Sri Lanka tour of Australia, Nov 2010

[vaibhav_delhi]

And to find these "non-rated" batsmen piling it against India is irritating. Eh?

Mate, I am sorry to say but batsmen like Mahela and thilan devalue test runs and test averages. Please have a look at Mahela's record in Aus, SA, Eng, Nz,PK: http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/49289.html?class=1;template=results;type=batting Same for Thilan: http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/50424.html?class=1;template=results;type=batting Sangakara is a great player though.

[vaibhav_delhi]

Ya' date=' I'd agree. Apart from Sangakkara and Dilshan (Mathews and Paranavithana have not played much overseas. But former is a better players of pace than spin) others usually hit the daylight out of crap attacks, because of their concentration and ability to play long innings. I'd put Sehwag also on the same list, but he scores it very quickly (even if he's a home track bully) to make it important.[/quote'] Wrong Again, Sehwag is one of the best openers the world has ever seen. Its basically a blasphemy to compare him with Jaya and Thilan.

[thongale]

Mate, I am sorry to say but batsmen like Mahela and thilan devalue test runs and test averages. Please have a look at Mahela's record in Aus, SA, Eng, Nz,PK: http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/49289.html?class=1;template=results;type=batting Same for Thilan: http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/50424.html?class=1;template=results;type=batting Sangakara is a great player though.

Samaraweera did not have enough chances to play away tests. Specially after he remodeled his technique and his Average shot form 40 to 50. So that stats will not mean much. Of couse if he fails in the second round, then I'll agree with you. And if you compare Mahela's stats with Sehwag's you'll start to see some real similarities. Of course because Sehwag scores fast he's useful in Inidan setting where there are good batsmen to stick with. But in SL setting Mahela is more useful because he plays long innings and holds the innings together.

[vaibhav_delhi]

^^ mahale is a flat track player and a failure in testing conditions unlike sehwag SL has never ever won a single test match in SA, india or Aust

[thongale]

^^ mahale is a flat track player and a failure in testing conditions unlike sehwag SL has never ever won a single test match in SA, india or Aust

The real truth is that Sehwag averages less than Mahela in SAF (31.4 vs 26.2), ENG (42.6 vs 39.5) and NZ (27.8 vs 20) where the ball swings a lot. In Australia Sehwag has done better (59 vs 34) because he has played on summer venues compared to winter venues that Mahela played (anyway I'll give that to Sehwag). You can bring out any arguments, but the numbers don't lie at all. If Mahela is a FTB, so is Sehwag to the same extent. And brining out team performance to judge a batsman will give that Kambli > Andy Flower type of a joke.

[Andy]

Ya' date=' I'd agree. Apart from Sangakkara and Dilshan (Mathews and Paranavithana have not played much overseas. But former is a better players of pace than spin) others usually hit the daylight out of crap attacks, because of their concentration and ability to play long innings. I'd put Sehwag also on the same list, but he scores it very quickly (even if he's a home track bully) to make it important.[/quote'] I rate Mathews much Beter technically other Than Sanga over any SL players. But how Sehwag is a FTB and is on Par with Samraweeras and Mahelas? True he scores at an average of 56 at Home, But you have to see his performance away from home, which is over 50 too.

[vaibhav_delhi]

The real truth is that Sehwag averages less than Mahela in SAF (31.4 vs 26.2), ENG (42.6 vs 39.5) and NZ (27.8 vs 20) where the ball swings a lot. In Australia Sehwag has done better (59 vs 34) because he has played on summer venues compared to winter venues that Mahela played (anyway I'll give that to Sehwag). You can bring out any arguments, but the numbers don't lie at all. If Mahela is a FTB, so is Sehwag to the same extent. And brining out team performance to judge a batsman will give that Kambli > Andy Flower type of a joke.

Are you arguing just for the sake of it? Does averaging 60 in Aust over 7 test matchs not count enough for you? As an opener sehwag has to counter swing evrytime he goes out to bat. To say he cant play swing just puts your cricket knowledge(the lack of it) on display. Sehwag was picked among best 4 openers the world has ever seen. Jaya wouldnt have even been nominated in his catagory if he wasnt a part of SL all time XI. The rate at which he scores and the way he sets up test victories for his team also cant be compared with Mahela coz hez never won a game in Ind,Aus or SA.

