Gavaskar vs Tendulkar

[patriot]

Yes. Because Sachin has the most 100s and is the highest run-getter in the history of cricket, at an average which is nothing short of mindblowing coz it has been maintained over 20 yrs. Remarkable, isn't it? :isalute: As for Lara, I'd like to reiterate my opinion on him-

If you take out minnows, both Lara and Ponting average more than him. Needless to say he has cashed in big time with an average of 136 against a third rate side like Bangladesh .

[saneindian]

conversely he has scored heavily in th ODI's wierd aint it? link

Naah mate, ODIs are garbage cricket, except the mtches where a certain batsman fails to score big. Only such ODIs are important and should be counted.

[thevortex]

I removed the 2 spinners from the list, because I rate the difficulties of playing fast bowling way ahead of playing spinners. He still averages 49.11. Absolutely fab. http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/8192.html?class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=default;player_involve=1765;player_involve=1775;player_involve=1884;player_involve=1935;player_involve=2011;player_involve=5649;template=results;type=allround

Dhondy - I am actually disappointed with this statement. Pace is better than spin, you reckon? I am sorry - but that just does not cut it. Forget playing with numbers. That is just not true. They offer different challenges, yes. But the point is any form of bowler can take wickets. That is the only 'threat' which is valid - for a batsman. Statistics do not count the number of blows that a batsman takes during an innings. History does not care. What the present as well as the future will care however is how long the innings lasts and how many runs are made. Both spin as well as pace can pick up wickets and cut short those innings. And that is the whole point. This inferiority attitude with respect to pace > spin is what is partly responsible for India losing ground on the spin front - both in terms of players as well as surfaces.

[saneindian]

If you take out minnows' date=' both Lara and Ponting average more than him. Needless to say he has cashed in big time with an average of 136 against a third rate side like Bangladesh .[/quote'] Talking about minnows, why not take out WI and NZ from that list too, add another factor of playing "AWAY" from home and then see who stands where http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;home_or_away=2;opposition=1;opposition=2;opposition=3;opposition=6;opposition=7;opposition=8;orderby=batting_average;qualmax1=10000;qualmin1=1500;qualval1=runs;spanmin1=01+nov+1989;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting Lara at no 9 and I can't even see Ponting in top 25. Says a lot about who cashed in big time by being a home bully.

[Tapioca]

Anyone and everyone who has watched Sunny Gavaskar handle the monsterous WI pace battery, Lillee and Co in the World Series without any protection whatsoever, opening the batting and averaging 60+ ,

A very bad way to start a thread. Have you watched Sunny Gavaskar handle the monstrous WI pace battery ? All I have watched is about 10 minutes in a DD program long ago. There is nothing in youtube as far as I know, and would be really interested to know if there is any. I would be surprised if people here (except a few seniors) have watched him against WI in the ground or on TV What World Series are you talking about ? SMG did not play in the Packer Series. In the B&H WSC in 1980/1, he crossed 25 once in 10 innings. In the three Tests against Lillee, he failed five times, and the only 25+ score was on the occasion where he threatened to walk out after being lbw Lillee.

[Sooda]

Heres something that surprised me a bit... Ponting.. Involving any of the players CEL Ambrose (WI) or AA Donald (SA) or A Kumble (India) or M Muralitharan (ICC/SL) or SM Pollock (SA) or Shoaib Akhtar (Pak) or CA Walsh (WI) or Waqar Younis (Pak) or Wasim Akram (Pak) Averages 60... http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/7133.html?class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=default;player_involve=1765;player_involve=1775;player_involve=1884;player_involve=1935;player_involve=1973;player_involve=2011;player_involve=2041;player_involve=2228;player_involve=5649;template=results;type=allround perhaps need to dig a bit deeper but make of that what you will

Dhondy - I am actually disappointed with this statement. Pace is better than spin, you reckon? I am sorry - but that just does not cut it. Forget playing with numbers. That is just not true.

True say, you get players who slam the best pacemen but struggle vs quality spin.

[patriot]

Dhondy - I am actually disappointed with this statement. Pace is better than spin, you reckon? I am sorry - but that just does not cut it. Forget playing with numbers. That is just not true. They offer different challenges, yes. But the point is any form of bowler can take wickets. That is the only 'threat' which is valid - for a batsman. Statistics do not count the number of blows that a batsman takes during an innings. History does not care. What the present as well as the future will care however is how long the innings lasts and how many runs are made. Both spin as well as pace can pick up wickets and cut short those innings. And that is the whole point. This inferiority attitude with respect to pace > spin is what is partly responsible for India losing ground on the spin front - both in terms of players as well as surfaces.

