It will be a travesty if India don't win this World Cup

[deathmonger]

6 hours ago, Sharjah-Harjah said:

Just because Ambani and Adami families are getting richer, it doesn’t mean India is getting richer and Cricket is improving as a result of it. This is some weird logic I only find here.

SA and Afg cricket are the most improved teams. However, their economy has not improved whatsoever. 
Anyway, Given IPL and ginormous size of India, Australia should not be the country with 5 ODI WC trophies. 

The 2000 generation of Indian cricketers were mentally superior to this lot in handling pressure. Let’s see if they can convert their hype into tangible outcome such as this WC trophy. 

Lol

 

Other way around. India is getting richer hence Ambani/Adani exist.

 

I mean, simple stats show that per capita income and HDI is way up. IMF, World Bank data will show that.

 

SA economy has improved decently. They are a solidly middle income high HDI country. Also the sport has spread to an extent among it's black majority (90% of South Africa).

 

Afg has improved simply because they are starting from a low base.

 

Australia has 5 WCs simply cause they are a first world country and has a good system. India's huge population mostly lived in poverty for long. Now that more and more have come out, the team is getting better.

 

Pakistani itself has a huge population - 4th or 5th largest in the world - has less WCs than West Indies and England and tied with Sri Lanka, a country with a population less than Karachi. Why is that so? Because Pakistan is one of the poorest countries in the world, below many African countries. Hence the "effective" population is way less and the systems are not proper.

[Sharjah-Harjah]

22 minutes ago, deathmonger said:

Lol

 

Other way around. India is getting richer hence Ambani/Adani exist.

 

I mean, simple stats show that per capita income and HDI is way up. IMF, World Bank data will show that.

 

SA economy has improved decently. They are a solidly middle income high HDI country. Also the sport has spread to an extent among it's black majority (90% of South Africa).

 

Afg has improved simply because they are starting from a low base.

 

Australia has 5 WCs simply cause they are a first world country and has a good system. India's huge population mostly lived in poverty for long. Now that more and more have come out, the team is getting better.

 

Pakistani itself has a huge population - 4th or 5th largest in the world - has less WCs than West Indies and England and tied with Sri Lanka, a country with a population less than Karachi. Why is that so? Because Pakistan is one of the poorest countries in the world, below many African countries. Hence the "effective" population is way less and the systems are not proper.

Yet more ignorant comments. Someone should pay me here to educate you. The worse aspect of your comment is intellectual dishonesty to distort facts to suit a certain agenda. 

 

1, South Africa and Afghanistan’s GDP per capita has been declining for the past 5 years while their cricket team has been improving. This example shows economy as an unreliable explanatory force for improvement in sport/cricket.
 

2. To take another example, Brazil and Argentina remained dominant forces in football over and above much richer countries. And still do. 

 

3. Pakistan and India both are poor, 3rd world countries based on their GDP per capita. India’s GDP of $2300 is 30% more than Pakistan’s but it is still well within 

Low income country and lower/comparable than African countries. 
 

4. GDP per capita is a poor metric unless you look at inequality metrics as well like the GINI coefficient. There are serious question marks about whether India has seen shared growth or wealth has accumulated in few hands looking at such a low GINI of Indian economy. 
 

Advice: Enjoy the success of your team currently but remain humble. Always remember highs and low are part of sport and life. 

Edited October 31, 2023 by Sharjah-Harjah

[Sharjah-Harjah]

31 minutes ago, dilliboy said:

What a troll post Lol. Ganguly and Gamngiyy shouldn't be near an all time Indian XI in any conditions.

 

Same goes with Harbhajan

Just because it’s not from an Indian, it doesn’t make it is a troll post. Ganguly and Gambhir were the most fearsome and accomplished  batters in pressure situations in ODIs for India.

 

If it weren’t for Gambhir, India would not have the 2 trophies this century. 
And if it weren’t for Ganguly and his leadership, perf in KOs, and aggressive batting, India would still be humiliated how it used to be pre-90s.

