What's new

Michael Holding - Commentary Thread

It was a poor comment, that is not the issue.

The issue is people attributing his every critique of India as biased.

For example, I’ve noticed Jonty Rhodes as being extremely pro-India and even as you say, praising Pakistan with “gritted teeth”.

That does not mean everything he says of Pakistan is biased.

Jonty Rhodes lives on Indian money these days and even named his daughter “India”, which is very cringeworthy.

Also, there are people like Hayden who called India a dump back in 2001, but is now calling India his second home.

I think even Indian fans don’t respect people like them.

Both extremes are wrong in my view.
 
And why Pakistanis cheering and defending every foolish comment made by The Great Whispering Death
What are you ? Cheerleaders

Because Mikey is a legend as bowler and as commentator. You want some bland BCCI sponsored rubbish thats fine, but i am i Sky subscriber and i think he is excellent.
 
My comment was a more general sentiment about your sudden regular presence on this forum and your obvious, improved mood since the past week.

Some of Holding’s comments on India have been unfair, I agree. The part about Pandya was spot on though.

My mood does not depend on whether India wins or loses. In fact I should be in a bad mood right now because I like the English team.

Cricket results impact me less and less as I grow older.
 
Really don't see what the big deal is, he said that Bhuvi, Ishant and Shami would be his preferred choices for England. The latter two have bowled well on the tour while Bhuvi has only missed out due to injury. It's not as though he said Bumrah is a rubbish bowler or anything.

Exactly, it's literally people trying to get the facts to fit their conclusions, rather than the other way around.

In the "Pandya is the golden boy" thread, I literally went through all of "anti-India" comments he is alleged to have made and posted the full quotation and context. Contrary to the repeated assertions, all of the comments he made were in fact very reasonable. After I posted that, no-one could tell me why any of what he said was "anti-India."
 
Holding is someone who changes colors to suit his needs. when Kerry Packer came along he went and joined World Series Cricket and all the devotion and dedication to test match cricket, which he displays today when talking about IPL, was thrown out of window when it personally benefitted him financially.
His grudge against India which probably took root when he was lbw to Amarnath in 1983 World cup final to be dethroned as world cup holders.
The fact that during IPL season his colleagues earn top $$$ and he watches IPL alone in his living room since IPL ignores him , to mildly put it, probably makes him depressed.
Even if India won a series abroad , he would probably resort to the evergreen excuse conspiracy makers fall back on... saying ""BCCI money power helped India win a series because the conditions were doctored to keep India happy "".
 
Jonty Rhodes lives on Indian money these days and even named his daughter “India”, which is very cringeworthy.

Also, there are people like Hayden who called India a dump back in 2001, but is now calling India his second home.

I think even Indian fans don’t respect people like them.

Both extremes are wrong in my view.

Even Lara named his daughter Sydney so I don’t see a problem with that.

That’s probably a bad example to bring up since Holding said something along the lines of, “at least he didn’t make his first hundred in Lahore”.
 
Last edited:
Are you a Sky subscriber? If not then you have no right.

So you can only criticize or praise someone if you pay his/her wages directly/indirectly?

Interesting pov, and a unique one too. Never looked at things from this angle before.
 
Holding is someone who changes colors to suit his needs. when Kerry Packer came along he went and joined World Series Cricket and all the devotion and dedication to test match cricket, which he displays today when talking about IPL, was thrown out of window when it personally benefitted him financially.
His grudge against India which probably took root when he was lbw to Amarnath in 1983 World cup final to be dethroned as world cup holders.
The fact that during IPL season his colleagues earn top $$$ and he watches IPL alone in his living room since IPL ignores him , to mildly put it, probably makes him depressed.
Even if India won a series abroad , he would probably resort to the evergreen excuse conspiracy makers fall back on... saying ""BCCI money power helped India win a series because the conditions were doctored to keep India happy "".

They played SuperTests in WSC, which were the exact same format as regular Test cricket.
 
So you can only criticize or praise someone if you pay his/her wages directly/indirectly?

Interesting pov, and a unique one too. Never looked at things from this angle before.

Yes, your sitting somewhere in Ind and you should be listening to the BCCI sponsored bland comments. Mikey answers to Sky subscribers like me.
 
Who is Holding to comment on Indians then? As he has his rights to comment on Indians, others have the right to call him out. Deal with it.

Again, you are getting confused.

No-one is denying you have the right to comment. But your claims will also be scrutinised.

It's all very well you running your mouth off, but your views can and should be challenged, especially if there is no logic/evidence to back up your claims.

