Sri Lanka tour of Australia, Nov 2010

[saneindian]

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. 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. 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!

Sehwag the opener averages 41 with a strike rate of 75+. Mahela, the number 4 batsman averages 36 with a strike rate of less than 50. Draw your own conclusions. And when I read MCG was a flat road but Hobart was a bowler's delight, I just could not stop laughing.

[thongale]

2 series is Good enough than 1 series no? Mahela has played two hence he had enough time to prove himself' date=' 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.[/quote']We'll agree to disagree here.

Why not?

Why should it be? Test and ODIs are two different games with two different field settings. You are bringing it to blur the points that i've brought withing the scope of the discussion. ODIs there's no question that Sehwag is better than Mahela. But we are discussing TEST matches.

The argument here is about Sehwag's capability of playing the moving ball.

Nope. Argument is Sehwag's ability to play moving ball in test macthes with test fields, with the red ball. Nothing more, nothing less.

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?

What you say has a merit. But the discussion is about Test matches. White ball and red ball is different and you'd realised if you have played some cricket.

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.

Obviously it was played on different tracks. SSC was super flat, Galle and PSS were fair pitches and Dambulla is the most bowler friendly wicket in SC. Now you'd get to see how they are different to each other. ODIs you can't bowl wide, or bowl many bouncers. And there's a limit for each bowler. Imagine Malinga bowling on a Damulla pitch with the red cherry. He won't be taken out for at least 10 overs if it moves as crazy as that, and it would have been mighty difficult to play with a test field. Obviously what you say has it's own merits. But Test match is the ultimate challenge. and that has to be taken as the yardstick for greatness. That is why Dravid > Dhoni as a batsman.

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,

I said majority of tracks that Sehwag played in AUS were flat (SCG, MCG and Adelaide). Yes, SC do have some juicy pitches and almost all of them are in SL. Sehwag did not play on a swinging pitch in SL (ex. Kandy - see how Aussies were reduced to 6 down for almost nothing on them twice). And even on this note their averages are extremely similar (60 and 59 respectively)

[thongale]

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

That shows that you've lost the argument. Attacking the poster when you cannot attack the post.:--D

[thongale]

Sehwag the opener averages 41 with a strike rate of 75+. Mahela, the number 4 batsman averages 36 with a strike rate of less than 50. Draw your own conclusions. And when I read MCG was a flat road but Hobart was a bowler's delight, I just could not stop laughing.

OK my bad, let's drop Hobart (which usually is green, but was flattish for that particular game, and he scored a 100 there!), but point still stands. Mahela has not played on typical Aussie roads of MCG, SCG and Adelaide up to now. If he plays there, and if he fails on them I'd withdraw my argument. But in this point of time, Sehwag played more on roads in Asutralia than Mahela, and I've given you facts as well.

[thongale]

Sehwag the opener averages 41 with a strike rate of 75+. Mahela, the number 4 batsman averages 36 with a strike rate of less than 50. Draw your own conclusions. And when I read MCG was a flat road but Hobart was a bowler's delight, I just could not stop laughing.

Ha Ha! Stats picking! I showed that they average 39 and 37 when averages adjusted to the number of matches played (if Mahela played on Aussie flat beds would have been much higher). SR is important only in the type of team you play. Sehwag is useful in IND team because there are some great batsman to follow him. But he'll be less useful compared to Mahela for SL because SL needs a guy to do the long haul, because SL batting is weaker than Indian. SR helps, but some times low SR also needed. SR is a very inconsistent measure of greatness of a test player.

[saneindian]

I said majority of tracks that Sehwag played in AUS were flat (SCG, MCG and Adelaide). Yes, SC do have some juicy pitches and almost all of them are in SL. Sehwag did not play on a swinging pitch in SL (ex. Kandy - see how Aussies were reduced to 6 down for almost nothing on them twice). And even on this note their averages are extremely similar (60 and 59 respectively)

Mahela averages 39 on this ground :--D BTW try naming some more "swinging and seaming" pitches in SL please.

[Sid]

for people reminder it is Sri Lanka tour of Australia, Nov 2010:--D

[saneindian]

Ha Ha! Stats picking! I showed that they average 39 and 37 when averages adjusted to the number of matches played (if Mahela played on Aussie flat beds would have been much higher). SR is important only in the type of team you play. Sehwag is useful in IND team because there are some great batsman to follow him. But he'll be less useful compared to Mahela for SL because SL needs a guy to do the long haul' date=' because SL batting is weaker than Indian. SR helps, but some times low SR also needed. [b']SR is a very inconsistent measure of greatness of a test player.

