cricketfan28 Posted August 25, 2020 Posted August 25, 2020 2 hours ago, G_B_ said: 4-0 australia coming up. I hope so, smith should do something stupid again.
Gambit Posted August 25, 2020 Posted August 25, 2020 12 hours ago, Gollum said: People overrate our 2000s team a lot: -Whitewash at home against RSA (no spinner) - Draw in Zim lol - Loss in RSA 2001, we even lost the unofficial 3rd test, by an innings and 100 runs - Loss in SL 2001 - Loss in WI 2002 lolololol, in fact dominated...NZ toured there and crushed them the following month - Humiliation in 2002 NZ - Humiliated by Aus at home in 2004, end result is flattering - Drawn series against Pak in 2005 at home, Sami, Razzaq, Kaneria, Afridi, Arshad Khan was their bowling attack...how do you not smash that side? - 2006 Karachi test humiliation where we lost by 350 runs after reducing them to 40/6 on day 1, 1st 90 minutes - Drawn series at home against Eng in 2006. useless, remember the capitulation against Udal in Mumbai, we won the toss in that match - Loss in RSA away (2006-07) blew so many chances and famous fab 4 shat their pants in Cape Town after Jaffer/Karthik's fantastic opening stand - Loss in Aus 2007-08 - Loss in SL 2008 - Drawn series against RSA at home in '08 and '10, both times we were outplayed and had to win final test on demand to escape Come on the way people hype those guys, sometimes feel like I live in a parallel universe. Good team but falls short of greatness, only in 2009 and 2010 were we undisputed #1. Against Kohli's side they might come out on top but both will exchange heavy blows. In SC I needn't bother telling how Shami, Umesh, Bumrah, Ashwin, Jaddu (bench: Ishant, Kuldeep, Bhuvi) compare to Sami, Razzaq, Afridi, Kaneria, Arshad. Terrible way of looking at this. Context matters. A lot. Before the test win in Zimbabwe in 2001, the last test victory for India outside Asia was in 1986! The last win in England was in 1986, in Australia 1981, in West Indies in 1976, in New Zealand 1976 and 0 test victories in South Africa ever. In Asia, the last win in Sri Lanka was in 1993 and we had never won in Pakistan. Ever. To go from that to achieving the following between 2001 and 2004 was phenomenal. - First ever win in Zimbawe - First win in England since 1986 and first drawn series since 1986 - First win in Australia since 1986 and first drawn series in 20+ years - First win in West since 1986 (we won the next series in 2006) - First win in Sri Lanka since 1993 - First win and series victory in Pakistan EVER Should we have won certain tests? Definitely. Did we lose series from winning positions? Sure. But this team did what others had not done IN DECADES and helped the teams thereafter (especially the 2007 - 11 team) to build on that success. adi B, raki05, AuxiliA and 2 others 4 1
Tibarn Posted August 25, 2020 Posted August 25, 2020 10 hours ago, zen said: There were quite a few high scores in the that series because of Aus relatively weak bowling. The series was mainly drawn because of the spell (once in a blue moon effort) by Sir Ajit Agarkar who picked up 6 wkts out of nowhere (was being laughed at for his ducks iirc) In 2018, Ind's bowlers (along with Pujara) did a splendid job to win it .... I doubt that the team of 2004 could have won it in 2018 PS In SL in 2008: Didn't you know? Every team in the early 2000s was at least 5 times the team any current team is. Every player was at least 7 