Discussion in 'Cricket' started by Fast Eddie, Jan 3, 2012.
Pocket money for him.
Oh for f**ks sake, can we have a thread where a dictionary isn't pulled out?
Kohli can behave like a dick, as do some of the Aussie players.
I'm sure you can.
What is your aversion to dictionaries?
Oh, someone else wants to pick a fight too.
Nothing AL, it's the cyclic BS that seems to permeate every cricket thread of late that annoys me. They lay bait, you bite and it's a race to the bottom from there.
A bit of banter is all in good fun but it's an out and out trollfest at times.
Are you uber emotional and looking for a fight?
If not, safe to say the bogan title was not for you.
Somewhere for sure. But he'd be wanting something a bit more lucrative than somewhere.
Well I doubt a chair on inside cricket pays that much. But if they will give a spot to Brad Haddin, then yep agreed Michael Clarke could get one there.
But if Ch 9 and Ch 10 don't want him, what high paying jobs are there left in Australia?
I highly doubt any of the Indian networks would want him; they prefer the Danny Morrison type commentators to work alongside their locals in T20 and go with the well spoken Robin Jackman type for the real cricket. Clarke has enough money already not to sell himself out as a Danny Morrison clone, and will never sound well educated enough to be a Robin Jackman type. Clarke sounds like his mouth is full whenever a word with the letter 'S' is mentioned by him.
Sky UK definitely would not. I think they want Punter don't they? I know they take Warne whenever they can get him. Although, Holding is due for a replacement. I fear that he is going senile before our very ears while while working in cricket commentary.
Safrica, NZ, WI, Pak, SL, Zim, and Ban all have no money to invest into pricey cricket commentators.
f**k, you dribble some absolute crap.
What you have posted here is an ad hominem with no reasonable argument relating to the topic.
It is the very definition of dribbling some absolute crap.
Have a good evening.
Have a cry about it.
Everything you have posted in relation to cricket in these forums has been incorrect.
You are such a plonker
This guy has a phobia of ad-hominems.
He doesn't realise that within the context we are using them they make perfect sense.
Once again, he doesn't get it. Just like everything else.
Even if an ad hominem is true, it is irrelevant in any and every context. That is why an ad hominem is a fallacy.
It is you who does not get it.
I haven't been following the series closely as I just assumed NZ would win given the wickets wouldn't be flat decks, but for people that watched how did Smith & Warner go on wickets with a bit more in them?
Warner had one good innings- 98- and two failures.
Smith had 3 failures.
That doesn't surprise me, Meth.
I think Warner is hands down the best opener in the world so I won't be too harsh on him. He's played some great innings overseas.
But I do worry about Smith's technique in more trying conditions than the Aussie featherbeds. When he swings the bat it's like watching a traditional Scottish caber toss. Or like watching a giant Redwood fall.
It's ugly stuff and I'm not sure how effective it'll be in the long run against seam and swing. Especially when you could fit a Death Star between his bat and pad.
Separate names with a comma.