If only He was there...

[graphic23]

Player Mat Inns Overs Mdns Runs Wkts BBI BBM Ave Econ SR 5 10 Ct St Harbhajan Singh 2 3 118.5 10 400 12 5/164 8/265 33.33 3.36 59.4 1 0 1 0 V Sehwag 2 2 33.0 3 92 2 1/37 2/92 46.00 2.78 99.0 0 0 0 0 A Kumble 2 3 98.0 15 241 4 2/106 3/163 60.25 2.45 147.0 0 0 1 0 S Sreesanth 2 3 61.0 9 233 3 2/87 2/87 77.66 3.81 122.0 0 0 0 0 VVS Laxman 2 1 10.0 2 19 0 - - - 1.90 - 0 0 1 0 SC Ganguly 2 3 8.0 1 25 0 - - - 3.12 - 0 0 1 0 IK Pathan 1 1 21.2 3 85 0 - - - 3.98 - 0 0 0 0 RP Singh 2 3 53.0 4 235 0 - - - 4.43 - 0 0 2 0 when a guy like bhajji is on the top of the list in wkts that says a lot abt our current pacers

I don't know if I'll agree that Harbhajan has not deserved to be on top of the list. He is the only one who has looked like he could take wickets. Unfortunately, something is wrong with Kumble otherwise I'm very sure that he would've been leading the wickets list. Perhaps, he has been caught off guard as well. Coming back to Bhajji, he has been flighting the ball, and changing his pace/length and of course using his doosra pretty well compared to the recent past where 99/100 deliveries had been flat and fast on to the stumps. He still isn't in his 2001 Australia series form, but he has done pretty well this series I feel.

[graphic23]

Changed bowler? Averaging 40 against Aussies and the pathetic Paki batting line-up? Averaging 30 against South Africa? This is the best form of his career? Averaging 22 against piss poor bangers? This is form of his life is it? One good series against England in England doesnt make him good in India where he averages 40! You must be srk fan too

I'm sorry. His county stint was in 2006. He returned to the South Africa series at the end of 2006. So lets take a look at the stats since then. A variety of stats are needed here. First lets take a look at his average in the matches India won and lost.

won match  	4  	8  	136.5  	34  	423  	[B]25[/B]  	5/34  	9/134  	[B]16.92[/B]  	3.09  	32.8  	2  	0  	
lost match 	3 	6 	127.4   20	 471 	[B]13 [/B]	4/62 	5/136  [B] 36.23[/B]  3.68   58.9  0 	 0

Thats a drastic change of nearly 20 points in the average. It shows how important it is for India to have Zaheer performing at his best. Now lets take a look at his average against the teams in this period.

v Australia  	1  	2  	43.4  	3  	187  	[B]5 [/B] 	4/94  	5/187  	[B]37.40[/B]  	4.28  	52.4  	0  	0  	
v Bangladesh 	2 	4 	40.0 	3 	175 	[B]8 [/B]	5/34 	7/88 	[B]21.87[/B] 	4.37 	30.0 	1 	0 	
v England 	3 	6 	136.2 	41 	366 	[B]18 	[/B]5/75 	9/134 	[B]20.33[/B] 	2.68 	45.4 	1 	0 	
v Pakistan 	2 	4 	71.2 	17 	191 	[B]5[/B] 	2/45 	4/90 	[B]38.20[/B] 	2.67 	85.6 	0 	0 	
v South Africa 	3 	6 	116.5 	25 	395 	[B]13[/B] 	4/62 	5/111 	[B]30.38[/B] 	3.38 	53.9 	0 	0 	

If you consider that he only played 1 test against Australia (just the Boxing day MCG one), I'd say this is a pretty good record since his comeback. So the average against Pakistan is 38.20, which is rather high. He played the two tests at the Kotla and at Eden Gardens, which are about as flat as pitches can get. He always got us the early breakthrough in the first sesssion, and I'd say thats prety darn valuable considering we haven't been able to do that this series at all. Some of the deliveries were so superb that no statistics will be able to explain them. The wicket of Ponting in that MCG test was just awesome. His performance in England is not something to be reminded of anyways. Infact, in a recent analysis on Cricinfo, they saw the largest portion of Zaheer's wickets are that of the top-order's and very seldom does he take 5WI by picking up the lower order wickets. Infact, he was on the top of the list where the percentage of the top-order wickets were considered. I think this evidence is good enough for me to say that he would've been a huge help for us both at Chennai and at Ahmedabad. Furthermore during this period (since Dec. 2006), his average has been 26.81, and he has taken 49 wickets. Thats an amazing average in these days where the bat has been dominating the ball overwhelmingly. The following table lists these facts.