[Andy]

The real truth is that Sehwag averages less than Mahela in SAF (31.4 vs 26.2)' date=' ENG (42.6 vs 39.5) and NZ (27.8 vs 20) where the ball swings a lot. In Australia Sehwag has done better (59 vs 34) [b']because he has played on summer venues compared to winter venues that Mahela played (anyway I'll give that to Sehwag). You can bring out any arguments, but the numbers don't lie at all. If Mahela is a FTB, so is Sehwag to the same extent. And brining out team performance to judge a batsman will give that Kambli > Andy Flower type of a joke.

Then i'll have to say Sehwag made Hundred on Debut against SA. The second time he played in SA was the time he was going through the worst Phase of his career. Talking about performance in England, Sehwag has played only one series in England when he batted as an Opener for the first time , Yet scored a 100 and a 85 on his first performance as an Opener. Mahela has played many in England so will be unfair to compare them. Talking about Performance in NZ, part from the 2002 series the balll never swung in NZ when India toured in 2009. In that 2002 series players from both sides were struggling to reach double figures and In the ODI series where people hardly saw IND/NZ score above 150, Sehwag scored two senturies in Swinging Conditions, so to say Sehwag cant score when the ball swings around is completly wrong. Now talking about Performance in Australia, he has outscored Mahela by a long way, even if you bring in Logic like Winter and Summer, let me tell you Sehwag even played once in Winter in Australia. And in the two innings he played for World 11 he scored one 73. So you have no excuse to put a FTB like Mahela over Sehwag.

[ZodiaC]

In Australia Sehwag has done better (59 vs 34) because he has played on summer venues compared to winter venues that Mahela played

:haha::hysterical::giggle:

[thongale]

I rate Mathews much Beter technically other Than Sanga over any SL players. But how Sehwag is a FTB and is on Par with Samraweeras and Mahelas? True he scores at an average of 56 at Home' date=' But you have to see his performance away from home, which is over 50 too.[/quote']When the ball moves they both find it difficult. And the stats prove it beyond any doubt. The accusation of Mahela is that he fails of tracks that do have movement and hence FTB. I have proved enough evidence that Sehwag has the same problems, as Mahela. Sehwag's "away" average of 50 consists by runs in SL and PAK where the tracks are similar to India (PAK flatter, SL bit of help). Outside SC, Sehwag averages 41 and Mahela 38. Hardly anything in it. When the ball moves they both struggle. If it's flat they'll score heavily. If it spins square, both won't mind. But I fail to get how Sehwag is significantly better on away tracks than Mahela.

[thongale]

Are you arguing just for the sake of it? Does averaging 60 in Aust over 7 test matchs not count enough for you?

No. It doesn't. Averaging close to nothing against best fast attacks do matter BTW.

As an opener sehwag has to counter swing evrytime he goes out to bat. To say he cant play swing just puts your cricket knowledge(the lack of it) on display.

Get off your fan-boy high horse mate. It's a known secret that he cannot play swing, specially when it comes in. Mitchell Johonson was way off the target when he wanted to bowl short at Sehwag, and I LMAO when first read that artcle. It's quick swinging deliveries that gets him. Of course fast swinging balls can get anybody. But Sehwag's Achilles is right there.

Sehwag was picked among best 4 openers the world has ever seen. Jaya wouldnt have even been nominated in his category if he wasnt a part of SL all time XI.

Buahaha! By fan boys perhaps. I can give Gavaskar, Hammond, Haynes, Hayden top of my head. Oh, Barry Richards too. Sehwag is definitely one of the best openers of current era, but to say he's a best ever is stretching it too much.

The rate at which he scores and the way he sets up test victories for his team also cant be compared with Mahela coz hez never won a game in Ind,Aus or SA.

