Are We All SKCs?

[CC1981]

Re: Are We All SKCs?

Imran has 27 wickets from 10 matches @ 28.03 in India Waz has 27 wickets from 8 matches @ 27.70 Pure nonsense to say they did well in India.

Since when did a Sub 28 avg become "Not-Good enuff" that too IN INDIA and especially considering they bowled in that maha dead series (1985) which was a continuos block-a-thon ...

An average of above 25 is 'not good enough' for a fast bowler, period. Especially when the said fast bowler's career record is far better than the performance quoted, it is safe to say that player sucked in the quoted performance. Wasim and Imran had lower strike rate, wicket/match, average and frequency of five-fers in India than outside India, indicating that their performance in India was not as good as they normally are.

[CC1981]

Re: Are We All SKCs?

But they dont even on the Home turf ... samjah kar yaar ...

bakwaas of the century and for that comment, i'd give you A+ on SKC 101. PS: I am not your 'yaar'.

[Lurker]

Re: Are We All SKCs?

ehh? How many Non-Indian Batsman scored 250+ IN INDIA in 75 yrs of Test Cricket when VVS did his 281 thing ... GRAND SUM OF ONE Cricketer ... (Rohan Kanhai) are you now saying that its a matter of shame for the Entire cricketing world that they didnt score more 250+ scores especially considering we had weak bowling attacks ?

Quick to forget are we BB? Forgot so easily how a complete unknown player as Faoud Bacchus scored 250 against India at Kanpur? Faoud Bacchus of all the people! India scored 3 centuries in first innings while Bacchus scored 250 as the match ended as a tame draw(surprise surprise). That was just from top of my head by the way. By the way I am not quite sure where you got that idea of 250 plus as a matter of shame for the rest of the world. No Indian batsman had scored 250 plus, at home or abroad, and hence Sunny's statement. Every country England, Australia, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, New Zealand, South Africa, West Indies had scores of 250 plus posted by batsmen, except India. That was why Sunny felt the way he did and I concur with him. Dont go about putting words in my mouth now.

Plenty of fast bowlers have done wonderful in India? Like who? Other than Marshall and Holding I can not seem to remember too many.

Kapil, Srinath, Hadlee, McGrath, Gillespie, Imran, Waz, Shoaib , Botham , Willis, Roberts, Walsh , Donald, Pollock from the top of my head ... That good enuff list for you ? Thats like me saying Warne, O Reilley, Grimmette, Arthur Mailey and co have done fantastic in Australia. Doesnt take us anywhere. By the way lets see some of the names you put in. Shall start with the names of foreign players first. Hadlee - 31 wickets in 6 tests. Great performance(and one I was lucky to have followed on tv) but worse than his performance in Australia or England. Mcgrath - 33 wickets in 8 tests. Good performance but worse than his overall performance as also worse than his performance in Australia, England, West Indies etc. Pollock - 13 wickets in 4 tests. Worse than what he performs in most countries. I could do that for more but I hope that shall suffice. Most of the players if not all have good performances but worse than what they normally did(and I have picked the best). By the way since when did Botham, Pollock etc become fast bowlers. Indian bowlers Kapil and Sreenath would count if and only if you are more than happy to agree about Warne and likes of Arthur Mailey's record Down Under. Else we would have another discussion at hand. xxx

[CC1981]

Re: Are We All SKCs?

what wonderfull logic ...and those mind fantastic facts .. jeez Iam left speechless

Don't have the time to regurgitate American contemporary history 101. Too much to do to burst your SKC bubble of America-worship. But you can continue to live in your fool's paradise that Americans are well loved globally and brilliant tourists.

And you say Yanks are arrogant

Yup. Still doesnt change the fact that you arn't my yaar. Continue with your pretense of 'desh-bhakti' while running away from your 'desh' as much as you want. Still doesn't give credibility to your half-cooked stats and interpretations that are not objective but solely designed to be as jingoistic as possible.

[apocalypse]

Re: Are We All SKCs?

Reason they more often than not are pain in the a$$ and come with chip on their shoulders.

Nah. Its because Indian professors don't fall for BS excuses ( i was sick/got a flat tyre/etc etc) as much as gora professors do. :hic: I avoid Indian professors as a plague too - they never give you an extension on a project or assignment unless someone died.

