The Independent Voice of West Indies Cricket

Message Board Archives

List of international hundreds...

 
Devin 2017-01-15 10:24:33 

1. Tendulkar - 100(782 innings)
2. Ponting - 71(668 innings)
3. Sangakkara - 63(666 innings)
4. Kallis - 62(617 innings)
5. Jayawardene - 54(725 innings)
6. Lara - 53(521 innings)
7. Amla - 49(343 innings)
8. Dravid - 48(605 innings)
9. ABD - 45(441 innings)
10. Kohli - 42(300 innings)

 
Courtesy 2017-01-15 10:28:06 

In reply to Devin

Amla is still ahead.

 
doosra 2017-01-15 10:34:27 

In reply to Devin

only 58 more to Tendy lol

 
doosra 2017-01-15 10:34:42 

he went pass shiv deh
big grin

 
Devin 2017-01-15 10:41:40 

In reply to Courtesy

It's amazing how good Amla's record is, and yet I find him incredibly ordinary. He makes sure to capitalize on weak teams, I'll give him that much.

I won't even bother to mention him in the same breath as VMFK. Can't hold a candle to him.

 
Courtesy 2017-01-15 10:42:57 

In reply to Devin

Don't do this brother.

 
doosra 2017-01-15 10:46:01 

In reply to Devin

He makes sure to capitalize on weak teams, I'll give him that much.


Tests

Aus - 5
Eng - 6
Ind - 5
NZ - 4
Pak - 2
SL - 2
WI - 1
Bang -1
Zim - 0

 
Devin 2017-01-15 10:51:53 

In reply to doosra

9 have come against India, Lanka, Windies and Bangladesh.

Post the ODI tons as well.

 
Courtesy 2017-01-15 10:53:53 

In reply to Devin

It's amazing how good Amla's record is, and yet I find him incredibly ordinary. He makes sure to capitalize on weak teams, I'll give him that much.

I won't even bother to mention him in the same breath as VMFK. Can't hold a candle to him.


Brother your criticism of Alma has already been made invalid.

 
doosra 2017-01-15 10:54:09 

In reply to Devin

100s against India in India are easy 100s?

oh my big grin

 
Devin 2017-01-15 10:54:54 

In reply to doosra

If he plays for 10 years and has some luck on his side with regards to injuries, he should be able to break Tendy's record, or at least get close.

 
Devin 2017-01-15 10:56:28 

In reply to doosra

Did he score them on featherbeds or rank turners?

 
Devin 2017-01-15 10:58:21 

In reply to Courtesy

Is that right, how so? Do you realize that Amla's name is never mentioned alongside the very best in the game, despite his numbers?

 
doosra 2017-01-15 10:58:33 

In reply to Devin

the 100 100s is yuuuuugeeee

 
doosra 2017-01-15 10:58:49 

In reply to Devin

i can't remember big grin

 
Courtesy 2017-01-15 11:00:53 

In reply to Devin

Is that right, how so? Do you realize that Amla's name is never mentioned alongside the very best in the game, despite his numbers?

Brother, you can make this statement to a casual follower of international cricket...but not disCourtesy.

Why South Africa’s Hashim Amla sits among one-day cricket’s best ever.

Don't waste your time, just read the first line of the referenced article IF your eyes are open.

 
Devin 2017-01-15 11:10:28 

In reply to Courtesy

Is he better than Kohli? Yes or no?

 
Courtesy 2017-01-15 11:13:26 

In reply to Devin

Is he better than Kohli? Yes or no?

I am not going there. You may wish to develop criteria for "better" that we can agree upon, then we may carry this thread forward in another direction.

 
Devin 2017-01-15 11:17:25 

In reply to Courtesy

Stupes. Look, no one in the world would pick Amla ahead of Kohli in any format of the game. He has lead South Africa to nothing while having a great bowling unit and an all time great batsman to partner him.

Kohli has a better average in all three formats. Kohli is more devastating, has more strokes, is the greatest match-winner of all time, and doesn't regularly get bowled down like a dunce.

 
Courtesy 2017-01-15 11:18:38 

In reply to Devin

Did you read the referenced article? Any untruths in the article?

Remove your head from your arse and stop belittling other cricketers' achievements to promote Kholi. This is not healthy.

