Jump to content


Members L2
  • Content count

  • Runs

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Time Online

    2d 19m 21s

About cricketpitch

  • Rank
    Marauder from Najafgarh
  • Birthday 03/26/1980
  1. Australia did not need an all-rounder because they had great bowlers who could bowl opposition out. The all-rounder theory only comes about when your 4 bowlers cannot do the job. 5th bowler is a luxury unless you have a Kallis who was a great batsman and bowl 140 KMPH. The Australian bowling attack of McGrath, Warne, Gillespie, Lee, Fleming, Kasperowicz, McGill et all did the job for them. West Indies did the same, their 4 prolonged pace attack were menacing enough but again they did have Larry Gomes, who could roll his arm over if needed, even though he wasn't required to bowl a lot. Viv Richards also bowled some part time stuff but again, West Indies and Australia did not require all rounders. If you have 4 very good bowlers who can maintain pressure and pick wickets, the 5th bowler is a luxury. Unless your 5th bowler gives you runs regularly, he is a waste of space. Teams like India need the 5th bowler because the 4 bowlers mostly don't do the job. Even now Australia is only playing 4 bowlers in the Ashes and they did the job for them. Australia did not play Cartwright or Marsh in the first test.
  2. This is India's best chance to win a series overseas.

    India won test in 2006 series and in 2010/11 series in South Africa. Not sure what you are talking about. Even last series India came close to winning the first test in SA. We have been competitive in the last 3 series there.
  3. This is India's best chance to win a series overseas.

    MSD wasn't. His field placing was point on when he kept Kohli in kind of straight mid on for Brendon McCullum. Lo and behold, McCullum hits one straight to Kohli and it is as easy as they come and our current captain shells it and rest is history. India's catching through those 2 years was pathetic which was the reason we struggled to compete. Nothing to do with Dhoni's rigid captaincy. Even in England India went into the third test leading 1-0 and Cook who was in Woeful form, edges when he is still in single digits and it was a straightforward catch, the slip fielder drops it and Cook goes on to get 90 odd. His confidence restored and India get hammered in the rest of the series. It is easy to blame one person for everything that went wrong but that is not entirely true. Dhoni was a bad test captain but all was not his fault.
  4. This is India's best chance to win a series overseas.

    2010/11 was our best chance to win a test series in SA. Our bowling blew it after having SA on the mat. March Boucher who was out of form through the series suddenly strung a partnership with Kallis to pull them out of the woods. After having them 130/5 we should have bowled them out for 200 odd and chased the score. This has been the case with our bowling all the time. 2003/04 1-1 we batted way too long in the first innings (187 overs to score 700 runs) and did not leave enough time to clean up the Aussie line up. Those were the two series which will haunt me to for ever. We could have already won the series in both those countries but failed to do so. It is almost like we are afraid to win series in Australia and SA that we start to choke the moment we get closer to one. 2013 series wasn't bad, we should have ended up 1-1 at least and we should have won 2-0 in NZ. Instead we ended up losing 1-0 in both. Stop blaming the spinners, our pace bowlers choke worse than the spinners. Our pace bowling attack needs to perform similar to how our spinners perform at home for us to have a chance of winning. It is easy to blame Ashwin or Jadeja for all our overseas woes but to be frank our pace bowlers haven't maintained enough pressure for the spinners to attack.
  5. Sachin Tendulkar vs Steve Smith - Comparative Analysis

    Who said it was not a good innings? Ashwin's 100 in that game was a very good innings which helped India to good total. Even though a physical game, cricket is played between the ears too. The innings like the one Smith played in extreme pressure situation needs to be lauded. Same with Ashwin, even though the opposition was not great, that innings was crucial for India. Kapil's 175 no is still talked about even now even though it was played against Zimbabwe as it came when India were tottering at 17/5. If Kapil had gotten out, India would have faced their most embarrassing defeats in a long time.
  6. A great article on Hahane's state of mind.

    So you guys want to drop Rahane as well and play some rookie in SA? We are already going to play Rohit who will be a walking wicket in SA. Rahane is a brilliant player outside Asia. He has the technique and shots to score runs everywhere. You just don't drop players because they are going through a bad patch.
  7. Best non-indian spinner in indian conditions??

    If you are talking about visiting spinners, there have been Saqlain Mushtaq, who had a brilliant series in 1999. He also did very well overseas. Saqlain averaged 34 in Australia, 25 in England and 30 in NZ. Greame Swann is another fantastic spinner who visited India and had a great series in 2012. So no I don't think Lyon is the best visiting spinner. But Lyon surely is one of the best finger spinners in last 2 decades.
  8. Sachin Tendulkar vs Steve Smith - Comparative Analysis

    We are not talking about the quality of the innings. Please read again. It does not matter what pitch the innings comes in. Steven Smith showed lots of mental resolve to play that innings. If he had gotten out at that time, England would have ended up with a Sizeable lead and the game could have been different. He dragged his team from 84/4 to 20 odd runs lead. England tried to frustrate him but he still remained unfazed. That is what is called a great innings. It is strange that you think that the Gabba innings wasn't special.
  9. The Premium subscription of Willow TV

    I used Willow for a long time while I was in the US. Top notch coverage and they telecast cricket from all around the world. As someone said above, if you have Dish subscription, willow is free. I had Indian channels in the US via dish and Willow was part of the package.
  10. 300 for Ashwin in tests : Fastest to get there.

    The biggest thing is that we need to lower the expectation on the spinner in countries outside Asia. We cannot compare Ashwin to Swann or Lyon, why? because they bowl in those conditions day in and day out. They play their first class cricket on those pitches. The reason Lyon struggled in the subcontinent when he first visited as it is hard for the spinner to determine what length to bowl. But again it is easier for Swann and Lyon to adjust to subcontinent pitches as once they adjust their length the pitch has lots of help for them to take loads of wickets. People clearly forget the situation in the 2014/15 Australia tour. Ashwin bowled brilliantly and poor selection left him out of the first test in Adelaide which was helping spinners from day one. India decided to play Karn Sharma instead who got pasted on a pitch Lyon grabbed 12. Ashwin was brought into the team from the second test onwards where he outbowled Lyon in spite of Indian pacers going for 4.5 runs an over and leaking runs from the other end. In England the first test was a flat and slow wicket and India played Jadeja and continued with Jadeja until the third test and brought Ashwin for the fourth and fifth. Both these games India were bowled out under 170 and were chasing the game. Ashwin bowled well and ended up with an average of 33 in spite of those wickets not being conducive to his spin. South Africa is only bad performance of Ravi Ashwin in tests and that too was only one test. He did not play in NZ. The Indian pace bowler need to step up for our spinners to have good figures. If you see in India Umesh/Shami/Ishant end up with 2-50, 3/60, 2/30 et all because the Indian spinners keep the pressure on from the other end and take wickets. Indian pace bowlers need to return the favours when they travel outside Asia. The spinners will mostly get one pitch in the entire series which might be suitable to them and they will take advantage of it but on other tracks the pacers should do the job so that the spinners can end with 2/50 or 3/60 sort of figures. In Australia our pacers never gave that chance to Ashwin as they were busy leaking runs and Ashwin was doing the containing job for Kohli.
  11. Sachin Tendulkar vs Steve Smith - Comparative Analysis

    There is no single all time great. Viv Richards, Sachin Tendulkar, Sunil Gavaskar, Glenn McGrath, Brian Lara, Shane Warne, Muttaih Muralitharan are all considered ATG. They are considered ATG not because they were compared to people from different eras but by what they achieved on the field during their playing time. It is also determined by watching a lot of cricket and see how a player actually plays and handles tough situations and conditions he encounters during his playing time. That is how you determine someone is an ATG or not. If averages are the only method to determine an ATG, anyone who averages 50 in tests can be called ATG. That is not how it is determined. Smith might end up as ATG not because he averages 60 in tests but because he plays innings like the one he did at the Gabba. That's what ATG's are made of. If we consider only averages, even Thilan Samaraweera or Maheela Jayawardane can be called ATG as well. Were these two players better than the Chappell brothers, David Gower, Clive Lloyd, Gordon Greenidge, Desmond Haynes, Vishwanath et all? Just based on average? Why don't we call Matthew Hayden an ATG while he averages same a Sunil Gavaskar? Think about it and you will get your answer.
  12. Sachin Tendulkar vs Steve Smith - Comparative Analysis