That's not the reason, anyway u will get to know once u will start the post-graduate studies

i had an advisor in my post graduate studies... it does not matter

[CC1981]

Re: Are We All SKCs?

they dont take crap from jealous lousy "desi" wannabe Canucks

I cant possibly see what i'd be jealous towards america about. I am anti-military, pro-socialist dude from the start. If America is what i wanted, i'd have gone to America.

which is why you are frothing at your mouth and hopping up and down ... understandable

No, its just that i know far far more american history-contemporary and past- than the average desi like yourself. I've studied about American history and politics in depth enough to realize that they pose just as much a threat to the rest of the world as islamic jihadists - in many cases, far more of a threat. since you view me to be jealous of america, you must be quite proud of america- typical SKC mentality in denial.

wannabe Canucks

Atleast i am not pretending to be a 'great desh-bhakt' while sitting in another country and mooching off of it because the country i proclaim to be the 'desh bhakt of' doesnt provide me with enough ALLMIGHTY DOLLAR. Funny to see your type of 'India-bhakts' who jumped ship at the first opportunity.

[veer]

Re: Are We All SKCs? dont know what the hell is this topic about.. but 7 damn pages within six hours.. i thought site was down..

[Lurker]

Re: Are We All SKCs?

dont know what the hell is this topic about.. but 7 damn pages within six hours.. i thought site was down..

Hahaha..Welcome to cyberworld. Actually it was a pretty decent debate even though we ended up doing more a cricket debate on a issue that was by and large non-cricketish..Good fun though.

[Lurker]

Re: Are We All SKCs?

yes you are right ... so that makes it Two ... but thats it .. heres the full list http://cricketstats.m6.net/HundredsPerTestByCountry.aspx ... there are 4 250+ scores in 75 yrs of Test Cricket IN INDIA which tells me that its not common for some one to score big in India.

So lets get to the bottom of this now BB, shall we? In the 75 year history of Indian cricket or so we had ONLY two players who could score 250 or more. And these two players were both NON-Indians. One, Foud Bacchus, would not make it to top 100 batsman list of all times, let alone greatest ever. The other Rohan Kanhai obviously was a fantastic batsman. But still it is debatable if he was in the same ranks as say Sunil Gavaskar, Rahul Dravid, Sachin Tendulkar. By most accounts, if not all, Kanhai was not. So here is a question to you now: Help me understand why the greatest of Indian batting trio - Sunny, Dravid, Sachin(not to mention the likes of Merchant, Hazare, Manjrekar(Vijay and Sanjay), Sardesai, Umrigar etc- did not score 250 or more at home even though they played plenty of games.

Yeah you can take out Home bowlers if you wish ... and I can come up with few more Fast bowlers if I start digging up records from statsguru from the old days ... And I dont agree on the Botham , Pollock thingy ... thats just semantics ...

Please feel free to refer to statsguru(or any such website for that matter). Here is what I have been arguing. Australian(we started with Ind-Aussie comparison) pitches have far more variety and offer more to bowlers. Hence it is not easy to score 500 runs in 5 tests(specially against Australia with their good ground keeping). What you have been arguing(and correct me if I am wrong here) is thats its a myth. So here is the question to you again: Of the list of players who you have selected can you compare their bowling stats in India with their bowling stats in Australia? That should give a better picture of whether Indian pitches assisted them better of Australian pitch. Fair? And no Pollock and Botham are classified nowhere as fast bowlers. Great medium pace bowlers yes but fast bowlers? xxxx

[Lurker]

Re: Are We All SKCs?

Because its very easy to bat in India ... Again these are not the only guys to miss out .... pretty much the Entire Cricketing world has not been able to score big in India .... No triple 100s in 75 yrs but every country has one scored in their grounds ....

So you concede that it is very easy to bat in India BB? That should put to rest all your assertions about India being touted as "batting track" a myth. Or did you say something you didnt mean to? By the way this excuse - pretty much the Entire Cricketing world has not been able to score big in India - is redundant. Sachin, Sunny, Dravid have all played 50 plus tests in India. If a Kanhai can score 250 in less than 10 test plus, and so does Bacchus it does merit a question as to why Indian batsmen have been found wanting to score big? Maybe they just do not have the capacity to score big(in terms of temperament and stamina)?

No we started this Ind/Aus thing when you said Aus pitches offer support for all types of Bowling Fast & Spin whereas Indian piches only help spinners .... which is when I said ... its not true ... especially for spin bowlers from opposition players playing in Aus ... There are far more fast and medium pace bowlers from opposition teams (Since you are very particular of that classification) that have succeeded IN India than spinners have IN AUSTRALIA ..