Vortex, Dhondy is absolutely right. We have our Ranji players by the bucketful bought up on turning pitches. We have seen how the Mumbai Ranji team smashed around Warne in 98 and even in successive side games in India. Same for Muralithran. I mean even the youngsters in India play them with utmost ease. 99.99 % players struggle against genuine pace. When this is combined with swing, it becomes lethal. If spinners were as challenging and etc...we should have during the 70's and 80's with the great spin quartet been something better than one of the weakest bowling teams, no ? Instead, the teams that ruled the roost are the ones with blazing fast bowlers, WI for example.

[patriot]

A very bad way to start a thread. Have you watched Sunny Gavaskar handle the monstrous WI pace battery ? All I have watched is about 10 minutes in a DD program long ago. There is nothing in youtube as far as I know, and would be really interested to know if there is any. I would be surprised if people here (except a few seniors) have watched him against WI in the ground or on TV What World Series are you talking about ? SMG did not play in the Packer Series. In the B&H WSC in 1980/1, he crossed 25 once in 10 innings. In the three Tests against Lillee, he failed five times, and the only 25+ score was on the occasion where he threatened to walk out after being lbw Lillee.

You are right , there is not much footage available of his batting. But there is plenty of those WI bowlers. Even in the latter half of his career ( 80s through retirement) , against arguably the nastiest pace quartet ever ( WI ) , he averaged 42+ as an opener. In an era without helmets and no bouncer restriction. That is some fricking achivement It would be a insult to the original master to be compared to Tendukar who batting at No.4 does not even average 40 against top 7 bowlers of his time batting with a spacesuit, on the feather beads of this day and age .

[achilles]

If you take out minnows' date=' both Lara and Ponting average more than him. Needless to say he has cashed in big time with an average of 136 against a third rate side like Bangladesh .[/quote'] Agreed.

Talking about minnows, why not take out WI and NZ from that list too, add another factor of playing "AWAY" from home and then see who stands where http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;home_or_away=2;opposition=1;opposition=2;opposition=3;opposition=6;opposition=7;opposition=8;orderby=batting_average;qualmax1=10000;qualmin1=1500;qualval1=runs;spanmin1=01+nov+1989;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting Lara at no 9 and I can't even see Ponting in top 25. Says a lot about who cashed in big time by being a home bully.

:punter:'s bullying in home conditions is always celebrated, ditto with a KP. Its really sad that people attribute Viru as a pure home bully when he has been brutal outside the subcontinent too. And as far as him being a home track bully goes, I think so is Punter (to a certain extent) and KP.

[satyam1729]

You are right , there is not much footage available of his batting. But there is plenty of those WI bowlers. Even in the latter half of his career ( 80s through retirement) , against arguably the nastiest pace quartet ever ( WI ) , he averaged 42+ as an opener. In an era without helmets and no bouncer restriction. That is some fricking achivement It would be a insult to the original master to be compared to Tendukar who batting at No.4 does not even average 40 against top 7 bowlers of his time batting with a spacesuit, on the feather beads of this day and age .

If you want to check the ability of playing fast bowling, Mohinder amarnath was the best player of fast bowling from Asia. He averaged 30 at home and 50 outside India. Home: http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/26225.html?class=1;home_or_away=1;template=results;type=batting;view=innings Away: http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/26225.html?class=1;home_or_away=2;template=results;type=batting;view=innings Played WI quartret better than any players in history of game http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;opposition=4;orderby=runs;player_involve=1426;player_involve=1451;player_involve=1522;player_involve=1571;player_involve_type=all;template=results;type=batting Averaged 55 in Aus, 57 against Imran khan and co in Pakistan. I mean he was much better batsman than his average suggest

