Remove this Banner Ad

Embarrassing

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Re: Embarassing

eddiesmith said:
I dont know if 1 extra r could be considered embarassing, I have seen much more embarassing spellings of the word embarassing. What would be embarassing about this thread would be the fact the original poster who found a comment by someone else embarassing has been embarassed themselves as their opinion is being slaughtered

Now thats embarassing
Click to expand...
That must have taken an hour Eddie! I bet you only picked up on it after your mate did!
 
Re: Embarassing

Drummond said:
People are not answering the question correctly. We all know he is a good batsman, but does he have a good technique? I voted no.
Click to expand...

And back up your "no" with an explanation

What makes his technique ********? Oh, because he can whip deliveries from outside off to the midwicket fence?

Mark Waugh used to do it a lot, he just did it in a lot more graceful manner, so I guess Junior had a ******** technique?

If anyone can't see how solid defensively Pieterson was throughout the series against the Aussies, then they really are blind.
 
Re: Embarassing

Cooldude said:
And back up your "no" with an explanation

What makes his technique ********? Oh, because he can whip deliveries from outside off to the midwicket fence?

Mark Waugh used to do it a lot, he just did it in a lot more graceful manner, so I guess Junior had a ******** technique?

If anyone can't see how solid defensively Pieterson was throughout the series against the Aussies, then they really are blind.
Click to expand...
I don't think you're in any position to be calling anyone blind. You must be blind to like soccer.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

what exactly is a good technique when the ball is being bowled at 140/150?
have a good eye is all you need, and he has it.

things seemed to go his way during the ashes, played on small quick grounds so he didnt have to work to hard to score runs.

probaly played the biggest test series he ever will already so we will find out soon if complacency sets in.
 
Re: Embarassing

Browney said:
Well he certainately had a technique that was good enough to destroy the Aussies.
Click to expand...

he got dropped 3 times in his only good innings

we were in a tight position, and after missing so many oppurtunities to get someone out, we lost confidence and he just slogged - thats all, not much of a technique man

his technique is average

but he is still a good bastman
 
Re: Embarassing

Cooldude said:
If anyone wants to watch a bloke who has a great eye but poor technique, then look no further than Sehwag

Pieterson's technique has always been compact and solid, just because he possesses the ability to tonk a ball a long way off his pads doesn't make him a "slogger"
Click to expand...
Sehwag's ability to keep his head over the ball while 'slogging' at the same time is the main thing that makes him as good as he is. He also has quite a good technique, combined with an ambitious shot selection.
 
Re: Embarassing

sheller891 said:
he got dropped 3 times in his only good innings

we were in a tight position, and after missing so many oppurtunities to get someone out, we lost confidence and he just slogged - thats all, not much of a technique man

his technique is average

but he is still a good bastman
Click to expand...
Ahhhhh, sorry, did you miss his first three innings in the ashes where he made 3 consecutive 50's? The first two where he top scored both times for England and fought his way to a decent score through batsmen collapsing around him, where he didnt score at a rapid rate, he put his head down and tried to build a decent total for England. He top scored in the Series out of both teams....

His only good innings? Did you miss the first 3? Which where his first 3 in Test match cricket?
 
Re: Embarassing

GoSydneySwans said:
Sehwag's ability to keep his head over the ball while 'slogging' at the same time is the main thing that makes him as good as he is. He also has quite a good technique, combined with an ambitious shot selection.
Click to expand...

Sehwag's technique? You mean when he'd play back to half volleys? Or having absolutely no forward stride? Or when he cuts, instead of move his back foot back and across, he moves it back towards leg stump?

Sehwag's technique is very very average, but he has one of the best eyes you'll ever see.

Pieterson on the other hand, does all the right things, all the way back, all the way forward, to quicks or spinners. He has all the shots, but he's just a lot more aggressive than your average batsman. Yet he's been branded a "slogger"?

Out of the England batting, the only two batsmen who has a technique on par with Pieterson's or better than his are Vaughan and Flintoff
 
Re: Embarassing

Browney said:
Ahhhhh, sorry, did you miss his first three innings in the ashes where he made 3 consecutive 50's? The first two where he top scored both times for England and fought his way to a decent score through batsmen collapsing around him, where he didnt score at a rapid rate, he put his head down and tried to build a decent total for England. He top scored in the Series out of both teams....

His only good innings? Did you miss the first 3? Which where his first 3 in Test match cricket?
Click to expand...

good first 3 innings - we'd never played against him and he was in good form

then 20,21,0,45,23,14 and 152 with 3 dropped catches (one on 0, one on 15)


once we learnt how he plays (and how is technqiue isn't great) we got him out quite early (lee got him out 4 times, and most batsmen with good techniques should be able to hold off our "Terrible" LEE eh?) and then he got the 152, being so very lucky and slogging like a bitch

don't kid yourself - he has a very good eye, but an average technique
 
Re: Embarassing

Cooldude said:
Sehwag's technique? You mean when he'd play back to half volleys? Or having absolutely no forward stride? Or when he cuts, instead of move his back foot back and across, he moves it back towards leg stump?

Sehwag's technique is very very average, but he has one of the best eyes you'll ever see.

Pieterson on the other hand, does all the right things, all the way back, all the way forward, to quicks or spinners. He has all the shots, but he's just a lot more aggressive than your average batsman. Yet he's been branded a "slogger"?