Dis done.

 
Devin 2017-01-15 11:24:33 

In reply to Courtesy

I am not belittling. My eyes tell me that I've never seen anything special from Amla. Everytime I watch him bat, he fails, and is usually bowled down like a clown.

His record says he is a great batsman. I won't dispute that, but he is nowhere near Kohli's class as a batsman.

 
Courtesy 2017-01-15 11:26:52 

In reply to Devin
Make up your mind...are you confused, or are you vacillating when confronted with the facts?

...It's amazing how good Amla's record is, and yet I find him incredibly ordinary...


...His record says he is a great batsman. I won't dispute that,...


Which of the above is correct?

Have a great day.

 
Runs 2017-01-15 11:30:47 

Amla is a proven great batsman, we don't need to tear down players achievements to big up others. cool

 
FuzzyWuzzy 2017-01-15 12:17:54 

Interesting top 10 : 1 Aussie 1 Windies 0 brits 2 Lankans 0 paks

 
black 2017-01-15 12:45:08 

In reply to doosra

Tests

Aus - 5
Eng - 6
Ind - 5
NZ - 4
Pak - 2
SL - 2
WI - 1
Bang -1
Zim - 0


Devin is having a TOLDUSO moment, putting stuff out there that can be easily disproved. lol

 
Devin 2017-01-15 13:04:46 

I asked to provide the ODI hundreds. Haven't seen them yet.

 
Devin 2017-01-15 13:10:06 

I'll help you guys out.

14 of Amla's 23 ODI hundreds have come against Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Ireland, Netherlands, Zimbabwe and West Indies.

His average over those 47 matches is 67.43.

His overall average is 51.33. But no one will point that out, and none of the analysts or commentators are aware of this.

Against Australia, India, Pakistan, England, and New Zealand, he averages 44.06 with 9 centuries from 90 matches.

 
Devin 2017-01-15 13:19:56 

In reply to Courtesy

Alastair Cook may surpass Tendy's test runs record. Most people find him ordinary.

There are many great batsmen who were ordinary to the eye, or weren't match winners or game changers.

Shiv, Boycott for example.

Many found Kallis and Waugh robotic.

If you take a handful of great batsmen and you can't separate them through the use of statistics, then what comes next? Match winning ability and aesthetics, no?

 
Devin 2017-01-15 13:21:07 

In reply to Courtesy

Answer the question, Amla or Kohli?

 
Devin 2017-01-15 13:26:27 

The list.

Link Text

 
Devin 2017-01-15 13:40:36 

Just to break Amla's ODI numbers down a tad more; he has scored 14 tons against the bums in 47 matches, but just 9 from 90 matches against the top teams.

 
Courtesy 2017-01-15 13:43:32 

In reply to Devin

Why don't you park your ass in a corner. I quoted you saying that based on his record Alma is great.

Brownie points just don't cut and if you want me to quote brownie points I can:

Amla's hundreds to innings ratio is better than Kholi's...14.28 and 14 respectively...plus more runs and not playing cricket on all these featherbed pitches, and he has scored a triple century.

Why don't you accept that Alma is great and Kholi is great.

 
Devin 2017-01-15 13:45:13 

In reply to Courtesy

They are both great, with one really knowing how to capitalize against $hit teams. You still ain't answering the question, and I wasn't the one who felt the need to compare one with the other. Who is the better batsman? Amla or Kohli?

 
Devin 2017-01-15 13:45:42 

In reply to Courtesy

In reply to Devin

Amla is still ahead.

 
Courtesy 2017-01-15 13:47:38 

In reply to Devin

And that post above was in reference to the first set of data you provided. I merely deliberately commented that "Amla is still ahead"...it's purely a statistical fact from the data you provided, which cannot and should not be debated or refuted by any dispassionate folk.

 
Courtesy 2017-01-15 13:48:32 

Amla's 100's to innings ratio is better... you dummy.

 
Devin 2017-01-15 13:50:53 

In reply to Courtesy

Because he has scored a bunch of tons against bums, yuh jackass.

Kohli has a higher average at every level of cricket. FC, List A, ODI, T20, Test.