[Sooda]

http://historyofcricket.blogspot.com/2007/11/myth-of-sunil-gavaskar-and-west-indies.html ... Gavaskar made his debut for India against the West Indies on the 6th of March, 1971 at Port of Spain. He played four tests, and finished the series with an impressive total of 774 runs at the astronomical average of 154.80 with four centuries. During this series, the West Indies were in a state of change. The leading pacemen of the 60s including Hall, Griffith and Gilchrist had all played their final test. The Windies bowling attack was dominated by spin, with Lance Gibbs well on his way to passing Fred Trueman as the leading test wicket-taker. The fast bowlers that Gavaskar faced during this series were Keith Boyce, Grayson Shillingford, Vanburn Holder and Uton Dowe (he of the 11th Commandment – Dowe shall not bowl). The other medium paced bowlers used included Gary Sobers and John Shepard. With all due respect to the bowlers of the time, it was hardly an attack to cause significant concerns to a player of Gavaskar’s obvious skill. Gavaskar only played two tests of the 1974/75 home series against the West Indies. He struggled, scoring 108 runs at an average of just 27. The quick bowlers he faced in this series included a young Andy Roberts, and the medium paced Holder, Boyce and left armer Bernard Julien. Gavaskar’s next series against the West Indies was again away from home in 1975/76. Gavaskar again batted beautifully, scoring 390 runs at 55.71, with another two centuries. By this time, the Windies fast bowling battery was just starting to take form. The first two Tests saw Gavaskar opening the batting against genuine quicks Michael Holding and Andy Roberts. In support was swing bowler Julien, and spinners Holford and Jumadeen. After disappointing initially with 37 and 1 in the First Test, Gavaskar did score a wonderful 156 in the second. The Third and Fourth Tests saw no Andy Roberts, with Michael Holding in his second series as a Windies player supported by Wayne Daniel, Holder, Julien, Jumadeen, Albert Padmore and Imtiaz Ali. There was not yet any sign of the four pronged pace attack that would soon dominate the cricket world. The West Indies then toured India in 1978/79. This tour was in the middle of the Packer years, and the West Indies bowling attack was decimated. Rather than facing Holding, Roberts, Garner and Croft, Gavaskar opened the batting in the First Test against the legendary Norbert Phillip, his old nemesis Vanburn Holder, and Sylvester Clarke. The Windies attack again had reverted to spin, with Derek Parry and Jumadeen both playing. Gavaskar again gorged himself, scoring 732 runs at 91.50, with another 4 centuries. A very young Malcolm Marshall made his debut during this very high scoring six test series that India won 1-0, with five draws. Gavaskar’s second last series against the Windies was away in 1982/83. He scored 240 runs at an average of 30, with one century. Against the full might of the Windies four quicks (Holding, Roberts, Garner and Marshall), he scored 20 and 0 in the First Test, 1 and 32 in the Second, a very good 147 not out in the Third (which was badly affected by weather and India didn’t even finish their first innings), 2 and 19 in the Fourth, and 18 and 1 in the Fifth. This was the first time Gavaskar had played against all of the Windies quicks, and he clearly struggled. In 1983/84, Gavaskar played the Windies for the last time. This series was at home, and the bowling attack was weakened by the absence of Garner. In the first test, the Windies fielding four quicks, but whilst Holding and Marshall were genuinely fast, neither Eldine Baptiste or Winston Davis really threatened. Gavaskar started poorly with 0 and 7 in the First Test, before finding some form with 121 and 15 in the Second, and 90 and 1 in the Third. 12, 3, 0 and 20 were his scores in the next two tests, before Gavaskar played one of his great knocks. In the final test, he dropped himself down the order to no. 4, with Gaekwad and Sidhu opening. The fact that Malcolm Marshall took two wickets without a run being scored meant that Gavaskar may as well have opened anyway. Gavaskar proceeded to totally dominate the Windies attack and scored a wonderful 236 not out. This was a fantastic innings, and underlined why Gavaskar is a great. There is a wonderful account of this innings at http://tcwj.blogspot.com/2007/10/29.html that is highly recommended reading. Unfortunately, his previous failures in the series were effectively covered up by this large unbeaten double century. When you examine the record of Gavaskar against the West Indies, it is clear that only the final three centuries were actually scored against an attack that resembled the fearsome Windies pace barrage that we remember. A large percentage of his runs were accumulated in two series against very much weakened bowling attacks. As a consequence of factors outside of his control, Gavaskar didn’t play against the Windies full strength team between 1975/76 and 1982/83. This analysis is not to decry Gavaskar – he is a legend of the game and deserves ultimate respect for what he has achieved. He could, after all, not control who he played against. A very strong argument can be made that Gavaskar should be considered of the best few opening batsmen in the history of the game. However, the claims made by some supporters that he is the greatest opener of all-time based solely on his record against the Windies is one that simply does not hold up to closer scrutiny.

[achilles]

^ Wonderful read. But I'd still pick the batsman playing without a helmet against even substandard 6 foot fearsome giants.