Out of the England batting, the only two batsmen who has a technique on par with Pieterson's or better than his are Vaughan and Flintoff
Click to expand...

Freddie is also called a slogger by Aussie fans
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Re: Embarassing

sheller891 said:
good first 3 innings - we'd never played against him and he was in good form

then 20,21,0,45,23,14 and 152 with 3 dropped catches (one on 0, one on 15)


once we learnt how he plays (and how is technqiue isn't great) we got him out quite early (lee got him out 4 times, and most batsmen with good techniques should be able to hold off our "Terrible" LEE eh?) and then he got the 152, being so very lucky and slogging like a bitch

don't kid yourself - he has a very good eye, but an average technique
Click to expand...
Slogging like a bitch hahaha, your an idiot mate. He top scored in the Ashes, not good enough for you?
Would you like a hundred in every innings, i am still struggling to figure out your point here as well. Never played against him? Didnt Australia play the One day series?
 
Re: Embarassing

Browney said:
Slogging like a bitch hahaha, your an idiot mate. He top scored in the Ashes, not good enough for you?
Would you like a hundred in every innings, i am still struggling to figure out your point here as well. Never played against him? Didnt Australia play the One day series?
Click to expand...

he top scored, due to the 152, which as i pointed out was extremely lucky?

admitedly - i was wrong about not having played him - there, admitted.

but, by top scoring (mainly due to lucky century) does that make him have a good technique automatically???????

now who's the idiot?
 
Re: Embarassing

sheller891 said:
he top scored, due to the 152, which as i pointed out was extremely lucky?

admitedly - i was wrong about not having played him - there, admitted.

but, by top scoring (mainly due to lucky century) does that make him have a good technique automatically???????

now who's the idiot?
Click to expand...
You, by saying they hadnt played them before, and of course he got some luck, i'd say about 90% of innings that get 150 will have some luck. When did i say he has a good technique? I think his technique is average, nothing to special, nothing shocking, i think you missed the point i was making.
 
Re: Embarassing

Cooldude said:
Sehwag's technique? You mean when he'd play back to half volleys? Or having absolutely no forward stride? Or when he cuts, instead of move his back foot back and across, he moves it back towards leg stump?

Sehwag's technique is very very average, but he has one of the best eyes you'll ever see.

Pieterson on the other hand, does all the right things, all the way back, all the way forward, to quicks or spinners. He has all the shots, but he's just a lot more aggressive than your average batsman. Yet he's been branded a "slogger"?

Out of the England batting, the only two batsmen who has a technique on par with Pieterson's or better than his are Vaughan and Flintoff
Click to expand...
Each for their own, I suppose. Personally I think the best techniques in the Pommy lineup would have to be Vaughan's and Strauss'.
 
Pieterson has a good technique but not great. He is pretty good however can be a little loose, other than that you couldnt really fault much. I wouldnt call him a slogger. Vaughan has by far the best technique in Englands side with Trescothick and Flintoff also having tighter and slightly better techniques than Pieterson. However to say Pieterson has a better technique than Sehwag is ridiculous. There is a difference between technique and footwork, Sehwag may not move his feet as much as some, but it is his very good technique as well as his eye that makes him such a good player with a test average of 55. Many modern players dont use excessive foot movements, with a still head and sound technique making up for their minimal movement.
 
Trescothick? Tight technique?

That's like saying McGrath can bat

His technique's shocking, but it's just that our new ball bowling was even more shocking and didn't exploit his weakness.

And anyone who thinks Sehwag has a good technique needs to see him bat a lot more, his technique is ******** poor, but he just happens middle every bloody ball because his eye's so good
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Cooldude said:
Trescothick? Tight technique?

That's like saying McGrath can bat

His technique's shocking, but it's just that our new ball bowling was even more shocking and didn't exploit his weakness.

And anyone who thinks Sehwag has a good technique needs to see him bat a lot more, his technique is ******** poor, but he just happens middle every bloody ball because his eye's so good
Click to expand...


A couple of seriously ill informed comments. And anyone who thinks Michael Clarke can bat and deserves his spot in the side needs to see him bat a lot more. Open your eyes mate.
 
Ill informed? Saying Trescothick has a tight technique is almost worse than saying Pieterson is a slogger

At least I can open my eyes, doesn't look like you have any eyes

And I'm biase with Clarke because he's my favourite, but of course I know he has some technical flaws that he needs to work on, but what he needs to work on even more is his ********ehouse shot selection.
 
Didnt say Trescothick has a super tight technique, just that its tighter than Pietersons. Which it is. Pieterson is good but a little loose, looser than Trescothick, if you cant see that you are kidding yourself.
 
Looser than Trescothick, my goodness, stop it, you're killing me :D

Pieterson was remarkably solid offensively and defensively against both of McGrath and Warne, he played both as well as anyone I've seen.

Trescothick, anyone who've seen him bat would know that he's one of the loosest opening bat going around, he loves giving slip catching practice, and quite frankly how he can average anything higher than the 30s is a damning assessment on the fast bowling stocks around the world

What do you term Pieterson as "loose"? You mean when he gets out hooking or trying to smack bowlers? Then that has nothing to do with technique, purely shot selection which even he would admit he's still yet to perfect. Other than that, the Aussies had little idea on where to bowl to him
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Embarrassing

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top