 
Devin 2017-01-15 13:52:05 

And to go back to my point about Amla always getting bowled down:

18.6% of Amla's dismissals have come from being bowled down.

6% of Kohli's dismissals have come from being bowled down.

 
Devin 2017-01-15 13:54:02 

While Amla's ratio is marginally better, Kohli's average is 4+ runs higher(52.75 vs 48.65) across all formats

 
Courtesy 2017-01-15 13:54:14 

In reply to Devin

Brother that's why I ask you to develop criteria which is properly weighted to appraise the two options.

Mature and rationale people don't just take shit from their asses without any scientific basis to appraise a given situation.

 
Courtesy 2017-01-15 13:55:40 

In reply to Devin

While Amla's ratio is marginally better, Kohli's average is 4+ runs higher(52.75 vs 48.65) across all formats

And that's the point. You just don't selectively pull out data or tidbits from a given set of data and use it as gospel. You have to eliminate any biases...and "see the wood from the trees".

You don't have to trash Alma to put Kholi on a pedestal.

 
Courtesy 2017-01-15 14:02:29 

In reply to Devin

And to go back to my point about Amla always getting bowled down:

18.6% of Amla's dismissals have come from being bowled down.

6% of Kohli's dismissals have come from being bowled down.


Am I arguing with a facting infant?...incredible.

Dis done. Go argue with persons of your ilk.

 
Devin 2017-01-15 14:07:56 

In reply to Courtesy

Can a knowledgeable person like yourself explain why Amla gets bowled so frequently?

 
Devin 2017-01-15 14:09:44 

In reply to Courtesy

You keep saying "dis done" without answering any questions. What is done?

 
Courtesy 2017-01-15 14:10:12 

In reply to Devin

Can a knowledgeable person like yourself explain why Amla gets bowled so frequently?

Oh fact man...can you tell me why an expert fisherman does catch sprat a lot of the time.

"I wonder why the grass is green....who taught the birds to build their nest...or when the moon is not quite round where can the missing bit be found...?

How many times have you seen Virat Kohli playing wide balls with the bat away from his body to the quicks, only to get out caught between the wicket keeper and gully?

My only option left on this thread is to ridicule you.

And now, the answer to your question: The number of times Amla was bowled the balls he received were unplayable. And yes, if a batsman gets bowled, it's because he cannot bat or he is not a great batsman...what a correlation...You skunt.

lol lol lol

 
Devin 2017-01-15 14:19:48 


Michael VaughanVerified account
‏@MichaelVaughan

Best Test player ... KOHLI
Best ODI player ... KOHLI.
Best T20 player ... KOHLI

RETWEETS
3,023
LIKES
3,730

9:50 AM - 15 Jan 2017

 
Devin 2017-01-15 14:21:07 

In reply to Courtesy

I saw Amla repeatedly being bowled down by Indian pacers in South Africa during a test series. Pitched up and straight, bowled down. That was enough for me.

 
Courtesy 2017-01-15 14:21:13 

In reply to Devin

And Vaughn's tweet says that Amla is not a great batsman? You skunt.

 
Courtesy 2017-01-15 14:22:55 

In reply to Devin

I saw Amla repeatedly being bowled down by Indian pacers in South Africa during a test series. Pitched up and straight, bowled down. That was enough for me.

Does it tell you the number of times Amla pulverized the same bowlers who bowled him.

Yes... Amla gets bowled because he is not a great batsman...only Kholi is great.

You myopic skunt.

................

Btw, I am glad I took you down this road. You should have checked that Kohli was not ahead of Amla in the stats you provided when you started the thread.

And further, you should have stopped for a minute to see that I was taking you down a road fraught with peril. I set you up for a precipitous fall.

Do have a wonderfall afternoon.

 
Devin 2017-01-15 15:01:08 

In reply to Courtesy

Listen up. I posted some numbers and your initial response was to tell me that Amla is ahead of Kohli. I took it a step further and told you that Amla is not in Kohli's class. I asked you which batsman is better. You are yet to answer.

I showed you that the only reason Amla has a marginally better century ratio is because he scored several tons against lowly ranked teams, some of them aren't even Test playing nations.

Aside from that, Kohli has better averages across the board, is a far greater match winner, is ranked higher in all formats, is rated higher by just about everyone. In fact, I don't know when last Amla was in the conversation.