feet tall and 300 lbs of pure muscle. Ajit Agarkar used to bowl 200 kph and was a mid tier bowler back then. Steve Smith would have averaged 7 in that era. Kohli would have averaged 5. Bumrah would be played off like a C-tier Ranji Spinner. Jadeja and Ashwin would be lofted out of the park for 6 every other delivery. Even club-level bowlers would banana swing the ball 10 degrees every delivery Ganguly winning 9 times against Zimbabwe and Bangladesh is the single greatest cricketing captaincy feat in cricket history. It's up there with whitewashing Viv Richard-era Windies teams Here is the rankings history of Ganguly's team: from 2000 to 2003 the team never even reached a 100 rating. It wasn't until 2004 that they finally crossed 100. Their peak rating wasn't until 2006, when Dravid took over the captaincy with a 1 month peak of 115. A team which struggled to cross a 100 rating is better than Dhoni's team from 2009-2010 or Kohli's current team 10 hours ago, zen said: There was the team of early 70s. In historical ICC rankings, it was ranked #1 for 15 months from April 73 to June 74. Besides the early 70s team, only two Ind teams have held the #1 rank for 12 or more months - Nov 2009 to Aug 2011 (21 months) and the current team Oct 2016 to Apr 2020 (43 months) Thanks for looking that up. That means that 70s team actually held the #1 spot longer than Dhoni's team. It looks like their peak rating was 123. Here is their squad from an England tour of India for that era https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/17240/scorecard/63090/india-vs-england-2nd-test-england-tour-of-india-1972-73 SM Gavaskar c Old b Underwood 18 71 89 3 0 25.35 RD Parkar c †Knott b Old 26 109 138 3 0 23.85 AL Wadekar (c) run out 44 84 118 8 0 52.38 GR Viswanath c Wood b Cottam 3 31 38 0 0 9.67 SA Durani b Greig 4 25 36 1 0 16.00 ED Solkar b Old 19 90 139 1 0 21.11 FM Engineer † b Underwood 75 144 215 10 0 52.08 S Abid Ali b Cottam 3 10 12 0 0 30.00 EAS Prasanna lbw b Cottam 6 9 14 1 0 66.66 BS Bedi run out 0 0 5 0 0 - BS Chandrasekhar not out BOWLING O M R W ECON WD NB S Abid Ali 4 1 4 0 1.00 0 0 ED Solkar 3 1 5 0 1.66 0 0 BS Bedi 26 7 59 2 2.26 0 0 BS Chandrasekhar 26.2 5 65 5 2.46 0 0 EAS Prasanna 16 4 33 3 2.06 0 I would be interested see an analysis of how good that team was by someone who watched it. Gavaskar and Viswanath seem to be the main batsmen. The spin attack is very good for that squad zen, AuxiliA and Gollum 3
Tibarn Posted August 25, 2020 Posted August 25, 2020 (edited) 12 hours ago, raki05 said: Biggest achievement was winning series in 2001 against GOAT aus team who was on winning spree of continuous 16 tests. LOL, that wasn't close to the GOAT Aussie team. From 2000-2001 https://web.archive.org/web/20130320092516/http://www.icc-cricket.com/match_zone/test_ranking.php?year=2000 https://web.archive.org/web/20130320093827/http://www.icc-cricket.com/match_zone/test_ranking.php?year=2001 The team struggled to maintain even a 120 rating. That makes them comparable to today's Australia. By the way, Ganguly's team got Whitewashed by that team in Australia in that 16 win streak... Test Matches for Australia - 14/10/1999 to 27/02/2001 Date Series Ground Result 1 14/10/1999 1999-2000 Zimbabwe v. Australia Harare Sports Club Australia won by 10 wickets 2 05/11/1999 1999-2000 Australia v. Pakistan Brisbane Cricket Ground Australia won by 10 wickets 3 18/11/1999 1999-2000 Australia