LOL averages adjusted? Doesn't work that way. Cant tweak the numbers to your liking. And I notice how you have tried to doge my other question. MCG as flat road and Hobart as a bowler's dream? On that SR part, what makes Sehwag unique is that SR. No one else in the history of the game has come out to open the batting and attacked from ball one so consistently. His 30 in 20 balls in a test in Australia/SA/NZ will set the innings nicely for the batsmen to follow, will put the oppsition on the backfoot even though it does not do much to boost his average.

[Andy]

We'll agree to disagree here. Why should it be? Test and ODIs are two different games with two different field settings. You are bringing it to blur the points that i've brought withing the scope of the discussion. ODIs there's no question that Sehwag is better than Mahela. But we are discussing TEST matches. Nope. Argument is Sehwag's ability to play moving ball in test macthes with test fields, with the red ball. Nothing more, nothing less. What you say has a merit. But the discussion is about Test matches. White ball and red ball is different and you'd realised if you have played some cricket. Obviously it was played on different tracks. SSC was super flat, Galle and PSS were fair pitches and Dambulla is the most bowler friendly wicket in SC. Now you'd get to see how they are different to each other. ODIs you can't bowl wide, or bowl many bouncers. And there's a limit for each bowler. Imagine Malinga bowling on a Damulla pitch with the red cherry. He won't be taken out for at least 10 overs if it moves as crazy as that, and it would have been mighty difficult to play with a test field. Obviously what you say has it's own merits. But Test match is the ultimate challenge. and that has to be taken as the yardstick for greatness. That is why Dravid > Dhoni as a batsman.

I do not agree with most part of this post other than Questioning my own experience on the Cricket field. Sometimes, some venues do provide us some ODI matches where the ball moves much than it has done on Test Matches, and i gave SL's example there. If we are talking about Sehwag's ability of playing the moving ball, then we must not Ignore the knocks he played in ODI cricket in NZ. Am not talking about the knonkc he played in 2009 series, i'll particularly talk about the 2002 series where Sehwag made two hundreds where other batsmen from both the teams were struggling to reach double figures, you must have not watched that series hence you are not getting my point, Most of the ODi's were green tracks with trees growing on them. NZ started with 4 slips and a gully and am not exagerating a bit there, if you have videos you should see yourself. This is what we see most of the times in Test matches, hence those knocks were played under 'almost' test match fields, and what made those knocks special was that his counterparts were struggling to cross the double figures and they were because of Pacers and medium pacers. Hence we can conclude that those ODI centuries were special and should be given as much as credit as scoring in Test matches outside SC is. BTW Your arguemnt about Dhoni and Dravid is actually Lame. Both are Middle Order players, hence not similar to the argument of Sehwag vs Mahela. Where SEhwag is an Opener and has to play in the most difficult conditions for a Batsman. Mahela comes in when the ball is relatively old and the job of scoring is easier. Hence by no way his 5 unit drop of average should be justified.

I said majority of tracks that Sehwag played in AUS were flat (SCG' date=' MCG and Adelaide). Yes, SC do have some juicy pitches and almost all of them are in SL. Sehwag did not play on a swinging pitch in SL (ex. Kandy - see how Aussies were reduced to 6 down for almost nothing on them twice). And even on this note their averages are [b']extremely similar (60 and 59 respectively)

Again i disagree if you discriminate among the pitches outside SC and start terming them as flat, then you should not ignore Sub continent performance too. Who says all the Sporting pitches are found in Lanka? Many times India have been bundled out for less than 100 in India, more recently this hapened in 2008 against SA. So you should consider all tracks outside SC as sporting ones or you should stop ignoring SC performances . Else we can also claim few wickets of India as Sporting ones.

[thongale]

Mahela averages 39 on this ground :--D BTW try naming some more "swinging and seaming" pitches in SL please.

Azharuddun 34, Vengsakar 36 (against Minnow SL:hysterical:), A Flower 23, Trescothin 21, Salim Malik 38. Dravid 45, and expected to do well on that pitch. Kandy pitch is a ****ing difficulty one to bat on the 1st innings. Post 1995, batting average of Asgiriya is just 26.7. And Sehwag won't average 35 on that pitch with his poor technique against swing.

