Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

This is the forum for discussion of all cricketing issues and news. Here you will find frank analysis and opinion on subjects ranging from selection policies, favourite cricketers and match post-mortems right through to dressing room and cricket board fiascos.

Who is the better bowler?

Pat Cummins (poor man's Pattinson)
4
67%
James Pattinson
2
33%
 
Total votes: 6

User avatar
Katto
CF Champion
CF Champion
Posts: 14726
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 2:34 pm
Cash on hand: Locked
Reputation: 0
Tuvalu

Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Katto » Thu Sep 14, 2017 7:09 am

Who is the better bowler?

User avatar
Going South
Muppet Administrator
Muppet Administrator
Posts: 25685
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2011 6:10 pm
Cash on hand: Locked
Reputation: 0
United States of America

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Going South » Thu Sep 14, 2017 9:45 am

pat who?

User avatar
Katto
CF Champion
CF Champion
Posts: 14726
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 2:34 pm
Cash on hand: Locked
Reputation: 0
Tuvalu

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Katto » Thu Sep 14, 2017 11:10 am

Going South wrote:pat who?


I'm not sure which decade India decide to tour Australia next, but you might become acquainted then

actually I think he's on the ODI tour but he wont play many matches due to workload issues and getting right for the Ashes

User avatar
Going South
Muppet Administrator
Muppet Administrator
Posts: 25685
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2011 6:10 pm
Cash on hand: Locked
Reputation: 0
United States of America

Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Going South » Thu Sep 14, 2017 12:20 pm

5 matches 21 wickets 1 five for.
vs
17 matches 70 wickets 4 four w hauls and 4 five w hauls.

no brainer. james pattinson is the PROVEN choice who got EXPERIENCE esp when you go against #1 ranked team with strong batting lineup. rookie, go sit on bench. you get your chance later on.

User avatar
Boycs
Muppet Moderator
Muppet Moderator
Posts: 11356
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 10:32 am
Cash on hand: Locked
Bank: Locked
Reputation: 0
United Kingdom

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Boycs » Thu Sep 14, 2017 3:32 pm

Plus isn't his brother Darren Pattinson one-test-wonder?

Mick180461
CF Senior
CF Senior
Posts: 1219
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2017 1:28 am
Cash on hand: Locked
Reputation: 0
Australia

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Mick180461 » Fri Sep 15, 2017 4:55 am

Boycs wrote:Plus isn't his brother Darren Pattinson one-test-wonder?

Yes and i think the English selectors picked the wrong Pattinson, James though only 17 at that time would have still been eligible to play for England, bet if they could go back now they would.
Pattinson or Cummins I'll happily take either and we may see both yet for the 1st Ashes Tests.
Cummins did actually make his test debut before Pattinson and 4 of his 5 tests have been in the Sub Continent so his records not bad.

User avatar
Katto
CF Champion
CF Champion
Posts: 14726
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 2:34 pm
Cash on hand: Locked
Reputation: 0
Tuvalu

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Katto » Fri Sep 15, 2017 5:54 am

his record is excellent under those conditions

another example of CF members looking solely at stats and not taking into account context :nana:

User avatar
Paddles
CF Senior
CF Senior
Posts: 4104
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 9:31 am
Cash on hand: Locked
Bank: Locked
Reputation: 0

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Paddles » Fri Sep 15, 2017 6:47 am

Katto wrote:his record is excellent under those conditions

another example of CF members looking solely at stats and not taking into account context :nana:


Well lets look at the stats:

Pat Cummins averages over 30 in India.

James Patttinson averages under 27.8 in India.

Pat Cummins averages 29 in Bangladesh, against what is an improving team, still widely perceived as a one man team.

Pat Cummins has a FC average of 27, striking at 54.8 and taken 48 wickets in 13 matches with 1 five fors.
Pattinson has a FC average of 22.01, striking at 41.3 and taken 220 wickets in 51 matches with 9 five fors.

Pattinson averages 26.15 with 70 wickets at 46.8 in tests.

Pattinson performed poorly in 2013 Ashes so this year went and played FC cricket in England where he dominated, absolutely dominated and outshone team mate Stuart Broad. Pat Cummins went to the IPL.

So with the context of 5 test matches, of which Pat did star in one win, and 13 FC matches, he hasn't really done much. James Pattinson has given the likes Tendulkar a 24 run average, Sehwag 33 runs, G Smith 16.5, K Williamson 3, Dravid 10, Ross Taylor 23.33, Laxman 1.5, and contained Kohli as well at 9.0 (as did the 2017 Aussie team which Pat played in at 6.0)

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/272465.html?class=1;template=results;type=bowling;view=batsman_summary

Pat Cummins has assisted in batting greats Jadeja averaging 63, Iqbal 78, and Steyn 41 against Australia with him in the team.

So again, what has Pat Cummins done since his famous debut vs South Africa 6 years ago? 14 wickets in 4 tests at nearly 30? The only test batsmen he has dismissed twice are Rahul and Sarkar, Rahul averages over 63. Pattinson has got BMac 4 times, Dhoni, DM Bravo, Sehwag, Ross Taylor 3 times, Tendulkar, Pujara, Samuels, G Smith, Vijay, and Laxman twice.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/489889.html?class=1;template=results;type=bowling;view=batsman_summary

Pattinson's quality is proven.

