Jump to content

Vijy

Members
  • Content count

    5,765
  • Runs

    61,080 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1
  • Time Online

    8d 10h 7m 43s

Posts posted by Vijy


  1. 7 minutes ago, sensible-indian said:

    Ashwin was a very good ipl bowler back in the day. Not the same in the last few years. 

     

    What rule changed in ipl since then? 

     

    Two things happened.  Batsmen got more bolder and Ash in his part declined in ipl.

     

    Ashwin had an awful 2012 in odis even before the rule change i think. Not sure of the timeline. 

    yes, he did badly in 2012 in ODIs.


  2. 2 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

    yep. another one gone to the wastes. Its kind of jaw-dropping, how deep and good their pace battery from mid 70s to early 90s was. Almost any one of them- even lesser names like Clarke,Davis, etc. could almost walk into any other team of their time in merit alone. Above them, there were the wasted 'what-ifs' like Croft, Bishop & Patterson. Also, sure-fire locks in virtually every team of their era. 

    Above them, the pool is one jaw-dropping mix of Roberts, Holding, Marshall, Walsh, Ambrose, Garner. 

     

     

    not to forget gray (tony gray). he was rated as being better than croft by some contemporaries. ended up with a stellar record in the few tests and ODIs he played.


  3. 22 minutes ago, velu said:

    Blade runner 2049..

     

    +ves:-

    engaging movie .. lengthy one though , sort of close to 3hrs ..  backgroudn score is awesome 

     

    -ves:-

    cinemotagraphy is dark , its a thriller movie with hardly any action scenes (  dont know why the movie in 3D ) .. went with expectations of good action tracks 

     

    overall a good movie but overrated by the critics

    it didn't live up to my expectations either.


  4. Just now, Muloghonto said:

     

    Marshall when he came on the scene (i remember his debut series)- he was military medium. His action was less chest-on. 

    Then he became hugely fast and kind of sling-y, from 80 or 81. Can't remember. Next time i saw Marshall, he was blazing quick. 

    Holding still looked as fast as him in 81, but then started to run out of gas when he became 30+ and instead of giving a chance of adapting, was cut off the team. He actually kept on bowling brilliantly and sometimes very fast too, in the mid 80s in county. but WI back then, were too good a bowling lineup for practically anyone to survive a lean-stretch after hitting 30. They too had the 'getting old, chuck him, get the new big guy with blazing speed in' mentality. 

     

    WI had always had pacers who were fast for some period of time (either short or long). Patterson was pretty nasty too.


  5. 2 minutes ago, Malcolm Merlyn said:
    9 minutes ago, Vijy said:
    it was undoubtedly fast, but what makes it look more deadly is the late swing, lara's exaggerated backlift and of course falling down. I don't know what the speed, but I'd guess around 90 mph.

    Its not easy to beat BC Lara that easily.1997, Lara at his peak.

    yes, but it was as much as the ball's trajectory as the speed that beat him. waqar at his pomp had both.


  6. Just now, sandeep said:

    There is a massive difference between Umesh and Shami back then, vs today.  Have you been watching them bowl in test cricket over the last 12 months or so?  Did you watch them back then?  Umesh was still in his spraygun phase back then. And Shami was quite inexperienced and may have been carrying the beginnings of an injury that saw him require surgery.  

    shami is always carrying an injury. Umesh and esp BK have improved. the upcoming tours will you and me how massive this difference is.


  7. 1 minute ago, sandeep said:

    This is pretty much the only pitch-fixing that opponents can really do against India at this point, and even that is no slam dunk anymore.   On the previous round of away tours, our bowling ranks were nowhere near as good, and more importantly deep.   

     

    Right now, SA knows that if they resort to a green-top, India has the skill and depth in its bowling unit, to come close to their own bowlers' efforts.  And that would reduce the game to an outright shootout between the batting units.  I like our chances in that scenario.   

     

    The bouncy road approach is the only one where they could hope to arbitrage an advantage in terms of bowling effectiveness.  And if we have a healthy pool of Shami, Umesh, Bhuvi, Ishant; and Pandya, Ash/Jaddu/Kuldeep to complement them - its not much of an advantage.   

