posted Dec 11, 2007

agreed with people saying murali not good enough, he was awful at the start 1996 i think, since 1997-98 been awesome, the english people big up panesar because he had a couple of 5 fors against the windies, the windies are bull, he couldnt do anything against india or sri lanka, he's back down to earth, he cannot play against sub continent teams, except pakistan and bangladesh. the superior sub continent sides can handle him, He had one good innings against the aussies and since then gone downhill, my advice is to try out swann instead, more batting and he has his variation, he showed me he had potential in the ODI's, the selecters are so dumb, swann was much better in the ODI.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 11, 2007

Late Sir Donald Bradman's all times best team
1.B Richards2A.Morris3D.Bradman 4.S.Tendulkar
5.G.Sobers6.D.Talon7 Ray Lindwal8.Dennis Lilie9Alec Bedser10.Bill O'Rilley 111.C.Grimmet12th Man W. Hammond
This team he made in 2001 and O'Reilly was picked ahead of Murlitharan and Warne and there are not many who would like to question the Great Sir Bradman's team.They are in batting order.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 11, 2007

"With the Murali factor even a lead of fifty will be enough for Sri-Lanka to win,
Panesar couldn't spin a bottle-top if his life depended on it,"

-------------------------------------------------

I seriously beg to differ.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 12, 2007

That debate is academic now....

The lead looks likely to be 200, and the England team will have been in the field for seven sessions by the time it is their turn to bat.

I foresee an England collapse in the second innings.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 12, 2007

After yesterday's statements I doubt if we will hear anything from; hitshugesixes or amarjitmadam and AderynCoch, I feel they will be busy getting their foot out of their gob's??? but some just can't help themselves and admit some fact's

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 12, 2007

Guys,If Murali's record is compared and shown in poor light, let me put one thing straight about Warne. Warne got 195 of his wickets against England who every one knows donot understand spin. So what is great about Warne- ofcource he is a great bowler in his own right.But nothing really remarkable. Now take Warne's record against Pak, India and Srilanka,he has about the same as against england, that is about 200.Now if Warnie is a great spin bowler he should have performed well against great teams like the the 3 above. These teams are real good against spin and Warnie was a miserable person bowling against them. I still remember that Chennai Test in late 1990 when Sachin went after Warnie and Warnie was forced to be removed for attack. He bowled just around 10 over that match. So what good is he if he cannot bowl against teams that play spin well.

For me getting wickets against England is getting wickets against minnows.

About taking 5 wickets against minnows in every innings , well Murali has had 5 wickets haul against every country, So what big deal.Taking wickets is all that matters.

I saw the way Murali bowled in the first test in the recent test series in Australia. Guys, non of the Aussie batsmen had any clue as to how to play him. He was devastating but his fielders let him down. 4 dropped catches. Had those easy catches been taken Australia would never have recovered against Murali.He would have broken the record in Australia and got his pay cheque from Warnie himself.

Murali will get to 1000 though the White world would not like him to do just that.Did they like the records Sachin made .No, not until the world said he is as good as the legendary Don.

Cricket is a gentlemens game and so it is gentlemanly to accept the reality and acknowledge that Murali is the greatest bowler.His simplicity to Waries bizzar life ( text messaging) takes his miles above where Warnie is or will be in history.

I have this to say to all those Aussies and the English ( the owners of Cricket)"AT LEAST MURALI DOES NOT BOWL UNDERARM"

And ICC have cleared him so who is anybody to doubt.Donot watch him if you donot like him.

I enjoy watching him and so do I enjoy watching Warnie. I am a cricketer first and last.
Vinod

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 12, 2007

Well said Vinod, don't take it to heart if some morons can't see further then the end of the beer glass and wish to stay in the 50's so be it hopefully the next generation will be able???

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 12, 2007

You seem to be a real cricket fan don't you! You thought we were playing Pakistan in England at the moment!
-------
Lol, you tell him GT.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 12, 2007

South Africa are not as good a test team as England
-----

I'm not so sure about that. With three bowlers - Steyn, Morkel, Ntini - bowling over 90 mph and a budding spinner, SA look like formidable test side. And I haven't yet mentioned the obscene form Kallis is in.

Without Flintoff, the English test attack is a a bit toothless and that is showing at the moment.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 20, 2007

Yeh GenesisTub I should really pay more attention and people should not listen to my opinions. Sorry I am Australian and dont follow England too much . But you are right England are a great team and playing above themselves . I was wrong . Your opinion of England is more accurate ... well done on your pertinant comments and erudite veiws.

add comment | complain about this comment