[Andy]

Azharuddun 34, Vengsakar 36 (against Minnow SL:hysterical:), A Flower 23, Trescothin 21, Salim Malik 38. Dravid 45, and expected to do well on that pitch. Kandy pitch is a ****ing difficulty one to bat on the 1st innings. Post 1995, batting average of Asgiriya is just 26.7. And Sehwag won't average 35 on that pitch with his poor technique against swing.

:hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical: Yet he scores 150's outside Subcontinents. Yes poor technique really. Give me that technique anyday over your Technically Gifted players.

[thongale]

LOL averages adjusted? Doesn't work that way. Cant tweak the numbers to your liking. And I notice how you have tried to doge my other question. MCG as flat road and Hobart as a bowler's dream? On that SR part, what makes Sehwag unique is that SR. No one else in the history of the game has come out to open the batting and attacked from ball one so consistently. His 30 in 20 balls in a test in Australia/SA/NZ will set the innings nicely for the batsmen to follow, will put the oppsition on the backfoot even though it does not do much to boost his average.

Bolded part I've answered it in a previous post. Care to go through them. Sehwag is maintains such high standards because he plays on flat pitches more and faces less quality pace attacks than in 90s. There's only Steyn, Morkel, Asif, Amir, Zaheer and Johnson as bowlers of note. Compare that to Wasim, Waqar, Shoaib, Imran, Ambrose, Walsh, Donald, Pollock, DeVilliers, McGrath and Gillespie. The 90s attack was a class above what we have. If Sehwag averaged 34 with SR of 80, wouldn't have been this effective. And don't bring in individual innings in to the picture, because any batsman will have few of those.

[thongale]

:hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical: Yet he scores 150's outside Subcontinents. Yes poor technique really. Give me that technique anyday over your Technically Gifted players.

On the flattest pitch on earth. Yeah!, what a performance.

[Andy]

Bolded part I've answered it in a previous post. Care to go through them. Sehwag is maintains such high standards because he plays on flat pitches more and faces less quality pace attacks than in 90s. There's only Steyn' date=' Morkel, Asif, Amir, Zaheer and Johnson as bowlers of note. Compare that to Wasim, Waqar, Shoaib, Imran, Ambrose, Walsh, Donald, Pollock, DeVilliers, McGrath and Gillespie. The 90s attack was a class above what we have. If Sehwag averaged 34 with SR of 80, wouldn't have been this effective. And don't bring in individual innings in to the picture, because any batsman will have few of those.[/quote'] Care to check his stats against Mcgrath, Pollock? The first Match he played against SA was against Pollock and he scored a 100, the only time Mcgrath Played in AUS when Sehwag played was in 2005 super series and he scored a 70 odd. Now count that average and Compare that with Mahela. And if you actually Claim Mcgrath is not as good what he is at Home while playing away you are making a massive error my friend, check Mcgrath's stats in India.

[thongale]

I do not agree with most part of this post other than Questioning my own experience on the Cricket field. Sometimes' date=' some venues do provide us some ODI matches where the ball moves much than it has done on Test Matches, and i gave SL's example there. If we are talking about Sehwag's ability of playing the moving ball, then we must not Ignore the knocks he played in ODI cricket in NZ. Am not talking about the knonkc he played in 2009 series, i'll particularly talk about the 2002 series where Sehwag made two hundreds where other batsmen from both the teams were struggling to reach double figures, you must have not watched that series hence you are not getting my point, Most of the ODi's were green tracks with trees growing on them. NZ started with 4 slips and a gully and am not exagerating a bit there, if you have videos you should see yourself. This is what we see most of the times in Test matches, hence those knocks were played under 'almost' test match fields, and what made those knocks special was that his counterparts were struggling to cross the double figures and they were because of Pacers and medium pacers. Hence we can conclude that those ODI centuries were special and should be given as much as credit as scoring in Test matches outside SC is.[/quote']We can agree to disagree on this I would think because it brings out nothing to the point in hand.

