England claiming to rate Ashes ahead of WC is 'sour grapes': Sidhu

[Sledger]

Lol.

So another Espn comment from the controversial pundit. Harsha Bhogle asked Simon Hughes why England had underachieved in WCs since '92 (prior to which their record was vey good). He was somewhat blasé and replied that while they hadn't performed late the people of England don't consider the WC as big a deal as test matches. He said the Ashes was the pinnacle and England had won. He was about to expand on the topic at which point Navjot interrupted and said it was just sour grapes because England had been poor of late.

The show was quickly drawn to a conclusion with a somewhat tense atmosphere. Hughes wasn't looking too impressed. :)))

[emclub]

Pure pawnage thank you Sidhu, You tha man

[Rana]

Spot on Sidhu!

[sh47]

I remember reading an article from either the telegraph or guardian the title was 20 reasons why the ashes is better and more important then the world cup and i think it was after england had retained the ashes in australia

[Khan6575]

Agree with Sidhu on this.

Good for him for speaking his mind, no matters how outrageous he sounds at times at least he is entertaining unlike others who just follow the "code" and repeat the same bull.... over and over.

[AfghanCricketFan]

maybe now the Admins will read my sig

[cricwiz]

Wow whats happening today??????????

First ICC makes right move in removing De Silva as Umpire from important matches...

Now Sidhu surprisingly talking sense...

Suraj kahin maghrib se tu nahi nikal aya aj?

[AfghanCricketFan]

Wow whats happening today??????????

First ICC makes right move in removing De Silva as Umpire from important matches...

Now Sidhu surprisingly talking sense...

Suraj kahin maghrib se tu nahi nikal aya aj?

and Canada makes 77 in pp vs Aus:yk

[Rana]

Wow whats happening today??????????

First ICC makes right move in removing De Silva as Umpire from important matches...

Now Sidhu surprisingly talking sense...

Suraj kahin maghrib se tu nahi nikal aya aj?

Whats next, ICC forcing an india v pak final in lahore?

[hasanmehmoodkhan]

sidhu strikes again.we really need a sidhu smiley

[Inswinger]

What's gotten into Sidhu? He's actually talking sense!

[Rana]

What's gotten into Sidhu? He's actually talking sense!

He has always been talking sense, just acting immature.

[Inswinger]

He has always been talking sense, just acting immature.

Comparing the Bangladeshi cricket team to cockroaches isn't talking sense.

[Rana]

Comparing the Bangladeshi cricket team to cockroaches isn't talking sense.

To you it might not be.

[Inswinger]

To you it might not be.

So, to you it is?

[freelance_cricketer]

Moment of brilliance from the genius :sidhuism

[*sallu*]

Sidhu talks correctly for once

And I concur, we need a Sidhu smiley now

http://cricketnow.in/wp-content/uploads/2006/12/navjot-singh-sidhu.jpg

[Amir]

For once he is spot on. I don't buy this whole Ashes is bigger so we don't care rubbish. The Ashes has been around for a long time and they performed well in the WC before. So why all of a sudden stop after 92? Did the Ashes get bigger after losing for 20 years to the Aussies?

They do care, whether they are willing to admit it or not.

[freelance_cricketer]

I think Sidhu really deserves a smiley, will always be handy :D

I suggest this one-

[Dr Khan]

I still think England can go a long way in this WC.

[161 KPH]

I would agree with him on this. There is far too much emphasis put on the ashes by the English, suggesting that it is the pinnacle is laughable. Tbh i've never liked Simon Hughes either.

[Rana]

So, to you it is?

I didnt say it is, some may dis-agree with what he said, many might have agreed.

[saeed-sohail]

Ashes will never beat the world cup.I hope test championship comes sooner so we can get rid of this ashes is bigger then anything else nonsense.

[asdf0045]

The cricketing world doesn't revolve around the English, there's more important events than the Ashes

[Munda Pakistani]

Please, no Sidhu smiley.

I still remember him and Harsha before the 2003 WC Ind-Pak match discussing how the Pakistani team kept fighting amongst themselves because Pakistan was a tribal society. Disgraceful stuff, would never be allowed in a civilized country.

In any case, he hasn't done anywhere near enough to deserve a smiley. As far as I can tell even Lawson and Dwyer don't have smilies and they really deserve one.

[Sledger]

Personally, I don't think any murderer deserves a smiley but, hey, I'm just funny like that.

[emclub]

Personally, I don't think any murderer deserves a smiley but, hey, I'm just funny like that.

It was an accident :sidhu

[s2k]

Ashes bigger than WC......lol India vs Pakistan is bigger than the Ashes...

[Down2Earth]

for once he got something right

[Ashraful_Rox]

It's bigger for the English fans, just like how Eid is special for us Muslim and Diwali for Hindus, simple.

[Down2Earth]

It's bigger for the English fans, just like how Eid is special for us Muslim and Diwali for Hindus, simple.

?????????????????????????? :))) :))) :)))

ALL teams participate in the world cup. where did you come up with that example from? :))) :danish

[Khan6575]

It's bigger for the English fans, just like how Eid is special for us Muslim and Diwali for Hindus, simple.

Comparing a sport event to religious holidays :))) you have the same mindset as M Ashraful hence the failure to differentiate.

[Ashraful_Rox]

Never question a fan of Ashrsfool :inti

[Riff]

First sensible comment from Sidhu this WC

[Khan6575]

Never question a fan of Ashrsfool :inti

:)) Learned my lesson. Thank you.

[Strike!]

I think Hughes is right, The English just don't care about the cricket world cup as much as they do about the ashes.

[farazaidi]

It was the case few years ago but not anymore. I remember watching Stuart Broad interview before the Ashes last year and he was very upbeat about their resurgence in ODIs and their chances in WC'11. He was very clear in that interview that while Ashes is important, nothing beats a WC victory. May be its the effect of T20 WC'10? :afridi

Sidhu being Sidhu once again interrupted his fellow commentator to remind the world what an idiot he really is

[AZ]

I think Hughes is right, The English just don't care about the cricket world cup as much as they do about the ashes.

indeed, Sidhu is wrong to write it off as sour grapes.

yes its easy to say that now since England are struggling, but its more than that, definitely.

[acewings]

Personally, I don't think any murderer deserves a smiley but, hey, I'm just funny like that.

Sorry, might be totally out of it, but what do you mean murderer?

[AZ]

maybe now the Admins will read my sig

none of these people will ever get a PP smiley.