Some of what you are saying is pure slander.
 
It was unofficial circus cricket with little sanctity and played on football grounds.

It had better equipment, payment, and devotion to the players so it wasn’t a circus.

The point I was making was that they didn’t change formats.
 
Again, you are getting confused.

No-one is denying you have the right to comment. But your claims will also be scrutinised.

It's all very well you running your mouth off, but your views can and should be challenged, especially if there is no logic/evidence to back up your claims.

Some of what you are saying is pure slander.

Plenty of logic in saying Holding has a dislike for India.
 
Yes, your sitting somewhere in Ind and you should be listening to the BCCI sponsored bland comments. Mikey answers to Sky subscribers like me.

Are you a Star/Sony subscriber? If not, you have no right to call them bland.
 
It had better equipment, payment, and devotion to the players so it wasn’t a circuis.

The point I was making was that they didn’t change formats.

Exactly. Holding doesn't like T20 (presumably because he thinks it is a modified version of baseball) and that is his right. There is also some logic to what he is saying.

He also backs his words up with actions, as shown by the fact he refuses to commentate on any T20s (even for Sky) even though it would be easy money for him. So it is a principled stance he has taken.

Then Indians come out with illogical statements like "he is jealous of the BCCI. It is because he doesn't get an IPL contract he makes these comments." :))
 
Except that the legends that played it still reckon its the toughest cricket they played. Did any Ind get invited?

If i left my country to play something for money i would praise it as well.

Yes many Indians got invited. They refused as they put country over money. Why dont you google.
 
Yes, your sitting somewhere in Ind and you should be listening to the BCCI sponsored bland comments. Mikey answers to Sky subscribers like me.

Didn’t know Peshawar, PK was in India. You have gone from “you are on Noora payroll” to “you are Indian”.

Not sure if that is an upgrade or a downgrade.
 
I have seen their commentary on UK satellite channels. And its not just bland its a cure for insomnia.

Likewise, the rest of us have had the "pleasure" to listen to Holding being cross-streamed on our feeds and we are basing our opinions on that.

Believe us, we didn't tune in to his baritone voice out of choice.
 
So you have right to say what you want but you take offence at his right to free speech?

Free speech can be criticized. Holding has the right to stay what he wants, but others also have the right to comment on what Holding is stating, regardless of whether they are Sky subscribers or not.

Free speech works both ways.
 
I have seen their commentary on UK satellite channels. And its not just bland its a cure for insomnia.

But you still don’t have the right to call it bland and a cure for insomnia. You are not a subscriber and you don’t pay them money, hence you don’t have the right to make any comment.
 
Likewise, the rest of us have had the "pleasure" to listen to Holding being cross-streamed on our feeds and we are basing our opinions on that.

Believe us, we didn't tune in to his baritone voice out of choice.

Just watch the cricket, i dont like many commentators but i dont go around moaning at what they say.
 
Just watch the cricket, i dont like many commentators but i dont go around moaning at what they say.

So what is the verdict. Can you criticize commentators even if you are not a subscriber, or have you taken your words back?
 
But you still don’t have the right to call it bland and a cure for insomnia. You are not a subscriber and you don’t pay them money, hence you don’t have the right to make any comment.

Actually i am, but not directly. And whats more i couldnt care less what they say as obviously its aimed at Ind snow flakes like you who like bland BCCI praising commentary.
 
Actually i am, but not directly. And whats more i couldnt care less what they say as obviously its aimed at Ind snow flakes like you who like bland BCCI praising commentary.

How are you paying for indirectly for Star/Sony and other pro-Indian media?
 
So what is the verdict. Can you criticize commentators even if you are not a subscriber, or have you taken your words back?

Yes but they have right to say what they like without snow flake Ind like you, demanding apologies from him.
 
So why is Mikey not allowed to say what he likes. Why were they calling for him to apologise?

He should apologize for the insensitive comment regarding the black armbands. There is freedom of speech (which is your right) and then there is making a crass, insensitive comment (which is not your right).

He of course doesn’t have to apologize for disliking Indian players in general. That is his prerogative.
 
Because Mikey is a legend as bowler and as commentator. You want some bland BCCI sponsored rubbish thats fine, but i am i Sky subscriber and i think he is excellent.

The same way u have right to cheerlead him indians have right to criticize his foolish cringworthy comments
 
He should apologize for the insensitive comment regarding the black armbands. There is freedom of speech (which is your right) and then there is making a crass, insensitive comment (which is not your right).

He of course doesn’t have to apologize for disliking Indian players in general. That is his prerogative.

