Tendulkar, Kapil, Gavaskar, Sehwag named in Greatest All Time Test XI

[Bhairava]

So, why do you need to know, when it's not part of the game itself?

Anyone can come up with any kind of parameters, it doesn't mean anything because it is not part of the game, or it rules.

And the fumble continues.....

If it exists, its a part of "recognized" cricket statistics (Link) I love your fumbling and the way you are groping in the dark for justifying it based on semantics.

Accept that before half an hour you did not know that there was Strike Rate for bowlers too and move on

ps:- Look for Q McMillan who played test cricket in 1929-1932.

 

[53fd]

If it exists, its a part of cricket.

No, it's not a part of cricket. It's just as much part of cricket as the "kiss my a**" statistic is in cricket: nothing. Tell me, how is strike rate part of the rules of cricket?

 

[Bhairava]

No, it's not a part of cricket. It's just as much part of cricket as the "kiss my a**" statistic is in cricket: nothing. Tell me, how is strike rate part of the rules of cricket?

Lol sematics again.

Its a recognized cricket statistic.link

Just accept you did not know Strike Rate existed for Bowlers, opened your big mouth with that thinking and got busted.

 

[53fd]

And the fumble continues.....

If it exists, its a part of "recognized" cricket statistics (Link) I love your fumbling and the way you are groping in the dark for justifying it based on semantics.

Accept that before half an hour you did not know that there was Strike Rate for bowlers too and move on

ps:- Look for Q McMillan who played test cricket in 1929-1932.

Lol sematics again.

Its a recognized cricket statistic.link

Again, tabulating results from different parameters do not make those parameters a part of that game

A parameter/statistic only gives you an explanation for things that are part of the game, the parameter/statistic itself is not a part of the game. You just don't get it

 

[53fd]

Lol sematics again.

Its a recognized cricket statistic.link

Just accept you did not know Strike Rate existed for Bowlers, opened your big mouth with that thinking and got busted.

You still haven't convinced me how the 'strike rate' is the part of the game, or the 'rules of the game', as you mentioned before. Why did you think the 'strike rate' is a rule of cricket? Why didn't you know that the strike rate was only used as a statistic after the 70s, not before that?

 

[Bhairava]

Again, tabulating results from different parameters do not make those parameters a part of that game

A parameter/statistic only gives you an explanation for things that are part of the game, the parameter/statistic itself is not a part of the game. You just don't get it

Shout from the rooftops - but the underline is half an hour ago you did not know there exists a thing called Strike Rate for bowlers.

What are you yelling at ?

You still haven't convinced me how the strike rate is the part of the game, or the 'rules of the game', as you mentioned before. Why did you think the 'strike rate' is a rule of cricket?

Lol I dont need to convince anything to anyone , especially one who thought there was no such thing as a Strike Rate for bowlers and one who though Sanga is a specialised opener before being busted on both claims. .

 

[53fd]

Lol I dont need to convince anything to anyone , especially one who thought there was no such thing as a Strike Rate for bowlers and one who though Sanga is a specialised opener before being busted on both claims. .

I never said Sangakkara was a specialized opener. I claimed he had opened before many times. But I understand that English isn't your strong point, considering the fact that you think the 'strike rate' is an important rule & part of the game. You still haven't told me why knowing the strike rate is important in understanding how the game is played? I'm waiting

 

[Bhairava]

I never said Sangakkara was a specialized opener. I claimed he had opened before many times. But I understand that English isn't your strong point, considering the fact that you think the 'strike rate' is an important rule & part of the game. You still haven't told me why knowing the strike rate is important in understanding how the game is played? I'm waiting

Lol a person with GRE 1490 if he is called weak in English, I dont know who is strong in that !!!

Accept you don't know that a Strike Rate for bowlers existed and it was me who taught you that and just move on.

Its such a basic thing that even 5th or 6th grade kids who watch cricket know that it exists.

Instead of waiting go and watch some cricket - you might get to know.

 

[53fd]

Shout from the rooftops - but the underline is half an hour ago you did not know there exists a thing called Strike Rate for bowlers.

'Strike rate' does not impact the way the game is played, just like the "kiss my a**" statistic does not impact the way cricket is played. Hence, both the 'strike rate' or 'kiss my a**' are not part of the game.

P.S 'kiss my a**' statistic in test matches is defined as how many overs are left before the day ends.

 

[Bhairava]

'Strike rate' does not impact the way the game is played, just like the "kiss my a**" statistic does not impact the way cricket is played. Hence, both the 'strike rate' or 'kiss my a**' are not part of the game.

P.S 'kiss my a**' statistic in test matches is defined as how many overs are left before the day ends.

There are no recognized statistics as listed by cricket staticians for kissing your arse.

But there exists a recognized one called Strike rate for bowlers and I have already provided you the link.

Even Wisden - the Bible of Cricket lists Strike rate for bowlers.

Its not about its importance, but about its very existence that betrayed your ignorace about cricket.

 

[53fd]

Lol a person with GRE 1490 if he is called weak in English, I dont know who is strong in that !!!

Accept you don't know that a Strike Rate for bowlers existed and it was me who taught you that and just move on.

Its such a basic thing that even 5th or 6th grade kids who watch cricket know that it exists.

Instead of waiting go and watch some cricket - you might get to know.

Why don't you admit that you never knew that Sangakkara has opened for his team in the past, instead of coming up with lame excuses? Why don't you admit you never knew there was no such thing as 'strike rate' before the 70s?

 

[Bhairava]

Why don't you admit that you never knew that Sangakkara has opened for his team in the past, instead of coming up with lame excuses? Why don't you admit you never knew there was no such thing as 'strike rate' before the 70s?

There exists now for he past 40 years and I knew it.Heck even an amateur in cricket will know it. You did not before half an hour before getting busted. That's the difference.

Sanga as opener - Dravid kept wickets for 5 years. Was he a keeper then ? Hell no. *facepalm*

 

[53fd]

There exists now and I know it. You did not before half an hour before getting busted. That's the difference.

Cricket was played before the 70s as well, without the 'strike rate' statistic. Meaning it is not part of cricket. The fact that I didn't know about bowling statistic is irrelevant.

 

[53fd]

There exists now for he past 40 years and I knew it.Heck even an amateur in cricket will know it. You did not before half an hour before getting busted. That's the difference.

Sanga as opener - Dravid kept wickets for 5 years. Was he a keeper then ? Hell no. *facepalm*

Yes, when Dravid was the keeper for 5 years, he was the keeper.

You're essentially saying that when Dravid kept wickets for India for 5 years, he was not the keeper

 

[Bhairava]

Cricket was played before the 70s as well, without the 'strike rate' statistic. Meaning it is not part of cricket. The fact that I didn't know about bowling statistic is irrelevant.

Your lack of knowledge about it shows how much you knew about cricket in the past 40 years.

And don't try to wriggle - you said plainly and clearly Strike Rate is only for Batsmen and they DON'T exist for bowlers. A claim that busted how much you know about cricket.