What does an opener do in his first inning in England?

[Bumper]

Ahahahahah! After seeing the fruits of the application of your criterion to your darling and SRT, you are backing away? I don't blame you considering how badly Sehwag has been trounced in something you thought he would have been better. 14 single digits!

Hahaha, moral victory, eh! Here is my quote from Post #50 which proves i never claimed sehwag was a better batsman on difficult tracks. Read & weep Mr Gambit Laloo :haha: Post #50:

Anyways i NEVER claimed veeru is a good player on difficult tracks. I was merely rebutting Shwetabh's claims that SRT is a much better player in such conditions, which is simply not true going by recent records (if u consider his overall career may be, but not in the last 5 years). Only Dravid can lay claims to that honor

This is a classic example of how u secure ur moral victories. First u assume something (in many cases even after i clarify my position, ignore my clarification) & cling on to what suits u & then claim victory :-) In the above case, i was trying to show that SRT was BAD in difficult circumstances as well (without making any claims about sehwag). But u quickly assumed that to mean a comparison of both & spent painful hours compiling facts to fight a battle that never existed. And when u learnt that i never contended that Sehwag was better, u accuse me of backing away, claiming a moral victory :haha: Its easy to drive u in circles pal, as u quickly lose perspective of what u are trying to prove :haha: Here is another example: And for all the rhetoric on the "last 5 years". Here is more proof that i ONLY meant the beginning of 2003 as the start of my last 5 year period. Post #34:

The discussion was started by CC based on my reputation claims. And i was countering that claim with a subjective response. Once u stepped in, it took a new turn. In my response, I picked the last 5 years (since the beginning of 2003), which is long enuff a time period to assess both players as test bats, starting with Ind-NZ series (in which both flopped). I ignored the series in which both players performed below average as there aint much to read into such performances.

Post #42:

You asked: Why 2003? Why not since Sehwag's debut as you claimed which prompted me to step in to relieve you of your misconceptions? I responded: 2003 ROUGHLY marks the most recent era (since last world cup timeframe), LOL!

Since you have filled your entire post with rhetoric & smilies, i take it that u have conveniently side stepped from rebutting the points i raised in my last post, but once again u are the moral victor :haha: I'll take the real victories

Oh so scoring twice in a game apparently doesn't count for Mr.Cheney because it makes his wonderboy's position even more untenable? How convenient!

Kindly edificate for me please. How do u win the SAME GAME TWICE. Are u saying if a batsman scores two 100s as opposed to one 200, he has contributed 2 match winning knocks as opposed to ONE ? Hey theres a first time for everything, thats the first time i have ever heard that :haha: But i never counted this against u, i merely pointed this as a fallacy in your facts.

Another blatant attempt at goalpost changing! And let's forget 2002 as if never happened. Because if we didn't, it would make Mr.Gulab Jamun not appear to be SRT's daddy like Mr.Cheney claimed!

I make a claim. In my claim i pick a date to ensure my claim is supportable. Ur job is to rebutt that if u wish. But ur rebuttal cannot force/request me to adjust my dates, thats called "begging" U are yet to come to terms with the fact that ur hero has been pathetic since then, eh

Bottomline - Last 5 years, Sehwag is NOT clearly a better batsman than SRT like Mr. Bumper Cheney claims and SRT's performance is quite comparable to his AND Sehwag has failed clearly more often than SRT as demonstrated using Mr.Bumper Cheney's criterion!

Whatever smilies u use, whatever nick names u choose, Sehwag is the better batsman Mr Gambit Laloo. 2003 was marginally in favor of Sehwag. 2004 & 2005 clearly belonged to sehwag. 2006 was mediocre for both, tho Sehwag averages more. Infact Sehwag averages better than Tendu in every year from 2003 to 2006 (if u exclude minnows). And the match winning potential claim too has been proved by a margin of 7 vs 2 (tons) and 4 vs 3 (50s). END OF DEBATE.

[Gambit]

I shall resist from using smileys in this post as they are clearly putting you off. It's a shame though because they were quite useful in showing how hilarious I found your contradictions to be.

