West Indies Cricket Fans

AFRO wrote: LOL at this old ENGLISH PERVERT using ONE PERSONS OPINION as some sort of "fact" , the bottom line is THE CONDITIONS WERE PERFECT FOR THE 100M FINAL, which is why the times were good, that doesn't change the fact that the field was WEAK though!! ,

BUT THEIR CONDITIONS ON THE DAY CONTRADICT THAT, Gay was unfit, Asafa is mentally weak and was clearly unfit too considering he didn't finish the race, Gatlin is a druggy aswell while the rest hadn't made any big waves all season, THOSE ARE THE FACTS,

Nobody could accuse you of being intelligent, Afro....

As I said before, Cram is jsut saying what everyone else is saying. If you'd read the two articles I provided, they also said it was the fastest and strongest field, before and after the race. Cram has a silver at the Olympics, and gold medals at the World Champs. What do you have, Afro? Nothing! So, Cram's opinion is worth more than yours....

Another fact...your druggie American Gatlin ran a PB, and that was only good enough for third. Gatlin ran faster than he ran in the Athens Olympics when he won gold, where it was said that conditions were as good as they were in London, and he still couldn't beat Bolt and Blake. There are many races where conditions are good, and never was there a time when seven out of eight finalists ran under 10 seconds. Are you really so uninformed to think this is the only race when conditions are supposed to be "good"?

As a matter of fact, before the race track pundits were complaining that conditions were not warm enough for a fantastic race. How wrong they were....

If you want to say this race was weak, that doesn't make it true. If you want to say the world is flat, that doesn't make it true either!

mikesiva wrote: Nobody could accuse you of being intelligent, Afro....

But everyone COULD accuse you of being an ENGLISH PERVERT who's NOT caribbean old boy!! ,

As I said before, Cram is jsut saying what everyone else is saying. If you'd read the two articles I provided, they also said it was the fastest and strongest field, before and after the race. Cram has a silver at the Olympics, and gold medals at the World Champs. What do you have, Afro? Nothing! So, Cram's opinion is worth more than yours....

Who is "everyone else"? all you've done is provide some garbage article from ONE individual who happens to agree with your biased point of view, the fact is the field was weak which is why the final was such an anti climax!! ,

Another fact...your druggie American Gatlin ran a PB, and that was only good enough for third. Gatlin ran faster than he ran in the Athens Olympics when he won gold, where it was said that conditions were as good as they were in London, and he still couldn't beat Bolt and Blake. There are many races where conditions are good, and never was there a time when seven out of eight finalists ran under 10 seconds. Are you really so uninformed to think this is the only race when conditions are supposed to be "good"?

Another load of GARBAGE!!.. Gatlin's a DRUGGIE and word is thos things stay in your system for a very long time!!, all year he'd done nothing of any substance and you think he was a real challenge to bolt? GET REAL duncy!!.. most of the jamaican's competition had problems galore, but the FANTASTIC conditions allowed them to get a respectable time, which was still miles behind a rusty Bolt, it's as simple as that,

As a matter of fact, before the race track pundits were complaining that conditions were not warm enough for a fantastic race. How wrong they were....

If you want to say this race was weak, that doesn't make it true. If you want to say the world is flat, that doesn't make it true either!

It was a WEAK FIELD mike, i've already listed the amount of problems Bolt and Blake's competition had, Gay (UNFIT), Gatlin (AN OVER HILL THE DRUGGIE), Powell (NOT FIT ENOUGH AND MENTALLY WEAK), Bailey (NOT GOOD ENOUGH), the list is endless old boy!!..but thats ok, you keep thinking that the whole field was in tip top shape if it makes you feel better!! .

mikesiva wrote: "The men's 100m final featured the fastest field of sprinters ever assembled. "

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/gallery ... metres-win" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;"

"While he normally likes to coast to the line, he needed all his energy to pull out the win against the strongest field this event has ever seen."

http://www.cbc.ca/olympics/trackandfiel ... blake.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Cram was stating a fact, not venturing an opinion. If you think otherwise, then show me a link to a final which was faster overall than this one. And show me a link to a former athlete like Cram who says otherwise, because you, Afro, have no credibility.

This is for you, Afro, since you're blind as well as stupid....

Cram said it, journalists in a British newspaper and a Canadian newspaper said it, that's good enough for me, compared to one moronic poster who knows shite-all about athletics....

The only straw you're grasping at is a Tyson Gay who could only challenge if he ran his PB.

1) Name two sprinters who could've replaced Gatlin and Bailey and run faster....

2) Name a track luminary comparable to Cram who supports your deluded view that this was a weak field....

3) Show me two articles which state that this was a weak field....

Here's the incontrovertable fact that you keep dodging....

9.80 was the fastest time ever clocked by a man finishing third in the 100m. The same goes for the time clocked for fourth place, the time clocked for fifth place, and the time clocked for sixth place. That's is why it's rated as the fastest 100m final of all time.