[Amir]

I think Hughes is right, The English just don't care about the cricket world cup as much as they do about the ashes.

No doubt Ashes is bigger. Just like any match involving us and India is bigger than Pakistan playing anyone else. HOWEVER, does it mean I don't care when we win or lose vs New Zealand? No, I do care. Regardless of form of the game, I want Pakistan to win.

However, they use it as an excuse to hide behind why their team is underperforming. That is what really gets under my skin. If it is not important why participate? I am sorry, I don't see how the Ashes has an impact on the one day game and England performed in the prior World Cups when the Ashes existed, so whats the difference now?

Furthermore, what does the public's view matter on the Ashes or WC? They are not the ones playing, its the team that is playing. Unless he is insinuating these players don't care and essentially not doing their job as a professional. Just face the music and admit your team has holes rather than blame oh the Ashes this and we don't care about it. You do care, otherwise you wouldn't have such devoted coverage to it. All rubbish from Hughes.

[Amir]

indeed, Sidhu is wrong to write it off as sour grapes.

yes its easy to say that now since England are struggling, but its more than that, definitely.

Because that is what ti is. When they were winning the T20 it was because of their flexible batting line up, top notch fielding standards and good bowling. Now when they losing its cause we got the Ashes so who cares!!! Despite the fact it is the same players and they are just out of form and sucking.

Sour grapes indeed.

[AZ]

this reasoning has been around for ages, its not anything new.

[farazaidi]

Who says they rate Ashes ahead of the WC? most of the pundits in this thread wouldnt even have watched the show. Hughes was talking about a perception

[SameerP]

lmao at Ashes ahead of WC, for once I agree with Sidhu. When Australia held the Ashes for over 16 years and England never won I guess the Ashes didn't matter back then, sore losers.

[Pakistani93]

First sensible comment from Sidhu in his life

fixed

[saamry]

hmm, to be fair. The answer depends on who you ask.

Pakistani would be happy to simply would have beaten India even if if Pak lose WC where i remember Indian fans being very happy in 92 when Pak won the WC but they did lose to India.

[percyman]

It true that both the English cricketers as well as fans rate " Ashes" something very superior to " world cup" . I have many English friends and all of them were really excited about Ashes , there were regular discussions over everyday's play during the Ashes however I dont see anyone among them talking about the world cup which clearly indicates to me that they arent remotely bothered about whats going on . A few English friends of mine are already putting there status on FB as " xyz days to go for the cricket season to start , Cant wait" . Looks like they dont care about the cricket thats going on now and want the summer to start.

[donsrk]

Yeah English did brag a lot about Ashes and put a lot of focus their and now the team is not doing well..

[AZ]

Who says they rate Ashes ahead of the WC? most of the pundits in this thread wouldnt even have watched the show. Hughes was talking about a perception

its quite clear, English cricket fans clearly prefer winning the Ashes to the World Cup.

[NO 1 AFRIDI FAN]

LOL, I never thought the day would come when Sidhu would be right!

[Pakistani93]

Sorry, might be totally out of it, but what do you mean murderer?
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2006-12-01/india/27814663_1_navjot-singh-sidhu-justices-mehtab-singh-gill-murder-case

[KingKhanWC]

He is right but not entirely. He doesn't understand WHY England fans rate the Ashes more. To many of them it's proper cricket for a start. The one day game isn't nearly as popular as test cricket in England.

Others do use this as an excuse when England are doing badly.

Sidhu forgot to mention the colourful pjyma bore of the IPL is also watched more than the World Cup in India.

[AfghanCricketFan]

none of these people will ever get a PP smiley.

you will be responsible for death of my cells :akhtar

[sa88]

Wow whats happening today??????????

First ICC makes right move in removing De Silva as Umpire from important matches...

Now Sidhu surprisingly talking sense...

Suraj kahin maghrib se tu nahi nikal aya aj?

Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

[Cpt. Rishwat]

It's Sidhu and the Indians who have got things out of proportion. Living in England, I can vouch for the fact that for the English, the Ashes is far more important than any other cricket game. Usually other series are seen as practice events for the real deal.

I respect this viewpoint actually. Indians could have had their own "Ashes" against Pakistan but preferred to use the game as a political weapon for the last 20 years and effectively destroy the game as a regional event. Ironically they have to pay ridiculous sums to English and Australian players to entice them to reluctantly play in their over-hyped IPL tournament which has lost a massive viewer base by excluding Pakistani players.

Rather than snipe at England and Australia for maintaining cricket as a spectator sport in countries which don't even consider it the major sport - in England anyway - Sidhu and his countrymen might want to consider what they could have done better.

[Levity]

The timing of this comment is impeccable

[Dr. Khan]

I do not like Sidhu at all and will not comment on what he said.

But how can the English rate Ashes ahead of the WC, as they have never won the WC and would not know what it is like.

What I am trying to say is that had they experienced winning both, then they could come out with a statement as to why one is better than the other.

[ShaunMarshRules]

You certainly wouldn't hear an Australian team saying the WC victories of 99,03 and 07 were second prize for them. Those wins were a major part of their hegemony and legendary run in world cricket.

If they don't win the WC for 10-20 years though, and win a few Ashes, you might hear them change their tune. I wouldn't call it sour grapes on the part of the English, more that it's hard to have much interest in a department your team is desperately mediocre at.

[SameerP]

It's Sidhu and the Indians who have got things out of proportion. Living in England, I can vouch for the fact that for the English, the Ashes is far more important than any other cricket game. Usually other series are seen as practice events for the real deal.

I respect this viewpoint actually. Indians could have had their own "Ashes" against Pakistan but preferred to use the game as a political weapon for the last 20 years and effectively destroy the game as a regional event. Ironically they have to pay ridiculous sums to English and Australian players to entice them to reluctantly play in their over-hyped IPL tournament which has lost a massive viewer base by excluding Pakistani players.

Rather than snipe at England and Australia for maintaining cricket as a spectator sport in countries which don't even consider it the major sport - in England anyway - Sidhu and his countrymen might want to consider what they could have done better.

Was Ashes so important to England when they didn't win a single one for 16 years and Australia held it for 16 years?

[Cosmic]

england had already win cup whats a big matter.....

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Was Ashes so important to England when they didn't win a single one for 16 years and Australia held it for 16 years?

Yes. Anyone who read the English press regularly would confirm it I am sure. In fact I would suggest that the India/Pakistan rivalry in cricket was commented on more in cricket media circles in the English press than India v England.

The fact of the matter is no one in England really cares about Indian cricket unless they are paid a lot of money to take an interest.

