Why Cricket Sucks

[lolbob_fan]

again you pick the lowest hanging fruit to argue, mallu.

 

Its obviously difficult to predict a winner in a game. but its easy to predict strategies they'll use in a game, while its in progress.

 

That's the point where I lose interest in a game. when I can predict right more than wrong.

[wololo]

Which is why I wonder..

 

at what point in time would Ricky Ponting have thought.. "enough of this shyte, I'm going home", when he was racking up centuries left and right.

 

You could say the same when his career went through a rough patch for a wee bit of time

[Guest chittimallu21]

Which is why I wonder..

 

at what point in time would Ricky Ponting have thought.. "enough of this shyte, I'm going home", when he was racking up centuries left and right.

lol you are cute.... Ricky is not even the top scorer in terms of runs/centuries .... why would he think that way? 

[Guest chittimallu21]

again you pick the lowest hanging fruit to argue, mallu.

 

Its obviously difficult to predict a winner in a game. but its easy to predict strategies they'll use in a game, while its in progress.

 

That's the point where I lose interest in a game. when I can predict right more than wrong.

 

not everyone can predict every strategy... most of them are hit and miss and you are lucky few times and are correct few other times

[wololo]

not everyone can predict every strategy... most of them are hit and miss and you are lucky few times and are correct few other times

Completely agree here. You can't just blatantly presume that all strategies are obvious to the spectators at which point the whole idea of watching any sport becomes an utter moot 

[lolbob_fan]

Wouldn't you agree on the fact that both those guys were top-notch while playing on clay courts and not on all other surfaces? Granted there are freaks out there, but not totally dominating at all the levels possible like Pete or Steffi? Not trying to disparage your comments here, BTW 

 

Pete Sampras was nowhere as dominant as the current top 4/3.

 

I also mention Gustavo Kuerten as a freak, who beat Sampras/Agassi in the year ending title championship in 2000.

 

The same guy won French Open few years back as a wildcard. and he was still picking and choosing tournaments to appear, and boycotted Wimbledon.

 

Do such things happen in Tennis now?

 

Stanislas Wawrinka's win last Aus Open was the exception.. But he's been on the fringes for far too long to be a surprise. 

 

And his game, is not freakish. Just outrageous.

[lolbob_fan]

lol you are cute.... Ricky is not even the top scorer in terms of runs/centuries .... why would he think that way? 

 

I picked Ricky Ponting, because he's from a first world country, with lots of other options to choose from.

[lolbob_fan]

Completely agree here. You can't just blatantly presume that all strategies are obvious to the spectators at which point the whole idea of watching any sport becomes an utter moot 

 

Which is what I'm saying. That cricket lost all its meaning for me.

 

we need dozen more teams to compete at the highest level.

[lolbob_fan]

Not just Kuerten.. There was Krajicek.

[lolbob_fan]

And that serving machine.. Ivanisevic.

[wololo]

Pete Sampras was nowhere as dominant as the current top 4/3.

 

I also mention Gustavo Kuerten as a freak, who beat Sampras/Agassi in the year ending title championship in 2000.

 

The same guy won French Open few years back as a wildcard. and he was still picking and choosing tournaments to appear, and boycotted Wimbledon.

 

Do such things happen in Tennis now?

 

Stanislas Wawrinka's win last Aus Open was the exception.. But he's been on the fringes for far too long to be a surprise. 

 

And his game, is not freakish. Just outrageous.

Could you care to post some stats that validate your claim on Pete? I am no big fan of his playmaking, but he did make hay when the competition was limited and ya, Gustavo won French open thrice and never won any of the other major, afair. His stamina was more in tune with clay courts and not grass or maybe Pete was better comparatively. Freak, by standards would be Roddick, Ivanesevic

 

Wawrinka isn't great here and no way would I even consider him to dole out any surprises anywhere.Now, Nishikori, I would agree

 

Rather than comparing Men's champs, it would be good to take a closer look at the current Women's side of things, which are far more interesting and exciting in every way possible 

[lolbob_fan]

Dozens of players in Chess in the 90s.. even more now.

 

ofcourse Carlsen towers above them all, but still there's lots to enjoy among competitve chess analysts, among other players.

[lolbob_fan]

Cricket's second tier is so bad, its laughable.

 

 

[Guest chittimallu21]

I picked Ricky Ponting, because he's from a first world country, with lots of other options to choose from.

 

you are wrong again... cricket is the dominant sport in Aus... they were never good at football  back in the day and are much better in the last few years by that time Ricky was already established in cricket...  

 

Aussie rules football sucks and they are terrible at rugby too.... so basically Aus is similar too in terms of sports... first world or third world doesnt even matter

[Guest chittimallu21]

Which is what I'm saying. That cricket lost all its meaning for me.

 

we need dozen more teams to compete at the highest level.

again you are looking just at the result which is a total fail... .there are many things that happen before the result which is what drives the adrenaline of the fans