OT: [censored] thread, August, READ RULES IN TOP POST

[sippin_criss]

[ QUOTE ]





The one in the middle he's already in SF. The image search was for 1997, but I'm not 100% that was the year.

Bonds started roids after Sosa and McGwire had their year passing Marris (1998) and they were both almost certainly on roids.

Also, Bonds is a jerk and I don't like the Giants anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah but look @ tiger woods. he was a skinny little twig and now hes ripped and im sure he could be plenty bigger if he wanted to. also, if anyone likes interpol their new album is pretty flippin good (pardon my language)

[Josem]

[ QUOTE ]
Josem, I know very little about cricket, but I'm fairly sure that given 3 months of coaching and practice, one of either, Reggie Bush, Alex Rodriguez, or Lebron James would be better than all 3 of the guys you listed

[/ QUOTE ]

lol - not a hope.

there is something in the order of 1.5billion people in significant cricketing countries. those three are amongst the greatest players of all time.

bradman had a batting average was 99.94 (average number of runs scored per innings)

ricky ponting, who is almost certainly the greatest batsman today, has an average in the high 50s.

you could get a regular spot in the English cricket team today with an average in the high 40s.



i think that fair odds for your challenge would be something in the order of 500:1, and I still think that you'd be taking the rough end of the stick.


i don't think you understand how far bradman (especially, let alone the other three) are above the statistical norm. i believe, however, if any of those blokes had played the game as a kid and applied it to cricket as they applied themselves to their current sport, they'd certainly make decent players.

[Velocity]

STANDARD BOORISH AMERICAN RETORT

ps. get on irc sometime we miss you

[Longy]

Bradman is a statistical phenomenem (sp?) in cricket his average is so far ahead of anyone elses its superhuman.

Hmm i begrudgingly will concede Ponting is the best batsman in the world today, especially given Lara has retired and Tendulkar star is falling. Though i happen to think Kevin Pietersen* ia probably 2nd in line as we speak.

As for the greatest the batsman i have seen it has to be Sir Viv Richards he was a totally dominant presence at the wicket.

Suggest that baseball players could be as good at cricket within 3 months is totally ludicrous and vice-versa they are different game which require different skill set, concentration, stamina and defensive technique are required in cricket that aren't as prevelant in baseball. As Josem correctly points out the player pool for cricket is a lot larger than baseball, it is the national sport and obsession in India the 2nd most populous country in the world.

* I know Pietersen is south african but he plays for England.

[blackize]

[ QUOTE ]
As Josem correctly points out the player pool for cricket is a lot larger than baseball, it is the national sport and obsession in India the 2nd most populous country in the world.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah but India is dirt ass poor in a lot of the most populated areas meaning they don't get proper nutrition and won't reach their potential. Plus Indians aren't good athletes in general.

[RexWoo]

Haven't tried it yet but a new feature of SnGWiz might kick ass :

http://www.sngwiz.com/index.php?opti...mp;topic=372.0

[Josem]

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah but India is dirt ass poor in a lot of the most populated areas meaning they don't get proper nutrition and won't reach their potential.

[/ QUOTE ]

that's probably a factor, to be fair.

But a billion people in India, 50 (?) million in Pakistan, 22 million in Australia, 80 (?) million in England, x million in the West Indies, x million in South Africa, 5 million in NZ, plus the other little countries = a bloody big pool.

[ QUOTE ]

Plus Indians aren't good athletes in general.


[/ QUOTE ]
that's 'cause they're all playing cricket, basically.



cricket is to india what television is to the US.


like, leading australian cricketer, brett lee, released an indian music video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48eHkZfnGug

it was huge.

[blackize]

I agree the player pool is huge. I was just being argumentative and saying that India probably isn't the best example despite its enormous population.

To be honest I don't even really know how cricket is played. From what little I do know it seems like a pretty easy game.

Edit: And it is very very likely that I just don't know anything about the nuances and athleticism that go into it.

[Gramps]

Actually, I think the HGH helping his vision was a big part of the boost he got when he had that sick year where he hit 73 homers. Dude was locked in on every pitch, something that gets harder to do as you get up to/past 40 no matter how well you know/read pitchers.

Bonds has put enough negative energy to enough people over the years where it's coming back to bite him, but it does suck that hundreds of players, and dozen of stars/superstars did as much/more roids than him and won't ever get busted or even accused of it. As one of the Giants announcers said, Bonds is taking a bullet for his generation.

Those OBP/SLG numbers were more incredible than the 73 homers one could argue - something like .550 OBP and .850 SLG% (too lazy to even google it). I was at the game tongiht, and they put his lifetime stats up on the scoreboard - OBP at .445 for his career. And that's not facing the same worn-out pitcher 4/5 times a game, hitting against defense with shoddy gloves/uneven infields, etc., etc. like Ruth got to face. Sick, sick, sick, sick. I'm sure Billy Beane would love to have Bonds next year if he could get him on the semi-cheap (at least if he was willing to deal with his personality/ego).

[fluorescenthippo]

can someone summarize the "mr gatorade's lies cost me 70k" thread from the zoo from 1-2 months back. i never got around to reading it and its super long. who was right?