Hahaha, moral victory, eh! Here is my quote from Post #50 which proves i never claimed sehwag was a better batsman on difficult tracks. Read & weep Mr Gambit Laloo Post #50: Quote: Anyways i NEVER claimed veeru is a good player on difficult tracks. I was merely rebutting Shwetabh's claims that SRT is a much better player in such conditions, which is simply not true going by recent records (if u consider his overall career may be, but not in the last 5 years). Only Dravid can lay claims to that honor This is a classic example of how u secure ur moral victories. First u assume something (in many cases even after i clarify my position, ignore my clarification) & cling on to what suits u & then claim victory :-) In the above case, i was trying to show that SRT was BAD in difficult circumstances as well (without making any claims about sehwag). But u quickly assumed that to mean a comparison of both & spent painful hours compiling facts to fight a battle that never existed. And when u learnt that i never contended that Sehwag was better, u accuse me of backing away, claiming a moral victory Its easy to drive u in circles pal, as u quickly lose perspective of what u are trying to prove

More clouding the issue from Mr.Cheney. Man, this single digit criterion was never about difficult situations according to you. This is what you said:

Here is a dossier of failures of SRT (since 2003): Ind-Aus'03 --> 3 single digits (spanning 3 tests) Ind-Pak'04 --> 3 single digits (spanning 2 tests) Ind-Aus'04 --> 3 single digits (spanning 2 tests) Ind-SA'04 --> 1 single digit, 1 sub 20 score (spanning 2 tests)

where you basically included all single digit scores SRT made in the recent past and assumed EACH single digit was made when a difficult situation had presented itself which isn't true AT ALL! For example, you included a 0 at Gabba when we were 62/2 chasing 323, not THAT difficult a situation. Also, Ind-SA '04 one single digit. He got out at 298/3 for crying out loud! Is that a difficult situation. Once again, you set the criterion and got confused by your own yardsticks. Like I said, classic case of shooting yourself in the foot. And you are right. Fetching that data for Sehwag did take hours because there were so many failures! LOL. And since this debate is about SRT and Sehwag, any criticism of SRT, any yardstick that you use to judge him will naturally be applied to Sehwag. Are you really that naive to think you can criticise SRT for something and not expect me to point out how glaringly pathetic Sehwag is at that same thing? You were clearly forced into a corner after realising how badly that backfired and are still in the process of slowly tiptoeing out of that hole you dug for yourself.

And for all the rhetoric on the "last 5 years". Here is more proof that i ONLY meant the beginning of 2003 as the start of my last 5 year period. Post #34: Quote: The discussion was started by CC based on my reputation claims. And i was countering that claim with a subjective response. Once u stepped in, it took a new turn. In my response, I picked the last 5 years (since the beginning of 2003), which is long enuff a time period to assess both players as test bats, starting with Ind-NZ series (in which both flopped). I ignored the series in which both players performed below average as there aint much to read into such performances. Post #42: Quote: You asked: Why 2003? Why not since Sehwag's debut as you claimed which prompted me to step in to relieve you of your misconceptions? I responded: 2003 ROUGHLY marks the most recent era (since last world cup timeframe), LOL!

For the nth time, in Mr.Cheney's first address to me, the great spin artist claimed:

Gambit, i have been following both sehwag & Tendu's career closely in the last 5 years. Tendu's averages are very misleading as they are built on usually one or two (usually one big knock).

As u can see in every key series that mattered it was Sehwag who stood out in the last 5 years.

Hmm. So let's break this down. Mr.Cheney claims to have followed their careers closely in the last 5 years and he asserts this not once but twice. In another post, he claims Sehwag to be better than SRT since Sehwag debuted, which is the post I responded to. After taking a look at the statistics, Mr.Cheney thinks twice after his initial two statements. Mr.Cheney has a sense of foreboding. He can see Gambit coming like a horseman of the apocalypse and systematically decapitating and butchering his rather tall and unfounded claims. Mr.Cheney shifts his first goalposts. Mr.Cheney makes another tall claim. Something about single digits and failures. When the same is applied to Sehwag, Mr.Cheney is left stunned and mortified. Mr.Cheney then shifts another goalpost and then angelically states that he never wanted Sehwag to be compared using that criterion. LOL. Waiting eagerly for more stance changing and spinning from Mr.Cheney.

