Ian Bishop Publicly Called Kemar Roach

Pages: 1  2  3  4  5  next 
link Raggs Joined: Jan 11, 2004
Posts: 34389
6/21/22, 4:25:42 PM 
avatar image
a great on an interview it's an insult to our greats. `He himself would have been a great if not for injuries. So please let's not be stupid in these times looking for greatness. Let's not forget Michael Holding, Andy Roberts, Joel Garner and Colin Croft left a lot of test wickets in the locker because of the Packer series. We could put easily another 50 wickets apiece on each of their tallies

link Dukes Joined: Dec 5, 2002
Posts: 43644
6/21/22, 4:32:49 PM 
avatar image
In reply to Raggs

Ian Bishop is entitled to a bit of Hyperbole..Those greats never played against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe.Not a big deal.Move on, nothing to see here.

link sudden Joined: Nov 26, 2006
Posts: 47830
6/21/22, 4:37:24 PM 
In reply to Dukes

So Dukes you think Roach should give back those wickets? How many are they anyway?

link brians_da_best Joined: Nov 12, 2002
Posts: 17378
6/21/22, 4:45:48 PM 
In reply to Raggs

Roach, if he can stay fit, has another 100 wickets in him. Look at Anderson, at 40, he's still going strong.

Roach is only 34 and can okay 3 more years, considering he plays only one format.

If he ends with 350 wickets, would you call him a great?

link Baje Joined: Dec 9, 2002
Posts: 7179
6/21/22, 4:50:32 PM 
In reply to Raggs
What makes a great..wickets..strike rates..average

link imusic Joined: Nov 12, 2002
Posts: 73927
6/21/22, 4:53:17 PM 
avatar image
In reply to Dukes
Those greats never played against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe

Unfair

Our greats feasted on the likes of Ken Rutherford, Gaekwad, Sandeep Patil, Jeff Crowe, Graeme Hick, Chris Broad etc.

Today’s NZ, Indian, and English teams have stronger batting lineups in general.

link VoopsandOut Joined: Jun 14, 2017
Posts: 1475
6/21/22, 4:57:55 PM 
In reply to imusic

Precisely. We cant devalue a man's contribution because of his opposition. He still has to run in and bowl and get batsmen to play false shots. The same way, Bradman can be devalued because he did not play against certain teams. Roach has made an immense contribution. It is a matter of personal opinion if he is called great. We dont need to pull down everyone to our own levels. Jeez man.

link tc1 Joined: Jun 11, 2004
Posts: 15677
6/21/22, 5:07:38 PM 
Why Roach is not a great? Holding bowled at 90 mph, (132 ft /per sec sq) Kemar bowled at 90mph (132fT/per sec sq).
Holding has 249 wks, Kemar has 249 wks and counting.
Holding run an old ass Boycott, Kemar run a middle age Pointing, Kemar shoulder injuries preventing him from bowling at 90mph and resulted in him reinventing himself, had these injuries not occurred he would have passed Holding long ago.

Holding Bowled with 3 other greats, Kemar bowled with the Angel and Tino.

Kemar played against Bangladesh and Zim just like Lara, Shiv and Sarwan.
Kemar stats signified greatness, Go Kemar, March on to 300.

link Raggs Joined: Jan 11, 2004
Posts: 34389
6/21/22, 5:17:22 PM 
avatar image
In reply to Baje

What makes a great..wickets..strike rates..average
was you listening when Holding/ Roberts/Croft and Garner was dealing with the opposition and the likes of Alan Border fighting for survival from his arrival..Yuh serious?
Colin Croft was a great, yes with far less than Roach's haul..

link Raggs Joined: Jan 11, 2004
Posts: 34389
6/21/22, 5:19:47 PM 
avatar image
In reply to brians_da_best

f he ends with 350 wickets, would you call him a great?
great servant to West Indian cricket, yes but a great..no

link imusic Joined: Nov 12, 2002
Posts: 73927
6/21/22, 5:21:16 PM 
avatar image
In reply to tc1

Holding Bowled with 3 other greats, Kemar bowled with the Angel and Tino.

I know your intent is to disparage Gabriel by that statement.

Gabriel took 161 wickets in 56 test matches.

Same amount as Ian Bishop

Link Text

13th highest wicket taker in the history of West Indies cricket.

More than Jason Holder (142 in 56)
Wayne Daniel
Pedro Collins
Corey Collymore
Vanburn Holder etc.

link sudden Joined: Nov 26, 2006
Posts: 47830
6/21/22, 5:27:28 PM 
In reply to tc1

There is a qualification.

You have to play on winning teams


Except Lara didn’t


I will have to check Dukes on this


I wonder whether McGrath or Anderson will have to discount their wickets against weak WI teams

link tc1 Joined: Jun 11, 2004
Posts: 15677
6/21/22, 5:41:18 PM 
In reply to imusic

Typical of you, Is the Angel and Tino equivalent to Robert, Croft and Big Bird as a supporting cast?


Stop being so narrow minded and trying to cast everything into disparaging Trini.