Which significant English cricketer would play in the IPL unless he was offered stupid money? Name me one.

[Amir]

It's Sidhu and the Indians who have got things out of proportion. Living in England, I can vouch for the fact that for the English, the Ashes is far more important than any other cricket game. Usually other series are seen as practice events for the real deal.

I respect this viewpoint actually. Indians could have had their own "Ashes" against Pakistan but preferred to use the game as a political weapon for the last 20 years and effectively destroy the game as a regional event. Ironically they have to pay ridiculous sums to English and Australian players to entice them to reluctantly play in their over-hyped IPL tournament which has lost a massive viewer base by excluding Pakistani players.

Rather than snipe at England and Australia for maintaining cricket as a spectator sport in countries which don't even consider it the major sport - in England anyway - Sidhu and his countrymen might want to consider what they could have done better.

That is great and all but what does the public's perception have anything to do with how the English team performs in the one-day arena? The Ashes was always important, yet they lost it for 16 years....indicating the public has no bearing on how the team plays.

I really would like to ask Mr. Hughes, how the publics perception affects the teams performance. These guys are professionals, they have a job to do.

[sid81]

Which significant English cricketer would play in the IPL unless he was offered stupid money? Name me one.

its not just English, no significant "International" Player would play in IPL, if not for the stupid money.

[sid81]

hmm, at last sidhu comes up with a meaningful quote. i was disappointed with the quote on bangla team..

[Kriketer]

Something sane finally said by the joker Sidhu.

England whining about no care limited over is nothing but sour grapes.

Go ask Aussies, they used to or still rate all their games be Ashes, Test, ODIs very highly. They take each game seriously and that's why they were/are so dominant b/c they care and play with the mindset to only beat the opponent.

England in easy terms is just not good enough for limited over cricket, though they have been improving.

[Cpt. Rishwat]

That is great and all but what does the public's perception have anything to do with how the English team performs in the one-day arena? The Ashes was always important, yet they lost it for 16 years....indicating the public has no bearing on how the team plays.

I really would like to ask Mr. Hughes, how the publics perception affects the teams performance. These guys are professionals, they have a job to do.

I'm struggling to understand how that is even relevant to what I have said. Yet you are a self proclaimed POTW and QOTW winner so maybe the fault lies with me.

[GOAT]

Yet you are a self proclaimed POTW and QOTW winner so maybe the fault lies with me.

I don't think he awards those to himself.

[justarslan]

Bitter English.

[Cpt. Rishwat]

I don't think he awards those to himself.

I can only assume you narrowed down to that minuscule technicality to avoid addressing the actual issue being discussed.

Good job.

[GOAT]

Eh? I don't really care what the English people want to give priority to. You'd have a point if I was engaged in a discussion here but that was my first post here so that doesn't work. No need to be so defensive, your post had false information and I corrected it.

Maybe next time you want to be witty, you'll check twice :).

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Eh? I don't really care what the English people want to give priority to. You'd have a point if I was engaged in a discussion here but that was my first post here so that doesn't work. No need to be so defensive, your post had false information and I corrected it.

Maybe next time you want to be witty, you'll check twice :).

If you aren't engaged in a discussion and only want to focus on one singular point why have you said you "don't really care what the English people want to give priority to"?

Since the quote you have picked up on didn't even mention English people?

Either engage properly or stay out. Don't play games, people aren't so stupid they can't read between the lines.

[Khan6575]

Cpt. Rishwat

Mate can I ask you question?

I will ask anyways, why are you so upset?

Now I know you will give me lecture on staying on topic and tell me how bad my post is but its a serious question, maybe you are coming across as grumpy and in reality you might be a very fun loving person. Just want to clarify.

[GOAT]

If you aren't engaged in a discussion and only want to focus on one singular point why have you said you "don't really care what the English people want to give priority to"?

Since the quote you have picked up on didn't even mention English people?

Either engage properly or stay out. Don't play games, people aren't so stupid they can't read between the lines.

Did someone pee in your cereal this morning?

Don't ever tell me where or what to post again. Last I checked, this was a forum on the internet and my comments were well within boundaries.

You clearly have some deep seated psychological issues you need to get checked out. No need to get this mad over a minor post.

But anyways, to please Cpt. Stick-up-his-***

The English and Aussies can say whatever they want but the pinnacle of cricket remains the WC. I wouldn't say its quite sour grapes but definitely it points to a lack of interest or popularity of cricket in England.

[munna_]

this is perhaps the first time im liking something coming out of the mouth of sidhu :D

we definitely shud have his smiley now!

[munna_]

well i have always had this question in my mind .. that who exactly follows ashes religiously?
there is a big percentage of people of both those countries who don't have cricket as their first love of sports... neutrals are partially interested.. people in subcontinent and middle east don't compromise on their sleeps to watch it!
on the other hand, WC has proved time n again that it attracts people towards cricket from all playing nations... people adjust their routines according to the schedules... the buzz and interest is definitely a lot more... n there are many other factors too that prove WC is the ultimate thing in cricket ...
India Pakistan series comes next without any arguments!
ashes might be third in ranking .. which recently has been given a tough competition by India Australia series

[James]

Capt. Rishwat is your man as usual. People born and raised in England fully recognise and understand the preference - for test cricket and the Ashes over the World Cup - because they tend to believe in two very important things: (It is up to you whether or not your find these points agreeable).

First - that test cricket is the gold standard of cricket. ODI cricket comes nowhere close.
Second - that ODI cricket is ODI cricket is ODI cricket. Even if there's a World Cup trophy up for grabs, teams still have to play jamodis to win.

To be honest, unlike, say, cricket fans from the subcontinent, English fans take cricket with a pinch of salt anyway, and would not care what anybody thinks of how they set out their priorities. This is why their cult of fans is so loyal to the game, and applauds quality cricket in all its forms - because we realise it is just a game of competition and banter, not a spur to make bitter remarks and an excuse to burn effigies.

[umerz]

Saw that live. It was totally hilarious.

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Did someone pee in your cereal this morning?

Don't ever tell me where or what to post again. Last I checked, this was a forum on the internet and my comments were well within boundaries.

You clearly have some deep seated psychological issues you need to get checked out. No need to get this mad over a minor post.

But anyways, to please Cpt. Stick-up-his-***

The English and Aussies can say whatever they want but the pinnacle of cricket remains the WC. I wouldn't say its quite sour grapes but definitely it points to a lack of interest or popularity of cricket in England.

