India all time test XI

[Muloghonto]

1 minute ago, Soldier said:

Cummins bumrah rabada are all better. Check out the great Ambrose's record vs India in West Indies. 
 

none of them are fit to carry drinks for Amby. 

1 minute ago, Soldier said:

 

Current Aussie attack is better. 

It isn’t. It’s worse. Far worse. Because bowlers are less fit. 

[Soldier]

1 minute ago, Muloghonto said:

none of them are fit to carry drinks for Amby. 

It isn’t. It’s worse. Far worse. Because bowlers are less fit. 

Cause you said so? It's conjecturing again mate. 

 

Aussie attack is better as it has better variety. Ambrose was great but Cummins is better. 

[Soldier]

2 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

none of them are fit to carry drinks for Amby. 

It isn’t. It’s worse. Far worse. Because bowlers are less fit. 

Ambrose himself will say bumrah is better. 

[Soldier]

3 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

plenty of past era players played T20s too.

 

it’s easier because it’s easier to bowl 24 balls max than 60 or 120+. Duh.

don’t lie, you are not old enough to have seen all of the 90s. 
it’s tough for modern players is because they are not fit enough. That’s why they cannot play as much as the older pros.

close in catching was far far better back then. 

they are inferior athletes. That’s why they cannot stay fit for as long as the older players who played far far more. Walsh was way fitter than any modern player and 90% of the players back then played more cricket than today’s players and got injured less often.

 

its attitudes like yours that is the leading cause of decline because your modernist take is to reinvent the wheel and discard proven methods just to try something different in the name of modernism. That’s why there ain’t a fast bowler today as durable as the oldies who played twice as much cricket in a year and did it for 20 year careers compared to the much less fit pacers today 

Past era players din't play t20. They din't play international standard quality T20. Much tougher than you think. Catching is still better now.

 

Fielding was horrible in the past. 

Better atheltes now. Because most tailenders can bat too except sub continent teams. 

[Muloghonto]

7 minutes ago, Soldier said:

Cause you said so? It's conjecturing again mate. 
 

coz noobs with 2-3 years of track record aren’t fit to carry the jockstrap of multi decade greats in any profession.

Quote

 

Aussie attack is better as it has better variety. Ambrose was great but Cummins is better. 

Nope. Cummins doesn’t even have half the wicket or half the fitness of Ambrose. 
pits conjecturing if I say they were better but not when you say no is are better. LOL 

Edited January 20, 2021 by Muloghonto

[Muloghonto]

1 minute ago, Soldier said:

Past era players din't play t20. They din't play international standard quality T20. Much tougher than you think. Catching is still better now.

which only aids their case. They didn’t play easy 24 ball games. 
they not only spent way more days on the field per year, they also spent way longer days than these noobs.

1 minute ago, Soldier said:

 

Fielding was horrible in the past. 

Better atheltes now. Because most tailenders can bat too except sub continent teams. 

Fielding being better doesn’t negate the fact that bowlers in T20 have it ez in terms of workload. And the bowlers are less fit than in the past, hence they can’t even play half as much cricket per annum. 

[Muloghonto]

7 minutes ago, Soldier said:

Ambrose himself will say bumrah is better. 

Ok let’s hear the big man say it then. 
bumrah  already has worse average than Ambrose. At less than 25% the wickets taken. While being less fit and less capable of durability.

 

current pacers are inferior in fitness. Already said so by the greats and the coaches themselves.  Cannot carry as much of a workload due to inferior training regimes- by trying to be too modern. 
 

trouble with your generation is, you don’t have much room to innovate but worship an innovative culture, leading to innovating for the sake of innovating rather than improvement- which leads to regress. Hence lesser fitness of bowlers today.

Edited January 20, 2021 by Muloghonto

[kohli]

25 minutes ago, Soldier said:

Ambrose himself will say bumrah is better. 

Aussie himself will say ambrose , walsh & bishop better than current aussie attack 

Edited January 20, 2021 by kohli

[Soldier]

55 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

coz noobs with 2-3 years of track record aren’t fit to carry the jockstrap of multi decade greats in any profession.

Nope. Cummins doesn’t even have half the wicket or half the fitness of Ambrose. 
pits conjecturing if I say they were better but not when you say no is are better. LOL 

Oh ok fair enough. So at least wait till both players retire before comparing them then? 

[Soldier]

34 minutes ago, kohli said:

Aussie himself will say ambrose , walsh & bishop better than current aussie attack 

But they aren't though and no Aussie would say that unless they are from 90s era.

 

It's all in your perception. 

[Soldier]

54 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

which only aids their case. They didn’t play easy 24 ball games. 
they not only spent way more days on the field per year, they also spent way longer days than these noobs.

