Was this match fixed or incompetent batting by Jadeja?

[Majestic]

1 minute ago, Lord said:

75 isn't great either considering field restrictions. (15 overs those days)

 

Dravid's role was to stabilise the innings and hit in end v reverse swing prominent then. Yet similar avg and SR.

Till 2003, Ganguly was at 75 and Dravid at 69. Read my point again. I added a bit more information.

[R!TTER]

10 minutes ago, Majestic said:

Till 2003, he had a strike rate close to 75. It was after 2003 that his weakness became more apparent and was struggling for shots.

 

http://howstat.com/cricket/Statistics/Players/PlayerYears_ODI.asp

 

When compared with Dravid, Ganguly and Azharuddin both scored faster. Dravid because he batted at 4-5, he would have to forcefully accelerate sometimes(after the 40th over) and hence ended up with strike rate of 73.

 

Further adding to it, if you look at their career strike rate till 2003, Ganguly was at 75 and Dravid was at 69. But since then Ganguly was past it and retired with strike rate of 73. Dravid improved his strike rate in mid-2000s and took it to 71.

 

Not 2003, it was 2001, like I said, when the bouncer was first introduced(re?) in ODI's & lots of tulleybaaz batters were found out across the world 

 

Of course SCG wasn't a full on TB but he had major issues with the short ball, like Raina, & suffered accordingly!

[Lord]

23 minutes ago, Majestic said:

Till 2003, he had a strike rate close to 75. It was after 2003 that his weakness became more apparent and was struggling for shots.

 

http://howstat.com/cricket/Statistics/Players/PlayerYears_ODI.asp

 

When compared with Dravid, Ganguly and Azharuddin both scored faster. Dravid because he batted at 4-5, he would have to forcefully accelerate sometimes(after the 40th over) and hence ended up with strike rate of 73.

 

Further adding to it, if you look at their career strike rate till 2003, Ganguly was at 75 and Dravid was at 69. But since then Ganguly was past it and retired with strike rate of 73. Dravid improved his strike rate in mid-2000s and took it to 71.

 

We need to look at overall career rather than till 2003 or any other point.He played 4 years after 2003

 

Dravid was slow himself even for stabilising role but rightly called out for it.But Ganguly is seen as an aggressive batsman despite not much SR difference.

[Majestic]

10 minutes ago, Lord said:

We need to look at overall career rather than till 2003 or any other point.He played 4 years after 2003

 

Dravid was slow himself even for stabilising role but rightly called out for it.But Ganguly is seen as an aggressive batsman despite not much SR difference.

Ganguly played in 2004,05 and 2007. Was dropped so didn't played in 2006.

 

Pitches started getting flatter everywhere from mid-2000s too and Dravid being technically more solid managed to up his strike rate later on while Ganguly had low strike rates in final years. However, the reputation for Ganguly as aggressive batsman was due to what he did till 2003 and you can see that there was a clear difference in SR between both (75 vs 69) till that time which is 85% of their career.

 

Edited December 11, 2022 by Majestic

[R!TTER]

Coincidentally you could also say that's when Oz LO reign started, before that even till 2000 SA were giving them a run for their money but post 2001 there was just one numero uno in cricket especially ODI's 

[Majestic]

22 minutes ago, R!TTER said:

Not 2003, it was 2001, like I said, when the bouncer was first introduced(re?) in ODI's & lots of tulleybaaz batters were found out across the world 

 

Of course SCG wasn't a full on TB but he had major issues with the short ball, like Raina, & suffered accordingly!

Ganguly did really well in 2003 and 2002 too.

Edited December 11, 2022 by Majestic

[Lord]

4 minutes ago, Majestic said:

Ganguly played in 2004,05 and 2007. Was dropped so didn't played in 2006.

 

Pitches started getting flatter everywhere from mid-2000s too and Dravid being technically more solid managed to up his strike rate later on while Ganguly had low strike rates in final years. However, the reputation for Ganguly as aggressive batsman was due to what he did till 2003 and you can see that there was a clear difference in SR between both (75 vs 69) till that time which is 85% of their career.

 

that's little difference accounting for field restrictions.

 

The wickets got flatter for Ganguly too. the SR should have gone up. Even in his prime he played many slow innings though on his day he could bat big,

[neel roy]

8 hours ago, Number said:

I don't think very slow batting by opening batsmen against good attacks was abnormal those days.

https://m.cricbuzz.com/live-cricket-scorecard/5869/ind-vs-aus-4th-odi-australia-in-india-odi-series-2001

 

Look at Ganguly's score 

This while chasing ~340 so it was a patta wicket.

what would we give for a lower order batsman of bhajjis calibre.. seriously.. feel

nauseated seeing indias tail now.. the bd series.. 