[B]Career Stats[/B]
unfiltered  	53  	98  	1735.0  	356  	5712  	[B]170[/B]  	5/29  	9/134  	[B]33.60[/B]  	3.29  	61.2  	5  	0  	
[B]Stint since Dec. 2006[/B]
filtered 	11 	22 	408.1 	     	 89     1314    [B]49[/B] 	5/34 	9/134 	[B]26.81[/B] 	3.21 	49.9 	2 	0

Note, statistics courtesy of cricinfo's statsguru.

[Rohip]

It could also be argues that we lost those games because Zaheer bowled to his usual ability. Why dont we only use his stats in games where he bowled well and where the track was helpful to bowlers, even then he'll probably be averaging over 30.

[Kartikey]

Definitely, we need him back.

[tonoy]

true, sigh.

[graphic23]

It could also be argues that we lost those games because Zaheer bowled to his usual ability. Why dont we only use his stats in games where he bowled well and where the track was helpful to bowlers, even then he'll probably be averaging over 30.

What do you want him to be? Glenn McGrath, with an average of 20? Plus, since Dec. 2006, he has played in SA, England (6 out of the 11 matches he's played), and those are very bowler-friendly. And his stats reflect that he's taken 13 and 18 wickets in these countries at an average of less than 30.I do not understand your argument. The usual tendency of any bowler is not to bowl bad but rather to generate really good spells. I think the lower average in winning games reflects that he bowled some awesome spells during this period, and deserved his wickets.

[cochise]

Also, Indian bowling averages tend always to be higer than their counterparts because of the lower standard of fielding that back the bowlers in their efforts. Thus, to compare a Indian bowler to his say Australian or South African counterpart, one should subtract 20% from his average for poor fielding of the side. So an average of 30 actually is more akin to an average of 24 internationally, which is good. Yes, Zaheer is missed badly.

[Rohip]

Dont make me laugh, are you saying the Pakistani fielding is better than ours? Yet their bowlers average around or under 25. Even their new guys like Asif average 23 and their reject Shabbir averages 23 too

[f.b.m]

Shabbir was rejected because of chucking. When he couldnt pelt them, he was useless. Asif has that avg. because he's damn good. Anyone who thinks that Zaheer isnt in our top 2-3 fast bowlers has something lacking in grey matter. And no I'm not talking about cricinfo SR and avgs. Watch him bowl a spell in say Feroz Shah Kotla. Also, most of his wickets are of geniune batsmen.

[cochise]

How much has Asif played? Keep an eye on his average when he gets around as much as Zaheer. That being said, I think Asif is a superior bowler...but that does not mean Zaheer is not good. As for Shabbir...how many international sides has he played?

[cochise]

Stats from http://www.howstat.com.au/cricket/home.asp Akhtar - Average 25.70 (Do we need to discuss his action?) Sami - Average 51.37 (Enough said) Naved-Ul-Hasan 58.00 (Ditto) Umar Gul - Average 31.55 (That's more like it) Abdul Razzaq - Average 36.94

[Rohip]

Also' date=' most of his wickets are of geniune batsmen.[/quote'] What's that supposed to mean? What you meant to say is that he cant clean up the tail which is an essential ingredient for all great fast bowlers like Kapil, McGrath, Wasim

[cochise]

If you were given a choice between two bowlers, with identical averages, one with a higher percentage of wickets from genuine batsmen and the other with a higher percentage of batsmen from the tail, which would you consider superior?

[Zakhmi]

well well, here we have got all iffs and buts of ZK...stats I believe ZK reads this and recover soon to be in XI... come on ZK, Indian team needs you...

[Rohip]

Stats from http://www.howstat.com.au/cricket/home.asp Akhtar - Average 25.70 (Do we need to discuss his action?) Sami - Average 51.37 (Enough said) Naved-Ul-Hasan 58.00 (Ditto) Umar Gul - Average 31.55 (That's more like it) Abdul Razzaq - Average 36.94

Make your mind up, one minute Zaheer is our best bowler the next minute you're comparing him with Razzaq, Rana and Sami. If Zaheer is our best then you should compare him with Shoaib and Asif but you chose Gul who would be equivalent to Munaf or Sreesanth in our team. Even so Gul after 20 games has a better average than Zaheer after 50 but just compare their strike rates and you can see Gul will end up a far better bowler by the end of his career. Zaheer is nothing more than mediocre just admit it and stop embarassing yourself

[graphic23]