Fielding being better doesn’t negate the fact that bowlers in T20 have it ez in terms of workload. And the bowlers are less fit than in the past, hence they can’t even play half as much cricket per annum. 

Dude T20 plus domestic cricket, plus frnahcize cricket that's played every 2 days aka IPL plus Asia cups, champions trophy, tests etc.

 

It all adds up. Much harder now bro. 

 

Preparing for a tournament is different to a test series.

 

You need to peak at the right time over a period of 2 months in the case of IPL. 

[Soldier]

55 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Ok let’s hear the big man say it then. 
bumrah  already has worse average than Ambrose. At less than 25% the wickets taken. While being less fit and less capable of durability.

 

current pacers are inferior in fitness. Already said so by the greats and the coaches themselves.  Cannot carry as much of a workload due to inferior training regimes- by trying to be too modern. 
 

trouble with your generation is, you don’t have much room to innovate but worship an innovative culture, leading to innovating for the sake of innovating rather than improvement- which leads to regress. Hence lesser fitness of bowlers today.

But look at their schedule man. They play too many cup tournaments which requires different conditioning methods. In a cup type tournament teams would need to peak at the right time. It's like preparing for a world cup except you have to utilize the same regime for several cup tournaments in the case of champions trophy, T20 World cups etc. Franchise tournaments. That's why I am saying don't compare across era's. 

[mani sha]

On 1/18/2021 at 6:59 AM, Ankit_sharma03 said:

 

in home condition pujara avg 60

what flat conditions, go see pitches in last few yrs....during dravid we had flatter ones 

 

main to kaha hi nahin im selecting overall XI, i just its for home condition or else do u think ill select 3 spinners

I will select pujara over dravid in all conditions - mainly cos dravid was not as good a wall against high quality pace as pujara is . It was v interesting to see pujara get out to crazy awsome peaches from Cummins . Dravid was v vulnerable to bounce but pujara isnt - pujara will be more successful in Australia and South Africa by end of career . 

[zen]

I have followed India cricket extensively since 1990. Watched some great batsmen over the years. But I have not seen anything like what Pujara did in Aus over the two series. While Sehwag is probably my fav Ind test batsman for his swashbuckling innings and revolutionary approach to test batting, I think, Pujara is the best test batsman that I have seen in terms of battling it out in the middle, valuing his wkt, understanding test cricket, playing it session by session, maximizing his relatively limited talent, bringing out match winning performances against odds (Adelaide 2018 - first test first inning, 9th man out - brilliantly run out iirc), standing tall with others falling apart for e.g. carried his bat through (132* in Eng), turning a series big, and so on. Both these players, on opposite ends of the batting approach spectrum, would make it to my Ind AT11 w/o a doubt ... While some of the other batsmen may be more "popular" or better to "watch", after having seen many of these guys battle it out v the best, Pujara edges ahead in my book at the moment ... a case of the tortoise triumphing over the hares ... I hope that he continues his good work 

 

 

Edited January 20, 2021 by zen

[zen]

2 hours ago, Cricspin said:

 

If you think that Pujara is the best Test batsman since 1990 at the same time admitting his limited talent.. there is not much room to discuss batting.

 

This period has Sachin, Ponting, Lara, Hayden, Sangakara, Kallis, Dravid, Virat , Sehwag, Gilchrist,  Hussey, G Smith, S smith, Mahela, Inzy, Yusuf, Cook.. pretty sure I missed other names.

 

Chandrapaul could hang around for a long time in tests, has an average to back it up and played some long ugly innings.. Never seen anyone saying him the best windiest batsman let alone the best batsman.

 

I am damn sure unless Pujara changes something his average will be below 45 by the time he retires unless he mostly plays at home. It's not even about averages, He has tenacity, concentration and patience.. I agree and admire that.. but best batsman.. not even of current Indian team, let alone of all bat since 1990..if if you were  only talking about Indian bats.

 

That's just my opinion which is different than some others and that's fine as we all see things differently.

 

 

 

If you "read" my post, it is discussing the Ind batting perspective ...  I am willing to tolerate a 10-20% variance in averages esp. when looking across periods and also account for impactful performances, along with unique value offered to the team  ... note there are many great batsmen who avg in the 45-50 range 

 

I do not see Sachin and Kohli become as successful as top order (#1-3) batsmen in tests; I do not see Dravid doing as well w/o the support and confidence of Sehwag, Tendulkar, VVS and Ganguly in the line up 

 

PS 

 

One of major qualities of Pujara is that he gets the job done by hook or crook. At Brisbane for e.g., when many thought that even lasting the day would be a win, Pujara battled for 5 and 1/2 hours. It would have been easier for him to hit a rash shot in all the pressure created by Aus, where one mistake = game over for Ind. Everyone in the team felt confident with Pujara at the crease soaking the pressure, enabling them to play their natural game

 

Pujara is taking the burden w/o too many major names to support him. Look at the fab 4-5, who played in the comfort and confidence of each other in the team, and still probably would not inspire confidence of drawing the game. While as fans, we knew that if Pujara stays, Ind can do something about the game ... Good looking shots, more talent, blah blah, means little if you cannot inspire confidence in critical situations. That is where Pujara forges ahead of the pack 

 

Edited January 20, 2021 by zen

[Muloghonto]

7 hours ago, Soldier said:

But they aren't though and no Aussie would say that unless they are from 90s era.