I haven't even bothered to compare their averages when chasing.

 
Courtesy 2017-01-15 15:08:49 

In reply to Devin

Why you took it a step further? What was the reason if not to satisfy an inner and latent lust for Kholi.

"Amla is ahead" was deliberately posted to taunt and lure you.

My comment was never about a comparison between the two in terms of "better". It was based on the cold naked stats you provided. Why didn't you just acknowledge the fact?

Your ego is too big and I just preyed on it. "Kholi must be first..." in your Kohli circumscribed world.

Your willingness and haste to kiss Kholi's ass is irresistible on your part and this leads you to be clouded in your judgement of anything else about him.

You were left trying to refute a simple fact from the data you provided which is irrefutable.

Be careful next time and don't be too quick to rush to judgement.

Btw, did you know Amla was ahead (conversion rate) when you provided the stats to start the thread?

 
Devin 2017-01-15 16:08:11 

In reply to Courtesy

Of course I knew that. I've posted the list several times. I also know that Amla only averages 41.88 batting second with just 5 centuries.

Just like I know that Amla has cashed in against the lower ranked teams in the world, some of them not even being Test playing nations.

Kohli, on the other hand, averages 64.30 batting second with 17 tons.

Dis truly done.

 
Courtesy 2017-01-15 16:13:36 

In reply to Devin

I only ask about Amla. Look how De hole post above is about Kohli.

You cyan help it, can you?

In summary, Title of thread: "List of international hundreds..."

Fact: "Amla is still ahead."

Now go and take a lick on that fact...

big grin

 
Devin 2017-01-15 16:17:42 

In reply to Courtesy

Ahead because he's played more matches. Who will be ahead when it's all said and done? big grin big grin big grin

 
Courtesy 2017-01-15 16:21:35 

In reply to Devin

Ahead because he's played more matches. Who will be ahead when it's all said and done?

No it's a snapshot of where we are now and with a very large sample size at that.

"Hundreds to innings ratio" is a level playing field.

Amla: 14.28

Kohli: 14.00

Why are you so dunce?

 
Devin 2017-01-15 16:25:13 

In reply to Courtesy

14 of Amla's 23 ODI hundreds have come against Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Ireland, Netherlands, Zimbabwe and West Indies.

His average over those 47 matches is 67.43.

His overall average is 51.33. But no one will point that out, and none of the analysts or commentators are aware of this.

Against Australia, India, Pakistan, England, and New Zealand, he averages 44.06 with 9 centuries from 90 matches.

 
Devin 2017-01-15 16:26:04 

In reply to Courtesy

Just to break Amla's ODI numbers down a tad more; he has scored 14 tons against the bums in 47 matches, but just 9 from 90 matches against the top teams.

 
Courtesy 2017-01-15 16:27:21 

In reply to Devin

14 of Amla's 23 ODI hundreds have come against Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Ireland, Netherlands, Zimbabwe and West Indies.

His average over those 47 matches is 67.43.

His overall average is 51.33. But no one will point that out, and none of the analysts or commentators are aware of this.

Against Australia, India, Pakistan, England, and New Zealand, he averages 44.06 with 9 centuries from 90 matches.


Oh my golly.

Take one more lick on Kohli's hole...rim his kakahole again.

lol lol lol

 
Devin 2017-01-15 16:56:18 

In reply to Courtesy

There is no need to get nasty.

 
Courtesy 2017-01-15 16:57:32 

In reply to Devin

If it's not familiar Kohli territory to you, then accept my apology.

 
Devin 2017-01-15 17:10:29 

In reply to Courtesy

You like nuff shite eh big grin big grin big grin

 
Courtesy 2017-01-15 17:17:05 

In reply to Devin

You like nuff shite eh

I don't consider myself an expert like you.

lol lol lol

 
runout 2017-01-15 21:23:34 

Can't we appreciate greatness as it manifest itself, or must we always deny our sensibilities to conform to "greatness" as we are conditioned to accept????

Virat is a boss right now No sense denying that...the man is the top of the class.

 
jballer84 2017-01-17 22:17:56 

In reply to Devin

I am a huge Kholi fan, and he is the best, but u dont diss Hashim who is a great player as well. Hashim's conversion rate is the best on that list!

