Symonds Vs Flintoff
Printed From: Cricket World
Category: Letter To The Editor
Forum Name: Cricket World Ratings
Forum Discription: Who is the Most Valuable Player?
URL: http://www.cricketworld.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1304
Printed Date: 25 May 2013 at 2:12am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.71 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Symonds Vs Flintoff
Posted By: Boony06
Subject: Symonds Vs Flintoff
Date Posted: 23 March 2006 at 10:36am
|
Alright this is to settle this discussion once and for all, i say Symonds very slightly as wickets are not that important in a One-Day International, its about economy. Symonds is the better batsman, and wateva Symonds loses to Flintoff in the bowling department he makes up for it in the field. ------------- In memory of Malcolm Denzil Marshall 1958-1999 The greatest fast bowler in Test Cricket history. |
Replies:
Posted By: ANIL KUMBLE
Date Posted: 23 March 2006 at 10:45am
|
od say in odis symonds tests flintoff overall flintoooff for sure ------------- Check out my blog http://crictopia.blogspot.com/ pretty bad though... |
Posted By: cricket_mstr
Date Posted: 23 March 2006 at 11:01am
|
Symonds: Pro's The best super hitter in cricket, handy bowling in both forms, excellent fielding Con's Bad defensive game, no sign of good test batting Flintoff: Pro's Handy batting, should rank up their in the Top 3 bowlers in the world Con's Fielding no where as good as Symonds, Not as good hair do as Symonds ------------- Cricket watcher but tennis player :) |
Posted By: Clobber
Date Posted: 23 March 2006 at 11:05am
|
Posted By: ANIL KUMBLE
Date Posted: 23 March 2006 at 11:13am
|
------------- Check out my blog http://crictopia.blogspot.com/ pretty bad though... |
Posted By: ANIL KUMBLE
Date Posted: 23 March 2006 at 11:16am
|
flintooof good fielder good batsmen very good bowler ------------- Check out my blog http://crictopia.blogspot.com/ pretty bad though... |
Posted By: Clobber
Date Posted: 23 March 2006 at 11:19am
| Flintoff is an exceptional fielder - one of the best slip catchers in the game and an extremely powerful arm when fielding in the deep |
Posted By: jumbo
Date Posted: 23 March 2006 at 12:09pm
|
recent form it has to be flintoff.the way he batted and bowled against the indians i think he is the best. there is no match for him at the present. he was cool in his approach. the way he bowled the bouncers, he has exceeded my expectations. |
Posted By: Sledger
Date Posted: 23 March 2006 at 1:26pm
Succinctly put Jumbo. Just ask yourself a simple question , who do you want bowling 10 overs and batting when it matters? Easy answering that , isn't it? ------------- Mental disintegration works for me !! |
Posted By: flipper
Date Posted: 23 March 2006 at 3:50pm
|
I think Andrew Symonds is an awesome player and I have to add, one of my favourite players. I'm sorry but you can't put him in the same league as 'freddie'. You think that 'pig mullet' looks great? you can't be serious?
------------- Warwickshire County Cricket, Edgbaston Birmingham England. County Champions 2012 |
Posted By: jumbo
Date Posted: 23 March 2006 at 4:13pm
|
freddie was awesome in the tests. it looked as if he wasn't putting any efforts. he bowled as if he was bowling to me the indian batsmen were completely fooled by his bouncers |
Posted By: warnester
Date Posted: 23 March 2006 at 4:27pm
| freddie no doubt about it. he is too impressive and consistent with the ball and bat where symonds is wild and is inconsisent with his scores. |
Posted By: minimurali
Date Posted: 23 March 2006 at 4:38pm
|
I hate to admit it but I'm going with Symonds. In ODIs he is exceptional and although Freddie wins hands down on tests, its Symmo for me in ODIs I'm afraid. ------------- County Sim on extended break until I've got less work and more free time. When I have a specific date, I'll post it in the thread. |
Posted By: crick
Date Posted: 23 March 2006 at 5:17pm
| i think symonds, mainly becuase flintoff has had a few years at test level to get the feel of it, whereas symonds hasnt quite got there yet, but with regard to odi's symmonds is definately the better of the 2 |
Posted By: DRAVID FAN
Date Posted: 23 March 2006 at 9:23pm
|
I would go for Freddy because I don't like Symonds, and Flintoof ahs been in the team for almost all the matches. Symonds is not taken for all matches. Plus he is a smoother player. More dangerous. More famous and popular. ------------- |
Posted By: henjam
Date Posted: 23 March 2006 at 10:17pm
| Freddies bowling is much better in both forms, i would put freddy over symonds batting wise in both forms, symonds better fielder, but something that is huge is that what do these players bring to their teams! Symonds brings no way near what freddy does to england, he is the heartbeat of the england team. |
Posted By: flipper
Date Posted: 23 March 2006 at 10:23pm
