODI career so far and that of AB de Villeirs' early ODI career. AB was in a similar position. When he first played ODIs for SA, he also opened the batting and failed. He was then also dropped down the order.
So, if the above is slagging him off, like ou Maaikie would like to believe, then so be it but I was not slagging him off. Apart from the above, I also took on ou Maaikie because of  his constant slagging off of Graeme Smith. He kept on saying that Smith needed to be fired because QDK was the answer and that he was the one that was needed to win us the CWC. This innings of QDK saved him some face, but not a lot. We were lucky that Sanga and Jayawardene was not on fire today. If we had to chase at a rate of 5 or 6 per over from the word "go", I am  sure that it would probably have been a different story again.
CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
18 Mar 2015, 13:54
#18
18 Mar 2015, 13:54#18
clevermike
 
Status: Hall Of Fame 
Posts: 15652RE: The Dunces attacked Dave - when he said 
March 18, 2015, 13:50:38 Ceradunce
There were others who doubted about DE Kock as well, but in the main they said he is a classy player - who is out of form.   You and Mozart just slagged him off without regard to his proven abilities.
There is a huge diifference between what you and Mozart said and what others said about both Duminy and De Kock.   Mozart especially has been slagging De Kock off for months now and it got worse during the tournament.        


  •  0 Likes

 Stop talking k@k,man. Where and  when did I slag him off. I said that he was letting us  down and that he wasn't producing. Was it true, or not? Quote me were I slagged him off or STFU. You are the master of slagging off players, you tool.
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
18 Mar 2015, 15:57
#19
18 Mar 2015, 15:57#19
 Ceradyne
Can you explain further your following statement please:-
"He kept on saying that Smith needed to be fired because QDK was the answer and that he was the one that was needed to win us the CWC." 
When exactly did I say what you said I did say as quoted above?
It could not be recently - since Smith was dropped from the ODI squad in December 2013 by SA Cricket.   I maybe did say it at that time - but that had nothing to do with the 2015 WC.  That decision stemmed from Smith's performances in 2012 and 2013.   In those two years in ODI's -
*   Smith rarely made any score of any significance; and *   his runs-per -over rate averaged out at about 3rpo even when making a reasonable score
SA Cricket took the decision after Smith was disastrously poor in a series during October/November  2013.   After the second ODI in that series Smith came back to SA - thank goodness - and he was replaced by De Kock - who in the third ODI made his first ODI century - followed by excellent scores in the 2 remaining ODI's - his runs per over rate was excellent.
Pakistan came to SA after that series and played 3 ODI's.  Smith was playing in the first 2 and flopped badly in both - both lost by SA.   The coach told Smith off and mention that he is going to play De Kock in the third ODI.  Smith left in a huff and De Kock played - did well and SA won that game.
It was clear that there was no chance that Smith would be preferred over DE Kock in subsequent matches and to save face - Smith announced his retirement from ODI'sThe mere idea of even suggesting that he should have been in the present WC squad was ridiculous - given his record in 2011 to 2013.  
It was never necessary for me to suggest that Smith be fired - he fired himself from ODI cricket  because of his deplorable performances in the period 2011 to 2013.      
CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
18 Mar 2015, 17:22
#20
18 Mar 2015, 17:22#20
 @Ou Maaikie.
"He kept on saying that Smith needed to be fired because QDK was the answer and that he was the one that was needed to win us the CWC." 

When exactly did I say what you said I did say as quoted above?

Are you denying that you said that?
It could not be recently - since Smith was dropped from the ODI squad in December 2013 by SA Cricket.   I maybe did say it at that time - but that had nothing to do with the 2015 WC.