If Bish had not incur an injury, he would be an all-time great.

link bird Joined: Nov 12, 2002
Posts: 1053
6/21/22, 5:49:35 PM 
In reply to brians_da_best
100 wickets I don't think so Roach should only play in the Caribbean

link tc1 Joined: Jun 11, 2004
Posts: 15677
6/21/22, 5:54:21 PM 
In reply to sudden


You can add the great Shiv, Gayle and the legend Samwell to the list.

We await the dukes' stats and analytics.

link Dukes Joined: Dec 5, 2002
Posts: 43644
6/21/22, 6:35:35 PM 
avatar image
In reply to sudden

How did this

Ian Bishop is entitled to a bit of Hyperbole..Those greats never played against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe.Not a big deal.Move on, nothing to see here.


Trigger this

So Dukes you think Roach should give back those wickets? How many are they anyway?

link InHindsight Joined: Feb 23, 2007
Posts: 10190
6/21/22, 6:38:09 PM 
If Kemar can maintain this for another two or so years yeah I'd count him among our greats


Some here facetious well

link sudden Joined: Nov 26, 2006
Posts: 47830
6/21/22, 6:40:56 PM 
In reply to Dukes

The part about Banga and Zim. In addition to the reference about greats etc. The implication seems to be that becos Roach did, he is not a great hyperbole or not

link Brerzerk Joined: Mar 15, 2021
Posts: 5124
6/21/22, 6:55:17 PM 

link powen001 Joined: Nov 25, 2006
Posts: 58314
6/21/22, 6:59:41 PM 
avatar image
In reply to Raggs

ease off o the bad weed nah.

249 wickets ...in the middle of our Great Fast Bowlers pack and with quite a few more wickets to come...and you discounting and calling into question that he earned them?

naah Raggs...

same kind of thinking that refuses to accept that Jason Holder has been the WORLD #1 ALL ROUNDER for quite some time.

self loathing perhaps?

link Dukes Joined: Dec 5, 2002
Posts: 43644
6/21/22, 7:00:57 PM 
avatar image
In reply to sudden

I consider Hall,Roberts,Marshall,Holding,Garner,Croft,Ambrose and Walsh as greats.
Now if you think that Roach should be considered as in the same category as those guys, then I disagree with you.When considering people from different eras, you have to think about who they played against.

Has it dawned on you that West Indies is playing Bangladesh very often these days? The fact that back in the late 70's and early 80's we were playing Australia almost annually whereas now it has been 7 years since we played a test match against Australia.Do you think that if we were playing Australia instead of Bangladesh as frequently Roach would be on 249 wickets now?
Roach has played 10 test matches against Australia and 10 test matches against Bangladesh.He has 28 wickets at 39 against one and 41 wickets at 19 against the other.

link FuzzyWuzzy Joined: May 31, 2005
Posts: 54912
6/21/22, 7:10:20 PM 
In reply to Dukes

I have already told you the 4 prong played against some weak ass India, except Gavaskar; Australia, Except border; England, except Lamb but include 42 yr old Brian Close.

So yes there was no zimbabwe and Bangladesh, but some weak ass teams

Maybe we should tek way some of Lara, Shiv and Gayle runs...and all that Kohli, Root and Smith made against us and Zimbabwe and Bangadesh.

link Dukes Joined: Dec 5, 2002
Posts: 43644
6/21/22, 7:21:48 PM 
avatar image
In reply to FuzzyWuzzy

I have already told you the 4 prong played against some weak ass India, except Gavaskar; Australia, Except border; England, except Lamb but include 42 yr old Brian Close.



You want me to show you that the above teams were not as weak as these Bangladesh and Zimbabwe teams but I have no intention of wasting my time.You guys just throw out statements with zero evidence and I must provide facts to disprove your assertions.How about it being the other way around. I ASSERT that India,Australia and England as represented by those teams above were stronger than the recent iterations of Bangladesh and Zimbabwe.

link imusic Joined: Nov 12, 2002
Posts: 73927
6/21/22, 7:23:39 PM 
avatar image
In reply to Dukes

Be fair.

Australia then had good players

Redpath (earlier times)
Hookes
Kim Hughes
Chappel brothers
Border
Dyson
Etc

The OZ team today and of recent times is at least as formidable, if not more.

Yes we play Bangladesh about as often as we used to olay Oz back in the day.

But people also are fond of saying that todays game is skewed towards batsmen, meaning that it would be harder for bowlers to get wickets.

It could be said that Kemar bowled on much less bowler friendly wickets than Holding at al.

I’ve always said there should be categories of “great”

If Lara is great, and Vic is great and Sobers is great, and they most definitely are……how do you place a Everton Weekes, or a Greenidge or a Chanderpaul as great? They re not the same.

But the argument for that is that they are great players in their own right. And that’s true.

So the same would apply to Kemar Roach.

link sudden Joined: Nov 26, 2006
Posts: 47830
6/21/22, 7:24:57 PM 
In reply to Dukes

Fair enough. That being the case wrt the teams we play against I don’t see us having many greats in the future if we continue to play second tier test cricket.

Should McGrath, Warne or Anderson discard their wickets against the WI?


How is Croft great? How many wickets does he have?

Very Happy Smile Sad Surprised Shocked Confused Cool Laughing Razz Embarassed Crying or Very sad Evil or Very Mad Twisted Evil Rolling Eyes Wink
 
Pages: 1  2  3  4  5  next