|
Nice post, good points. ------------- Warwickshire County Cricket, Edgbaston Birmingham England. County Champions 2012 |
Posted By: daisy77
Date Posted: 23 March 2006 at 11:02pm
|
I would definately go with Freddi. I can tell you one thing they both have in common though------ they were both born in England Symonds is a great player though but I just prefer Freddi compared to him...no offense. ------------- |
Posted By: crownmethod
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 3:08am
|
I think Freddie is better than Symonds because Freddie can play well in both ODI and Test. Symonds can only play well in ODI. And the only thing Symonds can do is slog. Freddie can protect his wicket, and slog. The only thing Symonds is better at is fielding. ------------- |
Posted By: abubakar52
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 3:33am
| I think Flintoff is better. |
Posted By: ANIL KUMBLE
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 3:49am
|
symmo in odis freddy in tests but if u had to pick flintoff for sure ------------- Check out my blog http://crictopia.blogspot.com/ pretty bad though... |
Posted By: MiNiWaRnEy
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 4:49am
Why?? You never elaborate AK...what is your reasoning to this..I am not disagreeing with you, but why do you think so and so is better in this and so and so is better then that.
Some details buddy  ------------- |
Posted By: RightHandBat
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 5:03am
Symonds doesn't slog. They're all proper cricket shots. |
Posted By: Boony06
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 5:06am
No offense mate but i think both players are even in how dangerous they are, Symonds can turn a match with batting, fielding and on the odd occasion with bowling, and Flintoff with the bat and ball. You say that Flintoff is more popular, well there are not a lot of people in Australia who dislike Andy Symonds he is probobably the most liked cricketer in Australia, Flintoff the most liked in England, You cant compare. ------------- In memory of Malcolm Denzil Marshall 1958-1999 The greatest fast bowler in Test Cricket history. |
Posted By: abubakar52
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 5:07am
| I think Freddie is a better all-rounder he ranks 2nd for best test all-rouners and he is also 2nd for Odi allrounders |
Posted By: MiNiWaRnEy
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 5:21am
|
Who's first?? Sobers is first in tests, what about ODI's? ------------- |
Posted By: abubakar52
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 5:25am
|
Im speaking of current best here is the list for current best all-rounder in ODI's i think its up to date
1 Shaun Pollock SA 2 Andrew Flintoff ENG 3 Andrew Symonds AUS 4 Irfan Pathan IND 5 Shoaib Malik PAK |
Posted By: MiNiWaRnEy
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 5:29am
|
Symonds is 3rd and those rankings do not indicate how excellent his fielding is, all the remarkable catches, run outs and saved runs.
Symonds is the most popular cricketer in Australia at the moment along with Hussey..do not say Freddy has a great deal more popularity..he has little here in Australia, but a lot in many other places. ------------- |
Posted By: Boony06
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 5:32am
|
Phil Tuffnell Is pretty popular in Australia ------------- In memory of Malcolm Denzil Marshall 1958-1999 The greatest fast bowler in Test Cricket history. |
Posted By: ANIL KUMBLE
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 5:32am
|
abdul razzaq is a better all rounder then malik,hes a good all rounder but razzaq is one of the best in odis ------------- Check out my blog http://crictopia.blogspot.com/ pretty bad though... |
Posted By: ANIL KUMBLE
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 5:33am
|
phil tuffnel is a ***ka did u see that vidoe on allan border medal night he was ****ing off all the players ------------- Check out my blog http://crictopia.blogspot.com/ pretty bad though... |
Posted By: abubakar52
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 5:37am
|
Answer To MiniWarnney: Yes you are right they do not indicate any performance but bowling averages and batting averages not even strike rates,wickets,fielding etc..
Answer To AK: You are right Razzaq is a better all-rounder but as I said erlier this list is only upon Averages in that malik is higher. |
Posted By: MiNiWaRnEy
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 5:38am
The best thing AK has said on this forum to date... You should be supporting the Aussies, with that sort of language you pass up as one anyday.  ------------- |
Posted By: Sledger
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 5:38am
|
The rankings are gimmicky and seem to influence the younger members of this forum.