Strange that you say that it had nothing to do with the 2015 WC. There was  no other CWC since 2013 and your argument was that Smith needed to be replaced by QDK in order for us to win the CWC. In addition you wanted Amla to bat down the order, because you firmly believed that Amla was (at the time) not a regular ODI opener. Hahaha. I still have a laugh every time that I remember that one. 
Now, can we get back to when and where I supposedly slagged off QDK and can we please have an explanation about the concept of the fifth bowler as well?
AG
AgPleezDeddyClub Pro900 posts
18 Mar 2015, 18:49
#21
18 Mar 2015, 18:49#21
 MikeI was also on the Duminy side with regards to him bowling, but I completely disagree with your choice of words. Not once did Mozart or anyone else 'attack' us, we had a good debate on the subject and you could definitely see where they were coming from. 
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
18 Mar 2015, 20:07
#22
18 Mar 2015, 20:07#22
 Ceradunce
Sure I may with justification have said it at the end of 2013.  Smith's performances during and after the 2011 WC was atrociously poor.  He failed in  the vast majority of matches to get more than 20 runs and when he did get more his run rate was circa 3 rpo - often enough less than that.
That is just not good enough for a ODI opener.   His continuous  wastage of balls early in innings put the whole batting line-up under pressure.   During that period SA's slide down the ranking list was disastrous and at one stage we were ranked as no 6 in ODI cricket.
However, I do not think that my comments were slagging off of Smith and the subsequent developments were pertinent.   After another series of flops by Smith in 4  matches against Pakistan in November/December 2013 -  the coach told Smith that he is not going to select him in future as a batsman on ODI level.   Smith lost his cool and left the Proteas squad in a huff before the series against Pakistan was completed - and after De Kock made three centuries in three successive ODI's against India - to save face Smith announced his retirement from ODI cricket.
I based my criticism at the time on facts - not fiction - not prejudice.  Smith was not producing the goods on ODI level at that time and there was no chance of an improvement afterwards.
 The fifth bowler issue was clear as daylight - you said the preset scenario where the Proteas played 6 batsmen and Duminy at 7 are wrong and that the Proteas should play a recognized bowler or Behardien at 7 - implying that De Kock should be sacked to allow for that scenario.  You and Mozart were all agog about opening the batting with Rossouw and forcing De Villiers to take the gloves - something he obviously did not want to do.
The worst part was the attack  on De Villiers as  captain.   He was made out to be not a captain's backside amid suggestions that he should be replaced.That was a really serious misjudgementto put it mildly.        
CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
18 Mar 2015, 21:26
#23
18 Mar 2015, 21:26#23
Ou Maaikie.
Ahh now we are making progress. 
"Sure I may with justification have said it at the end of 2013. ......" 
Now, if you would only admit and say that you have in fact said it.
This is similar to ou Dawie admitting that Duminy is a handy or more than handy fifth/part time bowler, which was the message that I was trying to get across. 
"The fifth bowler issue was clear as daylight - you said the preset scenario where the Proteas played 6 batsmen and Duminy at 7 are wrong and that the Proteas should play a recognized bowler or Behardien at 7 - implying that De Kock should be sacked to allow for that scenario."
Now you revert to blatant bullsh!t again. I have never questioned Duminy's batting position. My argument with Saffex has always been about Duminy's bowling. Saffex said that he is good enough to bowl 10 overs per game. In fact, you can go back to the origin of this argument. Saffex argued that he would not have Robin Peterson in the team and that he would rather have another batsman with Duminy taking over the spin bowling. Those are the facts, mate. I argued that anybody bowling 10 overs per game, has to be regarded as a front line bowler and I always said that he is one of the "fifth bowlers".
Saffex recently conceded that Duminy is not a specialist bowler and that to me is confirming that he is one of the fifth bowlers at best. Saffex tried to still back his own argument by saying that although Duminy is not a specialist bowler, he is better than a part time bowler. I did not even respond to that because it would just go back to a vicious circle again, because IMO you are either a specialist bowler or a part time bowler. Fact is the  difference between me and Saffex' disagreement is marginal, IMO.
I never once said that QDK has to be sacked to make way for Behardien. Show me where I said that. I said that I could understand why Behardien was there and what his role was. Before the CWC started, the matter of Behardien came up and someone said that he could score quick runs at the end, and I agree with that, showing his run rates in ODI's etc. He has shown against the UAE that he can score quick runs at the end when he scored 64* off only 31 balls.
This was Saffex' last remark on the matter of Duminy's bowling:
  • s
Saffex
 
Status: Hall Of Fame 
Posts: 11729RE: Young pop guns fire blanks...weaknesses exposed 
March 13, 2015, 11:18:34

There is no reason in the world that a part time bowler cant bowl 10 over you profoundly stupid man.

 

We all know JP is a not a specialist bowler, no-one ever said he was so once again you are exposing yourself for the dunce you are. Kindly point out where I said he was a specialist bowler.