Ironic how you and Khan6765 are accusing me of getting mad yet it is you guys who are resorting to personal insults :91:

Try to wrap your heads around this....no one is insulting the world cup. and I'm not saying I personally believe the Ashes is more important. I'm just saying that's how it is in England. Don't take it personally.

[asifp]

well I work in London and no one really seems to care about the cricket world cup at all.

Some of the people actually cared about the Ashes

[Robert]

Lol.

So another Espn comment from the controversial pundit. Harsha Bhogle asked Simon Hughes why England had underachieved in WCs since '92 (prior to which their record was vey good). He was somewhat blasé and replied that while they hadn't performed late the people of England don't consider the WC as big a deal as test matches. He said the Ashes was the pinnacle and England had won. He was about to expand on the topic at which point Navjot interrupted and said it was just sour grapes because England had been poor of late.


Sidhu clearly does not understand English people very well.

It's not sour grapes - we just don't really care about the that much WC. As whippy points out it's more JAMODI, if more important than a three-match ODI series between two nations.

[161 KPH]

The people more then likely don't but surely it's a sorry excuse to suggest that that is the reason for their recent failings at the world cup.

I haven't seen the programme myself so can someone just clarify if he was just referring to the fans not considering it a big deal or was he including the players aswell?

[malakian]

For me, i just think test cricket is miles better than anything else.

[Robert]

I haven't seen the programme myself so can someone just clarify if he was just referring to the fans not considering it a big deal or was he including the players aswell?

The team and management prepared meticulously for the Ashes for about 18 months in advance. Everyone knew exactly what they were doing, had a bowling and a batting plan against every oppponent.

Then they arrived at the WC having apparently done no homework at all, and making team choices that made no sense whatsoever.

What does that suggest to you?

[shan]

Excuses by England fans nothing else. But you just have to see last wicket in todays macth that English team do care about WC.

[James]

The Ashes is the most important thing in cricket to the vast majority of England fans as a result of a very straightforward piece of logic:

Test cricket is the purest and most challenging form of cricket. It is the gold standard in every way - physiologically, psychologically and traditionally. English fans are knowledgable, sharp, patient and relaxed enough to realise this.

Then you have the Ashes. You're unlikely to find many Pakistan fans, especially those that live outside of England and Australia, who can truly understand what it the Ashes means to both English and Australian fans. The colonial and historical context of this rivalry is immense, and inescapable to the English and the Australians before a ball has even been bowled.

It's a simple equation really. Greatest format of cricket to England fans + Greatest rivalry in cricket to England fans = Greatest form of cricket to England fans.

For the record, I'm absolutely loving this World Cup.

[ads101]

I haven't seen the programme myself so can someone just clarify if he was just referring to the fans not considering it a big deal or was he including the players aswell?

The team and management prepared meticulously for the Ashes for about 18 months in advance. Everyone knew exactly what they were doing, had a bowling and a batting plan against every oppponent.

Then they arrived at the WC having apparently done no homework at all, and making team choices that made no sense whatsoever.

What does that suggest to you?
This is why I'd hate England to win the world cup. I just don't think it means so much to them than other nations. I would have loved Bangladesh to have gone through.

I hated the build up for the ashes. It meant a lot of the series were seen as unimportant. All through the Pakistan and England series, they were talking about the ashes. Which undervalues the series.

Quite frankly winning the world cup for England is much harder than winning the ashes. Ashes they had about a 1 in 2 chance this time.

If the ashes were created now, it would be blasted. It's snobby. England and Australia talk about it being the pinnacle of cricket. How can it be the pinnacle of cricket, when most nations (including the strongest nations) aren't in it? Only England and Australia are able to reach the pinnacle of cricket. The ashes should just be a friendly rivalry. They should focus on it just before it takes place. The whole reason the ashes was created was it was between the two strongest teams and oldest teams, England and Australia. They aren't the strongest teams anymore.

They need to create a test championship. England seem to care more about the ashes than even the no.1 test ranking. That'd change if this championship was introduced.

[Sledger]

I haven't seen the programme myself so can someone just clarify if he was just referring to the fans not considering it a big deal or was he including the players aswell?

Simon Hughes was referring to England's attitude to cricket in general, I guess all-encompasing of both the public and the team. Sidhu just continued/interrupted the point.

[ads101]

The Ashes is the most important thing in cricket to the vast majority of England fans as a result of a very straightforward piece of logic:

Test cricket is the purest and most challenging form of cricket. It is the gold standard in every way - physiologically, psychologically and traditionally. English fans are knowledgable, sharp, patient and relaxed enough to realise this.

Then you have the Ashes. You're unlikely to find many Pakistan fans, especially those that live outside of England and Australia, who can truly understand what it the Ashes means to both English and Australian fans. The colonial and historical context of this rivalry is immense, and inescapable to the English and the Australians before a ball has even been bowled.

It's a simple equation really. Greatest format of cricket to England fans + Greatest rivalry in cricket to England fans = Greatest form of cricket to England fans.

For the record, I'm absolutely loving this World Cup.
The ashes may have been the greatest rivalry in cricket but it isn't anymore. For 20 years, Australia dominated it pretty much. There was no real rivalry. Yes there was talk, but it wasn't close Australia were simply by far the stronger teams.

It has now quite frankly just turned in to a contest of mid ranked teams. And the display of cricket from a neutral observer wasn't the best. There's little wonder why as a neutral observer, SA vs India was more entertaining. They're the strongest teams in cricket and the quality of cricket on show was a lot higher.

If both these teams want to focus their whole efforts on the ashes, they're going to suffer in other formats/series. What's the point of playing a whole season of cricket, all those different formats of cricket, if all they care about is the ashes. Might as well just practice until the ashes every year if they feel like that.

[James]

Like I said, you can see it in as rudimentary a context as makes you happy, but you'll never understand the cultural phenomenon of the Ashes and the aura of the urn, and your words are nothing in the face of 130 years of a rivalry that has so often been the lifeblood of the game of cricket.

[freelance_cricketer]

England doesn't prove anything in world cricket by winning an Ashes which i currently rate below at least three other test series which are India-RSA, India-Australia, RSA-England respectively in terms of quality of cricket.

Performance in ICC tournaments gives the best indication of where you stand in cricket.
England is a top side currently, and that was proved by their World T20 win in West Indies last year and not by any of their bilateral series performances.

Had they not won that tournament i wouldn't be rating them at all even if they had won Ashes 5-0.

[James]

They need to create a test championship. England seem to care more about the ashes than even the no.1 test ranking.