     

    I'm very curious to see what SA do in terms of pitches.  Historically, they have given us slow, low, almost subcontinental tracks for the warm-up game, and followed it up with an out and out seamer's paradise first up.  But that 2 card trick has started backfiring against India with the likes of Sreesanth bowling for us.   And will be of even more dubious utility this time around.  

    our bowling ranks had both shami and umesh in aus, where we didn't pick even 20 (or perhaps even 15) wickets even in 1 test I think.


  8. 6 minutes ago, sandeep said:

    I looked through this entire thread that talks about Ashwin's ODI performances circa 2010, 2012, and more recently.  And not a single poster pointed out the fact that ODI rules have changed in the 2 time-frames.  Right now, with only 4 outfielders in overs 10-40, you can attack finger spinners with less risk, than you could, back then.  This is the biggest reason why all finger spinners, not just Ash and Jaddu, have become less effective in the last few years.  

     

    All I see is arm-chair analysts pontificating and spreading all kinds of raita about Ash's loop, variations, technical glitches, accuracy, you name it.  

     

    Take away the field restrictions, and the likes of Adil Rashid will no longer be more wicket-taking than Ashwin, who is 10 times the bowler Rashid is, even in his fantasies.  

    All I see is yet another arm chair analyst adding to us arm chair analysts in pontificating and putting forth his theory. I think it goes without saying that most of us (perhaps all) are arm chair theorists.


  9. 4 minutes ago, sandeep said:

    I looked through this entire thread that talks about Ashwin's ODI performances circa 2010, 2012, and more recently.  And not a single poster pointed out the fact that ODI rules have changed in the 2 time-frames.  Right now, with only 4 outfielders in overs 10-40, you can attack finger spinners with less risk, than you could, back then.  This is the biggest reason why all finger spinners, not just Ash and Jaddu, have become less effective in the last few years.  

     

    All I see is arm-chair analysts pontificating and spreading all kinds of raita about Ash's loop, variations, technical glitches, accuracy, you name it.  

     

    Take away the field restrictions, and the likes of Adil Rashid will no longer be more wicket-taking than Ashwin, who is 10 times the bowler Rashid is, even in his fantasies.  

    obviously, as a whole, ashwin is a much better bowler than rashid. however, you're daydreaming if you think fielding restrictions alone explain everything. for example, santner, nurse and axar (all of whom are finger spinners) averaged around 30 with ERs < 5 since the beginning of 2016. in comparison, the great ash-jaddu in ODIs have averaged around 60 with ERs of 5.5 to 6.0

     


  10. 1 minute ago, Muloghonto said:

    No he wasn't accurate at all in tests back then. He was a T20 variety bowler, transplanted to tests. Losing line, length etc. means you are not accurate !

    He tried more things, because he was not accurate enough to find that length that bothers batsmen the most & stick to it for an entire spell.

    yes, cause and effect were mixed up. he lacked accuracy, lacked the mental stamina to bowl long, controlled spells, and lacked guile. he was just a LOI trickster at that point. look at jo'burg test 4th innings.. he didn't gave away too many runs per over, but had no idea how to pick up wkts.


  11. Just now, Muloghonto said:

    Yep. 
    ODIs 20 years ago was effectively a 50 over test match. if you found a spot where the batsmen were most troubled, batsmen would go 'crap, cant hit him today' and end up with 10-1-28-1 type figures.


    Nowadays, batsmen are like 'we must hit you. if i get out, so be it' and specifically target bowlers who bowl accurately and predictably a lot more. We see this, in the batting stances and what batsmen do in LOIs today compared to in the past- batsmen pre-meditate a lot more, which makes accurate but predictable bowlers chopped liver.


    Gavin Larsen would be the guy who'd bowl first three overs for 12 runs, then next two overs for 25 runs in today's climate. 

     

    indeed, there were so many "useless" bowlers who just bowled dibbly-dobbly and got away with it. harris, larsen, ealham, harvey, etc. this was why both Ind and SL could afford to go with so many part timers. the likes of ganguly, de silva, arnold, sehwag would be pummeled. tendu at least had both big spin and variations (but not much control) so he may do about the same these days.

     

    people don't fully appreciate how much the game has changed in 20 years. it has gone from being closer to tests to closer to t20s.


  12. 1 minute ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

    hows he better, he scores in IPL and domestic all the time and choke in international cricket. 