 

I have said he is better than a part timer and more than capable of bowling 10.......we all know he is a specialist bat who is a handy off spinner.

 

Why do I think he can do the job as a spinner.......for the simple reason that his bowling technique is spot on for a spinner as is his flight and the little turn he gets. His action and technique is better than Phangiso, the specialist spinner in the squad.

 

Exposed once again.....drum roll

 


  •  0 Likes

Fact is that I never said that Duminy cannot bowl 10 overs. My view is that you cannot give him all the spin bowling responsibilities, like Saffex wanted to do at the time of our Duminy/Peterson argument.
I have never been "agog" about Rossouw opening with Amla. Show me where I said that.
My argument about QDK and his batting postion was clear. Either keep him or let him go down to around no 4. I never once agreed that he should bat at 7. I said that rather drop him totally than to have him bat at no 7. That would have defeated the entire object of getting him back in form.
I have also never been keen for AB de Villiers to rake the gloves. Not in ODIs nor in tests. You can go register on SS,  if you so wish, and go check on the heated arguments where I disagreed with AB taking the gloves unless it was an absolute emergency, like when Boucher got injured in Taunton, England.
I still believe that AB is not the ideal captain, even though he got it right in this particular match. His decision making is suspect. His field placings and the use of his bowlers is quite often questionable. As an example, he, as the captain, should know how to handle his own batting spell. It has happened on a number of occasions, especially against Pakistan, that he was the one on fire and on strike and then he took a single of the first run of an over. Silly mistake because that brought on the new batsman who started wasting balls by scratching around to try and find a single to get AB back on strike.
I have nothing but admiration for AB as a cricket player but he is not the best ODI captain. He will never be the ODI captain that Graeme Smith or even Johan Botha was.


CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
19 Mar 2015, 03:05
#24
19 Mar 2015, 03:05#24
 Lets face facts - Graeme Smith when he started - was regarded as a top ODI player - but was soon enough found out and his scores in the latter part of his career in ODI cricket was very questionable.  It was under his captaincy that we went as low as 6th as an ODI team.
That slide - how did that happen when he was captain and a player in the team.  Poor performances should not be associated with good captaincy - a captain is supposed to set an example in performance and in that respect Smith came short.   He may have had some good wins as a captain - like the Ellis Park  438 test, but that is really too limited in number.
To tell me his bowling changes and field settings were better than De Villierss's is definitely tripe - as an example balls frequently go to where De Villiers suddenly before the ball was bowled placed a player.  Smith's placings were based on reaction, rather than foresight.   Nothing special.   Matter of fact Botha was proven to be a better ODI captain than Smith - but he did not captain SA in any WC tournaments.
Matter of fact Smith scored only 10 centuries early in his ODI career and 49 half-centuries in 194 matches played, with a batting average being 37,96.  His main problem was his rpo rate.  In the 2007 WC and afterwards that rate was never above 3,5 rpo and mostly 3rpo.  That made it impossible to score centuries in matches and his half-centuries became problematic since his low run rate made them costly for the rest of the batting line-ups - they constantly had to play catch up.   Although great test cricketers to have two batsmen with low rpo rates - like Smith and Kallis in the team - was part of the reason that - especially during and after 2007 - we started slipping in the rankings.  Great test players - but Kallis was a class player who filled a bowling roll as well, and as a batsman he was technically near to perfect - but mainly scoring at a slow rate.   For instance the last ODI half century he made was against Pakistan in December 2013, when he made 50 runs from 90 balls.
From an ODI perspective a combination of Smith and Kallis prevented us from ever be really competitive in ODI batting and it showed throughout the period 2007 to middle 2013.   We won two series in Australia with ease - but Smith and Kallis was not a combination in the team or was absent from the team altogether.
To summarize - a top captain said an all-round performance example - which Smith never did after 2007 - so how good a captain was he really?  No sentimentality - facts are the issue ehere and the facts are manufactured based on sentimentality - not reality.              
CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
19 Mar 2015, 11:14
#25
19 Mar 2015, 11:14#25
@Mike. Anybody who doubts the performances of Graeme Smith and comes up with this kind of BS is as thick as can be.
It is the same kind of person who denies the stature of a rugby player like Victor Matfield. Someone who has often said that Victor was never a great player. Yes, I know that you will point me to the fact that you have given him credit on the odd occasion but you have mostly said that he was crap over his entire career.
I would agree that Smith was not quite a Matthew Hayden or a Gary Kirsten, when it comes to ODIs but his ODI stats are right up there with the likes of Other openers like Gibbs, Strauss, Trescothick, Justin Langer, etc. Go check. Your problem is that you pluck BS out of the air and it becomes gospel to you. 
What amazes me  is that when you are in an discussion about rugby your litlle strings of stats are the alpha and the omega but when it comes to cricket, you rely on your own dreamt up BS. Cricket is one of the sports where stats play a  much bigger role in assessing and/or comparing players. Do yourself a favour, for once and check up on the stats. I doubt whether you ever do that, otherwise you would  not have argued Amla was not a regular ODI opening batsman.
"In the 2007 WC and afterwards that rate was never above 3,5 rpo and mostly 3rpo." 