This is also complete and utter tosh, I'm afraid. The very first thing the England team set their sights on after winning 3-1 in Australia (an incredible feat) was the top ranking, as you will know if you did your research before posting. Andrew Flower and Andrew Strauss will not rest until the top ranking in test cricket is achieved, or at least until they've given it their absolute best shot.

[James]

Had they not won that tournament i wouldn't be rating them at all even if they had won Ashes 5-0.

England have beaten Australia in 3 test series in 6 years, including once against the greatest team of all time, and then once away, winning three tests by an innings. If India had achieved even a shred of what England have achieved against Australia over the last 6 years in test cricket, we'd never hear the end of it from the Indians.

[161 KPH]

I am born and bred in England and it does mean a massive amount to the English however it really annoys me when I hear people talking about it as the pinnacle of cricket, it's all fine and dandy having your rivalry test series which is of significant value to yourself and the other participating team but don't suggest that it is the absolute highest standard of cricket. This year both sides were mid table or thereabouts in the test rankings.

[ads101]

Like I said, you can see it in as rudimentary a context as makes you happy, but you'll never understand the cultural phenomenon of the Ashes and the aura of the urn, and your words are nothing in the face of 130 years of a rivalry that has so often been the lifeblood of the game of cricket.
I do understand it, but I've always thought it's unfair on other nations. What essentially the ashes was, was a battle between the big boys of cricket. They could get away with it then, because they were essentially the stronger teams. Any country can now become the strongest. Every country now has a fair chance. Before cricket was only really properly established in those countries. That's not the case now.

Sometimes things in the past are history. You have to let them die. I don't think these Ashes contests are anywhere near the spectacle they used to be all those years ago. The contest is just going to get worse and worse. Unless Australia and England suddenly become by far the two strongest teams again (not just one of them). Which is unlikely. It's always going to be now a stronger team thrashing a weaker team, or a mid level contest.

What it should be is a friendly rivalry. Nothing less, nothing more.

[ads101]

This is also complete and utter tosh, I'm afraid. The very first thing the England team set their sights on after winning 3-1 in Australia (an incredible feat) was the top ranking, as you will know if you did your research before posting. Andrew Flower and Andrew Strauss will not rest until the top ranking in test cricket is achieved, or at least until they've given it their absolute best shot.
But the thing they set their eyes on very first was the ashes. Only afterwards did they say they will target the no.1 ranking.

Media and fans alike in general, will care more about the ashes next year than the no.1 ranking. The build up of the next ashes will start soon after the world cup I bet.

Other teams in general would have set their targets first on that no.1 ranking, then look to win enough series to get there. Let's say if India lost to West Indies on their way to the no.1. Would it matter? If England had lost to Australia on their way to no.1 would that matter? The first wouldn't so much, the second definitely would. England has always cared more about the ashes than even the no.1 ranking. Which isn't right for world cricket. They rate the ashes above the no.1 ranking. That's the problem. I'm not saying they don't care about the no.1 ranking. But it's second to the ashes.

[freelance_cricketer]

England have beaten Australia in 3 test series in 6 years, including once against the greatest team of all time, and then once away, winning three tests by an innings. If India had achieved even a shred of what England have achieved against Australia over the last 6 years in test cricket, we'd never hear the end of it from the Indians.

That is OTT comment Whippy, you need to check Australia's record against all teams in last decade and you will see India has done better. I am not going there, because my point was currently i rate England , much because they proved in World T20 that they can win an ICC tourney.

Its an absolute necessity for any team to called one of the better ones.

Pakistan epitomizes that, they don't win a lot of bilateral series but they have this ability to win any ICC tournament which is the reason why you never write them off

[GOAT]

England doesn't prove anything in world cricket by winning an Ashes which i currently rate below at least three other test series which are India-RSA, India-Australia, RSA-England respectively in terms of quality of cricket.


You're giving your side too much credit there. None of those series have anything special about them, the best series are and will always be:

India vs. Pakistan
Australia vs. England

The 'quality' of cricket you mention can tapper off pretty easily between those sides, especially SA and India. The quality isn't anything special either; its more so about Steyn trying to destroy your top 6 and vice versa than anything else.

[Masterji]

Ashes will never beat the world cup.I hope test championship comes sooner so we can get rid of this ashes is bigger then anything else nonsense.

Just a pointless statement, if the English don`t rate the WC because they enjoy, both players and spectators, the ashes more then you want to stop that.
It is fact, that the WC is treated like the Carling cup, with disdain. I work with young kids and there is no excitement or care for the WC. Most of them don`t even know it is going on. I guarantee if England get knocked out, Strauss`s house will not be burned down and he can return safely home. BTW i enjoy the ashes more than the WC. The only match worth waiting for is India and Pakistan.

[percyman]

India vs. Pakistan



Please dont flatter yourself , Pakistan is not an exciting test side in world cricket anymore .

[GOAT]

Please dont flatter yourself , Pakistan is not an exciting test side in world cricket anymore .

Look here, if you want to continue your troll like comments feel free to go over to ICF. Be a constructive part of the community or don't.

[freelance_cricketer]

You're giving your side too much credit there. None of those series have anything special about them, the best series are and will always be:

India vs. Pakistan
Australia vs. England

The 'quality' of cricket you mention can tapper off pretty easily between those sides, especially SA and India. The quality isn't anything special either; its more so about Steyn trying to destroy your top 6 and vice versa than anything else.

My assumption was based on the tight battles the teams have had in last few years and the quality of cricket in those series and not on the history between the teams.

[Masterji]

I am born and bred in England and it does mean a massive amount to the English however it really annoys me when I hear people talking about it as the pinnacle of cricket, it's all fine and dandy having your rivalry test series which is of significant value to yourself and the other participating team but don't suggest that it is the absolute highest standard of cricket. This year both sides were mid table or thereabouts in the test rankings.

It is the pinnacle of cricket for the English and Aussie players. Long may it continue.

[Sledger]

That's a mere matter of preference.

Neither are India, apart from when gifting Steyn wickets. That is, unless you consider 600 v 600 games 'exciting'

[GOAT]

My assumption was based on the tight battles the teams have had in last few years and the quality of cricket in those series and not on the history between the teams.

But history is what makes contest! English and Australian fans can back me in saying that what makes their contest special is due (partly) to the centuries of rivalry they enjoy.