v. Pakistan Bellerive Oval Australia won by 4 wickets 4 26/11/1999 1999-2000 Australia v. Pakistan WACA Ground Australia won by an innings and 20 runs 5 10/12/1999 1999-2000 Australia v. India Adelaide Oval Australia won by 285 runs 6 26/12/1999 1999-2000 Australia v. India Melbourne Cricket Ground Australia won by 180 runs 7 02/01/2000 1999-2000 Australia v. India Sydney Cricket Ground Australia won by an innings and 141 runs 8 11/03/2000 1999-2000 New Zealand v. Australia Eden Park Australia won by 62 runs 9 24/03/2000 1999-2000 New Zealand v. Australia Basin Reserve Australia won by 6 wickets 10 31/03/2000 1999-2000 New Zealand v. Australia Seddon Park Australia won by 6 wickets 11 23/11/2000 2000-2001 Australia v. West Indies Brisbane Cricket Ground Australia won by an innings and 126 runs 12 01/12/2000 2000-2001 Australia v. West Indies WACA Ground Australia won by an innings and 27 runs 13 15/12/2000 2000-2001 Australia v. West Indies Adelaide Oval Australia won by 5 wickets 14 26/12/2000 2000-2001 Australia v. West Indies Melbourne Cricket Ground Australia won by 352 runs 15 02/01/2001 2000-2001 Australia v. West Indies Sydney Cricket Ground Australia won by 6 wickets 16 27/02/2001 2000-2001 India v. Australia Wankhede Stadium Australia won by 10 wickets The GOAT Aussie team was from the end of 2004-2007, under Ponting, with a peak rating of 143 in 2007, where they never fell below a 130 rating. https://web.archive.org/web/20130320093757/http://www.icc-cricket.com/match_zone/test_ranking.php?year=2004 https://web.archive.org/web/20130320092902/http://www.icc-cricket.com/match_zone/test_ranking.php?year=2007 Ganguly lost a home series to that team in 2004-5. Greatest captain ever, getting whitewashed overseas and losing home series. Barely winning a home series after Laxman and Dravid saved his arse. Quote Kohli would have avg 5 in front of Warne when ofkee , Moeen and Rashid own him like no tomorrow. Edited August 25, 2020 by Tibarn
Gollum Posted August 25, 2020 Author Posted August 25, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, Gambit said: Terrible way of looking at this. Context matters. A lot. Before the test win in Zimbabwe in 2001, the last test victory for India outside Asia was in 1986! The last win in England was in 1986, in Australia 1981, in West Indies in 1976, in New Zealand 1976 and 0 test victories in South Africa ever. In Asia, the last win in Sri Lanka was in 1993 and we had never won in Pakistan. Ever. To go from that to achieving the following between 2001 and 2004 was phenomenal. - First ever win in Zimbawe - First win in England since 1986 and first drawn series since 1986 - First win in Australia since 1986 and first drawn series in 20+ years - First win in West since 1986 (we won the next series in 2006) - First win in Sri Lanka since 1993 - First win and series victory in Pakistan EVER Should we have won certain tests? Definitely. Did we lose series from winning positions? Sure. But this team did what others had not done IN DECADES and helped the teams thereafter (especially the 2007 - 11 team) to build on that success. See, compared to 90s these were memorable achievements but here we are comparing that team to Kohli's team. To do what others didn't do in 80s and 90s shouldn't get extra marks IMO. Judge them solely based on results. Very good team, started our recovery process post fixing saga. But we have to accept that