 

No Pakistani was ever worried about Sachin in the 90s, it was Ganguly. Sachin was a huge under-performer in pressure games vs Pak and KOs. Sachin would be disappointed with his average of 40 in test and ODIs vs Pakistan, which is after it actually improved a lot after 2004 feasting  on the likes of Shabbir Ahmed, Rana Naveed, Etc Yes he has iconic 2003 knock, but prior to that he was a bunny of Wasim, Razzak, and Saqlain. 

 

Rohit needs to win India something asap as his time is running out. 

 

As for Bhaji, that guy had a champion mindset and he was a fierce competitor. It’s not just about stats. 

[Norman]

7 hours ago, Sharjah-Harjah said:

Just because Ambani and Adami families are getting richer, it doesn’t mean India is getting richer and

 

Oh look at this Abdul from Sialkot, acting all experty on international economics. 

 

Kabhi India aaya hai? Most of the posters on this forum have gone through the 90s and the 2000s .. there's a night and day difference between the India of 2003 and India of 2023. Don't spout nonsense here just to soothe your burns..

[deathmonger]

1 minute ago, Sharjah-Harjah said:

Yet more ignorant comments. Someone should pay me here to educate you. The worse aspect of your comment is intellectual dishonesty to distort facts to suit a certain agenda. 

 

1, South Africa and Afghanistan’s GDP per capita has been declining for the past 5 years while their cricket team has been improving. This example shows economy as an unreliable explanatory force for improvement in sport/cricket.
 

2. To take another example, Brazil and Argentina remained dominant forces in football over and above much richer countries. And still do. 

 

3. Pakistan and India both are poor, 3rd world countries based on their GDP per capita. India’s GDP of $2300 is 30% more than Pakistan’s but it is still well within 

Low income country and lower/comparable than African countries. 
 

4. GDP per capita is a poor metric unless you look at inequality metrics as well like the GINI coefficient. There are serious question marks about whether India has seen shared growth or wealth has accumulated in few hands looking at such a low GINI of Indian economy. 
 

Advice: Enjoy the success of your team currently but remain humble. Always remember highs and low are part of sport and life. 

 

1. South Africa is already a middle income high HDI country. It's not like their team has massively improved - just reached previous levels after a lull (not even that tbh). Their 90s and late 00s teams were much stronger. For India that is not the case and there has been mass improvements every decade. Afghanistan is just starting from a low base. They didn't even play cricket pre 2000.

 

2. Brazil is a high HDI upper middle income country. They might be poorer than european countries but offset that with their huge population (200m+). Argentina is a very high HDI first world country with 40 million people. Those are bad examples.

 

3. Lies lies more lies. This is again the "sem2sem" that Pakistanis do to feel good about themselves. India is at $2610. Pakistan is at $1470. That is 77% more.

 

Here are the IMF figures - https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/NGDPDPC@WEO/IND/PAK

 

Also India has a higher GDP growth rate and lower population growth rate than Pakistan so way higher GDP per capita growth rate (5.5% this century compared to Pakistan's 2.1%). That means the divergence will grow. Also considering Pakistan's GDP pc growth rate it will take Pakistan 26 years ie 2049 to reach where India is now.

 

4. There are no "serious question marks". India's economic rise can be seen in all metrics (number of unicorn startups, billionaires, metro railways etc). India's GINI is higher simply because "some people have got rich" compared to Pakistan where "no one has got rich". China, USA, UK, Singapore etc all have higher GINI than India. Is India better off than these countries?

 

Advice: Invest in systems and infrastructure rather than "vibes and inshallah".

[dilliboy]

13 minutes ago, Sharjah-Harjah said:

Just because it’s not from an Indian, it doesn’t make it is a troll post. Ganguly and Gambhir were the most fearsome and accomplished  batters in pressure situations in ODIs for India.

