• The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state and are still being worked on. Normal posting/reading should now be possible.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

James Anderson Watch in Australia

Status
Not open for further replies.
essex boy said:
thats because Steyn and Morkel are the two best quicks around and they have the 6 best batsman in world cricket as a 6 along with India

You could play for SA and they would still be the best team knocking around with India
Click to expand...

Of all the outlandish claims you've made on this thread, that is by far the worst. ;-)
 

essex boy said:
I stand corrected but after the Ashes in 2005 we slipped from 2nd to about 7th and have got back up to 4th, lose this were down to 5th

We have never been ranked two since Jimmy has been a regular I dont believe
Click to expand...

Jan 2006 before the India Tour

Aus 129
India 115
England 113

Then after the successful India tour in which Anderson made a vital contribution England moved up to 2nd place and remained there for the rest of 2006.

You do have a slight get out here but i will let you find it ;-)
 
rentaghost said:
Jan 2006 before the India Tour

Aus 129
India 115
England 113

Then after the successful India tour in which Anderson made a vital contribution England moved up to 2nd place and remained there for the rest of 2006.

You do have a slight get out here but i will let you find it ;-)
Click to expand...

We definitely went into decline after the 2005 Ashes, coincidence when Jimmy came into team ;-)
 
amazing Jimmy doesnt get in the Daily Mail Aussie/English side based on the performances so far. They also flag up Harris as the most consistent :lol:

another person who doesnt know what theyre talking about
 
essex boy said:
amazing Jimmy doesnt get in the Daily Mail Aussie/English side based on the performances so far. They also flag up Harris as the most consistent :lol:

another person who doesnt know what theyre talking about
Click to expand...

You have to spoil it every time. You get a great little point to put across that despite Boycott thinking Anderson has been excellent some random newspaper writer hasnt put Jimmy in his team. However in your excitement you lied by saying that the article said Harris was the most consistent bowler on either side when all it said was he had found the outside edge of the bat a higher percentage than than others. Why do you do it? Do you think nobody will check? :-(
 
Last edited:
essex boy said:
amazing Jimmy doesnt get in the Daily Mail Aussie/English side based on the performances so far. They also flag up Harris as the most consistent :lol:

another person who doesnt know what theyre talking about
Click to expand...

your the most consistent in terms of twisting things to suit your bollox.

oh and, who gives a toss if one bloke from the rag doesnt pick him? :lol:
 
Dexter said:
:lol:
Click to expand...

2nd most read newspaper in the UK

So despite being crucified as knowing nothing and Im the only person on earth who cant see Jimmy has been brilliant, Laurence Booth and Paul Newman, two cricket journalists watching every ball in Australia dont think Jimmy has been that good either

:lol:
 
rentaghost said:
You have to spoil it every time. You get a great little point to put across that despite Boycott thinking Anderson has been excellent some random newspaper writer hasnt put Jimmy in his team. However in your excitement you lied by saying that the article said Harris was the most consistent bowler on either side when all it said was he had found the outside edge of the bat a higher percentage than than others. Why do you do it? Do you think nobody will check? :-(
Click to expand...

most consistent for me, finding the edge more than anyone else. The bulk of test wickets are taken behind the wicket.

will you be writing to the daily mail and telling them they know nothing ;-):lol:
 
essex boy said:
most consistent for me, finding the edge more than anyone else. The bulk of test wickets are taken behind the wicket.

will you be writing to the daily mail and telling them they know nothing ;-):lol:
Click to expand...

The saddest thing about your agruments is often when you have a good point to put across you lie to embellish your point. Certainly in your position I would have been glad to use the fact that these guys hadn't included Jimmy in their team but why on earth add the lie about them saying Harris was the most consistent. The second you didnt attach the link was the second I knew it was a lie :-(
 
rentaghost said:
The saddest thing about your agruments is often when you have a good point to put across you lie to embellish your point. Certainly in your position I would have been glad to use the fact that these guys hadn't included Jimmy in their team but why on earth add the lie about them saying Harris was the most consistent. The second you didnt attach the link was the second I knew it was a lie :-(
Click to expand...

will you be writing to Mr Booth and Mr Newman telling them they know nothing about cricket

two guys watching every ball live not half a days play under the duvet
 
essex boy said:
will you be writing to Mr Booth and Mr Newman telling them they know nothing about cricket

two guys watching every ball live not half a days play under the duvet
Click to expand...

So does Boycott and he knows a bit more about cricket than messrs Booth and Newman - who incidentally wanked over Anderson's performance in Adelaide. My issue with their selection isnt so much with Harris but with Tremlett. Even though Tremlett was excellent in Perth choosing a bowler who has played only one test match in perfect conditions for his style of bowling in a test match where we got hammered shouldnt be in ahead of someone who has played well in all 3 test matches and contributed massively to an England win.

I'm just glad that after days of trawling the internet you have at last found a squeak of light ;-)
 
rentaghost said:
So does Boycott and he knows a bit more about cricket than messrs Booth and Newman - who incidentally wanked over Anderson's performance in Adelaide. My issue with their selection isnt so much with Harris but with Tremlett. Even though Tremlett was excellent in Perth choosing a bowler who has played only one test match in perfect conditions for his style of bowling in a test match where we got hammered shouldnt be in ahead of someone who has played well in all 3 test matches and contributed massively to an England win.

I'm just glad that after days of trawling the internet you have at last found a squeak of light ;-)
Click to expand...

FYI - I read the mail every day. Secondly, Paul Newman lives local and has very good connections with the England side through his Essex connection and if you do some research, will find he is a very well respected member of the cricket media

Im assuming they were picking the 4 most likliest bowlers to win a test. If you want to pick only those who have played 3 tests then the attack is Siddle, Swann, Jimmy and Finn, which seems to be the only way you can get Jimmy in your side

However, if you want the 4 most threatening bowlers who are likely to win a test and who IMO have bowled the best spells of the series then they have picked the right four.

Will you be making an ass of yourself and writing to the two cricket journalists telling them they know nothing
 
Last edited:
essex boy said:
FYI - I read the mail every day. Secondly, Paul Newman lives local and has very good connections with the England side through his Essex connection and if you do some research, will find he is a very well respected member of the cricket media

Im assuming they were picking the 4 most likliest bowlers to win a test. If you want to pick only those who have played 3 tests then the attack is Siddle, Swann, Jimmy and Finn, which seems to be the only way you can get Jimmy in your side

However, if you want the 4 most threatening bowlers who are likely to win a test and who IMO have bowled the best spells of the series then they have picked the right four.

Will you be making an ass of yourself and writing to the two cricket journalists telling them they know nothing
Click to expand...


My highlighted bit - game over - merry xmas :lol: You still havent explained why you lied about them saying harris was the most consistent bowler either!

If you respect the views of Newman over the likes of Boycott etc why did you not use his views after the Adelaide test where you would struggle to find anyone more fulsome in his praise of Jimmy. In any respect I would hold the views of anyone that has played the game at a semi decent level way ahead of random Daily Mail journalists who are simply observers of the game like many of us. There are a few contributors on here who have played alongside and against quality test cricketers and learned a lot about the game. The views of Newman etc are no more qualified than lots of people on here and only marginally better than you tbf.

Merry xmas - roll on Melbourne
 
Last edited:
rentaghost said:
My highlighted bit - game over - merry xmas :lol: You still havent explained why you lied about them saying harris was the most consistent bowler either!

If you respect the views of Newman over the likes of Boycott etc why did you not use his views after the Adelaide test where you would struggle to find anyone more fulsome in his praise of Jimmy. In any respect I would hold the views of anyone that has played the game at a semi decent level way ahead of random Daily Mail journalists who are simply observers of the game like many of us. There are a few contributors on here who have played alongside and against quality test cricketers and learned a lot about the game. The views of Newman etc are no more qualified than lots of people on here and only marginally better than you tbf.

Merry xmas - roll on Melbourne
Click to expand...

happy xmas to you mate

English best cricketer ever in Beefy is usually condemned on here for talking out of his behind, you cant have it both ways.

At least im not the only person on earth who doesnt believe Jimmy has been that good in Australia, we have dispelled that myth.
 
essex boy said:
FYI - I read the mail every day. Secondly, Paul Newman lives local and has very good connections with the England side through his Essex connection and if you do some research, will find he is a very well respected member of the cricket media

Im assuming they were picking the 4 most likliest bowlers to win a test. If you want to pick only those who have played 3 tests then the attack is Siddle, Swann, Jimmy and Finn, which seems to be the only way you can get Jimmy in your side

However, if you want the 4 most threatening bowlers who are likely to win a test and who IMO have bowled the best spells of the series then they have picked the right four.

Will you be making an ass of yourself and writing to the two cricket journalists telling them they know nothing
Click to expand...
Have you ever lived in Oxclose?
 
essex boy said:
happy xmas to you mate

English best cricketer ever in Beefy is usually condemned on here for talking out of his behind, you cant have it both ways.

At least im not the only person on earth who doesnt believe Jimmy has been that good in Australia, we have dispelled that myth.
Click to expand...

Yip - good argument bud - you are back on a bit of form maybe Jimmy will follow suit ;-)

The argument with Beefy was and always is that he was such a brilliant, instinctive cricketer there was never a need to really think about the game to the extent that say an Hussain, Atherton or even a Boycott did. Its not that Beefy talks shite, just that there are expert summarisers that give a better insight into the game.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top