along with some highs, that team had several lows, wasn't consistent enough, wasn't ruthless at home, underachieved considering the ability in that top 7. If we were a rookie cricket nation I would have understood, but we have a much older test history and success starting from late 60s and early 70s. Truth be told we haven't produced an ATG team, maybe we will have one in the 2020s who knows? All our teams have had multiple flaws, so not a fan of putting them on a pedestal. Edited August 25, 2020 by Gollum SK_IH 1
raki05 Posted August 25, 2020 Posted August 25, 2020 7 minutes ago, Tibarn said: LOL, that wasn't close to the GOAT Aussie team. From 2000-2001 https://web.archive.org/web/20130320092516/http://www.icc-cricket.com/match_zone/test_ranking.php?year=2000 https://web.archive.org/web/20130320093827/http://www.icc-cricket.com/match_zone/test_ranking.php?year=2001 The team struggled to maintain even a 120 rating. That makes them comparable to today's Australia. By the way, Ganguly's team got Whitewashed by that team in Australia in that 16 win streak... Test Matches for Australia - 14/10/1999 to 27/02/2001 Date Series Ground Result 1 14/10/1999 1999-2000 Zimbabwe v. Australia Harare Sports Club Australia won by 10 wickets 2 05/11/1999 1999-2000 Australia v. Pakistan Brisbane Cricket Ground Australia won by 10 wickets 3 18/11/1999 1999-2000 Australia v. Pakistan Bellerive Oval Australia won by 4 wickets 4 26/11/1999 1999-2000 Australia v. Pakistan WACA Ground Australia won by an innings and 20 runs 5 10/12/1999 1999-2000 Australia v. India Adelaide Oval Australia won by 285 runs 6 26/12/1999 1999-2000 Australia v. India Melbourne Cricket Ground Australia won by 180 runs 7 02/01/2000 1999-2000 Australia v. India Sydney Cricket Ground Australia won by an innings and 141 runs 8 11/03/2000 1999-2000 New Zealand v. Australia Eden Park Australia won by 62 runs 9 24/03/2000 1999-2000 New Zealand v. Australia Basin Reserve Australia won by 6 wickets 10 31/03/2000 1999-2000 New Zealand v. Australia Seddon Park Australia won by 6 wickets 11 23/11/2000 2000-2001 Australia v. West Indies Brisbane Cricket Ground Australia won by an innings and 126 runs 12 01/12/2000 2000-2001 Australia v. West Indies WACA Ground Australia won by an innings and 27 runs 13 15/12/2000 2000-2001 Australia v. West Indies Adelaide Oval Australia won by 5 wickets 14 26/12/2000 2000-2001 Australia v. West Indies Melbourne Cricket Ground Australia won by 352 runs 15 02/01/2001 2000-2001 Australia v. West Indies Sydney Cricket Ground Australia won by 6 wickets 16 27/02/2001 2000-2001 India v. Australia Wankhede Stadium Australia won by 10 wickets The GOAT Aussie team was from the end of 2004-2007, under Ponting, with a peak rating of 143 in 2007, where they never fell below a 130 rating. https://web.archive.org/web/20130320093757/http://www.icc-cricket.com/match_zone/test_ranking.php?year=2004 https://web.archive.org/web/20130320092902/http://www.icc-cricket.com/match_zone/test_ranking.php?year=2007 Ganguly lost a home series to that team in 2004-5. Greatest captain ever, getting whitewashed overseas and losing home series. Barely winning a home series after Laxman and Dravid saved his arse. It's fist time I am hearing that Steve wagh team was not GOAT team. In test Steve wagh team was goat and ponting team was even behineed WI ATG team, ponting lost ashes left and right. Odi team under ponting was goat.