[Tapioca]

before finding some form with 121 and 15 in the Second' date=' and 90 and 1 in the Third.[/quote'] Extreme understatement. These were arguably the two greatest counter-attacking innings played against the Lloyd's and Richards' West Indies and Ahmedabad (the 90) was the sort of wicket where matches are abandoned these days. Waiting for SJS who may have watched the 121 at the ground.

[patriot]

Gavaskar made his debut for India against the West Indies on the 6th of March, 1971 at Port of Spain. He played four tests, and finished the series with an impressive total of 774 runs at the astronomical average of 154.80 with four centuries. During this series, the West Indies were in a state of change. The leading pacemen of the 60s including Hall, Griffith and Gilchrist had all played their final test. The Windies bowling attack was dominated by spin, with Lance Gibbs well on his way to passing Fred Trueman as the leading test wicket-taker. The fast bowlers that Gavaskar faced during this series were Keith Boyce, Grayson Shillingford, Vanburn Holder and Uton Dowe (he of the 11th Commandment – Dowe shall not bowl). The other medium paced bowlers used included Gary Sobers and John Shepard. With all due respect to the bowlers of the time, it was hardly an attack to cause significant concerns to a player of Gavaskar’s obvious skill. Gavaskar only played two tests of the 1974/75 home series against the West Indies. He struggled, scoring 108 runs at an average of just 27. The quick bowlers he faced in this series included a young Andy Roberts, and the medium paced Holder, Boyce and left armer Bernard Julien. Gavaskar’s next series against the West Indies was again away from home in 1975/76. Gavaskar again batted beautifully, scoring 390 runs at 55.71, with another two centuries. By this time, the Windies fast bowling battery was just starting to take form. The first two Tests saw Gavaskar opening the batting against genuine quicks Michael Holding and Andy Roberts. In support was swing bowler Julien, and spinners Holford and Jumadeen. After disappointing initially with 37 and 1 in the First Test, Gavaskar did score a wonderful 156 in the second. The Third and Fourth Tests saw no Andy Roberts, with Michael Holding in his second series as a Windies player supported by Wayne Daniel, Holder, Julien, Jumadeen, Albert Padmore and Imtiaz Ali. There was not yet any sign of the four pronged pace attack that would soon dominate the cricket world. The West Indies then toured India in 1978/79. This tour was in the middle of the Packer years, and the West Indies bowling attack was decimated. Rather than facing Holding, Roberts, Garner and Croft, Gavaskar opened the batting in the First Test against the legendary Norbert Phillip, his old nemesis Vanburn Holder, and Sylvester Clarke. The Windies attack again had reverted to spin, with Derek Parry and Jumadeen both playing. Gavaskar again gorged himself, scoring 732 runs at 91.50, with another 4 centuries. A very young Malcolm Marshall made his debut during this very high scoring six test series that India won 1-0, with five draws. Gavaskar’s second last series against the Windies was away in 1982/83. He scored 240 runs at an average of 30, with one century. Against the full might of the Windies four quicks (Holding, Roberts, Garner and Marshall), he scored 20 and 0 in the First Test, 1 and 32 in the Second, a very good 147 not out in the Third (which was badly affected by weather and India didn’t even finish their first innings), 2 and 19 in the Fourth, and 18 and 1 in the Fifth. This was the first time Gavaskar had played against all of the Windies quicks, and he clearly struggled. In 1983/84, Gavaskar played the Windies for the last time. This series was at home, and the bowling attack was weakened by the absence of Garner. In the first test, the Windies fielding four quicks, but whilst Holding and Marshall were genuinely fast, neither Eldine Baptiste or Winston Davis really threatened. Gavaskar started poorly with 0 and 7 in the First Test, before finding some form with 121 and 15 in the Second, and 90 and 1 in the Third. 12, 3, 0 and 20 were his scores in the next two tests, before Gavaskar played one of his great knocks. In the final test, he dropped himself down the order to no. 4, with Gaekwad and Sidhu opening. The fact that Malcolm Marshall took two wickets without a run being scored meant that Gavaskar may as well have opened anyway. Gavaskar proceeded to totally dominate the Windies attack and scored a wonderful 236 not out. This was a fantastic innings, and underlined why Gavaskar is a great. There is a wonderful account of this innings at http://tcwj.blogspot.com/2007/10/29.html that is highly recommended reading. Unfortunately, his previous failures in the series were effectively covered up by this large unbeaten double century. When you examine the record of Gavaskar against the West Indies, it is clear that only the final three centuries were actually scored against an attack that resembled the fearsome Windies pace barrage that we remember. A large percentage of his runs were accumulated in two series against very much weakened bowling attacks. As a consequence of factors outside of his control, Gavaskar didn’t play against the Windies full strength team between 1975/76 and 1982/83. This analysis is not to decry Gavaskar – he is a legend of the game and deserves ultimate respect for what he has achieved. He could, after all, not control who he played against. A very strong argument can be made that Gavaskar should be considered of the best few opening batsmen in the history of the game. However, the claims made by some supporters that he is the greatest opener of all-time based solely on his record against the Windies is one that simply does not hold up to closer scrutiny.