2007. Number of games played - 26. DNB in one against Pakistan. Effectively played 25 innings.Runs scored - 1079Balls faced - 1171Runrate - 5.53
2008Number of games played - 11. Runs scored - 492Balls faced - 578Runrate - 5.11
2009Number of games played - 13. Runs scored - 502Balls faced - 521Runrate - 5.88
2010Number of games played - 11. Runs scored - 328Balls faced - 384Runrate - 5.13
2011Number of games played - 15. Runs scored - 419Balls faced - 643Runrate - 3.91
2012Number of games played - 11. DNB in one against England. Effectively played 10 innings.Runs scored - 338Balls faced - 466Runrate - 4.35
2013Number of games played - 11. Runs scored - 291Balls faced - 400Runrate - 4.66
Even in his worst season, i.e. 2011, he was batting at just under 4 runs per over.
I hope you got the registration number of the lorry that dumped the load of eggs on your face. Gaan praat jou k@k op 'n ander plek, ou ballie.
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
19 Mar 2015, 11:32
#26
19 Mar 2015, 11:32#26

The point was NEVER about JP's form it was about whether he was good enough to bowl 10 overs, which of course he is. There were a few muppets who said he was not good enough to bowl 10. Case closed.

 

Same applies to de Kock, as Hussey said in commentary, he does not buy into this whole lack of form crap.......class is permanent, form temporary.

 

In fact JP was hardly out of form.....against Pakistan, he was targeted by an opening bat with his eye in, who happened to hit him for three 6's in a row on a tiny field. Those 3 balls were not bad balls.

 

The difference between me and Moz, Vlag and co is that I know what I am talking about - they dont

CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
19 Mar 2015, 11:49
#27
19 Mar 2015, 11:49#27
@Saffex. Correct, in a way. You and me started arguing about this issue when Robin Peterson was included in the squad for some series. You argued that we did not need him because, in your view, JP Duminy could have taken over the spin bowling duties.
I do not, and has never denied that Duminy can bowl the odd 10 over spell in a game. I just do not agree that he can be our prime spin bowler. You have said yourself that you do not regard him as a specialist bowler. 
As I said, the difference between what you are saying in my viewpoint is marginal. Now you can get off your high horse that has you thinking that when somebody does not agree with you, he/she knows nothing. 
As for your class/form story...... Go and see of you can find anywhere where I have said that QDK and/or Duminy are not class players. I have never said that. In fact, IIRC,  when I made the point that it would not be wise to play QDK at no 7, and I gave the reasons for saying so, you agreed with me. 
BTW, did you see the discussion, on Sky, after the SL game between Duminy and Jaques Kallis?
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
19 Mar 2015, 12:03
#28
19 Mar 2015, 12:03#28

Yep I saw it all.....he spoke of the fact that he was not bowling that well......that was never the issue, the issue was whether he was good enough to bowl 10 which I have always maintained he is.

 

JP in fact was being a little hard on himself when you think that against Pakistan he was targeted by an opening bat with his eye in, who hit him for three 6's on a tiny field. Those 3 balls were not bad balls but they fucked his figures up.

 

Its cricket and JP will of course get smacked around again.....that's life.......but my assertion is that the guy has a career average of just over 5 per over......and has a good bowling technique......therefore without doubt he is good enough to bowl 10.

 

When we were bowling Peterson as our test bowler, I said that JP was better and should have been used as our prime spinner.......I would not say the same about Tahir.  

CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
19 Mar 2015, 12:13
#29
19 Mar 2015, 12:13#29
 Saff, I have never denied that he can bowl 10 overs. I just did not agree that he could take over the entire spin bowling responsibilities. It is a pity that those threads are no longer available.
Our argument was mainly about Peterson's position in the squad at that point on time.I cannot clearly remember which series it was, otherwise we could have revisited the two players' stats at that time. As I said, I cannot clearly remember the series in question, but for some reason I seem to recall that Peterson eventually justified his selection in that series. I could be mistaken though.
I am not too sure that 5 rpo is that good, TBH. I will, when I have some time, look at the figures for other "good" spin bowlers.
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
19 Mar 2015, 13:17
#30
19 Mar 2015, 13:17#30
 Ceradunce
You are talking crap - analyze the run rate of Smith since 2011 unil 2013 and you woiuld find that his average run rate in that period was at 2,8 runs per over.  In two matches out of 25 he managed to bat at over 3 rpo - the rest was so bad - it pulled him down.
I analysed all the games Smith played since 2011 - inclusive of the WC and my statement as to his poor run rate and poor average as an opening batsman is provided elsewhere  Dunce - a batting average of less than 50 represents a run rate per over of less than 3 - so where did you get the following garbage from:-
"Even in his worst season, i.e. 2011, he was batting at just under 4 runs per over."
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
19 Mar 2015, 13:33
#31
19 Mar 2015, 13:33#31

Yeah I recall your comparison and Peterson turned out to have slightly better stats than JP but we conceded that this would be the case given the number of overs Peterson had bowled versus the part time stuff JP has mostly bowled.

 

As for 5 po, that is pretty reasonable for your 5th bowler in ODI's and you will find that JP goes for about 0.5 more per over than many of the specialist spinners in the WC.

 

I published all the spin bowlers stats on here who were involved in this WC, where JP's rpo and strike rate was much the same as the majority, including those used as specialist spinners.

 

It was while retrieving these stats that I realised how good Tahir is in ODI's, he is miles ahead of any other spinner in the WC in terms of strike rate etc.

 

The guy deserves more credit than he gets.....he is a strike bowler of note.

 

My main point re JP and some of the very average spinners we have picked as specialists, was that JP was just as good as them and therefore we should not be wasting our time with the likes of Peterson, Phasingo etc.

 

Hamer looks a better bet at test level and Tahir is our specialist in ODI's although sadly he is now 35.

CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
19 Mar 2015, 14:00
#32
19 Mar 2015, 14:00#32
 @Mike. Don't try and BS yourself out of this one by narrowing down your own parameters to suit your agenda. You were the one who set the bar at 2007 and ever since. You are not going to weasel yourself out of this one.
Smith had one bad season, i.e. 2011, and that was it. You are the one who came up with this 3.5 and 3 runs per over since 2007 BS and it blew up in your face. 
CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
19 Mar 2015, 14:17
#33
19 Mar 2015, 14:17#33
 Saffex
 
Status: Hall Of Fame 
Posts: 11738RE: The Dunces attacked Dave - when he said 
March 19, 2015, 13:33:22

Yeah I recall your comparison and Peterson turned out to have slightly better stats than JP but we conceded that this would be the case given the number of overs Peterson had bowled versus the part time stuff JP has mostly bowled.

 

As for 5 po, that is pretty reasonable for your 5th bowler in ODI's and you will find that JP goes for about 0.5 more per over than many of the specialist spinners in the WC.

 

I published all the spin bowlers stats on here who were involved in this WC, where JP's rpo and strike rate was much the same as the majority, including those used as specialist spinners.

 

It was while retrieving these stats that I realised how good Tahir is in ODI's, he is miles ahead of any other spinner in the WC in terms of strike rate etc.

 

The guy deserves more credit than he gets.....he is a strike bowler of note.

 

My main point re JP and some of the very average spinners we have picked as specialists, was that JP was just as good as them and therefore we should not be wasting our time with the likes of Peterson, Phasingo etc.

 

Hamer looks a better bet at test level and Tahir is our specialist in ODI's although sadly he is now 35.


