Message Board Archives
Devin is this yuh talking about?
In reply to Larr Pullo
Man, I don't think you really want me to dissect Lara's stats, cuz I will have a field day, and I don't need to manipulate anything.
No surprise to see Sanga and Gavaskar there. No surprise that Lara did it against Sri Lanka, that great bowling attack.
In reply to Larr Pullo
Devin's posts are a cry for attention.
And relevance.
But mostly attention.
A man who has done very little in Test cricket mentioned in the same sentence as BCL and Tendy. For me that is a damning statement to anyone's credibility. You cannot know anything about cricket or really any sport or have the ability to do simple math in order to say something as stupid as that.
But I appreciate stupidity. Tells me at least I have learned something 
In reply to nick2020
No no, you're the one who knows nothing about cricket, or any sport probably.
You see, jackass, you actually think Darren Bravo is a better batsman than Virat Kohli.
In reply to Larr Pullo
In 2000 he played 5 tests in England, scored 239 runs, averaged 26.55 from 9 innings. He had a highest score of 112, which means his other 8 innings yielded 127 runs.
In 2004 he played 4 Tests, scored 264 runs, averaged 33 from 8 innings.
Lara scored runs against England when they had Angus Frasier, Andy Caddick, Chris Lewis, and Phil Tufnell. Even Kohli with his dismal record against England would've dismantled those clowns.
Who did Lara really score runs against? We know it wasn't Wasim and Waqar, or Donald and Pollock, and rarely against McGrath and co. down under.
Apart from the meaningless 400 not out, Lara's last 23 innings against England yielded 603 runs at an average of 26.21
In reply to Devin
Devin, yuh talking shite!!
Lara scored those runs against Murali and Vaas who were a very potent bowling attack... Murali was ranked 3rd best bowler at the time - only Pollock and McGrath were ahead of him. Vaas was ranked 6th.
No other WI batsman supported Lara except for Sarwan.... Hell, you, Chrissy and I followed that series on cricinfo throughout the nights here. Like you've developed selective memory since your man crush on Kohli!
In reply to nick2020
Chappell says Kohli is ever better than Lara at finding gaps.
Cullinan says Kohli is the best he's seen at finding gaps since Lara.
Hayden says Kohli is the best he's seen since Lara.
Lara says Kohli is the best batsman in the world across all formats.
Viv Richards says Kohli reminds him the most of himself.
It's about foresight, and you have none. It's about the eye test, and you're probably blind.
People can call it lickit cricket or whatever, but the fact that all his shots are ideal and orthodox cricket shots is why analysts around the world expect him to dominate in all formats.
In reply to NineMiles
Bossman, you heard what Holding said about Lara? He is the greatest batsman he's seen against medium paced and spin bowling. I would not debate that, because it's probably true.
In reply to Devin
Yet his Test average against Eng is 62.15 while your lover-boy's is a pathetic 20.13
In reply to NineMiles
In 2000 he played 5 tests in England, scored 239 runs, averaged 26.55 from 9 innings. He had a highest score of 112, which means his other 8 innings yielded 127 runs.
In 2004 he played 4 Tests, scored 264 runs, averaged 33 from 8 innings.
Lara scored runs against England when they had Angus Frasier, Andy Caddick, Chris Lewis, and Phil Tufnell. Even Kohli with his dismal record against England would've dismantled those clowns.
In reply to Devin
Look, any cricketer's stats can be dissected and skewed unfavorably.
I don't need to big up Lara's achievements here for anyone.... who doesn't know is simply ignorant or has an agenda.
Lara is one of the greatest batsmen to ever grace the cricket field...... Kohli has a long way to go to reach those heights!
In reply to NineMiles
This is where you are wrong. With Devin there is no or.
Anyone with a shred of common sense regardless of the agenda would look at an equivalent span to compare two players where one is retired and one is active.
Virat Kohli has played 71 inns in Test. That is a large enough sample. The person with a drop of common sense would look at Brian Lara's first 71 inns and do a compare/contrast. But there are obvious reasons why Devin does not want to do that. He would rather say "look at this lean patch" in Lara's career. The kick in the nuts funny part about that is Lara's lean patch nets him an average that is not so distant than Kohli's whole career.
Lara - at his worst is Kohli.
That is the moral of the story.
And finally something that he has never answered - why is Kohli so great to the point he is the entire Justice League rolled up into one awesome cricketer yet he has not been able to sniff a double ton? A man that is the greatest cricketer ever?
After 71 inns it is clear he will not achieve the greatest record of all time - most runs in Test cricket. But to Devin he will always be the greatest.
In reply to nick2020
...and there is the small matter of rectifying this abysmal blotch on his record!
In reply to Larr Pullo
I notice something funny in dat Lara's game....it is Vaastly visible....
In reply to WestDem
In reply to nick2020
One can only say and it is clear to see that when it comes to Devin and Kholi, Love is blind.
Lara at his worst is Kohli
Take win!
In reply to Devin
Does that mean he is better than Lara as a batsman?
Does that mean he is better than Lara as a batsman?
That means he is better than Lara?
Stop shifting the goal post. Lara never played T20i. We talking about Test cricket.
And Kohli reminds you of yourself. Does not mean you can play cricket as well as Lara.
The eye test says Kohli averages 44 in Test cricket.
Can you tell me how to get to Sesame Street?
In reply to carl0002
Love / Obsession
Search
Live Scores
- no matches