YOur love of Gay over Caribbean athletes, including Trinidadian Richard Thompson, who ran well, speaks volumes about you and the patriotism you claim to have....

mikesiva wrote: This is for you, Afro, since you're blind as well as stupid....

Bwahahaha the retarded skunt STILL DOESN'T GET IT that ONE PERSON'S VIEW doesn't make it a FACT you dumb prick!!!.. oh gosh and this skunt says he was a "teacher"? i guess he was only interested in the kids because i can't see how he can "teach" anyone anything!!,

Cram said it, journalists in a British newspaper and a Canadian newspaper said it, that's good enough for me, compared to one moronic poster who knows shite-all about athletics....

The only straw you're grasping at is a Tyson Gay who could only challenge if he ran his PB.

WHICH JOURNALISTS? seeing as you seem to believe that yours and Crams views are shared "world wide" why can't you provide more views from others old boy? LOL i know why because YOU'RE TALKING CRAP!! ,

1) Name two sprinters who could've replaced Gatlin and Bailey and run faster....

None, which is why the field was so damn WEAK if the likes of those two are considered "strong competition",

2) Name a track luminary comparable to Cram who supports your deluded view that this was a weak field....

And this is why you're so fecking RETARDED mike because you can't understand the field was weak BECAUSE OF THE STATE OF BOLTS COMPETITION, they could all have brilliant pb's etc, but if they aren't fit or are over the hill that means THE FIELD WAS WEAK, you might have time to troll the net looking for garbage articles BUT I'VE GOT A LIFE TO LIFE old boy!!...unlike you who is no doubt stealing benefits off of your government!!...SELLOUT ,

3) Show me two articles which state that this was a weak field....

You show me FOUR journo's who claim that that final was best field ever!!

Here's the incontrovertable fact that you keep dodging....

9.80 was the fastest time ever clocked by a man finishing third in the 100m. The same goes for the time clocked for fourth place, the time clocked for fifth place, and the time clocked for sixth place. That's is why it's rated as the fastest 100m final of all time.

YOur love of Gay over Caribbean athletes, including Trinidadian Richard Thompson, who ran well, speaks volumes about you and the patriotism you claim to have....

CONDITIONS, CONDITIONS, CONDITIONS old boy!!.. thats the one "fact" you can't seem to handle!! , so third place doing well has to be expected when the track was so PERFECT for sprinting!!, furthermore i only mentioned gay because his pb is still BETTER than your boyfriend Blake's!!..something you're clearly finding hard to accept!! ,

And in closing do you really want to talk about "patriotism"? COMING FROM A SKUNT WHO CAN'T EVEN ADMIT THAT HE'S ENGLISH AND PAID NOT AN OUNCE OF ATTENTION TO THOSE SPORTS MEN AND WOMEN WHO WERE WINNING MEDALS RIGHT ON YOUR DOOR STEP!!.. and you think i've got issues? FECK OFF YOU DELUDED PRICK!! .

I have already provided the view of Cram, and two newspaper articles that you're apparently too illiterate to read, that state that this field was the strongest and fastest ever....

Now, can you provide any support for your lone position that this was a weak field? No, I thought not....

Sorry, Afro, but your beloved American Tyson Gay will never feature on top of a medal podium. I'm afraid Caribbean athletes now has his ticket, so you will just have to take your sorry American ass into the nearest cupboard and cry.

Funny how you think this field is weak, and you can't name anyone who can run faster. Okay, so you can't find anyone who is currently running today who can run faster. Can you even name someone from history who has run faster? Anyone, any time, ever?

The conditions were okay, but not perfect. The conditions for sprinting are better the hotter it is. As a result, anywhere that is hotter than it was in London that evening would've provide better sprinting conditions. So, any time of the year in Kingston and Port of Spain would provide better conditions for sprinting. That's why Keston Bledman of Trinidad could not repeat his fast time at the Trinidad trials in London - the conditions were not as good in London as they were in Port of Spain. In addition, anywhere with altitude also has better conditions than London, such as Eugene Oregon, where your Americans ran their trials, and Rieti in Italy where athletics meets are held every year.

And yet none of the above places produced a faster race than this one....

mikesiva wrote:I have already provided the view of Cram, and two newspaper articles that you're apparently too illiterate to read, that state that this field was the strongest and fastest ever....

"Two articles"? BWAHAHAHAH this dutty english pervert must think i'm as bone idle as his ugly WASHER WOMAN!! , erm fistly the guardian piece is nothing but a bunch of PICTURES of Bolt that you've no doubt been salivating over, it doesn't go into any great detail AT ALL, while the second article is written by some idiot, not even a well respected Journo, SO PLEASE WHEEL AND COME AGAIN OLD BOY!!

Now, can you provide any support for your lone position that this was a weak field? No, I thought not....