Personally I make my own mind up , masses of data give an incite to how a player has performed , but nothing at all on his INFLUENCE in the matches. If a batsman averages in the high 50's and the team hasn't the time to bowl the opposition out , doesn't that detract from his stats?? The answer is NO - the numbers are set in stone irrespective of the results. Stats are useful , but don't let them or the ratings cloud your own judgement of a player. ------------- Mental disintegration works for me !! |
Posted By: abubakar52
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 5:40am
Thanks for the advice but don't stats tell how the player performs and how the player performs is how good he is. Correct? |
Posted By: MiNiWaRnEy
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 5:42am
MALIK defiately started of as an off spinner who could bat alright...since getting called for a suspect action, and the gettting selected just for his batting becasue he was not allowed to bowl hos batting has dramatically improved.
Abdul's bowling has lost that zip about it just like Kallis (cept Kallis averages 55+).. He has the prerequisite of all Paki quicks and that is reverse swing..His batting is getting better though but needs some refinements, he would not get into the Paki team on only his bowling anymore, and his batting alone would not get him into the team. His batting, bowling and decent fielding compliment each other. ------------- |
Posted By: Boony06
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 5:44am
|
The stats used may also reflect the teams in which the players are opposing, for example, Sri Lanka play Bangladesh a lot therefore giving the players more oppurtunities against weak batting, bowling and fielding sides, no offense to Bangladesh, come 2031 World Cup they'll be undefeated champions ------------- In memory of Malcolm Denzil Marshall 1958-1999 The greatest fast bowler in Test Cricket history. |
Posted By: MiNiWaRnEy
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 5:44am
Dead right and well put out..I have sort of been trying to say that because a lot of the guys that are younger or new to the game focus too much on stats and do not know how good/bad they actually are. ------------- |
Posted By: MiNiWaRnEy
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 5:45am
|
Stats at times mean nothing or very little. Look at Ponting or Warne's stats, they have barely player or played no games versus Zimbabwe and Bangladesh. Since Bangladesh came into tests Murali's stats have improved dramatically. ------------- |
Posted By: ANIL KUMBLE
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 5:47am
|
true he has taken about 120 test wickets against them 2 teams ------------- Check out my blog http://crictopia.blogspot.com/ pretty bad though... |
Posted By: Sledger
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 5:47am
They don't tell all the story. For instance if Shaun Pollock's figures in the test today read either... 18-6-31-0 or& nbsp; 18-0-68-2 which is better? Taking wickets is vital in tests , but what's to say he didn't beat the bat 6 or 7 times and went wicketless (0-31) and the 2-68 were gifted wickets from poor balls and even worse shots? The same with batting - a batsman might make a seriously streaky 90-odd (Hayden at Newlands!) or a delightful 30 before getting a jaffa! Over an entire career , these things tend to level out , but that doesn't detract from the fact that figures can be very deceptive. ------------- Mental disintegration works for me !! |
Posted By: MiNiWaRnEy
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 5:48am
|
Streaky 90...c'mon matey. It was gritty in my book and was matchwinning, a very patient inning. ------------- |
Posted By: Sledger
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 5:51am
Just a wind up mate!!!  He's definitely changed his approach to batting and it's paying dividends now. I hope he goes back to his old biffing approach , come November!!------------- Mental disintegration works for me !! |
Posted By: MiNiWaRnEy
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 5:55am
|
Yeh he has incredible power, and his old style was to dominate and he was actually scoring very quickly. His new style is definately very reliable and efficient. ------------- |
Posted By: Guyon FitzMiles
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 6:18am
|
so whats your thoughts on the second test? ------------- Aussie my foot!!!! |
Posted By: cricket_mstr
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 10:37am
|
Symonds is the best fielder in the world at the moment, equal with Ponting. If you say Flintoff is good in slips and has a good arm. I've never seen Symonds have a ping at the stumps and miss. From about 30 metres away I've seen him time and time again hit the stumps accurately. Symonds can field short and deep, and also has hands that never drop catches. --- Here's some statistics for those of you that think Flintoff is a better bowler
Not much difference ------------- Cricket watcher but tennis player :) |
(ODI)Posted By: crownmethod
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 10:40am
Equal with Ponting?. No way. Ponting drops alot of catches when fielding in the slips, Symonds never drops catches. Symonds also makes those unbelievable dives to stop a ball going to the boundary, Ponting doesn't. ------------- |
Posted By: MiNiWaRnEy
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 10:40am
|
Good strike rates for both.... Symonds is definately a better one day player. In tests Flintoff has been given yrs to establish himself, Symonds hasn't..so it is tough to compare them becasue of that.