 

It's all in your perception. 

But yes they are. 

The ones who have seen them both say this unanimously.

7 hours ago, Soldier said:

Dude T20 plus domestic cricket, plus frnahcize cricket that's played every 2 days aka IPL plus Asia cups, champions trophy, tests etc.

 

It all adds up. Much harder now bro. 

T20 is much easier than FC cricket for bowlers' body. 24 balls in one day is way easier than potentially 120 and regularly 90+. Duh.

 

7 hours ago, Soldier said:

 

Preparing for a tournament is different to a test series.

 

You need to peak at the right time over a period of 2 months in the case of IPL. 

Dont make up nonsense. Bowling is running in and bowling, regardless of the format. There is a reason why the players today cannot finish a series with such regularity: inferior fitness regime than in the past. Because morons like you thought the wheel needed reinventing.

 

7 hours ago, Soldier said:

But look at their schedule man. They play too many cup tournaments which requires different conditioning methods.

Nonsense. Bowling is bowling. Their schedule is lighter than that of the past. thats why someone like cummins averages 45 days of cricket per annum and everyone from the 90s averaged 80-90 days of cricket per annum. 

 

7 hours ago, Soldier said:

In a cup type tournament teams would need to peak at the right time. It's like preparing for a world cup except you have to utilize the same regime for several cup tournaments in the case of champions trophy, T20 World cups etc. Franchise tournaments. That's why I am saying don't compare across era's. 

 

The prior eras had fitter bowlers. The evidence is decisive. Kapil was fitter than Bumrah- hence Bumrah cannot play 14 tests in one year or come close to it, while Kapil could. 

 

[express bowling]

37 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

. thats why someone like cummins averages 45 days of cricket per annum and everyone from the 90s averaged 80-90 days of cricket per annum. 

 

 

10 tests + say 15 ODIs + say 7 T20Is + 14 IPL games = 50 + 15 + 7 + 14 = 86 days - say 6 tests finishing early i.e around 80 days of cricket per annum for Cummins.

 

 

Quote

The prior eras had fitter bowlers. The evidence is decisive. Kapil was fitter than Bumrah- hence Bumrah cannot play 14 tests in one year or come close to it, while Kapil could. 

 

 

 

Kapil cut down on his pace to achieve this. Rarely bowled with full effort. Plus he did not have to play the IPL or 3 formats.

 

Have been seeing Bumrah bowl with tremendous effort in almost every spell. Almost always operates at his full pace. Hits the deck hard. While Kapil floated the ball up even when the ball was not swinging.

 

I would rather have a fast bowler who plays 60 tests and averages 20 to 25 and then retires ...  than a seamer who hangs on for 130 odd tests while operating at half pace and averages almost 30.

 

 

Edited January 20, 2021 by express bowling

[Muloghonto]

8 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

10 tests + say 15 ODIs + say 7 T20Is + 14 IPL games = 50 + 15 + 7 + 14 = 86 days - say 6 tests finishing early i.e around 80 days of cricket per annum for Cummins.

 

Err  I did the math earlier on this thread. cummins has less than 50 days of cricket per annum. Out of which 20% is the easy on the body 24 ball T20 cricket. 

Peope like Walsh has nearly TWICE as much cricket per annum over a 20 year span.

 

Quote

 

 

Kapil cut down on his pace to achieve this. Rarely bowled with full effort. Plus he did not have to play the IPL or 3 formats.

Dont be insulting. Kapil cut down his pace after his knee injury. 

If he had to play IPL it would have been easier on his body. IPL or T20 bowling is the easiest workload per match for a bowler.

 

Quote

 

Have been seeing Bumrah bowl with tremendous effort in almost every spell. Almost always operates at his full pace. Hits the deck hard. While Kapil floated the ball up.

Ok. Forget Kapil. Take a look at Walsh, Ambrose, McGrath, Lee, Marshall, Holding, Garner, Donald etc. 

ALL of them fitter than your Bumrah-Cummins et al. All of them capable of playing way more cricket through their careers than the inferior fitness millenials.

 

Quote

 

I would rather have a fast bowler who plays 60 tests and averages 20 to 25 and then retires ...  than a seamer who hangs on for 130 odd tests while operating at half pace and averaging 29.