Thats too simplistic a view. My assertion is that Australian pitches offer more variation. Perth is fast while Sydney takes a lot more spin. Here are some stats for SCG(to counter your claim about spin). I am taking only 1 decade in contention as it would be lot of work. Lets take 2000 plus till date. Fair? 1) Australia vs West Indies 2000-2001 Mcgill/Miller - 13 wickets (most wickets from West Indies - Nagamutoo) 2) Australia vs South Africa 2001-2002 Mcgill/Warne - 13 wickets (most wickets from South Africa - Nicky Boje) 3) Australia vs England 2002-2003 Mcgill - 5 wickets Most wickets - 10 by Andy Caddick 4) Australia vs India 2003-04 Most wickets - 12 by Kumble 5) Australia vs Pakistan 2004-05 Warne/Mcgill - 13 wickets Kaneria - 8 6) Australia vs South Africa 2006-07 Mcgill/Warne - 6 wickets 7) Australia vs England 20007-08 Warne - 2 wickets. Can you look those numbers and tell me that Sydney pitch does not support spinners? Of the 7 tests that have been played this decade 72 wickets have been picked by spinners. Tell me where am I going wrong. xxxx

[Lurker]

Re: Are We All SKCs?

Actually if you look at the Kanhai's inngs it was against a very mediocre bowling line up ... with only Subash Gupte being a bowler of any note ... and even he had a bowling avg of 32 at home .... And I agree about the Bacchus inngs being on a patta where they were not able to finish even one inngs .... but those are rare exceptions ... Heres the thing .... India have never ever had a really mean Test bowler (as in sub 23-25 Bowling avg) but even then No opposition has been able to put up big scores ... as there have been elsewhere in cricketing nations.

That could be one way to look at thing I guess. Other, which I choose to follow, is to give credit where its due and admit that foreign batsman have often provided much more application than the Indian batsmen and have succeeded in foreign environment. If weak bowling attack was the only reason then Indian batsmen should have scored triple centuries against the likes of Zimbabwe and Sri Lankan attack(I mean Sri Lankan team of 80's, their bowling attack was hardly anything to write home about). How many innings of pure steel have we seen played in India that have been on par with Dean Jones double century in Tied Tests? This is not to undermine Indian batsmen. We have our own strength, specially with stroke play and sheer artistry but I would admit that had a Sunny, a Umrigar a Merchant shown more application we may have had a triple centurion before Sehwag. Lets take your critique about SCG now.

Shane Warne Avg's 28.12 at SCG whereas his career Avg is 25 ... that tells you the story of SCG pretty much.

Negative. That includes his first test where he gave away 232 runs for 1 wicket(the match in which Shastri scored a century). Take that away and his record becomes 13 tests 63 wickets @24.8, better than his career stats. By the way you perhaps forgot to mention MacGill's stats on the same ground. 8 Tests 53 wickets @24.47

You will have to find out how many runs were conceeded by those bowlers .... I can tell you right now that the 2004 SCG Test ended up as a total flat track with 1747 runs being made throughout the match for just 25 wkts ..... Find me ONE Single Ground in India that has conceeded as many EVER !

Hain? In the same match Anil Kumble has 12 wickets for 270 odd runs! Why does it suddenly become the fault of the pitch that other spinners are unable to take any wickets on the same ground on which someone takes 12 wickets??? By the way I am sure you realize very well that Anil Kumble's record would have been much better on this ground had India held its chances, notably Parthiv. xx

[Lurker]

Re: Are We All SKCs?

Well for every double 100 scored by opposition team IN INDIA our guys have scored 1.5 as many (14 vs 9 ) ... and we have scored almost the same no-of double 100s away (just one less i.e 14 ) and this is not including the Minnows ! But to use your logic .... i.e to use the exception as the rule ... Can I now say that since no -one has ever made a double hundred after following on ... every batsmen other than VVS is Craap ?

You are making it unneccessarily complicated than it has to be. The point is this - Indian batsmen including the greatest of them have been found wanting in putting High scores on the very pitches they have spent lifetime playing. This is an area where Indian batting history is certainly not glorious till VVS and Sehwag scored those two mammoth innings. As for VVS his innings is noted by every cricket fan, an Indian or non-Indian, as the greatest ever. On most list it makes to top 10, top 5 or whatever so I am not even sure why you had to rake that up.

Yes Iam aware thats why I gave the 2000's decade stats seperately also ... Cant do that since we are talking about the Ground ...