In the ratings Roy is No.4 in batting and 2 or 3 in all rounder, and those ranking do not include versatility with the ball nor fielding. ------------- |
Posted By: cricket_mstr
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 10:57am
Your right, I'd admit my favorite batsman Ponting isn't as good as Symonds in the field ------------- Cricket watcher but tennis player :) |
Posted By: MiNiWaRnEy
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 10:59am
|
PONTING...What, he has the safest pair of hands on the planet, I have seen Roy drop a couple of catches..Anyway fielding a slip is a totally different agenda, we never say RHodes field there or Roy. ------------- |
Posted By: Clobber
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 11:05am
If Symonds was as good as some people appear to think he is, he would have been given plenty of opportunities in the test side long before now |
Posted By: Clobber
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 11:07am
| Incidentally this poll has yet again been rendered useless by people messing around - Symonds has had over 50 votes in the last hour which is BS |
Posted By: MiNiWaRnEy
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 11:09am
'Tis, congrats on the 1000 posts Clobber.!! ------------- |
Posted By: crownmethod
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 11:09am
|
Thats because whoever made this post allowed people to vote more than once. ------------- |
Posted By: crownmethod
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 11:09am
|
Isn't he on 999? ------------- |
Posted By: cricket_mstr
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 11:09am
That is why us Aussies think the selectors are dam stupid. Symonds should have been in the team long ago, the same as Hussey and Hodge Clobber you can't say Hussey isn't as good as people think ------------- Cricket watcher but tennis player :) |
Posted By: MiNiWaRnEy
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 11:10am
|
Yep ------------- |
Posted By: Clobber
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 11:11am
cheers matey....I think the 1000th was in another thread and none too profound. Do I get a prize now? |
Posted By: Clobber
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 11:13am
ahhhh just cos you know I'm a big Hussey fan I suppose the difference was that there just hasn't been a slot in the batting for so long whereas all sides would be delighted to uncover a quality all rounder. |
Posted By: cricket_mstr
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 11:18am
|
Well in Flintoff's favor, Australia would never have thought how useful an alrounder can be in a match if it weren't for Andrew Flintoff. With that century and wickets to go along side, Australia were thinking "Where's our Flintoff" ------------- Cricket watcher but tennis player :) |
Posted By: MiNiWaRnEy
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 11:27am
|
It is the only thing Aust. is missing..excellent keeper/batsmen (benchmark), excellent openers, best 1st drop, strong middle order, brilliant spinner/s, excellent fast attack, best fielding side in the world...AHH VOID no classy allrounder.
Flintoff should not have got that 100, he was as PLUMB as it gets on 8 to Warne. ------------- |
Posted By: cricket_mstr
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 11:30am
|
As an Australia you can't miss Flintoff's natural skill with the bat. It would need a good ball to get him out. --- I've seen Symonds hit Doosra's and other Murali tricks for !6!. How does Flintoff go against quality bowling? ------------- Cricket watcher but tennis player :) |
Posted By: Clobber
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 11:31am
| it's in the book |
Posted By: ANIL KUMBLE
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 11:45am
|
symonds got stumped in the vb series from muralis doosra ------------- Check out my blog http://crictopia.blogspot.com/ pretty bad though... |
Posted By: MiNiWaRnEy
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 12:19pm
|
Yes, and in the next game Murali got 0 for 99 off 10 overs, he was on the receiving end from Symonds. ------------- |
Posted By: RISE_OF_MACCA
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 1:59pm
| true great to watch aswell |
Posted By: ANIL KUMBLE
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 2:06pm
|
who is macca ------------- Check out my blog http://crictopia.blogspot.com/ pretty bad though... |
Posted By: RISE_OF_MACCA
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 2:10pm
| for starters symonds doesnt slog, and he can defend when he needs to and has been in test matches so far but he has defended too much as he feels he cant play his natural game, Flintoff got hit chance as being a quality bowler how can symonds get a chance is such a great decade for australia were limited changes were made he can bat,feild and on his day bowl so symmo for odi in test flintoff but there is a little bit of time for that to change if symonds gets himself into test match mode in south africa |
Posted By: RISE_OF_MACCA
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 2:12pm
| When has symonds dropped a catch???? symonds can play attacking cricket SHOTS and slog aswell |
Posted By: Clobber
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 2:51pm
it's not too hard to figure it out |
Posted By: ANIL KUMBLE
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 2:55pm
|
symmo ------------- Check out my blog http://crictopia.blogspot.com/ pretty bad though... |
Posted By: Clobber
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 2:57pm
|
|
Posted By: RISE_OF_MACCA
Date Posted: 25 March 2006 at 2:40am
| hahahaha i wish you knew how wrong you were thats my brother and we just happen to be big symonds supporters so i aint SYMMO hahahahaha |
Posted By: saadadvanced7
Date Posted: 26 March 2006 at 8:59am
|
We beelieeeeve youuuuu!