 

If it weren’t for Gambhir, India would not have the 2 trophies this century. 
And if it weren’t for Ganguly and his leadership, perf in KOs, and aggressive batting, India would still be humiliated how it used to be pre-90s.

 

No Pakistani was ever worried about Sachin in the 90s, it was Ganguly. Sachin was a huge under-performer in pressure games vs Pak and KOs. Sachin would be disappointed with his average of 40 in test and ODIs vs Pakistan, which is after it actually improved a lot after 2004 feasting  on the likes of Shabbir Ahmed, Rana Naveed, Etc Yes he has iconic 2003 knock, but prior to that he was a bunny of Wasim, Razzak, and Saqlain. 

 

Rohit needs to win India something asap as his time is running out. 

 

As for Bhaji, that guy had a champion mindset and he was a fierce competitor. It’s not just about stats. 

Rohit is far and away a better batsman than both..just because Ganguly performed in a semi final against Kenya, doesn't make him a better knockout player lol.

 

Also Ganguly being an aggressive batter? The guy had a Strike rate of 73 while batting as an opener when the field restrictions were for 15 overs. Pakistan wasn't the only side in the 90s, Ganguly has an average record against SA and Australia which were the best sides of that time, a joke to compare his record with Sachin who dominated every attack on all conditions at his peak.

 

Harbhajan being there is a joke..just because you think he is a 'fierce' competitor doesn't mean one ignores all the stats which shows he was a very average ODI spinner.

[Sharjah-Harjah]

26 minutes ago, deathmonger said:

 

1. South Africa is already a middle income high HDI country. It's not like their team has massively improved - just reached previous levels after a lull (not even that tbh). Their 90s and late 00s teams were much stronger. For India that is not the case and there has been mass improvements every decade. Afghanistan is just starting from a low base. They didn't even play cricket pre 2000.

 

2. Brazil is a high HDI upper middle income country. They might be poorer than european countries but offset that with their huge population (200m+). Argentina is a very high HDI first world country with 40 million people. Those are bad examples.

 

3. Lies lies more lies. This is again the "sem2sem" that Pakistanis do to feel good about themselves. India is at $2610. Pakistan is at $1470. That is 77% more.

 

Here are the IMF figures - https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/NGDPDPC@WEO/IND/PAK

 

Also India has a higher GDP growth rate and lower population growth rate than Pakistan so way higher GDP per capita growth rate (5.5% this century compared to Pakistan's 2.1%). That means the divergence will grow. Also considering Pakistan's GDP pc growth rate it will take Pakistan 26 years ie 2049 to reach where India is now.

 

4. There are no "serious question marks". India's economic rise can be seen in all metrics (number of unicorn startups, billionaires, metro railways etc). India's GINI is higher simply because "some people have got rich" compared to Pakistan where "no one has got rich". China, USA, UK, Singapore etc all have higher GINI than India. Is India better off than these countries?

 

Advice: Invest in systems and infrastructure rather than "vibes and inshallah".

What a convoluted analysis. 
 

1: GDP per capita not improving but their teams are improving. The base is irrelevant.

 

2. Yes, but lower HDI didn’t prevent them dominating those with 2x and 3x HDI and GDP per capita countries. 

 

3. India is a low-income poor country today based on metrics like HDI, GDP per capita. GINI, irrespective of whatever you want to believe. A GDP per capita of $2200 is pathetic and Indians should be humble about their success unless they touch $20000. 
 

4. Highways and trains mean nothing. Pakistan also has beautiful highways and railways. Billionaires and “unicorn startups” is an extremely poor indicator of economic success. What matters is the equality of income not 5 people making a billion dollars. 230 Million Indians still live below poverty line, which is pathetic to see. 

 

The release of the Global Hunger Index earlier this month cast a harsh light on India, which fell six places to rank 107th out of 121 nations, behind struggling neighbors Sri Lanka (64th) and Pakistan (99th) and just ahead of impoverished Afghanistan (109th).

[Lord]

9 hours ago, SRT100 said:

ODI or Test ?

