Depends a lot on when the bowlers in question have played a lot of their cricket - some seasons have been a lot more bowler-friendly than others.
My proof of you being shit is that you average 40 and have to fight for a BS spot. What proof do you have of the Gamblers being shit?
His "proof" is that we can't bat below 4 and have no bowlers other than Bullpitt. Which is a load of shit, obv.
The fact that we have players averaging 40+ in BS, playing in the ALC is good, not bad. And I showed I have averaged quite well in my last few encounters, so your proof kinda dies in the arse there. I've pointed out that your depth is crap, your number 8 (key position) can't really bat, and your bowling is iffy. We've had this debate numerous times, you end up just resorting to counting your opinion as fact and ignore actual facts, and we get no where.
I'm not sure if that's due to the fact that he's taken a lot of wickets against good batting teams in good batting seasons, or the fact that he's improved significantly. More recent performances obviously count a lot more towards the current rankings than older ones.
Weighted across relative opposition and time, he still only averages 29.87 in the BS. When you factor in recency of performance as well though, with the first ever BS game counting as 1, the most recent counting as 100 as everything in between being weighted accordingly, he averages 27.38. Which shows it's been more about him actually getting better than getting better conditions and situations to bowl in.
What? When did I mention the Vipers? You have shown you average 40 and struggle to make an average batting side. In a side like ours we need our number 8 to bowl, not bat. Whoever bats at 8 needs to average 15-20. Our depth is fine. We have Morgan, Burridge and Downes to cover the top order who aren't bad players, Downes is looking like he can turn out decent. We have Stacker to cover the number 8 spot and we have Crowley and Robinson to cover our bowling. Our depth is fine.
I don't see how struggling to make a side has anything to do with anything, when the people from 3-6 are averaging 45 or so. And the fact you continue to ignore that I am actually in the side, as well as my recent form shows you are clutching at straws. In your side, your batting drops away after #4. Morgan hasn't really proved much, Burridge hasn't been the best in BS and Downes has nothing but posts under his name atm really. Stacker is inactive and past it really, Crowley is hit and miss, and Robinson hasn't played BS since season 3, wouldn't say that is brilliant depth tbh.
If you can't make a side, you are not good enough. Your recent form against sub par opposition? You said our depth was poor, IIRC. I have proven that incorrect. You don't need to have rep standard players in seconds to have good depth.
So theoretically speaking, if a club has the 7 best batsmen in CricSim, but you can only fit 6, the 7th is shit? Doesn't sound retarded at all... I proved your proof was somewhat incorrect, so yeah. You don't need rep players, but it's good to have guys who are BS standard...