Symonds and Flintoff are both fine all-rounders! But Flintoff has certainly done a lot more for his country so that leads me to say that he's better! |
Posted By: grotbag
Date Posted: 27 March 2006 at 4:20am
|
In Tests Flintoff is arguably the best player in the world. In last 35 tests he averages 42 with bat and about 25 with ball. Symonds isn't test quality. In odi's Flintoff is absolutely unbelievable and possibly the best in the world again. Last 50 odi's for Flintoff Mat Runs HS BatAv 100 50 W BB BowlAv 5w Ct St
|
Posted By: Sledger
Date Posted: 27 March 2006 at 10:59am
|
Freddie just gets better and better.
He probably won't have a batting average against Australia at the end of the year! ------------- Mental disintegration works for me !! |
Posted By: MiNiWaRnEy
Date Posted: 27 March 2006 at 11:46am
|
He doesn't have enough tons to prove his ability as of yet though. ------------- |
Posted By: Clobber
Date Posted: 27 March 2006 at 12:05pm
| Who doesn't have enough tons? Flintoff? |
Posted By: Sledger
Date Posted: 27 March 2006 at 2:47pm
|
Clobs , it's head in the sand stuff , isn't it!! ------------- Mental disintegration works for me !! |
Posted By: Clobber
Date Posted: 27 March 2006 at 4:04pm
| If they all pretend hard enough that he doesn't exist maybe, just maybe he might not arrive down there in November to bash them! |
Posted By: DRAVID FAN
Date Posted: 27 March 2006 at 11:32pm
|
Flintoff is leading like anything. It's kind of obvious that he is a much better player. See I had said this earlier and I'm saying it again that he is a more dangerous and a more popular and known by the whole world that he is one the greatest allrounders right now. Symonds is not known to be that dangerous. Live with the fact that Flintoff is better unless you look at it like "the England team doesn't have many good players so Flintoof stands out and is the best." " Symonds team is very good so he is overshadowed." That;s not true. Plus Flintoff's bowling is way better than Symonds anyday. ------------- |
Posted By: $uNnY
Date Posted: 28 March 2006 at 12:32am
| Andrew Flintoff |
Posted By: cricket_mstr
Date Posted: 28 March 2006 at 2:18am
|
When was the last time you say Symonds bat DRAVID FAN Obviously not for a very long time or not ever. Don't make comments if you haven't seen him play on TV because he is a mamoth of a hitter. Don't down grade Symonds because he is just a batsman and a bit of a bowler. Flintoff is a totally different category, he actually is an alrounder Although in the stats I made in the last page of this topic their bowling isn't that different Flintoff gets wickets in ODI every 5.9 overs and Symonds every 7 ------------- Cricket watcher but tennis player :) |
Posted By: Sledger
Date Posted: 28 March 2006 at 7:39am
The difference is that Flintoff knocks guys over , Symonds buys his because batsmen take him on. Those figures mean little , just stick to cricket skills and then you'll see which of the two can REALLY bowl. ------------- Mental disintegration works for me !! |
Posted By: Clapo
Date Posted: 28 March 2006 at 8:20am
|
Even as a one-eyed aussie cricket fanatic Symonds isn't a test player, thats all there is to it, and flintoff is equal with him in ODI's, seems obvious to me that freddie is better... p.s. i will delete and deny all of the above once lee, warne and co. put him back in his place in november |
Bit of a stupid comparison really...Posted By: Clobber
Date Posted: 28 March 2006 at 1:36pm
|
Clapo, I don't believe you are really an Australian - you are far too rational and open minded
|
Posted By: ANIL KUMBLE
Date Posted: 28 March 2006 at 2:04pm
|
flintoff showed today that he can bat as aggresive if not even more aggresive then symonds after smashing two 6's and a 4 in one over ------------- Check out my blog http://crictopia.blogspot.com/ pretty bad though... |
Posted By: cricket_mstr
Date Posted: 28 March 2006 at 11:13pm
|