 

ODIs

[Lord]

10 hours ago, Norman said:

Lmao Srinath and Kumble over shami and Kuldeep..

 

 

 

yes longer careers and far lesser support.

[Sharjah-Harjah]

39 minutes ago, dilliboy said:

Rohit is far and away a better batsman than both..just because Ganguly performed in a semi final against Kenya, doesn't make him a better knockout player lol.

 

Also Ganguly being an aggressive batter? The guy had a Strike rate of 73 while batting as an opener when the field restrictions were for 15 overs. Pakistan wasn't the only side in the 90s, Ganguly has an average record against SA and Australia which were the best sides of that time, a joke to compare his record with Sachin who dominated every attack on all conditions at his peak.

 

Harbhajan being there is a joke..just because you think he is a 'fierce' competitor doesn't mean one ignores all the stats which shows he was a very average ODI spinner.

I rate Ganguly over Rohit any day of the week

[Lord]

9 hours ago, deathmonger said:

Naah

 

Rohit

Sachin

Kohli

Dravid/Ganguly

Yuvi

Dhoni

Kapil

Jadeja

Bumrah

Shami

Kuldeep

 

3 pacers 3 spinners (including Yuvi). Batting till 8.

 

Dev - 253 @ 27.45

Shami - 180 @ 24.65

Kuldeep - 162 @ 25.65

Bumrah - 143 @ 23.40

 

Kumble - 334 @ 30.83

Srinath - 315 @ 28.08

Zak - 269 @ 30.11

 

These guys have more wickets but the average difference is too much.

 

Thing is as India keeps becoming richer and richer and ICT keeps getting stronger the all time XI will keep having new players. In the ODI team only Kapil and test only Gavaskar and Kapil among those who have played cricket before 2000.

 

Test XI -

 

Gavaskar

Sehwag

Dravid

Tendulkar

Kohli

Pant

Kapil

Jadeja

Ashwin

Shami

Bumrah

 

ODIs Dravid, Jadeja, Shami will be replaced within 10-20 years

Tests Sehwag, Kohli, Shami within 10-20 years

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jadeja in all time ODI XI?

 

@Laaloo thoughts?

[Laaloo]

2 minutes ago, Lord said:

 

Jadeja in all time ODI XI?

 

@Laaloo thoughts?

Lol no way

[Lord]

1 hour ago, dilliboy said:

Kumble and Srinath had longevity but Shami and Kuldeep are statistically better in in terms of averages and strike rates. No doubt in my mind they are in my all time India ODI XI

 

 

Need to maintain it. Shami has been unlucky to not play more ODIs while Bhuvi did.

 

Former duo also had worse support.

[Lord]

1 minute ago, Laaloo said:

Lol no way

 

I agree with you for first time

 

 

[Norman]

5 minutes ago, Lord said:

 

yes longer careers and far lesser support.

 

For an all time XI , yes. I agree the older guys are definitely in as of now. 

 

But peak Kuldeep>>> Peak Kumble and peak Shami>> Peak srinath 

[Lord]

2 minutes ago, Norman said:

 

For an all time XI , yes. I agree the older guys are definitely in as of now. 

 

But peak Kuldeep>>> Peak Kumble and peak Shami>> Peak srinath 

 

Definitely. Need to maintain to be in all time XI. 

 

The biggest competition is for openers with Dhawan,Ganguly,Sehwag,Gambhir missing out.

[deathmonger]

6 minutes ago, Sharjah-Harjah said:

What a convoluted analysis. 
 

1: GDP per capita not improving but their teams are improving. The base is irrelevant.

 

2. Yes, but lower HDI didn’t prevent them dominating those with 2x and 3x HDI and GDP per capita countries. 

 

3. India is a low-income poor country today based on metrics like HDI, GDP per capita. GINI, irrespective of whatever you want to believe. A GDP per capita of $2200 is pathetic and Indians should be humble about their success unless they touch $20000. 
 