zen Posted August 25, 2020 Posted August 25, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, Tibarn said: Didn't you know? Every team in the early 2000s was at least 5 times the team any current team is. Every player was at least 7 feet tall and 300 lbs of pure muscle. Ajit Agarkar used to bowl 200 kph and was a mid tier bowler back then. Steve Smith would have averaged 7 in that era. Kohli would have averaged 5. Bumrah would be played off like a C-tier Ranji Spinner. Jadeja and Ashwin would be lofted out of the park for 6 every other delivery. Even club-level bowlers would banana swing the ball 10 degrees every delivery Ganguly winning 9 times against Zimbabwe and Bangladesh is the single greatest cricketing captaincy feat in cricket history. It's up there with whitewashing Viv Richard-era Windies teams Here is the rankings history of Ganguly's team: from 2000 to 2003 the team never even reached a 100 rating. It wasn't until 2004 that they finally crossed 100. Their peak rating wasn't until 2006, when Dravid took over the captaincy with a 1 month peak of 115. A team which struggled to cross a 100 rating is better than Dhoni's team from 2009-2010 or Kohli's current team At the end of day, that perception could related to overhyping/overrating some of the players from that time. The hatred for Kohli could be because he is taking batting performances to a new level in various formats, for Dhoni because he carved out his niche in ODIs. Having a team with perceived good players on paper and their actual performances can be different. While players who may not look that impactful on paper can push themselves to deliver memorable performances. For e.g. in the current team - Pujara and Kohli have had unmatched series in Aus. Bowlers like Bumrah and Shami have performed outstandingly. Pant became the first wk to score a 100 in SENA - 100s in both Eng and Aus. 1 hour ago, Tibarn said: I would be interested see an analysis of how good that team was by someone who watched it. Gavaskar and Viswanath seem to be the main batsmen. The spin attack is very good for that squad Have not watched that team. But - Chandra is one of the spinners (mystery variety) who could do well overseas relatively speaking. Won us games in WI and Eng iirc. Then the team had other great spinners as well, who probably did not get the conditions that spinners got in India post 1990. Gavaskar had some massive series overseas. Vishwanath was solid at home. Edited August 25, 2020 by zen
Tibarn Posted August 25, 2020 Posted August 25, 2020 (edited) 16 minutes ago, raki05 said: It's fist time I am hearing that Steve wagh team was not GOAT team. In test Steve wagh team was goat and ponting team was even behineed WI ATG team, ponting lost ashes left and right. Odi team under ponting was goat. 2000s Australia was the number 1 team for 8-9 years with 2 different captains. That doesn't mean that the team was equally good all those years. Waugh was captain the first half and his team was number 1 but never leagues better than all the other teams. They spent the year 2000, competing with SA for number 1, SA held it for a month and the two were always close in the rankings. https://web.archive.org/web/20130320092516/http://www.icc-cricket.com/match_zone/test_ranking.php?year=2000 It's not until Ponting's reign that they became unstoppable. From 2004 to 2007, they were the highest rated ream ever, won 48 tests in 77 matches, 16 straight wins, series win in India, etc You are free to your opinion, but rankings show Ponting's team from 2004 to 2007 was the one that was the unstoppable GOAT Aussie team . Edited August 25, 2020 by Tibarn
SK_IH Posted August 25, 2020 Posted August 25, 2020 (edited) 28 minutes ago, Gollum said: See, compared to 90s these were memorable achievements but here we are comparing that team to Kohli's team. To do what others didn't do in 80s and 90s shouldn't get extra marks IMO. Judge them solely based on results. Very good team, started our recovery process post fixing saga. But we have to accept that along with some highs, that team had several lows, wasn't consistent enough, wasn't ruthless at home, underachieved considering the ability in that top 7. If we were a rookie cricket nation I would have understood, but we have a much older test history and success starting from late 60s and early 70s. Truth be told we haven't produced an ATG team, maybe we will have one in the 2020s who knows? All our teams have had multiple flaws, so not a fan of putting them on a pedestal. True. This is my issue with Indian cricket as well. Celebrating what would be treated as failure in a country like Australia. India is a cricket mad country however it's history is replete with mediocrity. and fundamental issues still remain intact with Indian cricket. Major wins are still a shock and remain elusive. With all the resources that came in Indian cricket in the 90s, more was expected from Indian cricket & it's cricketers in 2000s, not just one-off wins. I hope 2020s finally see India emerging out of its mediocre history and become a true powerhouse. Edited August 25, 2020 by SK_IH Gollum 1