Same goes for Pakistan vs. India. As much we pretend not to, the political and social elements of our past are as much on the field as our players are. Who really cares about India vs. SA or Pakistan vs. SL 5-10 years from now? Their might be memorable series and personal contests, but nothing that would be on par with the Ashes or Pak/India IMO.

[Masterji]

I am also confused, why do people want England to care about something they don`t care about.

[James]

But the thing they set their eyes on very first was the ashes. Only afterwards did they say they will target the no.1 ranking.

Media and fans alike in general, will care more about the ashes next year than the no.1 ranking. The build up of the next ashes will start soon after the world cup I bet.

Other teams in general would have set their targets first on that no.1 ranking, then look to win enough series to get there. Let's say if India lost to West Indies on their way to the no.1. Would it matter? If England had lost to Australia on their way to no.1 would that matter? The first wouldn't so much, the second definitely would. England has always cared more about the ashes than even the no.1 ranking. Which isn't right for world cricket. They rate the ashes above the no.1 ranking. That's the problem. I'm not saying they don't care about the no.1 ranking. But it's second to the ashes.

They had to win the series in Australia as convincingly as possible as a stepping stone to the number 1 ranking. Andrew Flower is not a small-minded Englishman like many of us are, he is a highly professional and somewhat ruthless Zimbabwean, which is just what English cricket needed. He is always looking ahead, and the ultimate goal of his position as Team Director (not 'coach', remember - Flower is something greater) was always to return England to the top. He took the job to make the side he runs the best in the world, and that was always going to include winning the Ashes, as well as everything else. Heck, he delivered the Twenty20 World Cup barely a year into his tenure - no other England chief has ever brought home an ICC trophy.

[James]

But history is what makes contest! English and Australian fans can back me in saying that what makes their contest special is due (partly) to the centuries of rivalry they enjoy.

Same goes for Pakistan vs. India. As much we pretend not to, the political and social elements of our past are as much on the field as our players are. Who really cares about India vs. SA or Pakistan vs. SL 5-10 years from now? Their might be memorable series and personal contests, but nothing that would be on par with the Ashes or Pak/India IMO.

Spot on.

[freelance_cricketer]

Look its the choice of English people and you can't tell them to think differently.

Just that your worth is proved by your performance in ICC tournaments and not by Ashes results.
Any English fan disagrees?

[James]

Look its the choice of English people and you can't tell them to think differently.

Just that your worth is proved by your performance in ICC tournaments and not by Ashes results.
Any English fan disagrees?

Your worth is proved by your performance across all cricket. In the past 2 years, England have beaten Australia home and away in tests, beaten Pakistan 3-1 in tests and 3-2 in ODIs; we have also tied 1-1 with SA away in tests, beat SA 2-1 away in ODIs, got to the semis of the Champions Trophy, and won the Twenty20 World Cup, amongst other successes.

Success is defined by everything good that you do. Success is not only measured by the Ashes, but neither is it measured only by performance in ICC tournaments. If it was measured only by the latter, India would be jiggered.

[freelance_cricketer]

Your worth is proved by your performance across all cricket. In the past 2 years, England have beaten Australia home and away in tests, beaten Pakistan 3-1 in tests and 3-2 in ODIs; we have also tied 1-1 with SA away in tests, beat SA 2-1 away in ODIs, got to the semis of the Champions Trophy, and won the Twenty20 World Cup, amongst other successes.

Success is defined by everything good that you do. Success is not only measured by the Ashes, but neither is it measured only by performance in ICC tournaments. If it was measured only by the latter, India would be jiggered.

There lies the difference in ideoligies then about which we can't do anything. I like to believe that a good side is one that turns up big in ICC tournaments. #1 test rank doesn't satisfy me, i want ICC trophies

[SameerP]

If England win the world cup( extremely unlikely) then they will brag about it all day and will say it's the most important thing, but if they lose which they most likely will then they will just say the Ashes is more important. If Australia wins the next Ashes then once again it won't be important. Australia held the Ashes for so many years it wasn't even funny but now that England has it all of a sudden it's so important to them now.

[James]

The Ashes was always of huge importance to England fans even when they were losing.

[Robert]

[QUOTE=Robert;3594929]

If the ashes were created now, it would be blasted. It's snobby. England and Australia talk about it being the pinnacle of cricket. How can it be the pinnacle of cricket, when most nations (including the strongest nations) aren't in it? Only England and Australia are able to reach the pinnacle of cricket. The ashes should just be a friendly rivalry. They should focus on it just before it takes place. The whole reason the ashes was created was it was between the two strongest teams and oldest teams, England and Australia. They aren't the strongest teams anymore.


Only Aussies and English people can understand this: even if we were the two weakest sides in cricket (which was possibly the case in 1987) the Ashes is still the most important competition.

The Aussies will probably win WC11 and yet they would give it back in a heartbeat if that meant they could recover the Ashes.

[Robert]

Australia held the Ashes for so many years it wasn't even funny

And that burned us up inside for eighteen long, dark years. That was why there was a huge parade for Vaughan's boys in 2005.

[KingKhanWC]

[QUOTE=ads101;3595028]

Only Aussies and English people can understand this: even if we were the two weakest sides in cricket (which was possibly the case in 1987) the Ashes is still the most important competition.

The Aussies will probably win WC11 and yet they would give it back in a heartbeat if that meant they could recover the Ashes.

Sure and it is a very important series for the survival of test cricket, long may it continue.

However the English fans need to understand becoming the best and dominating like West Indies and Australia is when a team will be respected as a great team not by winning a bilateral series.

[James]

Sure and it is a very important series for the survival of test cricket, long may it continue.

However the English fans need to understand becoming the best and dominating like West Indies and Australia is when a team will be respected as a great team not by winning a bilateral series.

They do understand how to become the best side. Beating Australia home and away is a great start, and a tie away with SA was a reasonable result. England are playing Sri Lanka, India and South Africa at home over the next 18 months, and should be visiting Sri Lanka and the UAE (to play Pakistan) as well. Everybody in the set-up knows that there has to be a lot of good cricket played over the next 18 months to win often enough to become number 1. So I don't really see how or why people find a problem with our approach.

[gsivak]

I can understand Englands fascination with the Ashes but the funny thing is, though the Aussies clearly rate the Ashes highly, they have always displayed a clear interest and ability in winning other tournaments too. Eng at last has a team which can do more than win the Ashes so their fans should start expecting more from their team.

[Robert]

However the English fans need to understand becoming the best and dominating like West Indies and Australia is when a team will be respected as a great team not by winning a bilateral series.

Of course KK and we want to get consistently better than India (not so hard because their big stars will retire soon) and SA (harder because they have Steyn and Morkel).