 
Courtesy 2017-01-18 06:50:29 

In reply to jballer84

Thank you sah.

And that's the message that the tunnel visioned one failed to appreciate.

 
Devin 2017-01-18 11:13:10 

All I have said is this:

14 of Amla's 23 ODI hundreds have come against Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Ireland, Netherlands, Zimbabwe and West Indies.

His average over those 47 matches is 67.43.

His overall average is 51.33. But no one will point that out, and none of the analysts or commentators are aware of this.

Against Australia, India, Pakistan, England, and New Zealand, he averages 44.06 with 9 centuries from 90 matches.


His success against lower ranked teams has enabled him to have a fantastic ratio of hundreds per innings. I don't know what's hard to understand about that fact. 14 tons from 47 matches against the worst teams in the world, 9 from 90 against the best.

The minute someone posts something complimentary about Virat, some jackass has to come post about his record in England from ONE TOUR. Amla has made an ODI career out of dominating the lowly ranked teams.

He still averages 50 in Test cricket, and oddly enough while he's a more accomplished Test cricketer than Virat, Kohli is the one with the better ratio of 100's per innings.

 
Courtesy 2017-01-18 13:16:19 

In reply to Devin

Skunt, the entire thread is there so readers can decide.

You sought to downplay the achievements of Amla by referring to him as "ordinary" while elevating your man on a pedestal.

Dangerous behaviour...dishonest even.

 
Devin 2017-01-18 14:04:57 

In reply to Courtesy

Asshole, I said I find him ordinary. That is my opinion, because nothing that I've seen from him has impressed me.

There is nothing ordinary about his career numbers. The numbers alone would suggest that he is a great. I've just dug a little deeper and revealed the full extent of those numbers.

Stop responding, you sound like Nick2020.

 
Courtesy 2017-01-18 14:37:06 

In reply to Devin

But later, under pressure, you admitted he is great...make up your mind.

Amla's numbers are great (conversion rate better than Kholi) but he is ordinary.

You only have eyes for Kohli...you skunt.

Remove the mote from your eyes.

Amala is a class batsman like Kohli. And no unbiased cricket fan will doubt this...well unless...

 
Devin 2017-01-18 15:23:18 

In reply to Courtesy

His numbers are great, I find nothing special about his batting and when you research his ODI numbers, they suggest that he's been average to good against the best, and spectacular against weak teams.

Off the top of my head, here are the batsmen I've enjoyed watching:

Aravinda Da Silva
Kumar Sangakkara
Mahela Jayawardene
Yousuf Youhana
Sachin Tendulkar
VVS Laxman, at times
Kevin Pietersen

I'll throw in two very unusual names:

Stephen Fleming from New Zealand
Greg Blewett from Australia

As far as batsmen who were before my time:

Sunil Gavaskar
Graeme Pollock
Alvin Kallicharan

Modern day batsmen:
Virat Kohli
Ajinkya Rahane
Kane Williamson
Virat Kohli
Ab De Villiers(at times)
Virat Kohli
Virat Kohli

 
Devin 2017-01-18 15:29:44 

People carry on about Hooper, a man who spent most of his career averaging 35.

Some people on this MB think Bravo has the talent and ability to be as good as Kohli, Root and Williamson.

Most people don't find Jacques Kallis' batting appealing. There have been heaps of great batsmen who many didn't find particularly attractive in terms of strokeplay or capturing their attention.

 
Devin 2017-01-18 15:35:29 

In reply to Courtesy

It's interesting that you're just looking at Amla's overall numbers, but you can't dispute the stats I've provided.

You said Amla is ahead, I said Kohli is better. You still can't say who is better or who you'd choose, and it's escalated to this.

 
Courtesy 2017-01-18 15:50:54 

In reply to Devin

What is your thread title and are you willing to be lazer focused on the subject matter of your own thread?

What was the purpose of your thread?

What were you trying to achieve by your thread?

Was it to show that Kohli is the greatest or better?

Didn't I make a factual statement from the data you provided in your opening post?

Why din't you even acknowledge that Amla is ahead based on the data instead of opening up new tributaries..

Try for once on this thread to be honest.