  •  0 Likes

Saff, once again we are actually in agreement. You are just too stubborn to admit it. 
I agree with you that Duminy is a more than handy fifth bowler. I agree with you that he can bowl 10 overs per ODI on the odd occasion. As you have said, he is not a specialist bowler and there fore he would not be one of your prime bowlers. Robin Peterson was. Duminy is a batsman who is also a handy bowler. Peterson was a bowler who was also a handy batsman and that was the difference.
Peterson would have been expected to bowl 10 overs every game and contribute as well as possible with the bat, and he has in fact batted us out of the brown stuff on a number of occasions.
Duminy is expected to perform with the bat in every game and contribute as well as possible with the ball and he has in fact bowled us out of the brown stuff on a number of occasions.
Spot the subtle difference?
PS. If he can carry on with his bowling like this, he could well soon be a reckoned all-rounder but I doubt if he would ever be a "10 overs in every match" type of bowler. Even the great JHK hardly ever bowled 10 overs per match on a regular basis.
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
19 Mar 2015, 14:18
#34
19 Mar 2015, 14:18#34
 i do not live on history and deal with present and important scenarios - doffies.   After 2011 Smith was constantly below par and that is a fact.   I b\never ever raised anywhere anything about his performances prior to the 2011 WC and if you think Smith was  acceptable in 2012 and 2013 - it can only be becuase you are clueless as to the impact of run rates on the game
Any fool who believes that a run rate of 46 implies that a player scores at near to 4 runs per over - must have his head read.
Next time you want to discuss something logical please do not use the  snakelike deviation method of Mozart.   Stick to what was being discussed - do not invent other things to obscure the topic. Let me be clear - Smith was sub-standard in the period 2011 to 2013 in ODI's and that is a fact  - that made him a  bad future investment.  
CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
19 Mar 2015, 14:25
#35
19 Mar 2015, 14:25#35
Hahaha. "I do not live in history", says the man who, himself, brought in the figures since 2007 and when he burnt his fingers with it, decided to  move the bar to 2011 onwards.
I have not used snakelike deviations you far king idiot. You were the one who did that. I stuck to what was being discussed, i.e. Smith's runrate from 2007 to the end of  his career. You used snakelike deviations and changed it to a number of breakdowns since 2011 and even that was after I have already acknowledged that he had a bad 2011 season.
Geez, do you ever read and believe the BS that you post?
Everybody knew that Graeme Smith was heading towards the end of his career and nobody, especially me, saw him as "a future investment". Hell, you are a plank.

CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
19 Mar 2015, 14:50
#36
19 Mar 2015, 14:50#36
 Smith had a bad season in  2011 - and substandard seasons in both 2012 and 2013.
Now suddenly Smith was on the way out - but because I expressed reservations about Smith in 2013 - a rogue attack is no made in a previous posting because somewhere I sagged Smith.  Are you taking lessons from Mozart in devious tactics and lies?      
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
19 Mar 2015, 14:50
#37
19 Mar 2015, 14:50#37
 Smith had a bad season in  2011 - and substandard seasons in both 2012 and 2013.
Now suddenly Smith was on the way out - but because I expressed reservations about Smith in 2013 - a rogue attack is no made in a previous posting because somewhere I sagged Smith.  Are you taking lessons from Mozart in devious tactics and lies?      
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
19 Mar 2015, 15:09
#38
19 Mar 2015, 15:09#38

The difference is that I did not rate Peterson at all as a bowler, he should never have played for SA.

 

His stats might be slightly better than JP's for instance, but that is down to sheer volume of bowling and being a specialist.

 

Its a mark of how average he was given he is only marginally better than JP a part timer.

 

But we are in agreement........I think JP is good enough to be an all rounder and yes he will not always bowl 10 overs as on some days he will travel.......that's a given for most off spinners.

 

But I'd back to get through 10 in most games........and that has been my point from day one.....levelled more at Moz who said he had concerns about JP bowling 10. He said he was not good enough.......I have disagreed on this all along.  

CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
19 Mar 2015, 15:48
#39
19 Mar 2015, 15:48#39
 The Peterson argument is of no importance any more, in any case. Having said that, Peterson was one of the better spinners that we had at the time. Kind of One-eye being king in the land of the blind.
DB
DbDraadCaptain26,388 posts
19 Mar 2015, 20:35
#40
19 Mar 2015, 20:35#40
 Peterson had his moments with bat and ball. Filled a gap for a while. Opened the bowling and batting for a couple of games, did he not?
↓ LOAD MORE (page 2 of 2)

More from Cricket