[James]

I can understand Englands fascination with the Ashes but the funny thing is, though the Aussies clearly rate the Ashes highly, they have always displayed a clear interest and ability in winning other tournaments too. Eng at last has a team which can do more than win the Ashes so their fans should start expecting more from their team.

This brings me to another point.

Everyone always talks about England's interest in the Ashes with jealousy and resentment, but the Ashes is massive in Australia too. They build up to it and talk about it as much as we do, if not more. The attendances for England's tour this winter were massive, and the buildup was even greater! Every test series played by Australia before the Ashes was talked of by Ponting, Clarke and Watson as a buildup to the Ashes. This season will always be viewed as one of the darkest for Australian cricket in recent memory no matter what happens in the World Cup, because they got destroyed in the Ashes.

Australia have won many 50-over world cups. That's amazingly consistent and brilliant, of course. But they've simply always had a really good ODI team with really good ODI players. Of course they were going to win.

'Australia express more of an interest across the three formats and I will generally brown-nose them for no reason'. eh. It amuses me that people have already forgotten that we won the T20 World Cup. By beating a load of good teams, and then in the final we beat, er...Australia! Thrashed them actually. Clearly none of our effort goes into anything except the Ashes!!

England are now a better test and T20 team than Australia in general, yet we only care about the Ashes. Lol.

[ads101]

I can understand Englands fascination with the Ashes but the funny thing is, though the Aussies clearly rate the Ashes highly, they have always displayed a clear interest and ability in winning other tournaments too. Eng at last has a team which can do more than win the Ashes so their fans should start expecting more from their team.
The aussies in general although they do rate the ashes, have definitely seemed to give importance to limited overs and to tournaments. Which I like. The English in this world cup quite frankly were under prepared. They put all that planning into the ashes. They sidelined this word cup to some degree.

I don't like England's mentality to cricket. The whole limited overs doesn't matter, tests do is crap. It's all about the ashes. It's why they haven't won a world cup or had poor success in tournaments/ limited overs. The Aussies in that 18 year stretch were focusing on dominating every format, winning world cups, winning test series away from home. England were planning on how to just get the ashes back. This world cup should be a statement, something to prove to all other nations of cricket. Fans and the players should care about it. The amount of effort required to organise it, the tons of people watching. This is cricket's global event. This should be huge to both the players and the fans. Yet in the past, all england have cared about is the ashes. All the media seem to care about just that. When England won the t20 world cup, the media didn't really even seem to give a damn.

Flower in general is changing English cricket. He's trying to make england competitive in all formats, and try and win these tournaments. That's a good thing.

The measure of success of a team is dominating other countries by winning test (and perhaps even ODI) series against lots of countries, and winning tournaments. Not one contest between two countries.

[James]

It's not hard to 'place great emphasis on ODI cricket' and 'set an example in tournaments' when you consistently produce players as good as McGrath, Warne, Lee, Hussey, Waugh, Bevan, Gilchrist, Ponting yadda yadda yadda.

[ads101]

This brings me to another point.

Everyone always talks about England's interest in the Ashes with jealousy and resentment, but the Ashes is massive in Australia too. They build up to it and talk about it as much as we do, if not more. The attendances for England's tour this winter were massive, and the buildup was even greater! Every test series played by Australia before the Ashes was talked of by Ponting, Clarke and Watson as a buildup to the Ashes. This season will always be viewed as one of the darkest for Australian cricket in recent memory no matter what happens in the World Cup, because they got destroyed in the Ashes.

Australia have won many 50-over world cups. That's amazingly consistent and brilliant, of course. But they've simply always had a really good ODI team with really good ODI players. Of course they were going to win.

'Australia express more of an interest across the three formats and I will generally brown-nose them for no reason'. eh. It amuses me that people have already forgotten that we won the T20 World Cup. By beating a load of good teams, and then in the final we beat, er...Australia! Thrashed them actually. Clearly none of our effort goes into anything except the Ashes!!

England are now a better test and T20 team than Australia in general, yet we only care about the Ashes. Lol.
Australians are at fault too.

But in general they've given a lot more focus to other formats than England. I'm a big fan of Flower, he started to turn this side into a better test side as well as other formats. He kicks out guys who aren't performing, and is more ruthless in selection. He's also more committed to getting no.1 ranking to than previous coaches. It's good that he's changing england in this way. He's not content with just the ashes. A lot of fans and generally in the past, England has been.

Australia are a good limited overs team because they work hard at that format. Arguably a lot of their batsmen these days actually look more like limited overs batsmen than test. Which is a bit of a problem.

As I said I don't mind the ashes being a friendly rivalry. Just like if India-Pakistan played, the seats would be full. Just that it doesn't overpower everything else. It's just a series against two countries just like everything else. England focused far much on the ashes than the world cup. Which is wrong. The ashes quite simply should have got the same amount of focus as a normal test series should have got.

[James]

Please separate the issue of ODI and T20 cricket, you keep saying LOI cricket. England are more than sorted for T20 cricket!!

[ads101]

It's not hard to 'place great emphasis on ODI cricket' and 'set an example in tournaments' when you consistently produce players as good as McGrath, Warne, Lee, Hussey, Waugh, Bevan, Gilchrist, Ponting yadda yadda yadda.
disagree.

Australia are still producing quality ODI players such as Watson, Tait, Johnson, Callum Ferguson etc. Guys more suited to limited overs.

They are obviously putting focus on ODIs. One of the reasons why they were not good at T20 for a while, is that they didn't focus on them much. When they decided to do so and tailor their team for T20s they did very well at the world cup.

[James]

Beating Australia 3-1 away, by an innings 3 times, which has hardly if ever been done in the history of the universe.
Go out in the knockout stages of the world cup as always.

Which series deserved more focus? Which is a bigger achievement?

ODIs are ODIs are ODIs. The world cup is a series of ODIs. Test cricket is the real cricket. Massive test series wins are celebrated and remembered just as much as anything else.

[KingKhanWC]

They do understand how to become the best side. Beating Australia home and away is a great start, and a tie away with SA was a reasonable result. England are playing Sri Lanka, India and South Africa at home over the next 18 months, and should be visiting Sri Lanka and the UAE (to play Pakistan) as well. Everybody in the set-up knows that there has to be a lot of good cricket played over the next 18 months to win often enough to become number 1. So I don't really see how or why people find a problem with our approach.

