Why do certain teams play well against particular opponents?

[Bumper]

We are driving in circles. Opener's achievements are always greater than a middle order bat's, because openers face far WORSE conditions than the middle order batsmen. Hence the credit attributed to him, will in some sense be disproportionate to his actual stats. I have already shown Veeru's worth in numbers. To blunt my claims, you need to come back with answers to the same questions that I have answered, replacing Veeru with the other batsmen: 1) Does India fail to score 300+ 90% of the time against the Aussies, when one of SRT, Dravid or Laxman fail ? 2) Does India score in excess of 300, 90% of the time against the Aussies, when one of SRT, Dravid or Laxman succeed ? I havent researched the above. May be you can. Without such numbers, we wont be able to move fwd meaningfully.

[graphic23]

My argument will be based on this logic that if one of the Rahul Dravid, Sachin Tendulkar, VVS Laxman, and Sourav Ganguly have done better than Virender Sehwag in the matches we've scored 300+ runs, it will prove my point that Sehwag is a significant force but not the only force. Because Sachin's God and we all love him, lets use him as an example. In all the matches Sachin has participated in against Australia, we have scored 300+ runs in 14 innings. In these matches, we have lost 3 times, drawn 4 times, and won 7 times. Out of those in 5 matches, Sachin failed and in all the other 9 matches (win, lose, draw), he has contributed rather significantly. In all the matches Sehwag has played against Australia, we have won 2 matches, lost 1 match, and drew 4 matches. Out of these 7 matches, he has not "failed" in any of the matches (he has at least succeeded in one of the innings). In 2 of the 7 matches, he has outscored everyone else. In the remaining 5 matches, he has scored less than or equal to at least one other middle order batsman. I think this just reassures my point that he's been an essential ingredient in our successes but rarely has he been the sole difference between defeat and win/draw.

[The Outsider]

Some impressive work there with the numbers, Bumper but I don't think it's a point I was contesting to begin with. In fact, have written so previously in my thread also - about the importance of openers in general. Every team aspires for a good opening pair and having one increases the performance of the team. So I suspect the argument that you are making here, given that you have also included matches where Sehwag did not figure as an opener but we got good starts, is that opening partnerships are the single biggest factor behind success from a batting point of view and Sehwag has given them more often than the other lot we have tried. I would agree to that to an extent but when it comes down to just pure impact in a particular match Sehwag's performances are easily matched or bettered by Laxman, Dravid, and Tendulkar.

[The Outsider]

So you all think that without Sachin's 241 not out and 60 not as well as without Laxman's 178 in Sydney 03-04' date=' we could have saved that match and hence drawn the series? Remember, the series was still alive then![/quote'] Without both those innings we probably would not have saved the match but I was just excluding them one at a time and given that we lost what 8-9 wickets in the two innings put together, I think it still would have been a draw if you take out one of those innings.

[Bumper]

Some impressive work there with the numbers' date=' Bumper but I don't think it's a point I was contesting to begin with. In fact, have written so previously in my thread also - about the importance of openers in general. Every team aspires for a good opening pair and having one increases the performance of the team.[b'] So I suspect the argument that you are making here, given that you have also included matches where Sehwag did not figure as an opener but we got good starts, is that opening partnerships are the single biggest factor behind success from a batting point of view and Sehwag has given them more often than the other lot we have tried. I would agree to that to an extent but when it comes down to just pure impact in a particular match Sehwag's performances are easily matched or bettered by Laxman, Dravid, and Tendulkar.

Precisely. Making runs as an opener is not easy. The same Laxman & Dravid looked distinctly uncomfortable when opening. And Sachin has been quite reluctant to open from day one. Thats why Veery is special. Against a team like Australia, a good start is the key, as its very difficult to come back into the game, once they sieze the momentum. Very rarely do they let the foot of the gas pedal (Kolkatta'01 type games, happen once in a blue moon). Without a solid opening partnership, the powers of our middle order would be reduced disproportionately. And when Veeru entered, he not only fixed this very basic problem, but also did it in a manner that put us on top. From there it was just a matter of coasting to a big score. You still need a very good batting performance to put up a big score, but not the VVS's type magic. Prior to Veeru we played a developing Aussie test unit mostly at home on spinning tracks & won. When we toured Australia, we got pasted. 2001, was a freakish series for two reasons: 1) You dont see a batting effort a'la VVS's 281 & Dravid's 180 very often 2) You dont see a bowler taking 32 wickets against Australia in a 3 test series. Needless to say, such efforts cannot be replicated series after series. For these reasons, i reckon, Veeru has been the key to our improved record against the Aussies, esp in Australia.