Then in my opinion you are just trying to clutch at the straws. Let me spell it in simple terms. Warne has an absolutely trash record against India. It doesnt matter if he plays on a pitch which spins from day 1. It doesnt matter if he plays at Sydney, Chennai or Ahmedabad, he still comes out second best. Bottomline - Warne's record at any pitch,Sydney or Chennai, would go down if he plays against India.

Its a credit to AK not the pitch .... AK is seasoned pro and even he went for a lot of runs on that pitch .... and he had to bowl 89 overs to get those 12 wkts which is the highest no-of overs he has bowled in a single Test Match !.... he was the only one that got some wkts on that totally flat pitch .... heck the Australian team didnt even manage to get 10 Indian Wkts in 2 tries for almost 3 Days and conceeded almost 1000 runs ... thats an Avg of 100 runs/wkt !

So in the very next game that was played on the same pitch(Australia-Pakistan) the pitch suddenly underwent a transformation and 21 wickets were picked by Warne/Macgill/Kaneria? Listen noone is undermining Kumble. It was a fantastic effort but lets also not forget that this was Kumble's best effort in the ENTIRE series. He took as many wickets at Sydney as he took at Adelaide and Melbourne combined! Coincidence? I dont think so. xxxx

[gator]

Re: Are We All SKCs?

He took as many wickets at Sydney as he took at Adelaide and Melbourne combined! Coincidence? I dont think so.

u forgot to consider the number of overs too??? coincidence???

[Lurker]

Re: Are We All SKCs?

u forgot to consider the number of overs too??? coincidence???

Errr no. If you add up his Melbourne and Adelaide overs they were far more(about 120) as compared to what he bowled at Sydney(about 90). In other words Kumble bowled less overs than the first two tests and still picked up as many wickets. Coincidence? I think not. :hic:

[kumble_rocks]

Re: Are We All SKCs?

PS: I am not your 'yaar'.

CC, for a Pacifistic Buddhist and self confessed Vivekanada follower , you are mighty touchy and aggressive, I must comment. Show some peace brother. BTW, a honest question , why is it that some of the Bengalis are still Communist ?? :shrug:

[Lurker]

Re: Are We All SKCs?

That is not the case .... no-body has managed to consistently score big runs IN INDIA .... and there were some real Maharathis from outside India who played IN INDIA even when we had very very Craap bowling. The nature of the pitches makes it very hard for someone to score big ... and it usually requires a combination of luck and extraordinary skills to get past a score of 200 or 250 .... the whole point of my website was that ... and I have looked at from various angles ... I cannot go into each and every stat ... it will take many many pages to explain all that.

Hardly. Here are some historical cricket facts. Till 2000 every cricket playing country had a player who had scored 250 plus for their country. And yes that includes Zimbabwe too(David Haughton had a 260 plus in early 90's). India did not. Not only did Indian batsmen did not score abroad, they did not even score at home. Atleast not a 250 plus. I am willing to concede that as a black spot for Indian batsmen. You obviously are not. Lets agree to disgree on this because I beleive we have already shared as much as we can on this.

Nope. you are the one that asked for excluding a match because it didnt suit your point.

Hardly again. Any cricket fan would look at Warne's record dissecting it into two broad groups. One would be his performance against India and other against rest of the world. This is hardly something I have initiated to suit my point. Again you are free to disagree with that.

But to have nearly 1750 runs scored on a pitch certainly gives a very bad rep ... only the Timeless Tests back in the 20s and 30s had higher Match aggregates ... and if you go by Runs/Wkt then that Test Match at SCG is the King ...

The reason why you did not see too many score of 1750 before is actually rather simple - the scoring rate was much lower before 90's! When you mention timeless Test you forgot to mention the scoring rate at the time. Even with 8 ball overs they would hardly hold a candle to today's scoring rates. By the way if SCG 2003-04 was indeed a patta wicket are you willing to concede that Sachin Tendulkar's 241* actually came on a flat featherbred track? xxx

[Lurker]

Re: Are We All SKCs?

If Bradmans any no.of double 100s on similar pattas are accorded the same status then yeah ... else no ... needs to work both ways.

Hahaha..Where did that come from? Suddenly its back to Bradman. Look we are discussing the fact that Sachin played 241* on a track that scored 1750 runs for the loss of 25 wickets! I mean come on this is one of top 5 match aggregates(your data). Surely any Tom, Dick and Sachin could score here. Anyway lets agree to disagree on this. It has been a nice discussion but seems like we are both repeating ourselves now. xxx