Unpopular Cricket Opinions

Remove this Banner Ad

ok immagonnasayit

clarke is hogging the limelight

hong-kong-protests-umbrella-revolution1.jpg

I don't think 'limelight' is the right word and I don't really agree but I think I know what you're getting at. I think it is driven by a sense of duty, nothing else. Nothing is perfect in these situations.
 
It was well known long before this that Hughes and Clarke were best mates, or at least they were each others best mates within the Australian set up.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

ok immagonnasayit

clarke is hogging the limelight

hong-kong-protests-umbrella-revolution1.jpg
I kinda get what you are saying but I actually think that it is totally being media driven. I doubt he personally wants any of the attention at the moment.

The media focus is starting to get a bit much on this and think they need to step back bit. I too am starting to fear how far the coverage from the media will go over the summer
 
I kinda get what you are saying but I actually think that it is totally being media driven. I doubt he personally wants any of the attention at the moment.

The media focus is starting to get a bit much on this and think they need to step back bit. I too am starting to fear how far the coverage from the media will go over the summer

after some moments of thought, it is media driven. clarke has been very forthright on twitter consistently posting thoughts about he and hughes. however, if the media just focused on the family, then the public would have tweets publicised.
 
I haven't watched the funeral. I've been to a few and the idea of them being televised for any reason sickens me. I don't really understand the concept of extreme shared grief over someone I've never met.

To be honest I felt exactly the same way before but then I started watching the stream following a tweet from CA. What I saw changed my mind. It was extremely respectful and well done.
 
As per the rules he retired hurt. Had he not died but just sat out the game with concussion there would be no change to the scorecard. This is just gimmicky symbolism. Honour him with a ceremony and remember him as he was, and that means being truthful about what happened.
He didn't exactly retire, the game was called off without any further balls being bowled.

#63notout
 
He didn't exactly retire, the game was called off without any further balls being bowled.

#63notout
The game stopped as a result of him sustaining an injury. He retired hurt as per the rules of the game and no change would have been made to the records if he didn't die. The amendment is wrong.
 
The game stopped as a result of him sustaining an injury. He retired hurt as per the rules of the game and no change would have been made to the records if he didn't die. The amendment is wrong.
It doesn't hurt to have a bit of heart sometimes.
 
Laws are man made. They can be relaxed to accommodate unusual situations. I think it was a nice gesture from CA to change it from retired hurt to NO. It was a rare incident and unlikely to happen again.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

If that is directed at me rather than a general comment, I have been far from heartless through these events. I just disagree with this specific issue.
Sorry man, it was more a general comment. I just think in this issue, something heartfelt is more important than being 100% accurate. Especially when that slight inaccuracy doesn't actually change anything. It doesn't inflate or deflate anyone's individual stats.

And getting real technical can you be retired hurt from the last ball of a game? There was no next ball so he never had to be replaced at the crease.

As a fairly out there example, if you are not out at stumps on day two of a test, break your leg that night, but the final three days are washed out, then you would finish the innings not out. you wouldn't be retired hurt.
 
guy who came up with #putoutyourbats getting some media exposure now

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/meet-paul...s-phillip-hughes-tribute-20141204-11zz7x.html

Four minutes later, Taylor posted his photo and hashtag on the ABC Facebook page. "It exploded," says Taylor, who had refused international requests for interviews until after Hughes's funeral on Wednesday. "I don't want this to be about me."

a refreshing attitude from a seemingly humble and down to earth person. so utterly refreshing in todays times where its a race to be the first and most seen.
 
Sorry man, it was more a general comment. I just think in this issue, something heartfelt is more important than being 100% accurate. Especially when that slight inaccuracy doesn't actually change anything. It doesn't inflate or deflate anyone's individual stats.

And getting real technical can you be retired hurt from the last ball of a game? There was no next ball so he never had to be replaced at the crease.

As a fairly out there example, if you are not out at stumps on day two of a test, break your leg that night, but the final three days are washed out, then you would finish the innings not out. you wouldn't be retired hurt.
Yeah, I know what you mean. By all means honour and remember him in ceremony and with tributes, but I'll almost never support making it up as they go along. In your hypotheticals the game ends because it ends. In Hughes' case the game ended because of his injury. I just feel a factual account is better and it might actually help people move forward.
 
I don't rate MacGill as a better bowler, but I have maintained that if their birth dates were swapped around (Warne 1969, MacGill 1971) then we may not have seen Warne get much of a run in the test team. Other way around and it was a fair chance MacGill would have got first crack at test cricket, and if he was going at 29 runs per wicket in test cricket, there is no way he was going to get dropped for an overweight loudmouth who had been booted out of the Australian cricket academy, and was hardly setting the world on fire at Sheffield Shield level.

EDIT: At the end of 1991/92, Warne had played 7 Shield games, 13 wickets at an average of just over 50. He also had played 2 tests by that stage. Funnily enough not too dissimilar a situation that we have found ourselves in recent years with spinners. His final Shield career was 161 wickets at 34. Not particularly great.

There are a couple of counter arguments to it - MacGill was 23 when he played his first shield match, which is only a year and a bit older than Warne, but it was two a half years later before his second shield match so he developed a little slower than Warne. But that is just semantics of dates, you could say what if MacGill was five years older than Warne? The second is that Warne might not have had a great record in shield cricket, but knowing his personality, particularly in the 90's, it's hard to imagine he took shield games too seriously. If he was trying to oust a bloke from a test team and take his spot, he may have pulled his finger out.

In the end doesn't matter. Warne came along at the perfect time for Australian cricket. Desperate for a good spin bowler, after some pretty so-so years from Greg Matthews, Peter Taylor, Peter Sleep and Tim May. All decent enough bowlers in their own right, but a long way from guys that will win test matches for you. They took a punt on a fatty from Victoria, and turned out to be the best punt Australian cricket ever made. And when you're second leggy plays 40 tests, takes 200 wickets at under 30 you know things are going good.

EDIT: Yes, a pointless hypothetical, but sometimes I like to indulge in such things. But there is no doubt in the cricketing world, there are many "sliding doors" moments when it comes to spin bowlers, and to a lesser extent keepers when there is only a spot in a team and less of a chance to take a punt on someone and see how they go.
 
Last edited:

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top