 

 

And i would rather have a honest person, than a moron millenial who is an insult to humanity by thinking that its millenials who invented professionalism and all the older gen are inferior, parroting postmodernist western scum ideology and applying it like a typical house negro of the whites. 

All the while ignoring objective evidence of inferior bowler fitness today than 20 years ago and ignoring expert opinion of the coaches and former bowlers calling THIS generation inferior in fitness ( which had never been done in prior generations). 

Edited January 20, 2021 by Muloghonto

[express bowling]

2 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Err  I did the math earlier on this thread. cummins has less than 50 days of cricket per annum. Out of which 20% is the easy on the body 24 ball T20 cricket. 

 

 

I just did the math for you in the earlier post. You are wrong. Go check it again.

 

 

2 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

 

 

Dont be insulting. Kapil cut down his pace after his knee injury. 

 

 

It is not an insult but a fact. All these are excuses. Bumrah is coming back from a stress fracture of the back in late 2019. Don't see him giving the same excuse.

 

 

2 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

If he had to play IPL it would have been easier on his body. IPL or T20 bowling is the easiest workload per match for a bowler.

 

 

You have never played a T20 it seems.  It requires tremendous focused practice for many days. And the matches are very high intensity.

 

 

2 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

 

Ok. Forget Kapil. Take a look at Walsh, Ambrose, McGrath, Lee, Marshall, Holding, Garner, Donald etc. 

ALL of them fitter than your Bumrah-Cummins et al. All of them capable of playing way more cricket through their careers than the inferior fitness millenials.

 

 

This kind of generalization does not make sense. This ability is different for different bowlers. Anderson and Broad are still going on these days.

 

2 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

 

And i would rather have a honest person, than a moron millenial who is an insult to humanity by thinking that its millenials who invented professionalism and all the older gen are inferior, parroting postmodernist western scum ideology and applying it like a typical house negro of the whites. 

 

 

1.  I am not a millennial.  I am a 40+ guy.

 

2. You are resorting to baseless personal insults when you cannot find logic and facts to support you.

 

It is more a reflection on you than the other person.

[Muloghonto]

18 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

 

I just did the math for you in the earlier post. You are wrong. Go check it again.

 

 

I am not. You did the math wrong. 

Cummins debuted in winter 2011. That gives him 10 years of professional cricket ( not international cricket but professional cricket).

In that span hes played 96 T20s, 90 List As, 34 tests and an additional 13 FC matches.

 

That is (96 + 90 + 34*5 + 13*3)/10 = 39.5 days of cricket, MAXIMUM per annum.

 

Walsh debuted in 1981, he retired in 2000. That is exactly 20 years. 

In that span he played 132 tests, 440 List-As and 297 FC matches - some of them being 4 day cricket, since England used to do ( and maybe still does- not sure) 4 day first class crickets. But lets go easy on the modern inferior fitness bowlers and not make them look too bad and just assume Walsh only played 3 day FC cricket)

That is ( 440+ 132*5+ 297*3)/20 = 99.55 days of cricket MAXIMUM per annum.

 

Ie, Walsh played twice as much cricket as Cummins does, for twice as long.  And unlike Cummins and modern players, Walsh didnt have the luxury of easy bowling days where one days work == maximum 24 balls bowled.  Those are the basic facts.

Modern fitness regime has been called out as inferior by the actual experts - former fast bowlers and current coaches. 

 

We have objective evidence that modern bowlers are less durable, we have expert testimonial about it. What more evidence can there be that modern fitness regimen is inferior ?? 

Quote

 

It is not an insult but a fact. All these are excuses. Bumrah is coming back from a stress fracture of the back in late 2019. Don't see him giving the same excuse.

 

So slowing down of a bowler post injury is excuse. Okay then. Biology is an excuse.

 

Whats really an excuse is trying to justify the inferior fitness of the modern bowlers when being openly called out so by the experts and when data shows that they are LESS capable of playing as much. 

 

Quote

 

 

You have never played a T20 it seems.  It requires tremendous focused practice for many days. And the matches are very high intensity.

Irrelevant to the point that T20 is easier on the bowlers body than one day or first class cricket.

24 balls is easier on the body than 100+. Its just that simple.

 

Quote

 

 

 

This kind of generalization does not make sense. This ability is different for different bowlers. Anderson and Broad are still going on these days.

Yes. 

And the ability of MODERN bowlers to be durable is , in general, inferior. There is hardly a bowler today who can meet the workload of the bowlers 20 years ago.

 

Quote

 

 

1.  I am not a millennial.  I am a 40+ guy.

 

2. You are resorting to baseless personal insults when you cannot find logic and facts to support you.

 

It is more a reflection on you than the other person.

 

Then act like it, instead of talking nonsense about how older pros were less professional coz you said so.

 

Edited January 20, 2021 by Muloghonto