[Majestic]

6 minutes ago, Lord said:

that's little difference accounting for field restrictions.

 

The wickets got flatter for Ganguly too. the SR should have gone up. Even in his prime he played many slow innings though on his day he could bat big,

He has regressed by then and was awful in those 3 years hence the wickets getting flatter didn't helped him. Most teams probably troubled him frequently during that time with certain lengths. In 2005, he averaged 17 at SR of 54 and hence got dropped. Dravid dint regressed and was doing relatively well between 2005-07.

 

You can think of it like how Yuvraj regressed in his final years but that doesn't change the fact that he was a genuine match winner in his peak. 

[vayuu1]

2 hours ago, neel roy said:

what would we give for a lower order batsman of bhajjis calibre.. seriously.. feel

nauseated seeing indias tail now.. the bd series.. 

Don't forget about likes of agarkar,zaheer later irfan too all could bat aggressively not to forget likes of Tendulkar,sehwag, Ganguly,yuvi,raina, yousuf,likes of jadeja, Robin singh could bowl as well during 2011 wc we had players who could bat till nehra or sree and look at the number of bowling options sehwag, Tendulkar,yuvi,raina,munaf, zaheer,sree,bhajji and you can include young Kohli if u want too that gives you nine bowling options and till zaheer all can bat so 9 batting options and 9 bowling options 

[singhvivek141]

20 hours ago, Number said:

I don't think very slow batting by opening batsmen against good attacks was abnormal those days.

https://m.cricbuzz.com/live-cricket-scorecard/5869/ind-vs-aus-4th-odi-australia-in-india-odi-series-2001

 

Look at Ganguly's score 

This while chasing ~340 so it was a patta wicket.

Ganguly was a slow starter, usually he pick up pace when playing spinners.
 

[King6]

11 hours ago, Lord said:

that's little difference accounting for field restrictions.

 

The wickets got flatter for Ganguly too. the SR should have gone up. Even in his prime he played many slow innings though on his day he could bat big,

motm in odis ganguly 31 dravid 14..  Ganguly better odi player than dravid

[Majestic]

9 hours ago, singhvivek141 said:

Ganguly was a slow starter, usually he pick up pace when playing spinners.
 

In NatWest Final, Ganguly played faster than Sehwag.

[Lord]

12 hours ago, King6 said:

motm in odis ganguly 31 dravid 14..  Ganguly better odi player than dravid

 

Afridi -32

Dhoni -20

 

Afridi better ODI player than Dhoni

[singhvivek141]

2 hours ago, Majestic said:

In NatWest Final, Ganguly played faster than Sehwag.

Yup, not saying he can't do that...but he used to take time.
Greame Smith was another one, if needed he can go bonkers. But usually he as well took time to get going.

Just remembered, there was an incompetent batter in RSA named "Boeta Dippenaar"...god how frustating it was to see him bat. Still RSA kept on playing him as an opener.

Edited December 12, 2022 by singhvivek141

[King6]

9 hours ago, Lord said:

 

Afridi -32

Dhoni -20

 

Afridi better ODI player than Dhoni

yes in lois as a player afridi > dhoni

[Majestic]

21 minutes ago, King6 said:

yes in lois as a player afridi > dhoni

Naah.. Afridi is all rounder so more MOM..

[King6]

13 minutes ago, Majestic said:

Naah.. Afridi is all rounder so more MOM..

That's why I mention as a player.. As a batsman dhoni way ahead

[rkt.india]

On 12/11/2022 at 10:10 PM, Lord said:

We need to look at overall career rather than till 2003 or any other point.He played 4 years after 2003

 

Dravid was slow himself even for stabilising role but rightly called out for it.But Ganguly is seen as an aggressive batsman despite not much SR difference.

Ganguly's problem was he would hit a boundary and then 5 dot balls. He would struggle to rotate strike. It was a pattern but when set he did play some high SR innings.

[Bigg Brother]

10 hours ago, King6 said:

yes in lois as a player afridi > dhoni

This I agree. Afridi won more matches for Pakistan than Dhongiji did it for India. Dhoni was a statpadder post 2007-08. In T20s, he won 0 matches on his own, Afridi won them wt20 2009. MOS in 2007 wt20 . Also did well in 2011 wc.

Edited December 13, 2022 by Bigg Brother