Pat Cummins is far from it.

Now if you talk what you have seen over stats, I see Pattinson causing far more headaches to batsmen with his greater swing and seam movement than Pat Cummins ever causes with his extra 2km of pace sprayed around.

Pat had a fantastic debut, but he has not done anything since of any note. Not even in FC cricket.
Law 31.6 - benefit of the doubt for an dismissal appeal goes to the batsman
A third umpire call for a run out or stumping is a referral, not a review.

User avatar
Katto
CF Champion
CF Champion
Posts: 14726
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 2:34 pm
Cash on hand: Locked
Reputation: 0
Tuvalu

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Katto » Fri Sep 15, 2017 8:47 am

Paddles wrote:Pat had a fantastic debut, but he has not done anything since of any note. Not even in FC cricket.


he was injured ffs

User avatar
Paddles
CF Senior
CF Senior
Posts: 4104
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 9:31 am
Cash on hand: Locked
Bank: Locked
Reputation: 0

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Paddles » Tue Sep 26, 2017 11:19 am

Curiously on The Back Page this week, Kerry O'Keefe said that he thought not only is Pattinson a better bowler than Cummins, he'd also rather NCN (Nathan Coulter Nile) play the Ashes ahead of Pat Cummins.

His issue with Cummins? Thinks his trajectory is too flat and offers little once his pace drops.

Pat Cummins - the poor man's NCN?!

:)
Law 31.6 - benefit of the doubt for an dismissal appeal goes to the batsman
A third umpire call for a run out or stumping is a referral, not a review.

User avatar
Katto
CF Champion
CF Champion
Posts: 14726
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 2:34 pm
Cash on hand: Locked
Reputation: 0
Tuvalu

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Katto » Tue Sep 26, 2017 11:28 am

Paddles wrote:Curiously on The Back Page this week, Kerry O'Keefe said that he thought not only is Pattinson a better bowler than Cummins, he'd also rather NCN (Nathan Coulter Nile) play the Ashes ahead of Pat Cummins.

His issue with Cummins? Thinks his trajectory is too flat and offers little once his pace drops.

Pat Cummins - the poor man's NCN?!

:)


Kerry O'Keefe is your expert opinion now?
The guy is a clown.

User avatar
Bhumin
CF Regular
CF Regular
Posts: 330
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2017 11:41 pm
Cash on hand: Locked
Reputation: 0
Andorra

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Bhumin » Tue Sep 26, 2017 12:33 pm

Going South wrote:5 matches 21 wickets 1 five for.
vs
17 matches 70 wickets 4 four w hauls and 4 five w hauls.

no brainer. james pattinson is the PROVEN choice who got EXPERIENCE esp when you go against #1 ranked team with strong batting lineup. rookie, go sit on bench. you get your chance later on.


Pattinson with the bats scored 332 runs in tests but Cummins considered better batsman in Australia

I think Pattinson's international career over at tender age of 27 because his Stats poor in First class cricket plus Australian""Think Tank" Labled him,"as Injury Prone"

Go Cummins who is 24 only and better in all format with 100 international wickets,He has potential to be Australian allrounder,Not many allrounder become Man of Match in his test debut just like Cummins.
NZ batted 27 overs for their 26 (WR in Tests) all out in 1955

User avatar
Paddles
CF Senior
CF Senior
Posts: 4104
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 9:31 am
Cash on hand: Locked
Bank: Locked
Reputation: 0

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Paddles » Tue Sep 26, 2017 4:11 pm

Katto wrote:
Paddles wrote:Curiously on The Back Page this week, Kerry O'Keefe said that he thought not only is Pattinson a better bowler than Cummins, he'd also rather NCN (Nathan Coulter Nile) play the Ashes ahead of Pat Cummins.

His issue with Cummins? Thinks his trajectory is too flat and offers little once his pace drops.

Pat Cummins - the poor man's NCN?!

:)


Kerry O'Keefe is your expert opinion now?
The guy is a clown.


Dumb dumb, O'Keefe is a person, not an opinion.

What of the reasons given seems "clownish" to you?

Or will you just name call anyone with an reasoned opinion contrary to your own?
Law 31.6 - benefit of the doubt for an dismissal appeal goes to the batsman
A third umpire call for a run out or stumping is a referral, not a review.

User avatar
Paddles
CF Senior
CF Senior
Posts: 4104
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 9:31 am
Cash on hand: Locked
Bank: Locked
Reputation: 0

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Paddles » Tue Sep 26, 2017 4:13 pm

Bhumin wrote:
Going South wrote:5 matches 21 wickets 1 five for.
vs
17 matches 70 wickets 4 four w hauls and 4 five w hauls.

no brainer. james pattinson is the PROVEN choice who got EXPERIENCE esp when you go against #1 ranked team with strong batting lineup. rookie, go sit on bench. you get your chance later on.


