Ok, let's get these things straight. I never professed how good I was, just said I'd taken a few wickets. I never asked about you being a better bowler than me either, I just pointed out how it actually stands, so chin up son. I also pointed out that you've had another innings than me, and so another chance to score that 107 runs. I never said I would overtake you, but I said it was a possibility. If you hadn't had your last innings then you'd probably average less than me, wouldn't you? Your attitude is "Ifs, buts and maybes mean nothing" but maybe you should think about how you've managed to pip me. Part of me thinks that you said that is because you know that if you hadn't scored that one hundred in your last game, then you wouldn't be in front of me...
Haha. What was that you said, you'd rather have more wickets for a worse average? Contradicting yourself me thinks. But since you've decided to go down this route, have a look at how many overs you've bowled and I have too then for the sake of things, see who's the "better" economical bowler. And of course, don't forget that rankings are influenced by stats, unless you haven't realised, and according to them, I'm better than you, so I'm quite happy to say pipe down mate.
Re-read my post. I was talking about your initial post. I was talking about your attitude right up until the point you started failing. You began to get the impression you were better than you are, or at least that's how it appeared. If you take your average runs per innings and add that onto your current runs. You're behind me. That would be the fairest way to do it as that's what you score on average, you could argue you might make 107 when it's just as likely you make 0 tbh. Yeah makes sense. Take away my best performance to make yourself look better. But still, even if I'd got a duck I'd still have 2 more runs than you.
I think if you look back at the example you have me the bowler that took more wickets actually had the better average. Sort it out mate you don't even know what you're arguing anymore. **** economy for crying out load. What does it actually count for? Until you know quite how the rankings are worked out I wouldn't say they definitely make you a better bowler than me. FFS I take my wickets for less runs than you, want much else from a bowler?
Oh, so you were trying to look after me and make sure I didn't get too far ahead of myself were you? Yeah right. I never said I'd make the runs, but seeing as you were on another rant about "Ifs" and "buts" I thought I might point out that without that last innings, your stats are identical to mine with the bat pretty much, not making myself look better but getting you off your high horse that your batting is so special.
No I wasn't looking out for you, it was bugging me tbh. I was just waiting for the bubble to burst, like it inevitably would. My batting isn't special FFS. How many times do I have to say "I've been the first to admit I've been pretty poor in this." Honestly, how many times? I've been the first to criticise my own performances and then when I make 105* like I did this round it's a bit of a relief. I still don't get how taking out my best performance, just because you have managed something on that level makes any sense. Surely when comparing who is better than who you judge it on what they've managed. Else Monty Panesar is as good as Pietersen if Pietersen hadn't made all those 50s and 100s and Monty hadn't kept getting out.
Oh yes, I'm in the wrong. You said this: Would I rather a spinner that averages 40 and takes a quarter of a team's wickets or a spinner that averages 50-100 and takes 5-10% of a team's wickets. What the **** are you talking about now? I've taken more wickets than you at a worse average in the Club Comp. I argued I'd rather be averaging a little less, maybe 30-35, and be taking 1/2 wickets an innings than taking 3/4 but averaging something shit like 40 or 50. Stop contradicting yourself, take the hint and sit down.
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/bin3eB66Pd4&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/bin3eB66Pd4&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
How am I contradicting myself? I was pointing out the mistake in your example. Would I rater a bowler who takes more wickets AND for a better average or would I rather a bowler that takes less wickets for more runs... hmmm. I've never actually told you which bowler I'd prefer between one with a better average or one who has taken more wickets. It all depends on how many overs they have bowled also. In any case I'd rather the bowler with the better average. So quit trying to put words into my mouth, seriously once you have a ****ing clue what has been said by me, or you in fact yourself has said. Come back. Until then, ciao.