It's simply MY VIEW, which you are clearly unable to handle and as a result you're crying like a fecking BABY!! , you've provided TWO articles after you said "LOADS OF SPORTS JOURNO'S SAID IT WAS THE STRONGEST".. and you think just TWO is conclusive? BWAHAHAHAHAHAH, them fools were caught up in the hype without talking about the bad shape of the runners Bolt was up against, it's that simple,

Sorry, Afro, but your beloved American Tyson Gay will never feature on top of a medal podium. I'm afraid Caribbean athletes now has his ticket, so you will just have to take your sorry American ass into the nearest cupboard and cry.

But i bet he'll beat your FELLOW ENGLISH MEN chambers and Lewis-Francis!! ,

Funny how you think this field is weak, and you can't name anyone who can run faster. Okay, so you can't find anyone who is currently running today who can run faster. Can you even name someone from history who has run faster? Anyone, any time, ever?

What the feck are you talking about? do you think i've got time to talk about DRUG CHEATS? no thanks!!, and like i said i'm not an athletics groupie like you!!!.. in the main the sport sends me to zzZZZZZZZZZZ,

The conditions were okay, but not perfect. The conditions for sprinting are better the hotter it is. As a result, anywhere that is hotter than it was in London that evening would've provide better sprinting conditions. So, any time of the year in Kingston and Port of Spain would provide better conditions for sprinting. That's why Keston Bledman of Trinidad could not repeat his fast time at the Trinidad trials in London - the conditions were not as good in London as they were in Port of Spain. In addition, anywhere with altitude also has better conditions than London, such as Eugene Oregon, where your Americans ran their trials, and Rieti in Italy where athletics meets are held every year.

And yet none of the above places produced a faster race than this one....

RUBBISH, the media were all abuzz about Bolt possibley breaking his 2008 record because they said CONDITIONS WERE PERFECT, please stop making excuses and just accept that those conditions played a HUGE ROLE in times that race was ran in, and anyone with more than one brain cell knows it, but because your WANNABE RASS is so infactuated with Bolt and Blake you wanna try and DISTORT the facts!!.. it's PATHETIC MIKE!!

So, once again, you spout nothing but unsubstantiated opinion, based on nothing...typical Afro. Talks nothing but shite, with nothing to back it up....

Why am I not surprised?

At least I provided some support for my arguments. You argue about athletics the same way you argue about cricket. With not a damn thing to support your arguments!

mikesiva wrote:So, once again, you spout nothing but unsubstantiated opinion, based on nothing...typical Afro. Talks nothing but shite, with nothing to back it up....

Why am I not surprised?

At least I provided some support for my arguments. You argue about athletics the same way you argue about cricket. With not a damn thing to support your arguments!

I already put forth the REASONS why the field was weak, CAN YOU DEBUNK THOSE REASONS DUNCY? until you can provide proof that Gay WAS NOT unfit, that Powell WAS NOT unfit, THAT Gatlin WAS NOT AN OVER THE HILL DRUGGIE ETC then your argument is simplly a drop in the ocean...IT'S NOT SOLID!! ,

You're the onE trying to prove me wrong by providing one eyed articles more focussed on the sprinters pb times FROM THE PAST than their actual recent form, but guess what mike? IT'S JUST NOT CUTTING IT OLD BOY!! .

AFRO wrote:

mikesiva wrote:So, once again, you spout nothing but unsubstantiated opinion, based on nothing...typical Afro. Talks nothing but shite, with nothing to back it up....

Why am I not surprised?

At least I provided some support for my arguments. You argue about athletics the same way you argue about cricket. With not a damn thing to support your arguments!

I already put forth the REASONS why the field was weak, CAN YOU DEBUNK THOSE REASONS DUNCY? until you can provide proof that Gay WAS NOT unfit, that Powell WAS NOT unfit, THAT Gatlin WAS NOT AN OVER THE HILL DRUGGIE ETC then your argument is simplly a drop in the ocean...IT'S NOT SOLID!! ,

You're the won trying to prove me wrong by providing one eyed articles more focussed on the sprinters pb times FROM THE PAST than their actually recent form, but guess what mike? IT'S JUST NOT CUTTING IT OLD BOY!! .

You do realise that you are the only one on this planet who thinks this field was weak, right?

Can you provide any evidence of anyone else supporting your one-eyed view?

mikesiva wrote: You do realise that you are the only one on this planet who thinks this field was weak, right?

Can you provide any evidence of anyone else supporting your one-eyed view?

Jesus you mean you STILL can't engage your brain for one second old boy?

1. IF THEY HAD ALL BEEN RUNNING WHEN FIT AND IN THEIR BEST SHAPE THEN YES IT'S A GOOD FIELD,

2. THAT NEVER HAPPENED AS MANY OF THEM WERE UNFIT!!.. therefore the field was WEAK, the sooner you comprehend that the better duncy!! .