Pattinson with the bats scored 332 runs in tests but Cummins considered better batsman in Australia

I think Pattinson's international career over at tender age of 27 because his Stats poor in First class cricket plus Australian""Think Tank" Labled him,"as Injury Prone"

Go Cummins who is 24 only and better in all format with 100 international wickets,He has potential to be Australian allrounder,Not many allrounder become Man of Match in his test debut just like Cummins.


Pattinson has much better FC bowling stats than Cummins. Pattinson also has better test batting stats and similar batting FC batting stats.
Law 31.6 - benefit of the doubt for an dismissal appeal goes to the batsman
A third umpire call for a run out or stumping is a referral, not a review.

User avatar
Katto
CF Champion
CF Champion
Posts: 14726
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 2:34 pm
Cash on hand: Locked
Reputation: 0
Tuvalu

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Katto » Wed Sep 27, 2017 1:06 am

Paddles wrote:
Katto wrote:
Kerry O'Keefe is your expert opinion now?
The guy is a clown.


Dumb dumb, O'Keefe is a person, not an opinion.

What of the reasons given seems "clownish" to you?

Or will you just name call anyone with an reasoned opinion contrary to your own?


you mean like calling you a hypocrite?

User avatar
Paddles
CF Senior
CF Senior
Posts: 4104
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 9:31 am
Cash on hand: Locked
Bank: Locked
Reputation: 0

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Paddles » Wed Sep 27, 2017 2:10 am

Katto wrote:
Paddles wrote:
Dumb dumb, O'Keefe is a person, not an opinion.

What of the reasons given seems "clownish" to you?

Or will you just name call anyone with an reasoned opinion contrary to your own?


you mean like calling you a hypocrite?


Dumb dumb, there is no hypocrisy here as you have not provided any reasonable robuttal of O'Keefe's opinion. In fact, your only robuttal was to call him 'a clown'.
Law 31.6 - benefit of the doubt for an dismissal appeal goes to the batsman
A third umpire call for a run out or stumping is a referral, not a review.

User avatar
Katto
CF Champion
CF Champion
Posts: 14726
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 2:34 pm
Cash on hand: Locked
Reputation: 0
Tuvalu

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Katto » Wed Sep 27, 2017 2:28 am

Paddles wrote:
Katto wrote:
you mean like calling you a hypocrite?


Dumb dumb, there is no hypocrisy here as you have not provided any reasonable robuttal of O'Keefe's opinion. In fact, your only robuttal was to call him 'a clown'.


How can I rebut O'Keefe's opinion when he isn't here?
Unless he's providing your opinion which seems to be the case.

Mick180461
CF Senior
CF Senior
Posts: 1219
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2017 1:28 am
Cash on hand: Locked
Reputation: 0
Australia

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Mick180461 » Wed Sep 27, 2017 2:37 am

Paddles wrote:
Bhumin wrote:
Pattinson with the bats scored 332 runs in tests but Cummins considered better batsman in Australia

I think Pattinson's international career over at tender age of 27 because his Stats poor in First class cricket plus Australian""Think Tank" Labled him,"as Injury Prone"

Go Cummins who is 24 only and better in all format with 100 international wickets,He has potential to be Australian allrounder,Not many allrounder become Man of Match in his test debut just like Cummins.


Pattinson has much better FC bowling stats than Cummins. Pattinson also has better test batting stats and similar batting FC batting stats.

Cummins has played 5 test matches, you can't use he's test record as a guide, Pattinson 17 a bit better but still not brilliant.

User avatar
Paddles
CF Senior
CF Senior
Posts: 4104
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 9:31 am
Cash on hand: Locked
Bank: Locked
Reputation: 0

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Paddles » Wed Sep 27, 2017 2:57 am

Katto wrote:
Paddles wrote:
Dumb dumb, there is no hypocrisy here as you have not provided any reasonable robuttal of O'Keefe's opinion. In fact, your only robuttal was to call him 'a clown'.


How can I rebut O'Keefe's opinion when he isn't here?
Unless he's providing your opinion which seems to be the case.


Dumb dumb, what are you on about?

I gave you the synopsis of O'Keefe's opinion. He made two key criticisms of Pat Cummins, and put him in a relative standing of quality of being behind Pattinson and NCN. Feel free to rebut the details of it, or call him a clown. But O'Keefe does not need to be a forum user to have his opinion points rebutted.

How is O'Keefe providing my opinion? O'Keefe doesn't speak for me. It is his opinion, he doesn't even work for me which even if he did wouldn't make his opinion any less his opinion and not still my own. Even if I agreed entirely with him, then we would merely be of the same opinion. You make no sense at all dumb dumb.
Law 31.6 - benefit of the doubt for an dismissal appeal goes to the batsman
A third umpire call for a run out or stumping is a referral, not a review.

User avatar
Katto
CF Champion
CF Champion
Posts: 14726
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 2:34 pm
Cash on hand: Locked
Reputation: 0
Tuvalu

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Katto » Wed Sep 27, 2017 3:04 am

Paddles wrote:
Katto wrote:
How can I rebut O'Keefe's opinion when he isn't here?
Unless he's providing your opinion which seems to be the case.


Dumb dumb, what are you on about?