What's that supposed to mean? What you meant to say is that he cant clean up the tail which is an essential ingredient for all great fast bowlers like Kapil' date=' McGrath, Wasim[/quote'] RP Singh is very effective in cleaning up the tail (barring the SA series). But will you say right now that RP is a better bowler than Zaheer (and comparisons are valid because both of them are left-arm seamers)? RP is definitely talented as seen in England & Australia. But he has to learn how to bowl well on the flat subcontinental pitches. You will agree with me that though cleaning the tail up is an essential requirement for a great fast bowler, it is not a necessary requirement, because if you look at this list generated by one of cricinfo's writers as to the percentage of top-order wickets (non-tail wickets) a bowler has taken, Zaheer comes out on top. The bowlers are mentioned here http://blogs.cricinfo.com/itfigures/archives/2008/03/the_bowlers_who_took_the_most.php . The reason I mention this is because it is usually the top order batsmen who score the most, not the tail. You cannot have that as a requirement for "greatness" or "effectiveness" of a bowler. Wasim Akram, Kapil Dev, and Glenn McGrath are some of the greatest fast bowlers the cricket world has seen. Zaheer hasn't reached that level yet (though after Wasim, I expect him to become the next great left-arm seamer). It is unfair to compare him to these guys.

[Rohip]

You will agree with me that though cleaning the tail up is an essential requirement for a great fast bowler' date=' it is not a necessary requirement, because if you look at this list generated by one of cricinfo's writers as to the percentage of top-order wickets (non-tail wickets) a bowler has taken, Zaheer comes out on top. The bowlers are mentioned here [/quote'] Why do you keep going on about this meaningless stat? Out of every 10 batsmen Zaheer takes the wickets of 2 batsmen from the tail whilst Gul takes the wickets of 2.5 batsmen from the tail. There's hardly any difference.

[cochise]

Make your mind up, one minute Zaheer is our best bowler the next minute you're comparing him with Razzaq, Rana and Sami.

stop embarassing yourself

I think you should take some of your own advice. When did I say he was the best bowler in our side? To refresh your memory, here is what I said:

So an average of 30 actually is more akin to an average of 24 internationally, which is good. Yes, Zaheer is missed badly.

Where exactly in that do I say that he is "the best" bowler in our side?

Make your mind up, one minute Zaheer is our best bowler the next minute you're comparing him with Razzaq, Rana and Sami.

I am not comparing him...I am reflecting to you your claim. In particular, this one:

Yet their bowlers average around or under 25. Even their new guys like Asif average 23 and their reject Shabbir averages 23 too

I replied to you about Asif and Shabbirs lack of international exposure...it's too early to compare their averages to Zaheer's meaningfully. And yes, I think Asif is a superior bowler, as I said. As for Akhtar, he is in a league of his own...with suspect action to boot. Who else is left? Amongst the other Paki's did you have any other in the current line up aside from Razzaq, Rana and Sami (and Gul). None average under 25...only Akhtar averages 25.70... So we are going for Gul-Zaheer comparison then? I would say they are comparable, even though Gul has a slightly better average (31.55 vs 33.60) and better strike rate (53.91 vs 61.24 ). 16 test for Gul vs 55 for Zaheer. So yes, he compares favourably for now. One exception though. Gul has not had a single test match against Australia yet. Let's compare his average and strike rate after he has a few of Australia under his belt. Before that, there is not much to separate them.

[Zakhmi]

thanks and repped you graphix for the link and the above post.

[graphic23]

Why do you keep going on about this meaningless stat? Out of every 10 batsmen Zaheer takes the wickets of 2 batsmen from the tail whilst Gul takes the wickets of 2.5 batsmen from the tail. There's hardly any difference.

It is not a meaningless stat as far as I am concerned. For a team like India , which does not have a star performer who always troubles the batsman, it is very crucial to get early breakthroughs, and that stat shows me that he has very often done and given us opportunities to dominate the first sessions in the test match. It also shows that he is able to take use of the new ball available in Test cricket better than most other bowlers. I remember in England, several times when the new ball was taken, we got 2 or 3 quick wickets to put pressure on them (if they lasted that long). Whether the other bowlers supported him and used that opportunity is not of relevance. Even in very flat pitches, if he is able to get the early breakthroughs, it shows that the team needs him to be at his best and back for this series where we have not even beaten the bat many times. So, your argument about us embarrassing ourselves by understanding the importance of Zaheer is not valid and to be honest, doesn't mean anything except for the fact that you have never been impressed with him because you expect everyone to become a Wasim Akram if they are considered important/strike bowlers.