48 hours on there has been not a whisper of an apology in spite of an obviously offensive comment. And yet he'll shed crocodile tears for a spot fixer and get into an on-air squabble with Sangakkara heh.
 
I am no expert on Ind cricketers from the 70s but i watched Ind in the early 80's, 3 years after WSc ended and i would be very surprised if there were

Gavaskar Vishwanath Bedi Amarnath Chandra are some of the names from the top of my head.
 
Gavaskar Vishwanath Bedi Amarnath Chandra are some of the names from the top of my head.

Chandra had gone by the late 70s. The others were good players but i doubt that outside Bedi and Gavaskar others had any concrete offers. For me Vishi and Amarnath werent the type players that WSC would have wanted.
 
Last edited:
Chandra had gone by the late 70s. The others were good players but i doubt that outside Bedi and Gavaskar others had any concrete offers. For me Vishi and Amarnath werent the type players that WSC would have wanted.

Lol. The number of avg players WSC signed Vishi and Jimmy were a big big upgrade on them.

Chandra had taken 28 wkts on the 77-78 tour to Australia. Hardly finished.
 
Lol. The number of avg players WSC signed Vishi and Jimmy were a big big upgrade on them.

Chandra had taken 28 wkts on the 77-78 tour to Australia. Hardly finished.

As i most of the Aussie players were in WSC, i assume he took the wickets against against a 3rd string Aussie team/ kids. I agree Amarnath and Vishi were good players but were not the type of players suited to WSC
 
As i most of the Aussie players were in WSC, i assume he took the wickets against against a 3rd string Aussie team/ kids. I agree Amarnath and Vishi were good players but were not the type of players suited to WSC

Who were the type of players suited for WSC? Some of the WSC players didnt even play test cricket.Some hardly played 10 tests.

How do you know Amarnath and Vishy wouldnot suit WSC? If likes of Haroon Rashid Majid Khan Mushtaq Mohammad or Taslim Arif suited WSC,why not Jimmy and Vishy?
 
Who were the type of players suited for WSC? Some of the WSC players didnt even play test cricket.Some hardly played 10 tests.

How do you know Amarnath and Vishy wouldnot suit WSC? If likes of Haroon Rashid Majid Khan Mushtaq Mohammad or Taslim Arif suited WSC,why not Jimmy and Vishy?

I am only guessing but its like the IPL selections, they wanted stroke makers who entertained rather than just good players.
 
I am only guessing but its like the IPL selections, they wanted stroke makers who entertained rather than just good players.

And Haroon and Mushtaq and Taslim etc were better stroke makers than Vishy or Jimmy?

As i said almost 8 Indians received the offer.They all rejected. The article is on the web.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bumrah takes a 5-er in the 2nd innings, has bowling figures of 7/125 in the match.

During SA tour in January, Holding had said he will not play Bumrah in England!!

First Pandya and now Bumrah - Holding not having grestest few days as a pundit
 
Lol@ people demanding an apology from Mikey . Nothing wrong with what he said ,it was actually very much English humour & im sure most English fans found it funny inc myself. If you dont like English humour watch the Indian commentary with the likes of depressive Manjraker & co, simples.
 
Also, which part of what he said was wrong? If Bhuvi was fit, Bumrah (who has played 4 tests) would be the one most likely to miss out:

“I am not sure he is going to be a good new ball bowler. He struggles to take the ball away from right-handers when bowling with the new ball. So he wouldn’t be my first choice (on overseas tours). My first choice is always Bhuvneshwar Kumar,” Holding told PTI.

“Then I would think about Ishant Sharma and Mohammed Shami. When India play in England, pitches will be drastically different to South Africa. I wouldn’t play Bumrah because he bangs the ball in. Those pitches need someone to bowl so that the ball who kisses the surface and gets it to move around.”

“The Indian bowlers have done an excellent job. I will never fault them on this [South Africa] tour."

Why is this post being completely ignored in this depressing thread?
 
Also, the jury is still out on Pandya the test player. A five-wicket hall in great bowling conditions doesn't negate Holding's statement.
 
Why is this post being completely ignored in this depressing thread?

Haven't gone through all the posts, but it looks like a more important point has been missed.

Holding for all his contempt for the IPL was one of the earliest who wined and dined with Stanford for a Caribbean T20 league. So when he felt he could have a stake in some lucrative option, he had no qualms there.

There's a reason Holding enjoys time in England. However, the Brits have done a U Turn and now Mikey feels all alone.
 
Now it's getting boring.

Let's move on folks. Holding is not that important.
 
