Jump to content

Andrew Strauss Appreciation Thread


Recommended Posts

Posted
Innings of Strauss was better. Chasing a huge total under pressure is no joke. Plus He scored almost half the runs England scored. Wheras Tendulkar scored 1/3 of the runs India scored.
I don't think you understand my point. Strauss had no choice but to go for it. As VVSlaxman pointed out that no way Strauss would have played that way had this been first innings of the match. In fact, when you start batting in such huge chases there is relatively less pressure and this pressure only mounts as you reach closer to the target. For another example, you can look at Gibbs innings at Wanderers 2006 and Dilshan's 160 against India (while SL scored 411 in chase). For me it's hard to differentiate between these two innings.
Posted
I don't think you understand my point. Strauss had no choice but to go for it. As VVSlaxman pointed out that no way Strauss would have played that way had this been first innings of the match. In fact, when you start batting in such huge chases there is relatively less pressure and this pressure only mounts as you reach closer to the target. For another example, you can look at Gibbs innings at Wanderers 2006 and Dilshan's 160 against India (while SL scored 411 in chase). For me it's hard to differentiate between these two innings.
2003 worldcup final 349 chase. its only rarely these totals get chased down..more often they are not.
Posted
I don't think you understand my point. Strauss had no choice but to go for it. As VVSlaxman pointed out that no way Strauss would have played that way had this been first innings of the match. In fact, when you start batting in such huge chases there is relatively less pressure and this pressure only mounts as you reach closer to the target. For another example, you can look at Gibbs innings at Wanderers 2006 and Dilshan's 160 against India (while SL scored 411 in chase). For me it's hard to differentiate between these two innings.
So, Tendulkar's 175 and Dhoni's 183 were not scored under pressure. And during Tendulkar's 175 he got out closer to the target when pressure increases, so it would be fair to say he failed under pressure?
Posted
2003 worldcup final 349 chase. its only rarely these totals get chased down..more often they are not.
I know it happens rarely but that doesn't make Strauss' innings clearly better than Sachin's. What if Shehzad had not hit that six? Would Strauss' innings have been not as good? A good score in middling chase (240-300) is under more pressure situation then the one which comes in chase of 350.
Posted
2003 worldcup final 349 chase. its only rarely these totals get chased down..more often they are not.
I think after T20 the mindset of the players have changed. I still remember thinking.. "133 in 15 overs.. no way in hell we are going to reach to beat Aussies" during Tendulkar's desert storm innings. Even 96 in 15 overs which was required to qualify for the final was not an easy job those days. Over the last 15 years things have changed. It is not entirely impossible to chase down 330 plus totals. Remember how NZ chased 340 against Australia just before 2007 world cup. After T20 this has become even more comfortable. They just break it into 2. Last 20 overs and First 30 overs. Last 20 overs 140 runs.. they target which is very much chasable on a flat track. http://www.espncricinfo.com/icc_cricket_worldcup2011/engine/match/433568.html?view=comparison After 15 overs England 107/1 India 84/1 After 30 overs England 196/2 India 181/2 That left England to score 143 in the last 20 overs. In a T20 on a flat pitch it is a ridiculously easy total. I can even tolerate 107 in the first 15. But 89 runs in the next 15 overs should have never happened. That is the period Dhoni and Co completely lost the plot. That is the choking period.
Posted
I think after T20 the mindset of the players have changed. I still remember thinking.. "133 in 15 overs.. no way in hell we are going to reach to beat Aussies" during Tendulkar's desert storm innings. Even 96 in 15 overs which was required to qualify for the final was not an easy job those days. Over the last 15 years things have changed. It is not entirely impossible to chase down 330 plus totals. Remember how NZ chased 340 against Australia just before 2007 world cup. After T20 this has become even more comfortable. They just break it into 2. Last 20 overs and First 30 overs. Last 20 overs 140 runs.. they target which is very much chasable on a flat track. http://www.espncricinfo.com/icc_cricket_worldcup2011/engine/match/433568.html?view=comparison After 15 overs England 107/1 India 84/1 After 30 overs England 196/2 India 181/2 That left England to score 143 in the last 20 overs. In a T20 on a flat pitch it is a ridiculously easy total. I can even tolerate 107 in the first 15. But 89 runs in the next 15 overs should have never happened. That is the period Dhoni and Co completely lost the plot. That is the choking period.
So I guess Tendulkars innings against Pak in 2003 worldcup was not good either. Any innings chasing is not good nuff. cuz 275 was such a big score in 2003 and tendulkar had no pressure. he just had to play one way. Be consistent.
Posted
Sorry for playing the spoilsport but Strauss had one' date=' maybe two lives.[/quote'] But tendu was run out early in the 1st ODI and was better rested. :crazy4:
Posted

Finally someone did it! :hail: He may not be consistent but he's a fine individual in that English dressing room filled with egos and thoroughly a team man. Unassuming as ever - I watched the first game where Nasser Hussain ran him out at Lords (which was his last Test match) to deny him and opportunity of scoring a 100 in both innings at Lords.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...