The rate I agree with you. But that comes with the price of staying powers. Mahela stays and holds innings, and he's valuable in SL context than Sehwag who'll blast some runs and get out quickly. And equating team performance to that of players is like saying Kambli > Flower joke or Harbhajan > Murali using same arguments.:hysterical:

[Andy]

When the ball moves they both find it difficult. And the stats prove it beyond any doubt. The accusation of Mahela is that he fails of tracks that do have movement and hence FTB. I have proved enough evidence that Sehwag has the same problems' date=' as Mahela. Sehwag's "away" average of 50 consists by runs in SL and PAK where the tracks are similar to India (PAK flatter, SL bit of help). Outside SC, Sehwag averages 41 and Mahela 38. Hardly anything in it. When the ball moves they both struggle. If it's flat they'll score heavily. If it spins square, both won't mind. But I fail to get how Sehwag is significantly better on away tracks than Mahela.[/quote'] Who doesnt have problems when the ball Moves? Every batsman have. I havent seen many scoring Hundreds and Double Hundreds when the ball is swinging and seaming both ways. Great batsmen do cope with them and still score some runs which Sehwag does. Hence he has 5 hundreds outside SC. But Mahelas problem is just not Movement, he has problems when the pitch has more bounce hence he struggles in Australia. BTW you are actually wrong, Barring Minnows Sehwag do average 41 outside SC, which is not bad as he is an opener and he bats at a position where there is most for the Fast bowlers. And Mahela avergaes paltry 36 outside subcontinent barring Minnows. A drop of 5 Units. That says it all, He being a Middle Order batsman should score more than Sehwag or atleast same to be called On Par or better than Sehwag. 36 for a middle Order batsman is Ordinary when there is not much in it for the bowlers comparitively as for the openers. Not just that, South Africa and Australia have had the best bowling attack in last two decades. Sehwag has 3 hundreds combined the two and Mahela has only one, that says the story for me who is more of an FTB.

[vaibhav_delhi]

When the ball moves they both find it difficult. And the stats prove it beyond any doubt. The accusation of Mahela is that he fails of tracks that do have movement and hence FTB. I have proved enough evidence that Sehwag has the same problems' date=' as Mahela. Sehwag's "away" average of 50 consists by runs in SL and PAK where the tracks are similar to India (PAK flatter, SL bit of help). Outside SC, Sehwag averages 41 and Mahela 38. Hardly anything in it. When the ball moves they both struggle. If it's flat they'll score heavily. If it spins square, both won't mind. But I fail to get how Sehwag is significantly better on away tracks than Mahela.[/quote'] 1. Sehwag averages 60 in Aust. 2. Sehwag sets up test victories for india with his donimating batting. 3. Sehwag has to counter swing evrytime he goes out to bat while Mahela bats 2 down. There are rarely any opners in the history of cricket who average 50+. 4. Mahela has only mainly contributed in high scoring draws or in foregiven loss results for lanka where the opposition tends to relax a bit. 5. Sehwag was rated among top 4 openers in history by an independent jury (not an indian jury).

[thongale]

Then i'll have to say Sehwag made Hundred on Debut against SA.

This is called clutching of straws. Yeas, Sehwag made 105 in the first series he played, and Mahela made 98 in his first outing. Once again, nothing thre.

The second time he played in SA was the time he was going through the worst Phase of his career.

Same could be argued about Mahela. he never toured SAF after 2002, that is 8 frikkin seasons where he has matured and has come to the top tier of the ICC rankings. If he ahd played SAF in his best years would have scored more.

Talking about performance in England, Sehwag has played only one series in England when he batted as an Opener for the first time , Yet scored a 100 and a 85 on his first performance as an Opener. Mahela has played many in England so will be unfair to compare them.

Point taken. If comparison of 13 innings vs 6 is unfair so should be 14 vs 8 against Australia (in Brisbane, Cairns, Darwin and Hobart where the ball does most in Australia vs Brisbane, Adelaide, Melbourne, Sydney and Perth where Sehwag played):--D

Talking about Performance in NZ, part from the 2002 series the balll never swung in NZ when India toured in 2009. In that 2002 series players from both sides were struggling to reach double figures and In the ODI series where people hardly saw IND/NZ score above 150, Sehwag scored two senturies in Swinging Conditions, so to say Sehwag cant score when the ball swings around is completly wrong.

Agree with the bolded observation. And we are not talking of ODIs here as well. Our scope is test matches, with Test fields. In NZ other than for a odd series, ball boomerangs usually. Saying in NZ ball never swings is wrong. NZ is the best place in cricket for swing bowling. And from 1995 to 2010, best bowlers in NZ had been swing bowlers and seam bowlers.