I await honest answers.

 
nick2020 2017-01-18 16:09:21 

In reply to Devin

Yes. I see you are losing badly in an argument.
Yet you claim you never lose because you properly pick your fights.

Who needs to live in reality when fiction is so fun?

 
nick2020 2017-01-18 16:11:48 

In reply to Courtesy

I was waiting for the ref to stop the fight as poor Devin is refused to stay down.

Someone invoke the mercy rule.

You know powen and devin went to the same high school?

 
nick2020 2017-01-18 16:14:25 

In reply to Courtesy

Devin1/15/17 10:41:40 AM
In reply to Courtesy

It's amazing how good Amla's record is, and yet I find him incredibly ordinary. He makes sure to capitalize on weak teams, I'll give him that much.

I won't even bother to mention him in the same breath as VMFK. Can't hold a candle to him.


Anyone who thinks Amla is ordinary should never claim to know cricket.

 
Courtesy 2017-01-18 16:15:23 

In reply to nick2020

You know powen and devin went to the same high school?


I understand you went to the same school yet you are poles apart.

Devin is just a dishonest skunt whose job it is to keep Kholi's balls from dangling.

lol lol lol

 
Courtesy 2017-01-18 16:17:43 

In reply to nick2020

It's amazing how good Amla's record is, and yet I find him incredibly ordinary. He makes sure to capitalize on weak teams, I'll give him that much.

I won't even bother to mention him in the same breath as VMFK. Can't hold a candle to him.


Yet he goes on to say later that Amla's overall average is above 51. and against what Devin considers 'strong teams' over 44.

Brother, this whole thread is so full of holes. I just ignored most of what the dumb ass wrote.

I hope he is honest enough though to answer the questions I put to him above.

 
nick2020 2017-01-18 16:35:56 

In reply to Courtesy

I hope he is honest enough though to answer the questions I put to him above.


Good Luck with that.

 
Courtesy 2017-01-18 16:43:43 

In reply to nick2020

I know he will respond. He will never leave his own thread with unanswered questions.

And while he is at it, I want him to do a comparative analysis of the test stats for both players under reference against all test playing countries.

In particular Devin, work out Kholi's average against what you refer to as "weak teams".

You asked for it Devin.

Let's get down to debating that Amla is "ordinary".

 
Devin 2017-01-18 17:04:51 

In reply to nick2020

I know enough about cricket to know that Kohli was always a better batsman than Bravo, always.

 
Courtesy 2017-01-18 17:06:34 

In reply to Devin

Ahh!!! You're back...Nice to have you around.

Please start with my list of questions.

 
Devin 2017-01-18 17:08:38 

In reply to Courtesy

You're yet to answer who is better and who you'd pick. You are yet to address the glaring truths that in ODI's, Hashim Amla averages 44 against Australia, England, India, New Zealand, and Pakistan. Yet Amla averages 67.43 against Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Ireland, Netherlands, Zimbabwe and West Indies.

14 of 23 ODI centuries have been scored against the weak teams.

 
Courtesy 2017-01-18 17:13:04 

In reply to Devin

You're yet to answer who is better and who you'd pick. You are yet to address the glaring truths that in ODI's, Hashim Amla averages 44 against Australia, England, India, New Zealand, and Pakistan. Yet Amla averages 67.43 against Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Ireland, Netherlands, Zimbabwe and West Indies.

14 of 23 ODI centuries have been scored against the weak teams.


Get forking lost...you obfuscating dishonest skunt.

Your yardstick now is lickit cricket.

 
Devin 2017-01-18 17:15:10 

My opinion of Amla being ordinary is my opinion of Amla being ordinary. Why? Because almost everytime I watch him bat, he fails, and in many of those instances he's been bowled down by straight pitched up deliveries that average batsmen would be able to defend.

As I said before, there are many great batsmen out there that people found ordinary. It's an aesthetic thing.

Aside from Chanderpaul supporters, who wants to watch him bat? His numbers are great, especially wrt West Indies cricket, but would most West Indians watch him bat? Even if it were for free on TV?

Kallis is the 2nd greatest all rounder of all time, statistically he may be the greatest. I don't think most people were riveted by Kallis' batting or bowling. Many would describe his batting as robotic.