I gave you the synopsis of O'Keefe's opinion. He made two key criticisms of Pat Cummins, and put him in a relative standing of quality of being behind Pattinson and NCN. Feel free to rebut the details of it, or call him a clown. But O'Keefe does not need to be a forum user to have his opinion points rebutted.

How is O'Keefe providing my opinion? O'Keefe doesn't speak for me. It is his opinion, he doesn't even work for me which even if he did wouldn't make his opinion any less his opinion and not still my own. Even if I agreed entirely with him, then we would merely be of the same opinion. You make no sense at all dumb dumb.


LOL, you've lost a wheel.

User avatar
Paddles
CF Senior
CF Senior
Posts: 4104
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 9:31 am
Cash on hand: Locked
Bank: Locked
Reputation: 0

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Paddles » Wed Sep 27, 2017 3:06 am

Katto wrote:
Paddles wrote:
Dumb dumb, what are you on about?

I gave you the synopsis of O'Keefe's opinion. He made two key criticisms of Pat Cummins, and put him in a relative standing of quality of being behind Pattinson and NCN. Feel free to rebut the details of it, or call him a clown. But O'Keefe does not need to be a forum user to have his opinion points rebutted.

How is O'Keefe providing my opinion? O'Keefe doesn't speak for me. It is his opinion, he doesn't even work for me which even if he did wouldn't make his opinion any less his opinion and not still my own. Even if I agreed entirely with him, then we would merely be of the same opinion. You make no sense at all dumb dumb.


LOL, you've lost a wheel.


Dumb dumb, 4 posts later and your only rebuttal of O'Keefe's points is to call him a clown.
Law 31.6 - benefit of the doubt for an dismissal appeal goes to the batsman
A third umpire call for a run out or stumping is a referral, not a review.

User avatar
Paddles
CF Senior
CF Senior
Posts: 4104
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 9:31 am
Cash on hand: Locked
Bank: Locked
Reputation: 0

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Paddles » Wed Sep 27, 2017 3:10 am

Mick180461 wrote:
Paddles wrote:
Pattinson has much better FC bowling stats than Cummins. Pattinson also has better test batting stats and similar batting FC batting stats.

Cummins has played 5 test matches, you can't use he's test record as a guide, Pattinson 17 a bit better but still not brilliant.


It is a small sample, but I'm using it above in part to compare to Pattinson along with further comparable statistics, quality of batsmen dismissed therein and observations. 5 tests is more than most test cricketers get and its not like after 5 tests his record is anomalous in its brilliance or awfulness. But I agree, if he keeps get selected, the small sample is subject to likely change. For better or for worse? It becomes a question of weight in a small sample of statistics. Is it negligible? Is it completely insignificant? So at best, Cummins is unproven in his quality. At worst, statistically he is not as good as Pattinson.

I think the 17 tests for Pattinson and his achievements therein, is quite enough to prove he is a high quality bowler.
Law 31.6 - benefit of the doubt for an dismissal appeal goes to the batsman
A third umpire call for a run out or stumping is a referral, not a review.

User avatar
Katto
CF Champion
CF Champion
Posts: 14726
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 2:34 pm
Cash on hand: Locked
Reputation: 0
Tuvalu

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Katto » Wed Sep 27, 2017 5:24 am

Paddles wrote:I think the 17 tests for Pattinson and his achievements therein, is quite enough to prove he is a high quality bowler.


This looks a lot like a goal post move^

User avatar
Paddles
CF Senior
CF Senior
Posts: 4104
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 9:31 am
Cash on hand: Locked
Bank: Locked
Reputation: 0

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Paddles » Wed Sep 27, 2017 7:19 am

Katto wrote:
Paddles wrote:I think the 17 tests for Pattinson and his achievements therein, is quite enough to prove he is a high quality bowler.


This looks a lot like a goal post move^


Dumb dumb, what are your reasons as to why you think this or is this just a baseless allegation? You do realise its the larger sample and therefore statistically more weighty than the Cummins' sample? You do realise the Pattinson sample contains better results than the Cummins sample? Where and how have goal posts been moved? Do you understand the goalposts shifting fallacy?

I take it from this 5th post that you won't be rebutting O'Keefe's opinion on Cummins?

So besides calling people clowns and baselessy claiming 'goal post moving' to arguments you don't like - you're not offering much reason to the discussion you supposedly wanted by authoring this thread.

Are you actually unable to make a coherent and reasonable argument dumb dumb?
Law 31.6 - benefit of the doubt for an dismissal appeal goes to the batsman
A third umpire call for a run out or stumping is a referral, not a review.

User avatar
Katto
CF Champion
CF Champion
Posts: 14726
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 2:34 pm
Cash on hand: Locked
Reputation: 0
Tuvalu

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Katto » Wed Sep 27, 2017 8:09 am

Paddles wrote:
Katto wrote:
This looks a lot like a goal post move^


Dumb dumb, what are your reasons as to why you think this or is this just a baseless allegation? You do realise its the larger sample and therefore statistically more weighty than the Cummins' sample? You do realise the Pattinson sample contains better results than the Cummins sample? Where and how have goal posts been moved? Do you understand the goalposts shifting fallacy?