Now talking about Performance in Australia, he has outscored Mahela by a long way, even if you bring in Logic like Winter and Summer, let me tell you Sehwag even played once in Winter in Australia. And in the two innings he played for World 11 he scored one 73. So you have no excuse to put a FTB like Mahela over Sehwag.

When they both played in Brisbane Sehwag scored 45 and 0. Mahela scored 14 and 49. Once again very similar. And on Perth Sehwag struggled. He belted the Aussie attack on flat / spinning Adelaide, MCG and Sydney pitches. never played on a green Hobart wicket, nor on a cracking Darwin pitch. When ever they have played on similar tracks their records are similar. But to compare the amount of data is really lacking, and I hate when it happens. But has to work with what is available.

[vaibhav_delhi]

No. It doesn't. Averaging close to nothing against best fast attacks do matter BTW. Get off your fan-boy high horse mate. It's a known secret that he cannot play swing, specially when it comes in. Mitchell Johonson was way off the target when he wanted to bowl short at Sehwag, and I LMAO when first read that artcle. It's quick swinging deliveries that gets him. Of course fast swinging balls can get anybody. But Sehwag's Achilles is right there. Buahaha! By fan boys perhaps. I can give Gavaskar, Hammond, Haynes, Hayden top of my head. Oh, Barry Richards too. Sehwag is definitely one of the best openers of current era, but to say he's a best ever is stretching it too much. The rate I agree with you. But that comes with the price of staying powers. Mahela stays and holds innings, and he's valuable in SL context than Sehwag who'll blast some runs and get out quickly. And equating team performance to that of players is like saying Kambli > Flower joke or Harbhajan > Murali using same arguments.:hysterical:

Thanks for this reply. We all now know your cricketing IQ. No need for anybody to reply to this.

[Clarke]

damn it, discuss squads and venues for starters. Sehwag is not playing.

[Andy]

Point taken. If comparison of 13 innings vs 6 is unfair so should be 14 vs 8 against Australia (in Brisbane, Cairns, Darwin and Hobart where the ball does most in Australia vs Brisbane, Adelaide, Melbourne, Sydney and Perth where Sehwag played):--D

2 series is Good enough than 1 series no? Mahela has played two hence he had enough time to prove himself, but still he couldnt. IIn Case of Sehwag he has played only 1 series so as long as he doesnt play another series my argument clearly has an upper hand.

Agree with the bolded observation. And we are not talking of ODIs here as well. Our scope is test matches' date= with Test fields. In NZ other than for a odd series, ball boomerangs usually. Saying in NZ ball never swings is wrong. NZ is the best place in cricket for swing bowling. And from 1995 to 2010, best bowlers in NZ had been swing bowlers and seam bowlers.

When they both played in Brisbane Sehwag scored 45 and 0. Mahela scored 14 and 49. Once again very similar. And on Perth Sehwag struggled. He belted the Aussie attack on flat / spinning Adelaide' date=' MCG and Sydney pitches. never played on a green Hobart wicket, nor on a cracking Darwin pitch. When ever they have played on similar tracks their records are similar. But to compare the amount of data is really lacking, and I hate when it happens. But has to work with what is available.[/quote'] Now according to you some pitches even outside SC are flat ones right? So the similar can be said about the SC as well, that all pitches in SC are not Flat ones? Either you consider all wickets outside SC as challenging or do not discriminate among wickets in SC and Outside SC,

Why not? The argument here is about Sehwag's capability of playing the moving ball. There should be difference between ODIs and Tests while comparing batsmen, but when the great batsmen like Dravid and Tendulkars not being able to cross the double figures repeatedly, must be one hell of a bowling track , no? And we have seen many times Test matches have flat tracks and some ODis throw some tough challenge to the batsmen. For example if we talk about Our recent tour to SL, Test match pitches were mostly flat with some odd help for Bowlers occasionally. But we saw on screen how much difficult was it to bat under lights in SL when the ball was moving and most of the matches were low scoring ones than the ones we had in Tests. So while measuring the capability of a batsman to play swing and seam we cannnot cut down other Formats.

[vaibhav_delhi]

This thongale guy is obviously a troll with plenty of free time.

