MoeFOH

Video Review - Quai D'Orsay 54 (MSAJUN 18)

Recommended Posts

Great review as usual guys! Ken, yes I'll ring soon to find out about that cricket forum story! 😉

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, JohnS said:

Great review as usual guys! Ken, yes I'll ring soon to find out about that cricket forum story! 😉

john, it was a "forum argument" about an article written on some cricket site, long forgotten, where the author named the five greatest south african batsmen to play the game.

just dug it out, what utter trash. https://bleacherreport.com/articles/1687906-5-greatest-south-african-batsmen-of-all-time#slide5

interestingly, there are no comments left. they have been removed (because every one said the author didn't have a clue). she and i had a long (but very polite) back and forth where i tried to explain that just having an opinion did not make it right (her argument to justify her gibberish was that everyone is entitled to an opinion and i pointed out that she had set herself up as an expert but written something with no possible basis in reality and that claiming everyone can have an opinion didn't make that opinion valid or sensible or worth publishing) and that coming up with such utter stupidity as shaun pollock (as they said about MW, not even the best in his family) and most of the others - i think the original article was just four and she has redone it with five but made it even dumber - just made her and the site look like fools. i left the site after that. not been back since. 

no barry richards? stupid but in a pinch, one could argue not many tests. but no graeme pollock? the bloke has legitimate claims to be considered as the second greatest batsman to ever play the game behind bradman and this dimwit insisted that he was not even top five in south africa? and that his nephew, a bowling all-rounder, was a better batsman than he was. i think that would have embarrassed shaun enormously if anyone ever suggested that. beyond comprehension that the site allows her to continue to write such moronic and ill-informed tosh. 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for the very unique review.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ken Gargett said:

john, it was a "forum argument" about an article written on some cricket site, long forgotten, where the author named the five greatest south african batsmen to play the game.

just dug it out, what utter trash. https://bleacherreport.com/articles/1687906-5-greatest-south-african-batsmen-of-all-time#slide5

interestingly, there are no comments left. they have been removed (because every one said the author didn't have a clue). she and i had a long (but very polite) back and forth where i tried to explain that just having an opinion did not make it right (her argument to justify her gibberish was that everyone is entitled to an opinion and i pointed out that she had set herself up as an expert but written something with no possible basis in reality and that claiming everyone can have an opinion didn't make that opinion valid or sensible or worth publishing) and that coming up with such utter stupidity as shaun pollock (as they said about MW, not even the best in his family) and most of the others - i think the original article was just four and she has redone it with five but made it even dumber - just made her and the site look like fools. i left the site after that. not been back since. 

no barry richards? stupid but in a pinch, one could argue not many tests. but no graeme pollock? the bloke has legitimate claims to be considered as the second greatest batsman to ever play the game behind bradman and this dimwit insisted that he was not even top five in south africa? and that his nephew, a bowling all-rounder, was a better batsman than he was. i think that would have embarrassed shaun enormously if anyone ever suggested that. beyond comprehension that the site allows her to continue to write such moronic and ill-informed tosh. 

 

Yes, of course I concur. The first thing I thought was no Graeme Pollock or Barry Richards? You could even make an argument for cricketers such as Dudley Nourse and Aubrey Faulkner. Heck, I'd be tempted to put Mike Proctor there somewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, JohnS said:

Yes, of course I concur. The first thing I thought was no Graeme Pollock or Barry Richards? You could even make an argument for cricketers such as Dudley Nourse and Aubrey Faulkner. Heck, I'd be tempted to put Mike Proctor there somewhere.

nourse for certain. was discussing all this with a great friend of the family who toured south africa and played against nourse and he had him ranked extremely highly .

shaun P was a cracking bowler. would have made any test team as a quick. he would have struggled to make any test team solely as a batsman. average of just over 30. not good enough. his uncle averaged 62 or so from memory. remember he did not get to play tests against bangladesh and zimbabwe. no disrespect to sachin T but take those two nations out of his figures and he has an average of just 50 - sure, most of us would kill for a test average of 50 but it puts him right in the pack with plenty of others. pollock soars above that. other than one test v NZ, which he failed in, he only ever played australia and england. first series was 5 tests in australia when he was only 19 and he averaged well over 50 with his first test ton. by the time he retired, in his last few series, he'd been averaging mid 70s. a true superstar.  he had no bigger fan than bradman. 

saw G pollock bat once, against hall and sobers. just kept caressing the ball through the field into the boundary. magic. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the review guys.  Thoroughly enjoyed it.  I'm also a big fan of these (and the 50s), but they are getting harder and harder to find.  Would love to see them on 24:24 soon.  😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, JLinz said:

Thanks for the review guys.  Thoroughly enjoyed it.  I'm also a big fan of these (and the 50s), but they are getting harder and harder to find.  Would love to see them on 24:24 soon.  😉

Hope you don't blink when they go up cus you'll miss them there too.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would agree regarding the 54, I managed to snag two 10 boxes on 24:24 and smoked through one and trying desperately to get more but at a reasonable price as they are going for silly money on FB groups.  I managed to find a box at a decent price in my local B&M and it smoked amazing in the store but the ones from the rest of the box have been Meh. Still going to try to get more to get a larger sample size but definitely agree, not Cohiba Sig 6 but its up there and it's one of these or the E2 as my favourite smokes in 2019.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Solid review of my favorite stick...thank you

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, KavalanWhisky said:

I would agree regarding the 54, I managed to snag two 10 boxes on 24:24 and smoked through one and trying desperately to get more but at a reasonable price as they are going for silly money on FB groups.  I managed to find a box at a decent price in my local B&M and it smoked amazing in the store but the ones from the rest of the box have been Meh. Still going to try to get more to get a larger sample size but definitely agree, not Cohiba Sig 6 but its up there and it's one of these or the E2 as my favourite smokes in 2019.

What fb group are you using that they’re selling and how much? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, captain said:

Solid review of my favorite stick...thank you

Stoked; just bought a box and looking forward to them. I have the corona Claros and have been below average. Hope this box is awesome!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the review, great as usually! Have yet to pull the trigger on the 50s or 54s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very good review. I like the 54's a lot more than the 50's. A lot more flavor to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have to agree with the 25% here- smoking 50/54s always leaves me wanting more. It's a nice mild cigar, but not worthy of the crazy hype of the past few years, IMO. At least the price came down to reasonable levels, but the cigar is still quite bland.

1ST POST BTW lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Community Software by Invision Power Services, Inc.