Well thats againsnt India Symonds has smashed the English bowling line up in England, and other fast and slow bowling line ups around the world. Also Flintoff can afford to have a hit because he is a lower order batsman, Symonds can come in at No 4 and hit 6s ------------- Cricket watcher but tennis player :) |
Posted By: spin wizard
Date Posted: 29 March 2006 at 1:47am
|
you aussies are to biased, never admit that someone from another country is better but thats why there are good players from australia, they say to themselves that they can beat any team and thats why they do it cause they don't want to let their mouth down but flintoff is better than symonds, what an allrounder he is. Bettter with the ball and look better with the bat for the past 2 years, but symonds average is a little higher thats all but symonds is better in the field, what a genius. flintoff workload with the bat is much cause the english batsman are salt in india while symonds can just come in and it and get not out. ------------- In troubled times, being philosophical helps a great deal, it helps you to remain sane and not do any further damage. |
Posted By: Clobber
Date Posted: 29 March 2006 at 9:09am
you really do live in your own little fantasy world, don't you? This same Symonds who "has smashed the English bowling line up" averages 22 against England....very very ordinary |
Posted By: Sledger
Date Posted: 29 March 2006 at 9:19am
|
Now , now Clobs , don't let hard facts get in the way of good old Australian b*llocks !!! ------------- Mental disintegration works for me !! |
Posted By: RISE_OF_MACCA
Date Posted: 29 March 2006 at 9:23am
| didn't do to bad in the last tour. I thought out of everyone the english would realise how dangerous symonds is the amount of times his smashed quick tons in county. i admit symonds isn't a bowler. Although his a better batter and feilder than flintoff but alround flintoff is a better player as his not far behind in batting but symonds is a better batter than flintoff and does show control, how can you say he doesnt have control he hasnt got out from a really,really bad shot early in his innings he has when his got past the 50s twice i don't know what game yous are watching but flintoff and symonds are educated hitters its what they play cricket for and they both show the same amount of control its just whether they pick the right ball or not and im not a biased aussie i love watching both of them |
Posted By: Clobber
Date Posted: 29 March 2006 at 9:27am
| i see your use of punctuation hasn't improved yet SYMMO |
Posted By: RISE_OF_MACCA
Date Posted: 29 March 2006 at 11:45am
| ?????? sure isn't |
Posted By: cricket_mstr
Date Posted: 29 March 2006 at 1:04pm
I don't know where the magic stats come from but in the last tour of England Symonds had a good innings every match after his big night out ------------- Cricket watcher but tennis player :) |
Posted By: RISE_OF_MACCA
Date Posted: 29 March 2006 at 1:08pm
| yer only because at the start his career he went for it too early and mostly got caught out by the slow bowlers like irani and them |
Posted By: Clobber
Date Posted: 29 March 2006 at 1:46pm
|
The "magic stats" are fact as it happens - his career smashing the England bowlers reads - 23, 11, 0, 8, 0, 0, 73, 74, 29, 6, 5* oooh devastating |
Posted By: cricket_mstr
Date Posted: 30 March 2006 at 5:30am
|
I would say Flintoff is overrated as a batsman/'super hitter' and Symonds part time bowling not to be taken seriously ------------- Cricket watcher but tennis player :) |
Posted By: Clapo
Date Posted: 30 March 2006 at 9:03am
|
cricket_mst do you honestly think things through before you post.... How about just admitting that Flintoff is the better alrounder.... How can you say he is overatted as a batsman ?? your obviously did not see any of the ashes series? He was in excellent form.... As for symonds bowling, what do you mean by "Symonds part time bowling not to be taken seriously" ??? do you mean that his bowling is overrated, or that his bowling is underestimated ??? |
Posted By: Clobber
Date Posted: 30 March 2006 at 9:30am
| Thank goodness for Clapo - the voice of reason |