I take it from this 5th post that you won't be rebutting O'Keefe's opinion on Cummins?

So besides calling people clowns and baselessy claiming 'goal post moving' to arguments you don't like - you're not offering much reason to the discussion you supposedly wanted by authoring this thread.

Are you actually unable to make a coherent and reasonable argument dumb dumb?


the irony

User avatar
Paddles
CF Senior
CF Senior
Posts: 4104
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 9:31 am
Cash on hand: Locked
Bank: Locked
Reputation: 0

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Paddles » Wed Sep 27, 2017 8:16 am

Katto wrote:
Paddles wrote:
Dumb dumb, what are your reasons as to why you think this or is this just a baseless allegation? You do realise its the larger sample and therefore statistically more weighty than the Cummins' sample? You do realise the Pattinson sample contains better results than the Cummins sample? Where and how have goal posts been moved? Do you understand the goalposts shifting fallacy?

I take it from this 5th post that you won't be rebutting O'Keefe's opinion on Cummins?

So besides calling people clowns and baselessy claiming 'goal post moving' to arguments you don't like - you're not offering much reason to the discussion you supposedly wanted by authoring this thread.

Are you actually unable to make a coherent and reasonable argument dumb dumb?


the irony


Dumb dumb, this is now 6 posts and no response to O'Keefe's view.

I take it you now realise there was no moving of the goalposts?
Law 31.6 - benefit of the doubt for an dismissal appeal goes to the batsman
A third umpire call for a run out or stumping is a referral, not a review.

User avatar
Katto
CF Champion
CF Champion
Posts: 14726
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 2:34 pm
Cash on hand: Locked
Reputation: 0
Tuvalu

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Katto » Wed Sep 27, 2017 8:21 am

Paddles wrote:
Katto wrote:
the irony


Dumb dumb, this is now 6 posts and no response to O'Keefe's view.

I take it you now realise there was no moving of the goalposts?


But there was moving of the goal posts. You attributed a view to me that I never made and an irrelevant point to the discussion.
Meanwhile it looks like you're losing the poll as we speak. Angry?

User avatar
Paddles
CF Senior
CF Senior
Posts: 4104
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 9:31 am
Cash on hand: Locked
Bank: Locked
Reputation: 0

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Paddles » Wed Sep 27, 2017 8:27 am

Katto wrote:
Paddles wrote:
Dumb dumb, this is now 6 posts and no response to O'Keefe's view.

I take it you now realise there was no moving of the goalposts?


Katto wrote:But there was moving of the goal posts. You attributed a view to me that I never made and an irrelevant point to the discussion.


Dumb dumb, atrributing an innacurate view to you that is not yours could commonly be a strawman fallacy; it is never a moving of the goalposts.

If something is irrelevant - its irrelevant, it is never a moving of the goalposts.

Now what does any of the above have to do with Pattinson having played 17 tests and my opinion that he has proved his high quality in these tests?
Law 31.6 - benefit of the doubt for an dismissal appeal goes to the batsman
A third umpire call for a run out or stumping is a referral, not a review.

User avatar
Katto
CF Champion
CF Champion
Posts: 14726
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 2:34 pm
Cash on hand: Locked
Reputation: 0
Tuvalu

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Katto » Wed Sep 27, 2017 8:31 am

Paddles wrote:
Katto wrote:


Katto wrote:But there was moving of the goal posts. You attributed a view to me that I never made and an irrelevant point to the discussion.


Dumb dumb, atrributing an innacurate view to you that is not yours could commonly be a strawman fallacy; it is never a moving of the goalposts.

If something is irrelevant - its irrelevant, it is never a moving of the goalposts.

Now what does any of the above have to do with Pattinson having played 17 tests and my opinion that he has proved his quality in these tests?


You moved the goalposts...
Paddles wrote:I think the 17 tests for Pattinson and his achievements therein, is quite enough to prove he is a high quality bowler.


1. I never said he wasnt
2. Irrelevant to the discussion

User avatar
Paddles
CF Senior
CF Senior
Posts: 4104
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 9:31 am
Cash on hand: Locked
Bank: Locked
Reputation: 0

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Paddles » Wed Sep 27, 2017 8:40 am

Katto wrote:
Paddles wrote:


Dumb dumb, atrributing an innacurate view to you that is not yours could commonly be a strawman fallacy; it is never a moving of the goalposts.

If something is irrelevant - its irrelevant, it is never a moving of the goalposts.

Now what does any of the above have to do with Pattinson having played 17 tests and my opinion that he has proved his quality in these tests?


You moved the goalposts...
Paddles wrote:I think the 17 tests for Pattinson and his achievements therein, is quite enough to prove he is a high quality bowler.


1. I never said he wasnt
2. Irrelevant to the discussion


Wait - you're suggesting that you think the 17 test matches Pattinson has played and got a good overall record from and in my opinion proves him as a high quality bowler is irrelevant?

Dumb dumb - you just went full retard.

