Ordinary or not? You decide

[Guest DeveGowda]

You are right' date=' India's No.1 ranking should be revoked...how dare they...2 runs to win!!! Are you kidding me??? Some really need to put down the Magic Pipe.[/quote']

i think india is NO 1 TEST team in the world...and there is NO innings victory (although 2nd test is victory count same as innings..that possible beacuse bangla collapsed).. so its not big deal...if bangal is So ordinary India should have routed them by Innings in Each match

I don't know why' date=' you" didn't told" but if was not for those TWO runs, it was an innings win...but I guess winning by 10 wickets in whopping 2 balls was not enough to make a point, it HAD to be an Innings win. Get a clue bro.[/quote'] this is not about winning by runs or innings..thing winning agaginst bangla is Not a BIG deal ..no need to worry about that... Whtever u tell is RIGHT..i cant argue...ENJOY :yay:

[DocBindra]

Whtever u tell is RIGHT..i cant argue...ENJOY :yay:

[Guest DeveGowda]

Whtever u tell is RIGHT..i cant argue...ENJOY :yay:

LOL, you truly are a politician. Goodnight.http://www.indiancricketfans.com/images/smilies/laughing/hi.gif

[teacup]

Like they did in the second test match after the first test?? Get over it mate. India got over confident and dropped its guard in the first innings of the first test. We could have had a 3rd & a 4th test and they wouldn't have still taken 20 wkts in a match and the result would still have been a whitewash

If you expect Bangladesh to bowl out India twice or come close to doing it in consecutive test matches against India then, logically speaking, we don't deserve to be No.1 and our vaunted batting lineup does not deserve to be called the best in the world. All I am saying is they are not as bad as Sehwag dismissed them to be.

[teacup]

Have absolutely no idea as to what you are going on and on about...Sehwag said that as a psychological ploy the same way the Aussies have been doing to the English' date=' Proteas, India, etc for decades. He was try to get in their heads and probably rattle them and he succeeded. [/quote'] :hysterical: Psychological ploy? Really? Do we really need to get into psychological warfare to beat Bangladesh? Or, was that some kind of reverse-psychology? You crack me up dude!!

[Zap_Brannigan]

If you expect Bangladesh to bowl out India twice or come close to doing it in consecutive test matches against India then' date=' logically speaking, we don't deserve to be No.1 and our vaunted batting lineup does not deserve to be called the best in the world. All I am saying is they are not as bad as Sehwag dismissed them to be.[/quote'] Come close in the 1st test is an overstatement. I know 18 is close to 20 but India had already reached their target. They had lost just 5 wickets when they scored the runs that BD made and only 6 when they lead was 350, a number everyone wanted them to declare at. Dont forget that India had to play faster (4.74 RPO) to get a decent number of overs in the weather affected match. India managed to meet both its goals in the 2nd innings fairly comfortably, without losing 20 wickets. So in short, India had a bigger goal and they reached it before BD could take 20 wickets. Thats was what Sehwag said. If it was a normal game, India would have had another 1/3rd of the game to set the required target. There was no point in the last 2 days that anyone but India would be winning the game. Same with the last test.

[teacup]

Come close in the 1st test is an overstatement. I know 18 is close to 20 but India had already reached their target. They had lost just 5 wickets when they scored the runs that BD made and only 6 when they lead was 350, a number everyone wanted them to declare at. Dont forget that India had to play faster (4.74 RPO) to get a decent number of overs in the weather affected match. India managed to meet both its goals in the 2nd innings fairly comfortably, without losing 20 wickets. So in short, India had a bigger goal and they reached it before BD could take 20 wickets. Thats was what Sehwag said. If it was a normal game, India would have had another 1/3rd of the game to set the required target. There was no point in the last 2 days that anyone but India would be winning the game. Same with the last test.

You are trying to prove something based on hindsight.

[Zap_Brannigan]

You are trying to prove something based on hindsight.

Not hindsight. Just saying that crowing that BD took almost 20 wicket is no use when they didnt and couldnt take 20 wickets and they didnt stop India from reaching their goals. So Sehwag was correct in saying that BD cannot take 20 Indian wickets and that BD was ordinary that they never looked like winning and the small chance of a draw in the 1st test was mainly due to weather and not BD's performance. This is an example and if you go back and look at records, this has been proven.

[teacup]

Not hindsight. Just saying that crowing that BD took almost 20 wicket is no use when they didnt and couldnt take 20 wickets and they didnt stop India from reaching their goals. So Sehwag was correct in saying that BD cannot take 20 Indian wickets and that BD was ordinary that they never looked like winning and the small chance of a draw in the 1st test was mainly due to weather and not BD's performance. This is an example and if you go back and look at records, this has been proven.

Which part of "close to taking 20 wickets" you did not understand? Btw, if we go by your logic, Sri Lanka is also an ordinary side.

[champ]

I think this thread does serve one purpose' date=' however hard it might be to believe, and that is to identify those in this forum that take pleasure in picking on the weak. And King, you still have no answer to the fact that Sehwag was indeed proved wrong when Bangladesh did pick up 18 wickets and would have easily completed the 20 if not for the early declaration by India. Gavaskar did make a comment on TV that India will declare early to save Sehwag's face and that is exactly what happend.[/quote'] i think you are getting confused by sehwag's comments .. when he said bangladesh cant pick 20 wickets , he meant which results in a win .. even if bangladesh had picked 20 wickets if sehwag had declared , they would have not won .. so to pick 20 wickets means to win not draw or lose .. got the point ??