    How much chances does he deserve more, 13 yrs and he needs more chances sill 

    these karthik fans will want him to play even at 45. always fails to deliver in the important matches. even in WI, he did badly in the more challenging pitch and scored on a fairly placid (and inconsequential) one.


  13. Just now, Muloghonto said:

    i am sorry but do you actually see Ashwin bowl ? he bowls on the dime (same spot) over and over again, far better now than he did 4 years ago...in every format.

    Just because someone is getting hit, doesnt mean his accuracy is down. You can be as accurate you want, as a spinner but if you are predictable, you will get clobbered in the limited overs format. 


    if Old ashen was so accurate, he wouldn't be so bad against quality test batsmen on spinner friendly wickets. Because accuracy from a spinner almost always means tons of wickets on spinner-friendly wickets in tests. 

    yes, as per this tag of "accuracy", bowlers like gavin larsen would still be kings in LOIs in the 2010s. In reality, they would be given a thrashing if they played now. the game has changed greatly. ashwin turns the ball, but not massively. hence, if he was so accurate and bowled the same line and length, he would be treated as a slow medium bowler and given a thrashing.


  14. 2 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

    Yes, but i think he still fits the pattern of being an elite test bowler who is nowhere close to being elite in limited overs format. 

     

    that's true. moreover, rabada and ashwin (and philander) are so far only good in home conditions or against minnows like WI. ashwin is yet to take a 5-fer in SA, Eng and Aus I think and the same also goes for rabada and philander in SC.


  15. 5 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

    i wonder if in the coming year, when we tour RSA,ENG and AUS, we will see the old adage of 'serve them flat pitches, our bowlers will restrict them to 350, their bowlers will go for runs and we will make 500+ and win', like they did in the last overseas swing.

     

    it could be. there has been a lot of hoo-ha on this forum about how ours is the greatest pace attack, etc, etc. but I'll be fully convinced only when the team picks up 20 wkts on aus pattas. people say that we could have won adelaide test, etc. but that was only because of the declaration, and not because the team picked up 20 wkts. In that match, both ummi and shami were there. thus, 2 out of 3 pacers are gonna be the same. hence, it remains to be seen how much our pacers have improved since then.


  16. 2 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

    yup. exactly.
    I feel this is true for fast bowlers as well. limited over cricket has diverged so much from test cricket, that now, the best bowling formula for limited overs cricket is 'bowl variations without giving width', whereas tests is still about 'bowl balls batsmen can do nothing about, repeatedly, till they bottle it'. I think thats why we have the curious cases of Rabada, Ashwin, etc. struggling to be good in both formats. IIRC Steyn too, was very very mediocre in ODIs till the last 2-3 years. 

    rabada is still much better than ash in ODIs.


  17. 2 minutes ago, sensible-indian said:

    Ashwin bowls more annoying bad balls than in the past. When he first came on to the scene, he was simply unstoppable in both LOI formats.

     

    Picked like 2-3 wickets per game in List A games at that time (I used to wonder who is this Ashwin guy checking Hindu).

    Was a huge hit in IPL, Champions League.

    Destroyed NZ in India under Gambo's leadership.

    Looked amazing in WC 2011.

     

    Test is different. He wasn't a better bowler back then.

     

    After 2011, his IPL performances have been dropping badly.

    picked up 14 wkts in 7 matches in 2010, and avg 23. In 2011, picked 25 wkts in 18 matches at almost 30. since then it was downhill, apart from 2015.


  18. 5 minutes ago, sensible-indian said:

    I think these are theories.

     

    Play him on the tracks Mishra ji, Chahal, Kuldeep and Axar played post 2015 and he would do well. Would he do as well as them? Dunno. But he would do well. 

     

    In 2015, he bowled on turners against Sri Lanka and averaged like 4 in a series. Looked great against SA in T20s too. Same orthodox action.

     

    Issue is his accuracy isn't what it was. Even in CT 2013, he wasn't that accurate as he was in the past.

    mishra-ji played before 2015 too and was always a better LOI spinner than Jaddu and Ashwin. In fact, if not for his attitude and fitness, he would have been the No.1 spinner for India in these formats (in the past before Kuldeep/Chahal).

Guest, sign in to access all features.

×