Your question requires an assessment of Pattinson and Cummins' bowling so as to determine the better bowler.
Last edited by Paddles on Wed Sep 27, 2017 8:43 am, edited 1 time in total.
Law 31.6 - benefit of the doubt for an dismissal appeal goes to the batsman
A third umpire call for a run out or stumping is a referral, not a review.

User avatar
Katto
CF Champion
CF Champion
Posts: 14726
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 2:34 pm
Cash on hand: Locked
Reputation: 0
Tuvalu

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Katto » Wed Sep 27, 2017 8:42 am

Paddles wrote:
Katto wrote:
You moved the goalposts...


1. I never said he wasnt
2. Irrelevant to the discussion


Wait - you're suggesting that you think the 17 test matches Pattinson has played and got a good overall from is irrelevant?

Dumb dumb - you just went full retard.


We are not discussing whether he's a high quality bowler or not. That was never the question.
You only went there to move the goal posts (because you were losing).

User avatar
Paddles
CF Senior
CF Senior
Posts: 4104
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 9:31 am
Cash on hand: Locked
Bank: Locked
Reputation: 0

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Paddles » Wed Sep 27, 2017 8:45 am

Katto wrote:
Paddles wrote:
Wait - you're suggesting that you think the 17 test matches Pattinson has played and got a good overall from is irrelevant?

Dumb dumb - you just went full retard.


We are not discussing whether he's a high quality bowler or not. That was never the question.
You only went there to move the goal posts (because you were losing).

Dumb dumb - go look up the meaning of moving the goal posts and tell me where we agreed or I offered a determinitive evidential standard and then moved the standard to a higher one. In that post, I am merely discussing the quality of the differing evidential samples.

The qualities of both bowlers, high or low, and quality of proof underlying that categorisation, are entirely relevant as to who is the better (quality) bowler.

Dumb dumb, are you okay?
Last edited by Paddles on Wed Sep 27, 2017 8:52 am, edited 1 time in total.
Law 31.6 - benefit of the doubt for an dismissal appeal goes to the batsman
A third umpire call for a run out or stumping is a referral, not a review.

User avatar
Katto
CF Champion
CF Champion
Posts: 14726
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 2:34 pm
Cash on hand: Locked
Reputation: 0
Tuvalu

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Katto » Wed Sep 27, 2017 8:51 am

Paddles wrote:
Katto wrote:
We are not discussing whether he's a high quality bowler or not. That was never the question.
You only went there to move the goal posts (because you were losing).

Dumb dumb - go look up the meaning of moving the goal posts and tell me where we agreed or I offered a determinitive evidential standard and then moved the standard to a higher one.

The qualities of both bowlers, high or low, and quality of proof underlying that categorisation, are entirely relevant as to who is the better (quality) bowler.


So we can now deduce you're claiming Cummins is not a high quality bowler.

User avatar
Paddles
CF Senior
CF Senior
Posts: 4104
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 9:31 am
Cash on hand: Locked
Bank: Locked
Reputation: 0

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Paddles » Wed Sep 27, 2017 8:55 am

Katto wrote:
Paddles wrote:Dumb dumb - go look up the meaning of moving the goal posts and tell me where we agreed or I offered a determinitive evidential standard and then moved the standard to a higher one.

The qualities of both bowlers, high or low, and quality of proof underlying that categorisation, are entirely relevant as to who is the better (quality) bowler.


So we can now deduce you're claiming Cummins is not a high quality bowler.


Deduce?

No.

The question you may more reasonably have is whether you can safely infer it.

You really don't understand logic.

What you can 'deduce' is that I think Pattinson as a proven high quality bowler is a better bowler than Cummins , who is far from proven as high quality and I see less than I do in Pattinson suggesting Cummins will get there.
Last edited by Paddles on Wed Sep 27, 2017 9:12 am, edited 2 times in total.
Law 31.6 - benefit of the doubt for an dismissal appeal goes to the batsman
A third umpire call for a run out or stumping is a referral, not a review.

User avatar
Katto
CF Champion
CF Champion
Posts: 14726
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 2:34 pm
Cash on hand: Locked
Reputation: 0
Tuvalu

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Katto » Wed Sep 27, 2017 8:57 am

Paddles wrote:
Katto wrote:
So we can now deduce you're claiming Cummins is not a high quality bowler.


Deduce?

No.

The question you may have is whether you can infer it.

You really don't understand logic.


But you claim stating Pattinson is a high quality bowler is relevant to the discussion. Its only relevant if you claim Cummins isn't.
...and you call me dumb :lol:

User avatar
Paddles
CF Senior
CF Senior
Posts: 4104
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 9:31 am
Cash on hand: Locked
Bank: Locked
Reputation: 0

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Paddles » Wed Sep 27, 2017 8:58 am

Katto wrote:
Paddles wrote:
Deduce?

No.

The question you may have is whether you can infer it.

You really don't understand logic.


But you claim stating Pattinson is a high quality bowler is relevant to the discussion. Its only relevant if you claim Cummins isn't.
...and you call me dumb :lol:


Dumb dumb, what you can 'deduce' is that I think Pattinson as a proven high quality bowler is a better bowler than Cummins, who is far from proven as high quality with a worse record (in his smaller sample) and I see less than I do in Pattinson suggesting Cummins will get there.
Last edited by Paddles on Wed Sep 27, 2017 9:00 am, edited 1 time in total.
Law 31.6 - benefit of the doubt for an dismissal appeal goes to the batsman
A third umpire call for a run out or stumping is a referral, not a review.