However, the Brits have done a U Turn and now Mikey feels all alone.

I had a chuckle at that. ECB and partners have bolted, Holding left waiting at the altar.
I also note he hasn't expressed any opinion on the tacky new t20 comp 'The Hundred' which will be rolled out by his employers Sky and ECB. Tell us what you think, mikey.
 
August 2018 must be the most relevant Whispering Death has been this century.
 
Jasprit Bumrah still not a new-ball bowler, stresses Michael Holding

Despite Jasprit Bumrah’s starring show in India’s win at Trent Bridge, Michael Holding has stuck to his opinion that the young paceman is not a new-ball bowler.

During the course of the series, Holding has said that Hardik Pandya is “not a Test all-rounder yet” and that he had second thoughts about picking Bumrah for the Tests in England.

Bumrah, returning from an injury, returned 2/37 in the England first innings of 161 and then went on to pick up 5/85 in the second as England folded for 317 and India won by 203 runs.

The 24-year-old took the new ball in both innings, and though he didn’t find immediate success, he did get among the wickets.

He was especially effective with the second new ball in the England second innings, breaking the 169-run stand between Ben Stokes and Jos Buttler with the latter’s wicket, and followed it up by hitting Jonny Bairstow’s stumps the very next ball before accounting for Chris Woakes and Stuart Broad as well.

Holding called the bouncer to get rid of Woakes as ‘perfect’ but, speaking to The Times of India, reiterated, “I would still not have him as my opening bowler. Ishant Sharma and Mohammed Shami do a bit more with the brand new ball and they will remain my opening bowlers in Bhuvneshwar Kumar's absence.”

Elaborating, the iconic Jamaican paceman of the 1970s and 1980s said, “What I have seen is he can get the ball to straighten from wide of the crease and is more effective with the slightly older ball.

“What you have to remember is that in England, with so much assistance from both pitch and atmosphere for the quick bowlers, Bumrah will get the odd ball to straighten on the right-handers' off-stump, although his action doesn't enhance his ability to do so.

“The same delivery in South Africa, Australia, etc would not straighten as it can tend to do in England. He has pace, though, which is a welcome asset that cannot be bought.”

If Bumrah picked up five wickets in the England second innings, Pandya did the same in the first, ending with 5/28. He has so far picked up nine wickets in the series to go with 160 runs, the second highest for India after Virat Kohli’s chart-topping 440.

Holding, like Pandya himself, clarified that his problem was with people calling him the next Kapil Dev.

“Please go back and listen to or read what I have said about Pandya. I was more critical of the people who were telling me he is the next Kapil Dev, not of Pandya himself,” said Holding. “I have gone on to say that he is not the man to fill that sort of role as yet, batting at No.6 and bowling.

“What I am glad also to see is that I read somewhere that he had said he doesn't want to be known as the new Kapil Dev; he is Hardik Pandya, which is the right attitude.”

Speaking at length about Pandya, the 24-year-old all-rounder who has been filling the fast-bowling all-rounder’s role for India in all formats of late, Holding said, “He only bowled 10 overs in the entire first Test and 17 in the entire second Test where the seamers on both teams were making the ball talk and batsmen were struggling.

“He got no runs in either of the first two Tests as well. He bowled a lot more in the third Test and maybe that is down to the fact that he got a wicket with his first delivery, which then convinced his captain to give him more overs than in the first two Tests.”

The five-match series is currently 2-1 in England’s favour with the fourth Test set to begin in Southampton on 30 August.

https://www.icc-cricket.com/news/831786
 
The public love him here and his opinion is highly sort after.

Compared to his middling cricketer counterparts in the comm box (Gower, Atherton, Lloyd, etc.) he was at least successful back in his day.

Plays a part.
 
Ok mate, those guys were terrible, you know best and everyone else has no idea about cricket. Satisfied- now go away.

And there comes the indignant response. Iam so glad that the world of science , medicine and Engineering does not operate like the Cartel in cricket. Just no concept of impartial rigorous peer review process or even a desire to entertain logic , reason and facts. Just Pure hill-billy cowboy mentality.
 
Ok mate, those guys were terrible, you know best and everyone else has no idea about cricket. Satisfied- now go away.

And there comes the indignant response. Iam so glad that the world of science , medicine and Engineering does not operate like the Cartel in cricket. Just no concept of impartial rigorous peer review process or even a desire to entertain logic , reason and facts. Just Pure hill-billy cowboy mentality.

Once in a while we do get some well researched articles in cricket like this one: http://www.thecricketmonthly.com/story/1026113/the-longest-shot

Before you fire off more indignant responses Please read that to understand what I mean by a independent impartial peer review process.

[MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION]
[MENTION=142162]Napa[/MENTION]
[MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION]
[MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION]
 
Last edited:
No friend. You know best and i along with those guys that saw those players are idiots. You won.

*sigh* lets try this differently ... Would you take a drug that is tested only by what the manufacturer says instead of going thru a rigorous FDA approval after a independent double blind randomized test ?

[MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION]
[MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION]
 
Last edited:
[MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION]
Where do you stand on the Sylvester Clarke debate. I know you thought he was incredibly quick but do you like i, believe that had he had a decent run, that he too would have been in the top 10 list.
 
[MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION]
Where do you stand on the Sylvester Clarke debate. I know you thought he was incredibly quick but do you like i, believe that had he had a decent run, that he too would have been in the top 10 list.

I can tell you how that debate went between me and [MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION]

J: Sylvester Clarke was measured at 101MPH by Transvaal Police using Radar guns
T: There is no mention of this in any reputable sources . Also How does one possible measure speed of a small cricket ball using a device meant to measure speeds of vehicles that are much larger ?
J: Silence

And I can tell you the discussion wont be any different today if he ever responds. this is my biggest pet peeve about old era fanatics. They just are so thoroughly convinced in their head about their heroes that they expect everyone to just shut-up and listen to them and take their word as Gospel. This is especially sad when Junaids - who is in a medical profession - does this.
 
I can tell you how that debate went between me and [MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION]

J: Sylvester Clarke was measured at 101MPH by Transvaal Police using Radar guns
T: There is no mention of this in any reputable sources . Also How does one possible measure speed of a small cricket ball using a device meant to measure speeds of vehicles that are much larger ?
J: Silence

And I can tell you the discussion wont be any different today if he ever responds. this is my biggest pet peeve about old era fanatics. They just are so thoroughly convinced in their head about their heroes that they expect everyone to just shut-up and listen to them and take their word as Gospel. This is especially sad when Junaids - who is in a medical profession - does this.

I know about his speed without any speed guns. My point was about his quality and how he would he have fared if he had a run in the great Windies team of the late 70s and early 80's.
 
I know about his speed without any speed guns.

Whats your estimate of how fast he was ?


My point was about his quality and how he would he have fared if he had a run in the great Windies team of the late 70s and early 80's.

According to [MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION] he was the fastest and most menacing of the lot based on tall stories from county cricket and that Transvaal speed measurement. Perhaps in top 5. But ask him if he was better than Steyn, Anderson, Starc, Rabada etc and I will be very surprised if he said anything other than Clarke >>>> Steyn & Co.
 
Whats your estimate of how fast he was ?




According to [MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION] he was the fastest and most menacing of the lot based on tall stories from county cricket and that Transvaal speed measurement. Perhaps in top 5. But ask him if he was better than Steyn, Anderson, Starc, Rabada etc and I will be very surprised if he said anything other than Clarke >>>> Steyn & Co.

I missed his peak but i first saw him around 1985 in a county match and as there was very little tv courage and i was very young, i didnt really know who he was but he was bloody quick. Based on that game and the few games i saw of him i would put him in the 93mph. His action was a bit weird, very front on and based on power. Tbh not knowing the reason for his sacking from the Windies team ( going to apartheid SA) i was amazed that he wasnt chosen for the tour in 84 which included bowlers like average bowlers like Milton Small( cousin of future England bowler Gladstone) and Eldine Baptiste.
As far as quality goes, i dont know if was better than those guys( Steyn and co) because he didnt play enough at that level but based on my small sample he wouldn't be too far away.
 
Last edited:
I missed his peak but i first saw him around 1985 in a county match and as there was very little tv courage and i was very young, i didnt really know who he was but he was bloody quick. Based on that game and the few games i saw of him i would put him in the 93mph. His action was a bit weird, very front on and based on power. Tbh not knowing the reason for his sacking from the Windies team ( going to apartheid SA) i was amazed that he wasnt chosen for the tour in 84 which included bowlers like average bowlers like Milton Small( cousin of future England bowler Gladstone) and Eldine Baptiste.
As far as quality goes, i dont know if was better than those guys( Steyn and co) because he didnt play enough at that level but based on my small sample he wouldn't be too far away.

Here is a clip : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GA1L_cDJEEI&t=27s

Iam sorry but there is no way in Gods green earth that you can say that a guy with that sort of bowling action is capable of bowling almost 150Ks ( 93MPH) . No way ... just not true.
 
Back
Top