BTW Your arguemnt about Dhoni and Dravid is actually Lame. Both are Middle Order players, hence not similar to the argument of Sehwag vs Mahela. Where SEhwag is an Opener and has to play in the most difficult conditions for a Batsman. Mahela comes in when the ball is relatively old and the job of scoring is easier. Hence by no way his 5 unit drop of average should be justified.

Not every time. 0/0 is lot better than to come in than 2/14 in 5 overs.

Again i disagree if you discriminate among the pitches outside SC and start terming them as flat, then you should not ignore Sub continent performance too. Who says all the Sporting pitches are found in Lanka? Many times India have been bundled out for less than 100 in India, more recently this hapened in 2008 against SA. So you should consider all tracks outside SC as sporting ones or you should stop ignoring SC performances . Else we can also claim few wickets of India as Sporting ones.

There's no discrimination. The point is whether you include SC stats or not their stats are extremely comparable. If one is called a FTB, so should be the other.

[Andy]

On the flattest pitch on earth. Yeah!' date=' what a performance.[/quote'] You seemed to have ducked my question, according to You even they provide Roads outside SC and not willing to consider Sehwag's performance in SC where teams have been bowled out for less than hundred many times, And when i mean teams, i mean India. If MCG is a road then every place Mahela has scored can be claimed as road too.

[saneindian]

Azharuddun 34, Vengsakar 36 (against Minnow SL:hysterical:), A Flower 23, Trescothin 21, Salim Malik 38. Dravid 45, and expected to do well on that pitch. Kandy pitch is a ****ing difficulty one to bat on the 1st innings. Post 1995, batting average of Asgiriya is just 26.7. And Sehwag won't average 35 on that pitch with his poor technique against swing.

Now go through this link and check the average of the opposition batsmen on the flat roads of MCG, SCG and Adelaide post 1995. http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;ground=131;ground=132;ground=61;groupby=overall;opposition=2;orderby=runs;spanmin1=01+Jan+1995;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting Average of 27.23. Flat road, indeed. MCG Average of 23.5 Adelaide Average of 28 SCG average of 29 True flat roads as you say.

[Andy]

We can agree to disagree on this I would think because it brings out nothing to the point in hand. Not every time. 0/0 is lot better than to come in than 2/14 in 5 overs. There's no discrimination. The point is whether you include SC stats or not their stats are extremely comparable. If one is called a FTB, so should be the other.

Fair enough, then every performance outside SC will be considered and we wont be talking about any roads. The debate should be how players have been sucessful Outside Subcontinent, Not like how players have been sucesfull outside SC that were not roads, as that will lead to lot of confusion. Am not ready to accept MCG was Flat where other than Sehwag who scored 195, the only batsman scored a 50 in that innings was Dravid. So it wasnt a Flat track IMO.

[Andy]

Now go through this link and check the average of the opposition batsmen on the flat roads of MCG, SCG and Adelaide post 1995. http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;ground=131;ground=132;ground=61;groupby=overall;opposition=2;orderby=runs;spanmin1=01+Jan+1995;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting Average of 27.23. Flat road, indeed. MCG Average of 23.5 Adelaide Average of 28 SCG average of 29 True flat roads as you say.

Thongale Pawned. Excellent.:two_thumbs_up:

[saneindian]

Bolded part I've answered it in a previous post. Care to go through them. Sehwag is maintains such high standards because he plays on flat pitches more and faces less quality pace attacks than in 90s. There's only Steyn' date=' Morkel, Asif, Amir, Zaheer and Johnson as bowlers of note. Compare that to Wasim, Waqar, Shoaib, Imran, Ambrose, Walsh, Donald, Pollock, DeVilliers, McGrath and Gillespie. The 90s attack was a class above what we have. If Sehwag averaged 34 with SR of 80, wouldn't have been this effective. And don't bring in individual innings in to the picture, because any batsman will have few of those.[/quote'] Ok now consider a cut off of 2003 WC, take a look at what Mahela did when playing against those bowlers away from home. http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/49289.html?class=1;filter=advanced;host=1;host=2;host=3;host=4;host=5;host=7;orderby=default;spanmax1=31+mar+2003;spanval1=span;template=results;type=allround 14 tests, 880-0dd runs, 35 average, 1 100. And out of the bowlers you mentioned, Mahela did not play against Imran, Ambrose , Walsh and Devilliers. DId not play a test against Mcgrath and Gillespie away from Sri Lanka prior to the 2003 WC either.