Gollum Posted August 25, 2020 Author Posted August 25, 2020 (edited) How did I forget mentioning the 2004 home series against NZ? After crushing us in NZ they came to Ind and drew the series with a rubbish side, in fact we had to struggle to avoid innings defeat in the Mohali test. We were so bad at home...NZ, Eng, Pak, RSA 2x drew in Ind (RSA sans spinner, other 3 weakass teams) and in 2000/2004 we suffered home series defeats. Imagine Kohli's team suffering and barely escaping with a draw in a home series against this side, can you imagine the threads on ICF? Richardson Vincent Styris Fleming Astle McMillan Hart Vettori Wiseman Tuffey Butler Willing to bet that even a severely depleted Indian team (think minus Che, Kohli, Jaddu, Shami, Umesh) will need max 4 days to finish off this Kiwi side at home. Edited August 25, 2020 by Gollum
raki05 Posted August 25, 2020 Posted August 25, 2020 (edited) 59 minutes ago, Tibarn said: 2000s Australia was the number 1 team for 8-9 years with 2 different captains. That doesn't mean that the team was equally good all those years. Waugh was captain the first half and his team was number 1 but never leagues better than all the other teams. They spent the year 2000, competing with SA for number 1, SA held it for a month and the two were always close in the rankings. https://web.archive.org/web/20130320092516/http://www.icc-cricket.com/match_zone/test_ranking.php?year=2000 It's not until Ponting's reign that they became unstoppable. From 2004 to 2007, they were the highest rated ream ever, won 48 tests in 77 matches, 16 straight wins, series win in India, etc You are free to your opinion, but rankings show Ponting's team from 2004 to 2007 was the one that was the unstoppable GOAT Aussie team . For AuS ashes still considered as biggest events ponting lost 2 of them and I think one in aus as well which Steve wagh team never did. Aus team which defeated india in 2004 dint have Tendulkar in 2 of the matches and kumble was also missing. If you go by icc rating there are several batsmen who achieved more rating than Lara and Tendulkar doesn't mean they were greater than Lara/Tendulkar. In my opinion Steve wagh team was greater than ponting test team however ponting odi team was goat. Edited August 25, 2020 by raki05 Stan AF 1
raki05 Posted August 25, 2020 Posted August 25, 2020 (edited) Problem is just to big up Kohlis team they compare it with old team or demean old timer. Reality is with the leverage of best bowling attack and than aus and to some extent eng and NZ right now no team has that strong bowlin attack how it was during 90s-00 where wi, aus, sa,pak has absolute beast bowling attack. At present Indian team is pretty strong and overseas team like sa, wi to some extent aus also downgraded compared to the batting what they have till 2007. Inspite of all these Kohli doesn't have things to showcase in terms of overseas performance in sena. Less said about icc knockouts. Why should I judge Kohli team based on past Indian team at present India is considered one of the strong st team but we lost all icc knockout since 2013 ct. Our performance in overseas are also shitty but the if people wants to bask in glory that he is better than past Indian team than nothing to say. For me until Kohli win something of relevant I don't consider him different than some of the previous captains. Edited August 25, 2020 by raki05 Stan AF, Vk1 and Lone Wolf 1 2
zen Posted August 25, 2020 Posted August 25, 2020 11 minutes ago, raki05 said: If you go by icc rating there are several batsmen who achieved more rating than Lara and Tendulkar doesn't mean they were greater than Lara/Tendulkar. Buddy that is a logical fallacy. As Lara or Tendulkar would be compared to batsmen in their league (not any batsmen). Among various criteria of comparison can be ICC rating.
raki05 Posted August 25, 2020 Posted August 25, 2020 5 minutes ago, zen said: Buddy that is a logical fallacy. As Lara or Tendulkar would be compared to batsmen in their league (not any batsmen). Among various criteria of comparison can be ICC rating. Shane Warne highest bowling ranking was 905 and Ashwin got 904. Same is the case with Jadeja and Herath to some extent. Do you consider them in same league. Stan AF 1
zen Posted August 25, 2020 Posted August 25, 2020 1 minute ago, raki05 said: Shane Warne highest bowling ranking was 905 and Ashwin got 904. Same is the case with Jadeja and Herath to some extent. Do you consider them in same league. As already mentioned - "Buddy that is a logical fallacy. As Lara or Tendulkar would be compared to batsmen in their league (not any batsmen). Among various criteria of comparison can be ICC rating." If you think Warne is in the league of Ashwin, etc., by all means use ICC ratings if it helps to shed light on performances. If not, it is a logical fallacy such as: Richards, when being compared to great ODI batsmen, is better because he had a SR of 90+ in his time. Use of logical fallacy, but Kapil had that kind of SR too, does not mean Kapil is better.