4. Highways and trains mean nothing. Pakistan also has beautiful highways and railways. Billionaires and “unicorn startups” is an extremely poor indicator of economic success. What matters is the equality of income not 5 people making a billion dollars. 230 Million Indians still live below poverty line, which is pathetic to see. 

 

The release of the Global Hunger Index earlier this month cast a harsh light on India, which fell six places to rank 107th out of 121 nations, behind struggling neighbors Sri Lanka (64th) and Pakistan (99th) and just ahead of impoverished Afghanistan (109th).

Standard Pakistani cope.

 

1. SA isn't "improving". They are back to where they were before (not even that tbh). Afghanistan base is important cause they started playing 20 years ago.

 

2. There is no 3X HDI. Argentina is at 0.842, close to a lot of European countries. Brazil is at 0.754 but their population is 210 million which compensates their lower HDI.

 

3. India is a medium HDI country. Pakistan is a low HDI country. These are not random definitions but UN designated ones. A GDP per capita of $2700 with growth rates of 6.5-7% is admirable despite what Pakistanis would like to believe.  What is pathetic is Pakistan who has a lower gdp per capita than 2015. Pakistanis should stay humble and not comment on Indians, a people superior to them in every aspect.

 

4. Pakistan DOES NOT have beautiful highways and railways. A highway in Islamabad means ****-all. Pakistan has only one small metro in Lahore. India has metro systems in non capitals of smaller states. There is nothing in Pakistan like the Vande Bharat trains. India has highways and railways everywhere.

 

India has the 2nd largest road network in the world with 6,700,000 km. Pakistan is at 263,775 km - smaller than countries like Bangladesh, Vietnam, Mexico, Brazil, South Africa, Thailand which have less population than them not to mention the first world countries of Germany, France, Japan, Canada etc.

 

India has the 4th largest rail network in the worlod with 68,043 km. Pakistan is at 7791 km - less than countries like Hungary, Myanmar, Romania, Kazakhstan etc.

 

[deathmonger]

The thing about Pakistanis are that their country formed the same year India got independence, so we are the basis of their comparison.

 

Until economic reforms, Pakistan was slightly richer due to their American sugar daddies. Even then we had higher literacy, HDI etc etc. Also was setting up the base for what was to follow by setting up IITs, DRDO, ISRO etc.

 

Post reforms, India has gone so far ahead that Pakistanis are burning in jealousy (and lots of Pakistanis have admitted to it as well). The only field Pakistan believes it can compete is men's cricket so when India dominates them, they can't take it. That's why they use a lot of copium refusing to believe the gap between the teams is due to structure rather than lucking into good players. Well, they have a long and painful life ahead of them.

 

 

 

[deathmonger]

24 minutes ago, Lord said:

 

Jadeja in all time ODI XI?

 

@Laaloo thoughts?

Best of bad options.

 

He is prolly the best Indian spin bowling allrounder ever. Maybe Sundar will replace him some day.

 

Kapil, Bumrah, Shami is already 3 pacers. Kuldeep is a spinner so Jadeja can complement him economically.

 

Basically for batting at 8 and a defensive bowling option plus fielding. Kumble, Harbhajan, Zaheer slightly better bowlers but considerably worse batsmen.

 

 

[Suhaan]

On 10/30/2023 at 6:22 PM, deathmonger said:

Shami has plugged the Siraj gap. Ashwin in place of Shardul on a slightly turning surface makes it good.

Although,i understand your point on selecting Ashwin

But this Ashwin is not the same,many expected him to do better than what he did in Chennai against Aus

His craze for unnecessary variations sometimes hurts his side

Plus,pitches are getting sluggish not that much turn

Spinning wickets which aren't slow bring in finger spinners more,we already have one in Jadeja

These sluggish pitches helps pacers better, deliveries after pitching don't reach the batsmen at regular pace

It had happened in Lucknow,in Pune ,

Eden gardens too seems sluggish (not watched the BD innings today thoroughly though)but few deliveries looked getting stuck