Gavaskar opened in 49 tests against 7 all time great fast bowlers, without helemet , without any protection where he averaged 48. 20 of those 49 tests were against atleast one of the WI bowlers Marshall, Holding, Joel Garner or Andy Roberts. He averaged 50 in those 20 tests.

http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/28794.html?class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=default;player_involve=1369;player_involve=1383;player_involve=1407;player_involve=1426;player_involve=1451;player_involve=1522;player_involve=1571;template=results;type=batting

[thevortex]

Vortex, Dhondy is absolutely right. We have our Ranji players by the bucketful bought up on turning pitches. We have seen how the Mumbai Ranji team smashed around Warne in 98 and even in successive side games in India. Same for Muralithran. I mean even the youngsters in India play them with utmost ease. 99.99 % players struggle against genuine pace. When this is combined with swing, it becomes lethal. If spinners were as challenging and etc...we should have during the 70's and 80's with the great spin quartet been something better than one of the weakest bowling teams, no ? Instead, the teams that ruled the roost are the ones with blazing fast bowlers, WI for example.

Patriot - what sort of apologist argument is this? Heterogeneity is the lifeblood of cricket. No other game (that I know of) can boast of the variety and heterogeneity that is there in cricket - both in terms of disciplines, resources as well as styles and surfaces. There is a reason why Indians are strong against spin and Australians/South Africans are weak against it. Each of them are used to the kind of bowling that they get to face in their own backyard. Do you see the Australians and South Africans crowing that spin is better than pace because their batsmen cannot handle it? I am sorry - but this is just not on. About winning with our spin - we would and we did on surfaces which suited that style. At home. I am sure I dont need to tell you that cricket has been revolutionalized over the times. All the time, in fact. You are not gonig to find wristy batsmen in the early part of the game. It required the Asians to promote that style of batsmanship. And you will notice that that advantage still holds. Not to mention the art of spin. While there were doubtless good spinners even before India was ushered in as a Test team, it cannot be denied that a new dimension was discovered with the Indian spinners. The point is that spin could not win matches abroad - because the home team was not going to be welcoming the visitors by pandering to the latter's strength. It was going to be pace and swing - which Indian batsmen were not used to. Over time, the equation changed. However, while the Australians came along in the spin department they never were stupid enough to lose sight of their original strength - pace. However in our hurry to develop pacemen and in our fascination for the undiscovered, with no regard for homegrown strengths, we ran after pace and we are now in an absolutely unenviable position as far as spin talent is concerned. That is the point. Bowling disciplines are just ways to get batsmen out. Any talk of one or the other discipline being better just does not make any cricketing sense. That is like saying that right handed batsmen are better than left handers. Or to take that forward, the pull shot is greater than the drive! Horses for courses - that is what it is, really.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Roshanrocks]

BB... there is no point in further discussion in this thread... Gavaskar > Tendulkar because he played without helmet.... :D nice criteria no.... to define who is better :D

[patriot]