My assertion that I find Amla ordinary is due to the fact that the majority of times I've seen him bat, he's failed.

I also don't have a lot of respect for a batsman who gets bowled down so often in Test cricket. I have a very old school mentality when it comes to batting in Test cricket. Rule #1, protect your stumps.

 
Courtesy 2017-01-18 17:17:26 

In reply to Devin

...Why? Because almost everytime I watch him bat, he fails, and in many of those instances he's been bowled down by straight pitched up deliveries that average batsmen would be able to defend...


You are a forking dishonest, obfuscating skunt.

You are making such a statement above in this internet and communication age.

I am wasting my time.

Have a great night.

 
Devin 2017-01-18 17:17:38 

In reply to Courtesy

You dumb fu#king stupid skunt. This list is about international hundreds, cu#t.

23 of Amla's 49 hundreds have come in ODI cricket. In fact, a debate can be made that he's had a more successful career in ODI cricket. He is the fastest to 2,000, 3,000, 4,000, 5,000, and 6,000 ODI runs.

 
Courtesy 2017-01-18 17:19:54 

In reply to Devin

He is the fastest to 2,000, 3,000, 4,000, 5,000, and 6,000 Test runs.


Oh so you read and you are quoting from the reference article I provided.

The writer is a "dumb fu#king stupid skunt too.

Let's have some more quotes from the article.

And yes "ordinary" players achieve such a feat.

Simpleton.

Good nite mate.

 
Devin 2017-01-18 17:23:26 

In reply to Courtesy

14 of Amla's 23 ODI hundreds have come against Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Ireland, Netherlands, Zimbabwe and West Indies.

His average over those 47 matches is 67.43. 14 hundreds in 47 matches. That's a century 1 out of 3 times.

His overall average is 51.33. But no one will point that out, and none of the analysts or commentators are aware of this.

Against Australia, India, Pakistan, England, and New Zealand, he averages 44.06 with 9 centuries from 90 matches.

 
Courtesy 2017-01-18 17:25:51 

In reply to Devin

And Amla is equally woeful in test cricket (the real cricket)...would you say?

 
nick2020 2017-01-18 17:26:04 

In reply to Devin

Kohli does not have the best Test career numbers and I do not know why this is such a problem for you. So instead you argue all over the place instead of accepting that.

Brilliant LO batsman and arguably the best. But Test? No.

 
Devin 2017-01-18 17:28:50 

Oh, and before I forget, Amla opens in ODI's, which obviously means he has more opportunities to score centuries than Kohli. That may be the reason why he has a marginally better ratio of hundreds per innings.

 
Courtesy 2017-01-18 17:33:01 

There are no downsides to facing the new ball?

You myopic skunt.

 
Devin 2017-01-18 17:33:30 

In reply to nick2020

I've always prided myself on judging talent with my eyes. Of course statistics play a role when it's time to get down to the nitty gritty of it all.

I trust my eyes. I saw something special in Kohli a long time ago, and I was calling Aaron Rodgers the best QB in the NFL before people even had him in the top 10. Of course I've been wrong in the past as well, because talent and aesthetic appeal alone won't take you to the top.

All I've maintained here is that Amla doesn't impress me because he's usually failed when I've watched him bat. What the hell do you want me to say? If I see a batsman bat 10 times, and his scores are 20, 1, 5, 18, 0, 50, 13, 17, 0, 32. Then what kind of impact is that going to make on me? Now if that batsman averages 50 in all formats, I have to give him his due and say that statistically he is very good, or perhaps even great.

 
Courtesy 2017-01-18 17:34:49 

All I've maintained here is that Amla doesn't impress me because he's usually failed when I've watched him bat. What the hell do you want me to say?


lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol

Dishonesty at its best. The metric by which the batsmen are judged for being "ordinary".

"What a tangled web we weave..."

 
Devin 2017-01-18 17:36:01 

In reply to Courtesy

Of course there are downsides. Kohli bats at 3 with inconsistent openers, so he would know about that. But if you're chasing 210, then as an opener you know that if you see the team home, you'll probably have a century next to your name.

If you're batting at 3 and chasing that same total and your openers give the team a 20 or 30 run partnership, then there isn't much of an opportunity for the #3 batsman to score a ton.