User avatar
Katto
CF Champion
CF Champion
Posts: 14726
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 2:34 pm
Cash on hand: Locked
Reputation: 0
Tuvalu

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Katto » Wed Sep 27, 2017 8:59 am

LOL you keep editing your old posts :lol: :lol: :lol:
You cant even convince yourself let alone me.

User avatar
Paddles
CF Senior
CF Senior
Posts: 4104
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 9:31 am
Cash on hand: Locked
Bank: Locked
Reputation: 0

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Paddles » Wed Sep 27, 2017 9:05 am

Katto wrote:LOL you keep editing your old posts :lol: :lol: :lol:
You cant even convince yourself let alone me.


Dumb dumb, my editing of posts is irrelevant as to who I think is the better bowler. My edits have not changed Pattinson with Cummins as the better bowler at any point.

That said, you still have not rebutted to O'Keefe, but you have learned what moving the goalposts means. You're welcome for me for teaching you this, but I do not enjoy always teaching basic logic to you. It's not stimulating for me, and its not rewarding to keep teaching your slow and unappreciative self. I'm used to students of a higher calibre even if lacking gratitude.
Law 31.6 - benefit of the doubt for an dismissal appeal goes to the batsman
A third umpire call for a run out or stumping is a referral, not a review.

User avatar
Katto
CF Champion
CF Champion
Posts: 14726
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 2:34 pm
Cash on hand: Locked
Reputation: 0
Tuvalu

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Katto » Wed Sep 27, 2017 9:14 am

Paddles wrote:
Katto wrote:LOL you keep editing your old posts :lol: :lol: :lol:
You cant even convince yourself let alone me.


Dumb dumb, my editing of posts is irrelevant as to who I think is the better bowler. My edits have not changed Pattinson with Cummins as the better bowler at any point.

That said, you still have not rebutted to O'Keefe, but you have learned what moving the goalposts means. You're welcome for me for teaching you this, but I do not enjoy always teaching basic logic to you. It's not stimulating for me, and its not rewarding to keep teaching your slow and unappreciative self. I'm used to students of a higher calibre.


:lol: Students?

User avatar
Paddles
CF Senior
CF Senior
Posts: 4104
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 9:31 am
Cash on hand: Locked
Bank: Locked
Reputation: 0

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Paddles » Wed Sep 27, 2017 9:16 am

Katto wrote:
Paddles wrote:
Dumb dumb, my editing of posts is irrelevant as to who I think is the better bowler. My edits have not changed Pattinson with Cummins as the better bowler at any point.

That said, you still have not rebutted to O'Keefe, but you have learned what moving the goalposts means. You're welcome for me for teaching you this, but I do not enjoy always teaching basic logic to you. It's not stimulating for me, and its not rewarding to keep teaching your slow and unappreciative self. I'm used to students of a higher calibre.


:lol: Students?


Yeah - contract law students.
Law 31.6 - benefit of the doubt for an dismissal appeal goes to the batsman
A third umpire call for a run out or stumping is a referral, not a review.

User avatar
Katto
CF Champion
CF Champion
Posts: 14726
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 2:34 pm
Cash on hand: Locked
Reputation: 0
Tuvalu

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Katto » Wed Sep 27, 2017 9:22 am

Paddles wrote:
Katto wrote:
:lol: Students?


Yeah - contract law students.


So you're a failed lawyer which is why you're still stuck in a university earning peanuts.

User avatar
Paddles
CF Senior
CF Senior
Posts: 4104
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 9:31 am
Cash on hand: Locked
Bank: Locked
Reputation: 0

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Paddles » Wed Sep 27, 2017 9:35 am

Katto wrote:
Paddles wrote:
Yeah - contract law students.


So you're a failed lawyer which is why you're still stuck in a university earning peanuts.


Who I am is someone who is highly logical and a cricket fan, who reasonably argues an answer to your question that I opine that James Pattinson is a better bowler than Pat Cummins and that you Katto, is a rather unpleasant and obtuse dumb dumb.

By the way, you seem to be unaware plenty of successful lawyers switch between tutoring and lecturing, and practice or persue both at the same time. It is not uncommon to have quite a few current QC's and present or former law firm partners as part of a good law school's faculty.
Last edited by Paddles on Wed Sep 27, 2017 9:40 am, edited 1 time in total.
Law 31.6 - benefit of the doubt for an dismissal appeal goes to the batsman
A third umpire call for a run out or stumping is a referral, not a review.

User avatar
Katto
CF Champion
CF Champion
Posts: 14726
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 2:34 pm
Cash on hand: Locked
Reputation: 0
Tuvalu

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Katto » Wed Sep 27, 2017 9:39 am

Paddles wrote:
Katto wrote:
So you're a failed lawyer which is why you're still stuck in a university earning peanuts.


Who I am is someone who is highly logical and a cricket fan, who reasonably argues an answer to your question that I opine that James Pattinson is a better bowler than Pat Cummins and that you Katto, is a rather unpleasant and obtuse dumb dumb.

By the way, you seem to be unaware plenty of successful lawyers switch between tutoring and lecturing, and practice or persue both at the same time. It is not uncommon to have current QC's and present or former law firm partners as part of a good law school's faculty.


...except you're not one of them :lol:

User avatar
Bhumin
CF Regular
CF Regular
Posts: 330
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2017 11:41 pm
Cash on hand: Locked
Reputation: 0
Andorra

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Bhumin » Wed Sep 27, 2017 9:42 am

I can tell you, Pattison's career over for test, he is injury prone plus momentum toward Pat Cummins in entire world despite PC took only 100 wickets for Australia in international.Guy was M.O M in his début test for his bowling.
NZ batted 27 overs for their 26 (WR in Tests) all out in 1955

User avatar
Paddles
CF Senior
CF Senior
Posts: 4104
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 9:31 am
Cash on hand: Locked
Bank: Locked
Reputation: 0

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Paddles » Wed Sep 27, 2017 9:49 am

Katto wrote:
Paddles wrote:
Who I am is someone who is highly logical and a cricket fan, who reasonably argues an answer to your question that I opine that James Pattinson is a better bowler than Pat Cummins and that you Katto, is a rather unpleasant and obtuse dumb dumb.

By the way, you seem to be unaware plenty of successful lawyers switch between tutoring and lecturing, and practice or persue both at the same time. It is not uncommon to have current QC's and present or former law firm partners as part of a good law school's faculty.


...except you're not one of them :lol:


Who or what I am or will end up becomming, academic or practice achievements or lack thereof, past or future, makes no difference in assessing the logical and well reasoned quality of my arguments I post on this site.

A good reasoned argument is a good reasoned argument. A bad argument is a bad argument. This is true for regardless of the author.

Dumb dumb, you constantly try to play the author and not the content posts. You appear to be a slave to illogical ad hominem and personal bias to authors you think little of. You're definitely no organic intellectual in my opinion. Not even close to a pseudo one. You don't think well logically as displayed by your posts. You appear to have great difficulty in grasping logical concepts and seem happier just to throw insults and baseless conclusions around, quick to pull the trigger in a "gotcha" rather than thinking things through. I sadly find you and your posts rather feral.
Last edited by Paddles on Wed Sep 27, 2017 10:02 am, edited 1 time in total.
Law 31.6 - benefit of the doubt for an dismissal appeal goes to the batsman
A third umpire call for a run out or stumping is a referral, not a review.

User avatar
Katto
CF Champion
CF Champion
Posts: 14726
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 2:34 pm
Cash on hand: Locked
Reputation: 0
Tuvalu

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Katto » Wed Sep 27, 2017 10:01 am

Paddles wrote:
Katto wrote:
...except you're not one of them :lol:


Who or what I am or will end up becomming, academic or practice achievements or lack thereof, past or future, makes no difference in assessing the logical and well reasoned quality of my arguments I post on this site.

A good reasoned argument is a good reasoned argument. A bad argument is a bad argument. This is true for regardless of the author.

Dumb dumb, you constantly try to play the author and not the content posts. You appear to be a slave to illogical ad hominem and personal bias to authors you think little of. You're definitely no organic intellectual in my opinion. Not even close to a pseudo one. You don't think well logically as displayed by your posts. You appear to have great difficulty in grasping logical concepts and seem happier to throw insults and baseless conclusions around. I sadly find you rather feral.


You should listen to yourself :lmao:

User avatar
Paddles
CF Senior
CF Senior
Posts: 4104
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 9:31 am
Cash on hand: Locked
Bank: Locked
Reputation: 0

Re: Poll: Pat Cummins vs James Pattinson

Postby Paddles » Wed Sep 27, 2017 10:09 am

Katto wrote:
Paddles wrote:
Who or what I am or will end up becomming, academic or practice achievements or lack thereof, past or future, makes no difference in assessing the logical and well reasoned quality of my arguments I post on this site.

A good reasoned argument is a good reasoned argument. A bad argument is a bad argument. This is true for regardless of the author.

Dumb dumb, you constantly try to play the author and not the content posts. You appear to be a slave to illogical ad hominem and personal bias to authors you think little of. You're definitely no organic intellectual in my opinion. Not even close to a pseudo one. You don't think well logically as displayed by your posts. You appear to have great difficulty in grasping logical concepts and seem happier to throw insults and baseless conclusions around. I sadly find you rather feral.


You should listen to yourself :lmao:


Dumb dumb, I'm telling you what I think of you and the typical quality your posts. Despite my personal point of view of you, typically I still point out your logical errors when debating with you and give you reasoned arguments for my opinion when it differs to yours and if I agree, I agree. If one day you say something smart, I'll acknowledge it as such. I care about the reasons and the logical thinking, regardless of the author. I typically always play the ball, even if I call you Dumb dumb.
Law 31.6 - benefit of the doubt for an dismissal appeal goes to the batsman
A third umpire call for a run out or stumping is a referral, not a review.