Patriot - what sort of apologist argument is this? Heterogeneity is the lifeblood of cricket. No other game (that I know of) can boast of the variety and heterogeneity that is there in cricket - both in terms of disciplines, resources as well as styles and surfaces. There is a reason why Indians are strong against spin and Australians/South Africans are weak against it. Each of them are used to the kind of bowling that they get to face in their own backyard. Do you see the Australians and South Africans crowing that spin is better than pace because their batsmen cannot handle it? I am sorry - but this is just not on. About winning with our spin - we would and we did on surfaces which suited that style. At home. I am sure I dont need to tell you that cricket has been revolutionalized over the times. All the time, in fact. You are not gonig to find wristy batsmen in the early part of the game. It required the Asians to promote that style of batsmanship. And you will notice that that advantage still holds. Not to mention the art of spin. While there were doubtless good spinners even before India was ushered in as a Test team, it cannot be denied that a new dimension was discovered with the Indian spinners. The point is that spin could not win matches abroad - because the home team was not going to be welcoming the visitors by pandering to the latter's strength. It was going to be pace and swing - which Indian batsmen were not used to. Over time, the equation changed. However, while the Australians came along in the spin department they never were stupid enough to lose sight of their original strength - pace. However in our hurry to develop pacemen and in our fascination for the undiscovered, with no regard for homegrown strengths, we ran after pace and we are now in an absolutely unenviable position as far as spin talent is concerned. That is the point. Bowling disciplines are just ways to get batsmen out. Any talk of one or the other discipline being better just does not make any cricketing sense. That is like saying that right handed batsmen are better than left handers. Or to take that forward, the pull shot is greater than the drive! Horses for courses - that is what it is, really.

I am sory to dissapont you dear friend. My arguement cuts across the point and is factually correct. Yours on the other hand comes across as pure argy bargy with all due respect. First lets get your facts right. Fact # 1 The "weak against spin " South Africans have a problem with Warne and are not as good as Indians - no one is. But the " weak against spin " South Africans have won test series against Lanka in Lanka , Pakistan in Pakistan..and the biggest of all India in India, hell whitewashing us 2-0 once. We have struggled to hold on to them even at home. Check out Kumble and Harbhajan's atrocious home record against " weak against spin " South Africa. Fact # 2 Playing on pitches with bounce is not the same as playing genuine pace. Akhtar and Steyn have demolished Aussies in the past with sheer pace. Johnson has done the same to Saffies last year with sheer pace. Speed khelna koi bacchon ka khel nahi hai, phirti gend khelna toh anubhav se niota jata hai.

[achilles]

If you want to check the ability of playing fast bowling, Mohinder amarnath was the best player of fast bowling from Asia. He averaged 30 at home and 50 outside India. Home: http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/26225.html?class=1;home_or_away=1;template=results;type=batting;view=innings Away: http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/26225.html?class=1;home_or_away=2;template=results;type=batting;view=innings Played WI quartret better than any players in history of game http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;opposition=4;orderby=runs;player_involve=1426;player_involve=1451;player_involve=1522;player_involve=1571;player_involve_type=all;template=results;type=batting Averaged 55 in Aus, 57 against Imran khan and co in Pakistan. I mean he was much better batsman than his average suggest

Jimmy Amarnath was maybe the greatest Indian batsman against pace. But he never got the fame and the limelight he deserved. In more ways than one, "Rahul Dravid" is the Jimmy Amarnath of this decade. I see a parallel between the two.

Patriot - what sort of apologist argument is this? Heterogeneity is the lifeblood of cricket. No other game (that I know of) can boast of the variety and heterogeneity that is there in cricket - both in terms of disciplines, resources as well as styles and surfaces. There is a reason why Indians are strong against spin and Australians/South Africans are weak against it. Each of them are used to the kind of bowling that they get to face in their own backyard. Do you see the Australians and South Africans crowing that spin is better than pace because their batsmen cannot handle it? I am sorry - but this is just not on. About winning with our spin - we would and we did on surfaces which suited that style. At home. I am sure I dont need to tell you that cricket has been revolutionalized over the times. All the time, in fact. You are not gonig to find wristy batsmen in the early part of the game. It required the Asians to promote that style of batsmanship. And you will notice that that advantage still holds. Not to mention the art of spin. While there were doubtless good spinners even before India was ushered in as a Test team, it cannot be denied that a new dimension was discovered with the Indian spinners. The point is that spin could not win matches abroad - because the home team was not going to be welcoming the visitors by pandering to the latter's strength. It was going to be pace and swing - which Indian batsmen were not used to. Over time, the equation changed. However, while the Australians came along in the spin department they never were stupid enough to lose sight of their original strength - pace. However in our hurry to develop pacemen and in our fascination for the undiscovered, with no regard for homegrown strengths, we ran after pace and we are now in an absolutely unenviable position as far as spin talent is concerned. That is the point. Bowling disciplines are just ways to get batsmen out. Any talk of one or the other discipline being better just does not make any cricketing sense. That is like saying that right handed batsmen are better than left handers. Or to take that forward, the pull shot is greater than the drive! Horses for courses - that is what it is, really.

Sri, I think I'm falling short of words to describe the sheer spectacularness of your posts. :hatsoff: