sourab10forever Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 Test ✓ ODIs ✓ Only T20s left.. express bowling, beetle, Mosher and 1 other 4 Link to comment
sourab10forever Posted September 21, 2017 Author Share Posted September 21, 2017 8 consecutive ODI wins... Next best is 9 wins b/w 2008 and 2009 Link to comment
G_B_ Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 need a cup.... Gollum, Shunya and Laaloo 3 Link to comment
Gollum Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 No cup, no celebration. Only test no 1 matters because we get to keep the mace and after all, that is the purest format of the game. Link to comment
Straight_talk Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 every format matters. those who don't blv are either old fgs or 'trying to act cool' ppl JaFanatic 1 Link to comment
Ankit_sharma03 Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 Not important, whats gr8 is in terms of selection and planning we are on right path Link to comment
Gollum Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 10 minutes ago, Straight_talk said: every format matters. those who don't blv are either old fgs or 'trying to act cool' ppl Then why don't most of the best cricketers big up ODI and T20 cricket like they do with tests match cricket? See any great player talk and see how highly they hold red ball cricket, even most modern day greats like Kohli, Ashwin, Starc, Smith, Root, Amla, KW, Steyn etc give more importance to test cricket. Test cricket is like classical chess, ODI is rapid chess, T20 is blitz/bullet. GMs are rated in terms of greatness based on their classical performance, then rapid, blitz is for laughs and isn't taken seriously. Cricket is similar to chess in that aspect. GoldenSun 1 Link to comment
Straight_talk Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 2 minutes ago, Gollum said: Then why don't most of the best cricketers big up ODI and T20 cricket like they do with tests match cricket? See any great player talk and see how highly they hold red ball cricket, even most modern day greats like Kohli, Ashwin, Starc, Smith, Root, Amla, KW, Steyn etc give more importance to test cricket. Test cricket is like classical chess, ODI is rapid chess, T20 is blitz/bullet. GMs are rated in terms of greatness based on their classical performance, then rapid, blitz is for laughs and isn't taken seriously. Cricket is similar to chess in that aspect. Yes but people tend to go overboard saying every test player can play otehr format but not otherwise which is utter shytee. Laxman, langer, pujara, samaraweera, misbah, rahane, etc etc all people with goood test record could ever make it big in short or shorter format. You gotta respek the fact that every format has it's own challenges and skillset required rather than insulting them coz it's not so called 'elite' format. Link to comment
Gollum Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 (edited) 15 minutes ago, Straight_talk said: Yes but people tend to go overboard saying every test player can play otehr format but not otherwise which is utter shytee. Laxman, langer, pujara, samaraweera, misbah, rahane, etc etc all people with goood test record could ever make it big in short or shorter format. You gotta respek the fact that every format has it's own challenges and skillset required rather than insulting them coz it's not so called 'elite' format. Similar to chess where not all great classical players(Topalov, Caruana) are great in blitz and not all top blitz players(Meier, Dubov) are great in classical. But long format players are always rated higher compared to short format players. Moreover it is easier to transition from tests to ODIs/T20s for greats than the reverse. You can name 10 test greats who failed in shorter formats and I will name 50 great shorter format players who failed in tests. In longer formats you have to force mistakes(batsmen or bowler or chess player) but in shorter formats you get more unforced errors because of time constraints. Another factor is patience, perseverance and tenacity, same reasons why BO5 matches(Slams, earlier 1000M) in tennis are given more importance than BO3. Tomorrow if football/field hockey is reduced to a 10 minute game with sudden death penalty shootouts the matches will be more wide open, you see the picture....... Edited September 21, 2017 by Gollum GoldenSun 1 Link to comment
Straight_talk Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 3 minutes ago, Gollum said: Similar to chess where not all great classical players(Topalov, Caruana) are great in blitz and not all top blitz players(Meier, Dubov) are great in classical. But long format players are always rated higher compared to short format players. Moreover it is easier to transition from tests to ODIs/T20s for greats than the reverse. You can name 10 test greats who failed in shorter formats and I will name 50 great shorter format players who failed in tests. In longer formats you have to force mistakes(batsmen or bowler or chess player) but in shorter formats you get more unforced errors because of time constraints. Another factor is patience, perseverance and tenacity, same reasons why BO5 matches(Slams, earlier 1000M) in tennis are given more importance than BO3. Tomorrow if football/field hockey is reduced to a 10 minute game with sudden death penalty shootouts the matches will be more wide open, you see the picture....... Yes, but ODIs especially has enough space for everyone. It's not dependent on luck factor like t20 and also gives you chance to come back. I am a fan of test cricket but 50 overs will always be special for me. I guess it comes down to preference after all. express bowling 1 Link to comment
Samcric Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 The most satisfying part is that this time, Batting and Bowling have contributed in equal parts for India to be no.1 in Tests+ODIs. Batting used to do the heavy lifting in the team of 2008-2010. express bowling 1 Link to comment
Gollum Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 1 minute ago, Straight_talk said: Yes, but ODIs especially has enough space for everyone. It's not dependent on luck factor like t20 and also gives you chance to come back. I am a fan of test cricket but 50 overs will always be special for me. I guess it comes down to preference after all. Even I love ODIs especially when there is balance between bat and ball. In the 90s with challenging pitches, more lenient fielding restrictions and 1 new ball rule which helped bowlers get their due I never missed an ODI. Even though I place tests on top, ODI cricket will always have a special place in my heart(unless we get 400 meets 375 batting shootouts where bowlers are treated like bowling machines). I am not averse to T20 as well, just that I believe that Tests>ODIs>T20s in the minds of most genuine cricket followers. Forever Indian and GoldenSun 2 Link to comment
goose Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 Still unproven overseas. Shami, Umesh, Bhuvi, Panda, and Ishant is a line-up based more on hope than expectation where the away series against RSA/ENG/AUS in 2018 is concerned. GoldenSun 1 Link to comment
SK_IH Posted September 22, 2017 Share Posted September 22, 2017 7 hours ago, Gollum said: No cup, no celebration. Only test no 1 matters because we get to keep the mace and after all, that is the purest format of the game. amongst all the negative hyperbole you post,this time I agree with you,rankings in limited overs mean nothing without trophies Link to comment
ravishingravi Posted September 22, 2017 Share Posted September 22, 2017 Rankings mean zilch. We have to see how the skill level of players improves to win in all conditions and be undisputed no. 1 Link to comment
chewy Posted September 22, 2017 Share Posted September 22, 2017 These rankings need to be given home-away weighting factors Maybe points earned in away matches should be 25% extra Link to comment
chewy Posted September 22, 2017 Share Posted September 22, 2017 Another flaw with rankings system is the number of uneven matches played between nations classic example is Ashes, Eng and Aus who play 5 test series, whilst most series are 3 matches and in Bangla case 1 or 2 match series Link to comment
Trichromatic Posted September 23, 2017 Share Posted September 23, 2017 ODI bilaterals are probably most boring part of cricket. Need to bring back triangular series. T20s are likely to replace ODIs in longer run. Link to comment
sensible-indian Posted September 23, 2017 Share Posted September 23, 2017 (edited) We have become like SA in ODIs and T20s. Edited September 23, 2017 by sensible-indian Gollum 1 Link to comment
express bowling Posted September 23, 2017 Share Posted September 23, 2017 (edited) 5 hours ago, sensible-indian said: We have become like SA in ODIs and T20s. We have won both WC and CT in the last 6 years So, I would say, no for ODIs. No team has won big tournaments consecutively apart from Australia. T20 is lottery Edited September 23, 2017 by express bowling Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now