Gollum Posted August 25, 2020 Author Posted August 25, 2020 (edited) 16 minutes ago, raki05 said: Shane Warne highest bowling ranking was 905 and Ashwin got 904. Same is the case with Jadeja and Herath to some extent. Do you consider them in same league. Ashwin had a high peak, maybe because we played more matches in SC in that period but he was creating all sorts of records in the 2015-16 season. Like it or not we have to respect that achievement, also in 2015-16 he had 4-5 consecutive MOS awards I think including away (SL, WI) and at home against RSA, NZ. That doesn't make him a better bowler, it is the case of an inferior bowler matching the GOAT at his best. Also while we are at it in SC conditions Ash>Warne. Not the only one, Ponting is an inferior player compared to the likes of Viv/Lara but had one of the highest peaks of all time in the mid 2000s. Jadeja is a better bowler than Herath. Edited August 25, 2020 by Gollum
raki05 Posted August 25, 2020 Posted August 25, 2020 Just now, zen said: As already mentioned - "Buddy that is a logical fallacy. As Lara or Tendulkar would be compared to batsmen in their league (not any batsmen). Among various criteria of comparison can be ICC rating." If you think Warne is in the league of Ashwin, etc., by all means use ICC ratings if it helps to shed light on performances. If not, it is a logical fallacy such as: Richards, when being compared to great ODI batsmen, is better because he had a SR of 90+ in his time. Use of logical fallacy, but Kapil had that kind of SR too, does not mean Kapil is better. And that's what exactly I meant ratin is just a parameter but you don't judge greatness only on the basis of rating . Not sure why you quoted me as that's what I mentioned to other poster. May be ponting team achieve highest rating but it doesn't mean his team was greater than Steve wagh. Steve wagh team did not loose a single ashes I believe but ponting lost 2 of them and just like Steve wagh ponting never won in India . Stan AF 1
raki05 Posted August 25, 2020 Posted August 25, 2020 2 minutes ago, Gollum said: Ashwin had a high peak, maybe because we played more matches in SC in that period but he was creating all sorts of records in the 2015-16 season. Like it or not we have to respect that achievement, also in 2015-16 he had 4-5 consecutive MOS awards I think including away (SL, WI) and at home against RSA, NZ. That doesn't make him a better bowler, it is the case of an inferior bowler matching the GOAT at his best. Also while we are at it in SC conditions Ash>Warne. Not the only one, Ponting is an inferior player compared to the likes of Viv/Lara but had one of the highest peaks of all time in the mid 2000s. Jadeja is a better bowler than Herath. And that's what I am saying ranking is not be it all to judge a player. Gollum 1
zen Posted August 25, 2020 Posted August 25, 2020 (edited) 36 minutes ago, raki05 said: And that's what exactly I meant ratin is just a parameter but you don't judge greatness only on the basis of rating . Not sure why you quoted me as that's what I mentioned to other poster. Unfortunately, making logical fallacies do not make a counter point esp. w/o understanding it what is on the table. For e.g. if someone has already identified greats and added another metric to it. Quote May be ponting team achieve highest rating but it doesn't mean his team was greater than Steve wagh. Steve wagh team did not loose a single ashes I believe but ponting lost 2 of them and just like Steve wagh ponting never won in India . Winning or losing Ashes may not have a relation to how a team is rated among other teams. By a similar token, the Ind team lost to Pak in 2006, that should make its claim invalid Edited August 25, 2020 by zen
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