    Seriously you want statistics to prove, Glenn Mcgrath, Alan Donald, Curtly Ambrose, Muralitharan, Shane Warne, Wasim Akram, Waqar Younis, Courtney Walsh, Shaun Pollock, Jason Gillespie, Anil Kumble, et all as greats? or better bowlers than lots of them playing currently? I have watched all my cricket in the 90's and don't require statistic to call the above bowlers as greats and better than most of them bowling today. I am not doing any disservice to current generation, if you read my post completely you would know that I said Steven Smith is ahead of his peers by a long way. Which means that he will end up as a great, I am just saying that he does not need to be better than a player of the previous era as stats cannot always give you the clear picture. I have never watched Viv Richards or Sunil Gavaskar live, have only watched videos on youtube, I cannot say that Matthew Hayden is equal to Sunil or Virat is better than Richards by looking at the stats alone. You need to see what era they played in, Playing conditions, Bowling attacks every thing to make a valid comparison. Can you beyond doubt prove, Sachin Tendulkar or Vivian Richards in their peak would not equal Smith's current performance if they were playing currently? Sachin for a sustained period of time averaged close to 60 from mid nineties to early 2000's. At the same time can we beyond doubt prove that Smith or Kohli would have out performed Sachin or Richards from the previous eras if they played then? We cannot and anything we do will only be speculation and cannot be based on facts. Smith can only be compared properly and factually with his peers and he is better than all of them at the moment in tests and that is the only valid comparison.
  13. Rahane has been averaging 31 since England series

    You can't just drop people from the team for having a bad phase. Rahane has been India's main stay in the batting along with Kohli and Vijay. You can just get rid of them and play who? Rohit? Please I will rather have Jadeja or Ashwin play as a batsman for Mr Rohit. He is sitting duck in test cricket outside India. No matter what his form is, he is a sure starter for the SA tests. No one cares about the millionth test series versus the Lankans.
  14. Grooming Iyer and taking him to South Africa

    Now with Virat's buddy Rohit scoring a meaningless hundred against SL, he will be on the plane to SA. Iyer or for that matter any young player is not going to be selected. India already have to pick Dhawan, Rahul and Vijay in the 15 and Rohit also will be in the 15. So below is what the Squad will look like: Murali Vijay Shikhar Dhawan Lokesh Rahul C Pujara A Rahane V Kohli (c) Rohit Sharma W Saha (Wk) B Kumar R Ashwin R Jadeja I Sharma M Shami U Yadav H Pandya That will be the 15, where will India fit in Iyer or any young player in the Squad? Also R Sharma did not fail because of lack of home test, he was simply not good enough. These days players play lots of ODI cricket all over the world and they have enough exposure to foreign conditions than the players of the past. R Sharma was playing cricket for 5 years before his first overseas test tour. There is no excuse for his failures.
  15. Sachin Tendulkar vs Steve Smith - Comparative Analysis

    To be frank you can bring any number of stats but you can never compare people from different eras by just numbers. The reason being you can never replicate pitch conditions or the bowling attacks across eras to make the comparison valid. How do you know if Sachin at his peak in the current era will not be as good as Smith? Or How can you prove Smith would have been as good in the 90's against the bowling Sachin faced and the pitches Sachin played on? No matter how we spin it, the bowling attacks in the 90's were way better than it is today and the pitches were much more conducive to pace bowling compared to today. People are forgetting that even West Indies were a very good team till 1995. West Indies won a tri series featuring Pakistan and South Africa easily in 1993/94. They won test series against Pakistan away and England away before 1994-95. They were a very strong team. EVen their second string bowlers like W Benjamin, K Benjamin, P Patterson, A Cummins were all way better than most of the bowlers we see today playing world cricket. Only NZ and England probably have better attacks right now. So to bring some numbers and say Sachin or any batsman from 90's is worse than Steven Smith would be a great disservice to the players of the previous eras. Steven Smith is a fantastic batsman and will end up as a ATG. He will be the best batsman of this era, thats about it. You cannot compare him with legends of the past and tell he was better than them just based on stat as there is no way to compare them on an even keel. The best comparison for Steven Smith is to compare him with his peers and he is way ahead of all in tests and that is the only valid comparison.

Guest, sign in to access all features.