I think it comes from the previous Ashes victory in 05 when England went over the top in celebrations but this time they will keep their feet on the ground and look to move up the rankings to become the no.1 test team. At present England and South Africa are the two teams who have the best approach, players and facilities to become a dominant no.1 team and good luck to them.

Of course KK and we want to get consistently better than India (not so hard because their big stars will retire soon) and SA (harder because they have Steyn and Morkel).

Agree. England have a lot more backup this time round with an excellent squad but must win in Asia. If you can win in Sri Lanka and India next time round it will give the team a massive boost for the no.1 spot.

[James]

I think it comes from the previous Ashes victory in 05 when England went over the top in celebrations but this time they will keep their feet on the ground and look to move up the rankings to become the no.1 test team. At present England and South Africa are the two teams who have the best approach, players and facilities to become a dominant no.1 team and good luck to them.

2005 was a long time ago. Different players, different coach, differently mentality. England fans and the world of cricket remembers that series fondly but they have moved on from it, so maybe the jealous foreign fans should accept that this is 2011 and things have changed. Not saying you are one of these fans at all mein freund, but there are enough out there to irritate me.

[Khan6575]

Sorry for this interruption, I just want to make a very important announcement......................

JAMES TREDWELL is the best spinner in the world. oldstaaa beauty.


Thank you for your attention.

[Hasnain_786]

whoever thinks ashes is bigger than the CWC is just an idiot

[James]

whoever thinks ashes is bigger than the CWC is just an idiot

ta love.

[gsivak]

This brings me to another point.

Everyone always talks about England's interest in the Ashes with jealousy and resentment, but the Ashes is massive in Australia too. They build up to it and talk about it as much as we do, if not more. The attendances for England's tour this winter were massive, and the buildup was even greater! Every test series played by Australia before the Ashes was talked of by Ponting, Clarke and Watson as a buildup to the Ashes. This season will always be viewed as one of the darkest for Australian cricket in recent memory no matter what happens in the World Cup, because they got destroyed in the Ashes.

Australia have won many 50-over world cups. That's amazingly consistent and brilliant, of course. But they've simply always had a really good ODI team with really good ODI players. Of course they were going to win.

'Australia express more of an interest across the three formats and I will generally brown-nose them for no reason'. eh. It amuses me that people have already forgotten that we won the T20 World Cup. By beating a load of good teams, and then in the final we beat, er...Australia! Thrashed them actually. Clearly none of our effort goes into anything except the Ashes!!

England are now a better test and T20 team than Australia in general, yet we only care about the Ashes. Lol.

True, the recent performance of England makes our allegation sound unfair. You wouldn't find Aussie team, press or fans offer Ashes as an excuse for poor performance or preparation for other tournaments. England till recently have done that. This year has been different, I must admit.

[KingKhanWC]

2005 was a long time ago. Different players, different coach, differently mentality. England fans and the world of cricket remembers that series fondly but they have moved on from it, so maybe the jealous foreign fans should accept that this is 2011 and things have changed. Not saying you are one of these fans at all mein freund, but there are enough out there to irritate me.

lol. No I understand where you are coming from. Yes it's a totally different England set up now with Flower. Duncan Fletcher was good but his replacment Peter Moores took the team backwards imo. Luckily KP had a bust up with him and he was removed in time.

How long to do you think Flower will stay? A change of coach wouldn't help things imo.

[TheHulk]

Sorry for this interruption, I just want to make a very important announcement......................

JAMES TREDWELL is the best spinner in the world. oldstaaa beauty.


Thank you for your attention.

Are you stupid, Tredwell has just started playing internationl cricket. i am lurk a lot and this is the most stupid post ever.

[Khan6575]

Are you stupid, Tredwell has just started playing internationl cricket. i am lurk a lot and this is the most stupid post ever.

I knew it, I just knew that people would be jealous of this proclamation. Bhai facts are facts you cannot hide them. Get with the business.

[James]

Flower has delivered some marvellous things. He'd have to totally bomb in test cricket in the next 2 years and/or have a rubbish 2015 WC for them to actually dispose of him.

After 2005, Fletcher had taken us about as far as he could. This is why he rapidly passed his sell-by date afterwards. You don't get that feeling with Flower in 2011. His work is just beginning.

Right now, it looks Flower will have the job as long as he wants it. Andrew Strauss can be captain for as long as he wants too.

[ads101]

I knew it, I just knew that people would be jealous of this proclamation. Bhai facts are facts you cannot hide them. Get with the business.
man I agree with you.

Can't believe some people think Tredwell isn't the best spinner in the world. Some guys have got no knowledge of cricket whatsoever.

Heard this Swann guy is ok. Not as good as Tredwell. When Tredwell retires in 10 years, maybe we can perhaps give this guy the role of Premier spinner in the team, rather than just being back up for Tredwell. I know he's not half the spinner Tredwell is, but hey you have to make the best with what you've got.

[Khan6575]

Delete plz

[ads101]

Goodness sake, I was just joking with Whippy, RELAX people. Don"t take everything so seriously. Man, a lot of people have deficiency in sense of humor and sarcasm. Really bad mix.
I was just joining in on your joke :D

[Khan6575]

I was just joining in on your joke :D

OUCH MY BAD..................:))

You sounded so serious. I should give that advise to myself now.

[Pathan_007]

Sorry for this interruption, I just want to make a very important announcement......................

JAMES TREDWELL is the best spinner in the world. oldstaaa beauty.


Thank you for your attention.

:))) He really is class.

[ads101]

OUCH MY BAD..................:))

You sounded so serious. I should give that advise to myself now.
So you thought I was being sarcastic in a way to damn/insult you as I actually believed that you though Tredwell was the best spinner? Nah, I was just joining in with your bit of fun, when I saw the Hulk's post. Couldn't believe anyone would take your post seriously :)))

Guess my post did look a bit like that. I didn't mean too sorry. I guess sarcasm is a difficult game on the internet. Maybe I went a bit overboard with it :)))

No hard feelings :D

[Khan6575]

So you thought I was being sarcastic in a way to damn/insult you as I actually believed that you though Tredwell was the best spinner? Nah, I was just joining in with your bit of fun, when I saw the Hulk's post. Couldn't believe anyone would take your post seriously :)))

Guess my post did look a bit like that. I didn't mean too sorry. I guess sarcasm is a difficult game on the internet. Maybe I went a bit overboard with it :)))

No hard feelings :D

No, your post was well within the limits if anyone has to be sorry its me. It was completely my fault to take your post seriously. Can you blame me tough after what Mr hulk had written :))