I know he was disappointed, but to twice repeat "dey din beat us, we lorse" is absurd.
Not even congrats to Trinidad- you would expect him to say we play badly and congrats to Trinidad, they played well, etc, but not this cappo.
Message Board Archives
Sour Loser- Leewards Cappo
In reply to Emir
Well said!
I like that attitude.
115/0 to 212 all out. We have only ourselves to blame especially how Bonner and Samuels got out.
In reply to Emir He means Leewards were their own worst enemy today, which they were. Middle order was terrible and constantly ensures all the pressure is left on the openers and tail-enders.
In reply to Judgement
Yes Sir, I agree and everyone else.
But to say what he said, TWICE, without paying congratulations to the opposition is poor sportsmanship.
The interviewer gave him a chance, but he refused to congratulate the winning team.
In reply to voiceofreason
True. They should not have let this game slip, it was there for the taking and they blew it.
But it does not prevent the cappo form saying well done Trinidad.
T&T won the game. Beat them fair and square.
Sad match comments from the captain. Never acknowledged the opponent's fight and execution in the game.
Poor sportsmanship, bad for the game.
shameful
In reply to voiceofreason
weak response from the REVO
Not surprising at all
If anything, I would be surprised had they congratulated T&T
In reply to Emir
A set a whining Trinis. Allyuh sound so trivial. So what if he did not congratulate you all? He shaked your hands right?
Stewpss dude. This is competition and he was very upset in how we threw away the game. Stop making a big deal over nothing.
In reply to Emir... add VOR to that list.
it is a good thing he wasnt a sore loser
In reply to sudden
In reply to voiceofreason
I wish our WI captains had that kind of attitude rather than being so gracious and accepting of defeat.
In reply to sudden
Come on Sudden,quit nitpicking. You too Americanized. 'Sour' loser is PROBABLY a Trini thing and it means the same thing literally speaking.
In reply to analyst-kid
No, the whining Trinis prefer the girlie, soft man approach. Stewpss.
In reply to voiceofreason
i wood knot now weather their mean the same thing.
In reply to voiceofreason
He shaked your hands right?........huh?....say you did not type that.......
He shook your hands........right..........
I want to believe that you typed that in the heat of the moment...............LHM...
In reply to sudden
Figured.But the above examples are irrelevant in this case.
In reply to cherri
Yes it was done in the heat of the moment and so what? Thanks for the correction.
In reply to sudden
[b]In reply to sudden
If he was a sore loser he may have managed a short congrats , but being sour.....I could understand the tude.............
in this post truth era anything can be justified. just now someone is going to argue strongly that VOR is not a goatmout superstar
I must commend the natives of Little England (Barbados) for their command of the English Language.
In reply to voiceofreason
You kept talking about Bonner and Samuel but what about the captain ? He is the one that started it with his foolish thinking to go half way down the pitch to the new bowler and ended up making himself and the team looking like real fools. At that time what he was trying to do was not needed at that time and so he suffered and the team with him.
In reply to cricketfreak
It was important that the set batsman (who happened to be a LHB) attack the left arm spinner who is more a threat to the RHB than the LHB.
I did not see what happened prior to the dismissal so I understand now that the spinner pulled up the first time when he saw him coming and then Powell still came to him so the spinner dragged the ball wide. Considering that in the context KP was wrong but I am not understanding why is he being blamed for the loss when the two previous games he scored consecutive centuries in wins so why could the other batsmen not follow his lead then and score the 100 runs between them?
In reply to cricketfreak
Man don't try to stop VOR being VOR .
In reply to voiceofreason
Vor the two batters were in no trouble they were picking up the the 1 & 2s against that same spiner the runs was coming the pressure was on Ramdin and his guys so why try to take on the spiner and get out like a real dance? Another easy hundred was on the card for Powell and a easy win for the Leewards so stop blaming others, if Powell had stayed there i think Hodge would of reach his hundred along with Powell and it would of been Leewards won the game without losing any wickets.
In reply to cricketfreak
The law of averages say that you are bound to fail at some point. The reality is this team should never be about one man/player or it would not be a team. Powell was using his feet all night long which BTW is the correct approach for the spinners. You cannot let them settle. Simple.
We agree to disagree. I believe Powell did the right thing and it was incumbent on the other batsmen to build on the great foundation afforded to them. They are to blame the most for htis loss, not Kieran or Montcin.
I am sure he is a poster here..
In reply to cricketfreak
"if Powell had stayed there i think Hodge would of reach his hundred along with Powell and it would of been Leewards won the game without losing any wickets."
This has surely got to be nominated for the most unintelligent remark of the year? Either that or this is someone with a personal grudge against Powell because there surely can't be such outrageously low IQ'd people on this planet. You are questioning the HIGHEST run scorer in the tournament because he has a team (note i said "team") of men that can't put together 100 runs BETWEEN them and he has to keep doing it for them?? Give me a break!
And it is "would have" not "would of". I say no more smh.
In reply to sudden Just loved your comment. Is it asking too much to spell properly
Search
Live Scores
- no matches