Aggressors in cricket - Why the game needs these characters

[MenInG]

To me the abiding legacy of the Late Andrew Symonds is that of someone who apart from his own performances put life in contests with his aggressive attitude towards batting and in his dealings with the opposition.

Some may not have liked it but the game of cricket became much more interesting with players like him.

Shahid Afridi is the other one and maybe Punter but likes of GG and Ben Stokes in the current lot also have made this game more watchable for many.

Thoughts?

 

[pratiktc]

Now the new trend is to be world peace promoter like Rizwan

 

[Titan24]

Definitely, I believe every game needs different kind of characters to create that right balance. Not to forget commercially really important as well because it gets that Adrenaline rush even amongst the fans as well and thats an important part of playing as well as watching sports. When we talk about the aggressors here, its not abusing or taking sledging to the next level rather is more about competitive nature and in your face kind of attitude.

One of the most cherished part of WC 2015 around the world was Wahab vs Watson in the Quarterfinals. One guy wearing his heart on the sleeve, full of adrenaline rush and passion to try and produce something for his side in the game while the other guy completely clueless on quite a few deliveries but with enough will power and focus to give it his all to survive. This is what sports should be producing more often and that can only come with characters who sometimes can allow their emotions to come but, at the same translate them into their performances. It was pure, it was real.

 

[sweep_shot]

Cricket has changed. Cricket is now more about objective performances.

Also, players play with each other in various leagues. So, the feistiness/hostility is much less.

I personality don't see an issue with it as long as I can see good cricket.

 

[sweep_shot]

I was not a fan of Australian aggression. I think they crossed the line many times.

I think sandpaper incident tamed them a bit. Also, modern Australian cricketers are less aggressive.

 

[Mobashir]

To me the abiding legacy of the Late Andrew Symonds is that of someone who apart from his own performances put life in contests with his aggressive attitude towards batting and in his dealings with the opposition.

Some may not have liked it but the game of cricket became much more interesting with players like him.

Shahid Afridi is the other one and maybe Punter but likes of GG and Ben Stokes in the current lot also have made this game more watchable for many.

Thoughts?

I am missing someone or GG stands for Gautham Ghambir?

You have put 4 names of agressive, charismatic cricketers. What has GG to do in it?

Otherwise I agree these guys are the ones you make it more watchable.

 

[MenInG]

I am missing someone or GG stands for Gautham Ghambir?

You have put 4 names of agressive, charismatic cricketers. What has GG to do in it?

Otherwise I agree these guys are the ones you make it more watchable.

You as a Pakistani may not think so, but Indian fans loved him taking on Afridi.

 

[BunnyRabbit]

Playing feisty cricket can be achieved without "acting aggressive". Have never liked this Australian mentality. But I don't like NZ's over the top nice guy persona either.