[thongale]

Who doesnt have problems when the ball Moves? Every batsman have. I havent seen many scoring Hundreds and Double Hundreds when the ball is swinging and seaming both ways. Great batsmen do cope with them and still score some runs which Sehwag does. Hence he has 5 hundreds outside SC. But Mahelas problem is just not Movement' date=' he has problems when the pitch has more bounce hence he struggles in Australia.[/quote']His problem is with the movement. He belts the **** out of fast bowlers when they try to bounce him unlike Sehwag. And interestingly Mahela has 4 centuries outside SC too.

BTW you are actually wrong, Barring Minnows Sehwag do average 41 outside SC, which is not bad as he is an opener and he bats at a position where there is most for the Fast bowlers. And Mahela avergaes paltry 36 outside subcontinent barring Minnows.

And you've got caught pants down with stats picking. 1999 ZIM team that Mahela played was not a minnow. Goodwin, Johnson, Flower brothers, Olonga and Brandes were in that team. That is basically better than WI of late. And the above games were played on seaming paradises, not on flat tacks. Sorry, you are very dishonest when it comes to stats picking. I would ahev agreed if you removed the joke ZIM teams of post 2000, but removing that 1999 team as a minnow is intellectual dishonesty.

A drop of 5 Units. That says it all, He being a Middle Order batsman should score more than Sehwag or atleast same to be called On Par or better than Sehwag. 36 for a middle Order batsman is Ordinary when there is not much in it for the bowlers comparitively as for the openers. Not just that, South Africa and Australia have had the best bowling attack in last two decades. Sehwag has 3 hundreds combined the two and Mahela has only one, that says the story for me who is more of an FTB.

Still the averages ate 36.3 vs 41. Considering that 1/4 of those innings were payed at roads of MCG, SCG abnd Adelaide, there's no wonder. Even forgetting that Sehwag had benefits of the flat tracks to play, assuming if the played equal amounts of matches against AUS, ENG, NZ, WI, SAF and Zim of 1997 - 2000, Sehwag would have averaged 39.28 (by averaging the averages) vs 37.17 of Mahela. Once again, nothing in it at all. Based on that if Mahela is a FTB who averages 37 on adjusted average (AA), then should be Sehwag with AA of 39. Case close my dear!

[Andy]

His problem is with the movement. He belts the **** out of fast bowlers when they try to bounce him unlike Sehwag. And interestingly Mahela has 4 centuries outside SC too.

Care to clarify? Sehwag having problems with Bouncers wont have scored 5 Tons . Mahela struggles against the Best Outside home, hence his performance is so poor in AUS .

And you've got caught pants down with stats picking. 1999 ZIM team that Mahela played was not a minnow. Goodwin' date=' Johnson, Flower brothers, Olonga and Brandes were in that team. That is basically better than WI of late. And the above games were played on seaming paradises, not on flat tacks. Sorry, you are very dishonest when it comes to stats picking. I would ahev agreed if you removed the joke ZIM teams of post 2000, but removing that 1999 team as a minnow is intellectual dishonesty.[/quote'] ZIM never had decent bowlers even to be talked about in 1990s. The only good bowler they had was Heath Streak, but then again its one. Where as WI has a poor batting Line up, but their bowling is much beter and often Dismiss most of the Sides in WI. So obviously WI is rated above ZIM and is no Minnow. IfWI were a minnow why havent Sri Lanka won the last time they played there? I think here you are being dishonest by not accepting the Reality, Sehwag scores against Beter attacks all over the world whn other batsmen falls around. Which is so much Unlike Mahela.

Still the averages ate 36.3 vs 41. Considering that 1/4 of those innings were payed at roads of MCG' date=' SCG abnd Adelaide, there's no wonder. Even forgetting that Sehwag had benefits of the flat tracks to play, assuming if the played equal amounts of matches against AUS, ENG, NZ, WI, SAF and Zim of 1997 - 2000, Sehwag would have averaged 39.28 (by averaging the averages) vs 37.17 of Mahela. Once again, nothing in it at all. Based on that if Mahela is a FTB who averages 37 on adjusted average (AA), then should be Sehwag with AA of 39. Case close my dear![/quote'] Not really a closed case my friend, as i have already said If you discriminate even wickets outside SC, and term them as Flat ones, then you should include SC pitches while judging a player. As according to you many wickets outside SC are flat ones, hence it can be said that many wickets in SC are not Flat ones? So you must include Sehwag's performance in pitches like Mohali ,and many other places where bowler is known to get help.