Greg Chappell: Only surprise is that anyone can compete with India at all

[rollingstoned]

16 minutes ago, goose said:

i find this narrative (similar to Langer's post match reaction) a bit back-handed. It's like they cannot accept an Indian, all things being equal, could be better than them. India didn't win because it has a population of 1.5 billion it won due to the 11 players on the pitch.

beyond a point your population isn't going to matter that much. just coz we have 50 times australia's population doesn't mean there are an equivalent number of international class cricketers playing the game at any point of time in the country even with a good system. this is something people who wish to use the population as a stick to beat us with don't understand.

Edited January 24, 2021 by rollingstoned

[rkt.india]

3 hours ago, putrevus said:

Greg is writing lot of nonsense, Other than Gill who is the last great batting talent to have emerged from India in last decade. Morons who think it was Kohli who had stopped talented players from playing for India. Whose  are those talented batsmen.

Plenty. Aussies don't have talent like Sarfaraz Khan who is no where near India team. 

[sage]

Aussie are playing 4D chess trying to make it seem they lost to the greatest team ever to hide their embarrassment of being whooped at home and losing at the Gabba. If England put up a tough fight in India, Aussie will look so much worse

[BacktoCricaddict]

Trying to get an IPL coaching gig, eh, Greggo?  

[IndianRenegade]

3 hours ago, putrevus said:

Greg is writing lot of nonsense, Other than Gill who is the last great batting talent to have emerged from India in last decade. Morons who think it was Kohli who had stopped talented players from playing for India. Whose  are those talented batsmen.

Pant & Gill, should have been in the team      For a longer period than they have been.

 

2019 WC could have been different if these two had settled places in the team by then.

[express bowling]

12 hours ago, rollingstoned said:

beyond a point your population isn't going to matter that much. just coz we have 50 times australia's population doesn't mean there are an equivalent number of international class cricketers playing the game at any point of time in the country even with a good system. this is something people who wish to use the population as a stick to beat us with don't understand.

 

 

Too high a population puts extra stress on resources. Available resources per person gets reduced a lot.

 

Beyond a point, population is a disadvantage.

[R!TTER]

12 hours ago, IndianRenegade said:

Pant & Gill, should have been in the team      For a longer period than they have been.

Don't mind Kohli fans, they just get riled up when someone utters the name of the one who cannot/should not be named 

[rollingstoned]

39 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

 

Too high a population puts extra stress on resources. Available resources per person gets reduced a lot.

 

Beyond a point, population is a disadvantage.

yes but in our defence we have enough first class teams for it. my point is it is the law of diminishing returns applies at some point. you cannot max out your population output beyond a point. brazil having several times the population of some of those european teams doesn't mean they would be that many times better at football even at their best.

anyways cricket is not a poor man's sport like football is, traditionally only middle class people at worst could afford to allow their kids to play it.

[express bowling]

1 hour ago, rollingstoned said:

yes but in our defence we have enough first class teams for it. my point is it is the law of diminishing returns applies at some point. you cannot max out your population output beyond a point. brazil having several times the population of some of those european teams doesn't mean they would be that many times better at football even at their best.

anyways cricket is not a poor man's sport like football is, traditionally only middle class people at worst could afford to allow their kids to play it.

 

 

I was agreeing with you only.

 

If there are say 500 young kids trying to get in a local club but only 30 or 40 are succeeding, often because of the influence of their fathers ... it may well be that a top talent misses out while a well off mediocre talent gets a chance to further his cricket career.

 

Happens all the time in India.

[Lone Wolf]

1 hour ago, rollingstoned said:

yes but in our defence we have enough first class teams for it. my point is it is the law of diminishing returns applies at some point. you cannot max out your population output beyond a point. brazil having several times the population of some of those european teams doesn't mean they would be that many times better at football even at their best.

anyways cricket is not a poor man's sport like football is, traditionally only middle class people at worst could afford to allow their kids to play it.

Exactly this population excuse is laughable as Cricket always has been an elite level sport that let's be frank most poor family guys can't afford. 

These Aussie guys grew up with better facilities having a big backyard when they are little or something which Indians don't have. 

Aussies think every Indian gets to play cricket out of a billion people. 

I am glad that our 2nd XI beat them & they have no excuse in front of media which has grilled langer & co brutally. 

 

[TheWall]

On 1/24/2021 at 11:17 PM, BacktoCricaddict said:

Trying to get an IPL coaching gig, eh, Greggo?  

KKR can hire him...

[Vk1]

19 hours ago, rollingstoned said:

yes but in our defence we have enough first class teams for it. my point is it is the law of diminishing returns applies at some point. you cannot max out your population output beyond a point. brazil having several times the population of some of those european teams doesn't mean they would be that many times better at football even at their best.

anyways cricket is not a poor man's sport like football is, traditionally only middle class people at worst could afford to allow their kids to play it.

 

European teams vs Brazil theory holds good as all those nations are equally crazy about soccer.. cricket is hardly the nbr 2 sport in SENA.. a team like NZ deserves even more praise.

[Vk1]

Once a sport becomes the favorite sport of a country, guess it will occupy a min. of 50% of everything..eye balls, resources and the budding talent.. gulf between the nbr 1 sport vs nbr 2 also seems pretty large.. when Eng won the 2005 Ashes and 19 WC their experts talked majorly about the influence these wins would have in promoting the game.. that is ignored if its a nbr 1 sport as it is more or less a inevitable thing even without those wins.