[teacup]

i think you are getting confused by sehwag's comments .. when he said bangladesh cant pick 20 wickets ' date=' he meant which results in a win .. even if bangladesh had picked 20 wickets if sehwag had declared , they would have not won .. so to pick 20 wickets means to win not draw or lose .. got the point ??[/quote'] Oh, so I am confused? Sehwag says "Bangladesh is an ordinary side. They can't take 20 wickets" but I should take it as "They can't win". Why didn't he just say that then? Does that mean that a side that is competitive but has no results to show is ordinary? They may not be a good side but I don't agree you can use both the adjectives, ordinary and competitive, to describe a team and make sense.

[Gunner_Mania]

That is cheap. The problem people had on Sehwag's statement was a lack of respect/decency. It was not a question of fact. Btw' date=' 18 wickets is as good as 20 and India would not have declared in the 2nd inning if not for the weak batting lineup of Bangladesh. Now, get a life.[/quote'] 18 is not as good as 20. Ask South Africa, They got 19 twice and ended up losing the series because they couldn't get 20. We could keep arguing till the cows home, but lets just agree to disagree. Whether they are an ordinary side or not will depend on how they perform in NZ next, against Eng home and away. If they end up losing all the 5 test matches, nobody will be able to deny the fact that they are ordinary.

[Zap_Brannigan]

Which part of "close to taking 20 wickets" you did not understand? Btw' date= if we go by your logic, Sri Lanka is also an ordinary side.

Did SL suffer against all other sides? Sehwag's comment that BD is ordinary and that they cannot take 20 wickets are mutually exclusive. Besides SL did take 20 wickets and even won the match when we toured them. Your definition of ordinary is different from mine and mine is different from Sehwags. As far as i am concerned, BD has not won a single test against a good side nor have they managed to draw one without the help of weather conditions shortening the game. I regard BD side as a horrible side. Sehwag reckons it is ordinary.

[teacup]

18 is not as good as 20. Ask South Africa, They got 19 twice and ended up losing the series because they couldn't get 20. We could keep arguing till the cows home, but lets just agree to disagree. Whether they are an ordinary side or not will depend on how they perform in NZ next, against Eng home and away. If they end up losing all the 5 test matches, nobody will be able to deny the fact that they are ordinary.

You are taking my quote out-of-context. 18 is as good as 20 to prove they are not an "Ordinary side". I was not talking about it being good enough to win.

[saneindian]

Sehwag calling BD ordinary was in itself a cheap shot at BD. It's like going to someone's place for a dinner and then telling them you know what, your cullinary skills suck!! In public life, one needs to maintain some modesty and show some respect to the opposition (unless it's Aus :P).

[Zap_Brannigan]

Sehwag calling BD ordinary was in itself a cheap shot at BD. It's like going to someone's place for a dinner and then telling them you know what, your cullinary skills suck!! In public life, one needs to maintain some modesty and show some respect to the opposition (unless it's Aus :P).

No, its like being put in a cheap hotel by the company on a business trip and then calling it cheap.It is what it is. Its not like BD was doing charity here. They were getting money to host. Respect needs to be earned. Its not something one has to fake. For us, common folks, we show respect to our bosses even when they dont deserve it but if we are on the top of the game, we wont necessarily do that. Do you think Ratan Tata will show respect to a badly run company?

[vvvslaxman]

Yes one has to be ordinary to collapse like that' date=' that too more than once.[/quote'] Nice way to take a dig at Pakistan :hysterical:

[vvvslaxman]

Guys let it go. Don't even feel like gloating. My frustration is the number of injuries we picked up on this tour.

[Rajan]

Oh' date=' so I am confused? [b']Sehwag says "Bangladesh is an ordinary side. They can't take 20 wickets" but I should take it as "They can't win". Why didn't he just say that then? Does that mean that a side that is competitive but has no results to show is ordinary? They may not be a good side but I don't agree you can use both the adjectives, ordinary and competitive, to describe a team and make sense.

that is what he said , for the same question... read this... http://www.cricinfo.com/bdeshvind2010/content/story/444422.html ------------

A journalist asked the obvious question - can Bangladesh surprise India? "No. They can't beat us in Test matches," Sehwag said. "They can surprise you in ODIs but not in Tests." Why? "Because they can't take 20 Indian wickets. Even Sri Lanka found it difficult. Bangladesh can't. They are an ordinary side."

--------------------------------- now, having understood what was asked, what was replied by Sehweag, it would be better if you just shut up ...

[teacup]

that is what he said , for the same question... read this... http://www.cricinfo.com/bdeshvind2010/content/story/444422.html ------------ A journalist asked the obvious question - can Bangladesh surprise India? "No. They can't beat us in Test matches," Sehwag said. "They can surprise you in ODIs but not in Tests." Why? "Because they can't take 20 Indian wickets. Even Sri Lanka found it difficult. Bangladesh can't. They are an ordinary side." --------------------------------- now, having understood what was asked, what was replied by Sehweag, it would be better if you just shut up ...

Ok, so he did say "They can't win" but to repeat what I had said in the same post that you chose to quote, they were competitive in one of the two matches we played against them - by no means an ordinary effort considering that they were playing against the No.1 team, which by the way happens to be the question of this thread. Sehwag's lack of civility (not my words but cricinfo's) was astounding but what is more baffling is the lack of sense shown by forum members in defending the indefensible.