 
Courtesy 2017-01-18 17:39:24 

In reply to Devin

Bother, direct your posts elsewhere. I have already concluded that you are a SIMPLETON.

 
nick2020 2017-01-18 17:39:59 

In reply to Devin

It's amazing how good Amla's record is, and yet I find him incredibly ordinary.


Okay resolve this for me. You are maintaining that he is indeed ordinary?

Edit: My mistake. Incredibly ordinary?

 
Courtesy 2017-01-18 17:41:16 

In reply to nick2020

And he qualified "ordinary" at that.

big grin

Btw, that post was made after the reality of my post "Amla is better" hit him.

 
Devin 2017-01-18 17:44:24 

In reply to Courtesy

You're right, I'm being dishonest.

The last time India toured South Africa(2013), Amla averaged 14.33 in the Test series and was bowled three times in three innings.

The last time South Africa toured India, Amla averaged 16.85 from 7 innings with a highest score of 43.

He was bowled three times in seven innings.

 
Devin 2017-01-18 17:45:29 

In reply to Courtesy

Skunthole, you're still fu#king responding and asking me to direct my posts elsewhere?

 
Devin 2017-01-18 17:51:54 

In reply to Courtesy

Btw, that post was made after the reality of my post "Amla is better" hit him.


The reality of what hit who? Jackass, Amla is not a better batsman than Kohli in any format.

 
Courtesy 2017-01-18 17:51:59 

In reply to Devin

You're right, I'm being dishonest.


Indeed you are. You are not using a representative sample... 3 innings...and yet Amla's overall average against India is 45.

...............

To continue with this line of argument, "the last time Kholi played against Bangladesh he averaged 14.00.

Is this where you want to go...selective skewed stats?

 
Devin 2017-01-18 17:57:12 

In reply to Courtesy

I gave you 10 innings vs India that span their last two encounters, one in 2013 in South Africa, and the other in 2015 in India.

From 10 innings, he was bowled 6 times and averaged 15 odd.

These are not random stats. That's when I saw him bat.

I suppose if someone saw Kohli in England during that one series, they'd think he was the worst batsman to have every played cricket.

How does a specialist batsman get bowled 6 times in 10 innings though? That is what I really want to know.

 
Courtesy 2017-01-18 17:58:41 

In reply to Devin

I suppose if someone saw Kohli in England during that one series, they'd think he was the worst batsman to have every played cricket.


Ahha!!! Your best post.

Yep by your own metric.

The same metric you used to assess Amla's batsmanship.

Finally, the curtains have come down.

Dis done.

Nighty, nighty.

 
Devin 2017-01-18 18:02:25 

In reply to Courtesy

That's called a preemptive strike. At least Kohli wasn't being bowled down like a complete dunce. And at least Kohli has responded by pummeling all English bowlers for the past two months. One of them couldn't get him out or even beat his bat over the course of two matches, so he decided to feign injury and run home.

 
nick2020 2017-01-18 18:10:39 

In reply to Devin

Is Amla incredibly ordinary?

 
Devin 2017-01-18 18:30:36 

In reply to nick2020

When I've seen him, he's been terribly ordinary. His record in ODI's against the best teams is also relatively ordinary, especially when you consider what his overall record is, and what he's done against the weaker teams.

 
Khaga 2017-01-18 18:32:34 

In reply to nick2020

Given he hasn't dominated in ICC tournaments or not a huge draw in any of the famous 20/20 leagues, his limited overs' "prowess" is overstated and misleading..

 
nick2020 2017-01-18 21:34:59 

In reply to Khaga

Surely by the lead post and data therein his prowess is not limited to limited overs.

 
nick2020 2017-01-18 21:42:07 

In reply to Devin


Well how often have you seen Amla? I guess I can only say not enough because clearly the numbers do not lie.

But Devin you are going to find yourself between a rock and a hard place because you frequently post numbers to paint a picture yet you are saying the numbers in Amla's case do not paint the correct picture.

Where do you go from there?

 
Khaga 2017-01-19 05:55:33 

In reply to nick2020


Well how often have you seen Amla?


lol lol lol lol

 
Devin 2017-02-09 06:34:35 

#43