Edited January 26, 2021 by Vk1

[rollingstoned]

1 hour ago, Vk1 said:

 

European teams vs Brazil theory holds good as all those nations are equally crazy about soccer.. cricket is hardly the nbr 2 sport in SENA.. a team like NZ deserves even more praise.

it is not about how crazy people are in a country about a game, talk was about population and attendant expectations. beyond a point a 200mn country with a cricket crazy population will also hit a ceiling where it's population will provide it with an advantage, eg bangladesh and pakistan. you will only have so many people playing a sport in any country regardless of it's size, it is just economics.

 

in australia, new zealand and england cricket is a summer sport. not something that no body cares about exactly. you should see the tv ratings for every important series there. what the ecb was saying was that they want the working class to play cricket which isn't always possible because of the high costs of taking it up like we mentioned above which is partly because cricket is not shown on fta tv over there. it is a distant second to football for that same reason, except that south asian expats will always make up the numbers. I agree about saf which is why these quotas are not necessarily a bad thing, without the native black population taking some interest in it the sport might die out.

[sage]

On 1/26/2021 at 2:23 AM, Vk1 said:

Once a sport becomes the favorite sport of a country, guess it will occupy a min. of 50% of everything..eye balls, resources and the budding talent.. gulf between the nbr 1 sport vs nbr 2 also seems pretty large.. when Eng won the 2005 Ashes and 19 WC their experts talked majorly about the influence these wins would have in promoting the game.. that is ignored if its a nbr 1 sport as it is more or less a inevitable thing even without those wins.

England's problems with football are similar to India. They have by far the most money/resources etc. going into it and keep failing to get anywhere on the world stage

[Vk1]

2 hours ago, sage said:

England's problems with football are similar to India. They have by far the most money/resources etc. going into it and keep failing to get anywhere on the world stage

is that true? even if it is.. I suppose other boards are not lagging behind.. gulf between the teams in quality is not much unlike in Cricket.. not sure if any western european nation is lacking in infrastructure/ money etc.. if a Messi from Arg could be identified as a child prodigy by a Spanish club wonder how much effort goes into searching for local talent.. 

[Soldier]

On 1/25/2021 at 5:46 PM, Lone Wolf said:

Exactly this population excuse is laughable as Cricket always has been an elite level sport that let's be frank most poor family guys can't afford. 

These Aussie guys grew up with better facilities having a big backyard when they are little or something which Indians don't have. 

Aussies think every Indian gets to play cricket out of a billion people. 

I am glad that our 2nd XI beat them & they have no excuse in front of media which has grilled langer & co brutally. 

 

Perfectly summarised and this should put an end to all the balderdash that's spewed out of these filthy mouths of foreigners and poyz. 

 

Population is a rubbish excuse. Literally no one except upper middle class get access to play first class cricket and even then it's not even the utmost priroirty as parents usually dissuade their kids from pursuing sports. 

 

Real talents are found in the poorer areas who grew up in tough neighbourhoods. Cricket being an elitist sport makes it hard for such talents to emerge from poorer class families. 

 

You could say there are a lot of upper middle class talents but even then many of them don't actually play first class cricket unless their school offers such facilities. Most schools don't even have access to such privileges. 

 

[Lone Wolf]

20 minutes ago, Soldier said:

Perfectly summarised and this should put an end to all the balderdash that's spewed out of these filthy mouths of foreigners and poyz. 

 

Population is a rubbish excuse. Literally no one except upper middle class get access to play first class cricket and even then it's not even the utmost priroirty as parents usually dissuade their kids from pursuing sports. 

 

Real talents are found in the poorer areas who grew up in tough neighbourhoods. Cricket being an elitist sport makes it hard for such talents to emerge from poorer class families. 

 

You could say there are a lot of upper middle class talents but even then many of them don't actually play first class cricket unless their school offers such facilities. Most schools don't even have access to such privileges. 

 

Exactly the faculties suitable for cricket is not available in most corners of the country.

Things have somewhat started to change a little with more quality cricketers coming out of non metro cities or even small cities but it's an early stage.  Not every Indian state is obsessed with cricket as well. 

North east & J&K don't even have good infrastructure to play cricket.  I won't go too deeply about why is that but it is hilarious when they come up with excuses like a billion people play cricket in India. 

[youngindia]

Maybe the headline would would be more valid in the next 8-15 years.

 

For 70 years we didn't have the talent to be a top tier test side.There was an improvement in the 2000's which finally gave a top 3 ranking.

 

Now the process of leaving others behind had begun. The u19 teams are almost sureshot reach a final and win it.

 

I always rated the talent from 2016 onwards more highly. Their deployment will take place in the next few years. Already the promise was shown in the australian series.

but they will take time to settle down as well in internationals.

 

The fast bowling resources are still a bit behind Australia/SA. Its where the biggest question mark is, But improvements have been made.

 

Its true that a lot of areas outside metros has not produced superstars. But Pujara and Pant show they are breaking the Mumbai/Delhi domination trend atleast a bit.

Atleast the process has begun

 

And its also true that the population is finally coming into play. Population is of real advantage only when you have a organised system to harness and make use of  manpower.

 

That process has certainly matured over the modern era especially since the 90's(when BCCI started getting profits) to produce a top 3 team consistently.  

 

For domination over others, it has to expand and refine further. That's when Greg's article will start to make sense.

 

 

[GeeGaw]

Improved communication technologies allows more top talent from all walks of life to be discovered. When you have a large pool to draw from and everyone has a video camera in their pocket then players from even the most remote locales will get noticed if they show something special. This was not possible up to 15 years ago.  It’s not a coincidence this is when India started to realize its potential.