Since you have filled your entire post with rhetoric & smilies, i take it that u have conveniently side stepped from rebutting the points i raised in my last post, but once again u are the moral victor I'll take the real victories

LOL. What points? Each one was shot down and discarded, a bit like Sehwag has been from the test team!

Kindly edificate for me please. How do u win the SAME GAME TWICE. Are u saying if a batsman scores two 100s as opposed to one 200, he has contributed 2 match winning knocks as opposed to ONE ? Hey theres a first time for everything, thats the first time i have ever heard that

Let me lay it out for you. Team A scores 400. Batsman X in Team B scores 150 and they end up with 250. Team A scores 200 and sets 350. Batsman X in Team scores 135 again and leads them to victory. 135 would have been useless without 150 and vice versa. Hence two matchwinning performances in one game. I don't think there's any fallacy in this reasoning.

I make a claim. In my claim i pick a date to ensure my claim is supportable. Ur job is to rebutt that if u wish. But ur rebuttal cannot force/request me to adjust my dates, thats called "begging" U are yet to come to terms with the fact that ur hero has been pathetic since then, eh

Wrong! You make a claim clearly stating 5 years and stating the time they started playing together. I put two and two together and come up with 2002. Now I use the 2002 as the starting point and make your claims look laughable and extremely ludicrous. You, in turn, sheepishly try and cloud your initial statement as it obviously has your claims severely crippled. U turn after U turn, backpeddle after backpeddle! You truly are a master at this.

END OF DEBATE.

I can see why you are in such a hurry to get out of this thread. Anyone would after they have so hilariously and legendarily shot themselves in the foot. :hysterical: OOPS! Sorry! I promise, just this one smiley. Anywho, to sum up: Last 5 years, Sehwag is NOT clearly a better batsman than SRT as you claimed and SRT's performance is quite comparable to his AND Sehwag has failed clearly more often than SRT as demonstrated using your criterion!

[CC1981]

Last 5 years, Sehwag is NOT clearly a better batsman than SRT as you claimed and SRT's performance is quite comparable to his AND Sehwag has failed clearly more often than SRT as demonstrated using your criterion!

Anyone who thinks that the above statement is true in Test cricket is very obviously living a very blinkered existance in the cricketing universe. Sorry to see your sanity departing on this issue, Gambo. You are usually one of the most balanced posters in cricketing matters.

[Gambit]

Anyone who thinks that the above statement is true in Test cricket is very obviously living a very blinkered existance in the cricketing universe. Sorry to see your sanity departing on this issue, Gambo. You are usually one of the most balanced posters in cricketing matters.

CC, you have obviously missed the post where bumper equated failure to single digit performances. I used the same yardstick to Sehwag and he had more failures than SRT using bumper's yardstick. Regarding the first point, bumper had stated earlier that Sehwag was clearly the better batsman in the last 5 years. I responded by saying it was not THAT clear and that their performances were comparable. I never said SRT has been awesome in the last 5 years. And I never said he was Sehwag's daddy in the last 5 years either. (I have said this in an earlier post too). I have shown both of them to be comparable. Samjhe?

[Bumper]

I'll just summarise by saying this: 1) Whatever statements i made about SRT & Sehwag playing TOGETHER were to CC NOT to you. When i really entered a debate with u, i admitted that some of my statements to CC were subjective & then clarified that it is a 5 year term that i was talking about. BUT u never seemed to have accepted this term as it makes ur stand significantly WEAKER. 2) And i did clarify what that 5 year term meant in one of my early posts and the ones that followed it (as beginning of 2003). I continued to refer to this period as last 5 years (may be a literatally accurate version shud have been last 4 years & 6 months, but u very well knew, yet did not want to know, what i meant). 3) The use of smilies aint putting me off, rather the use of rhetoric which makes the debate childish. Besides it drifts the focus from the main points of the debate 4) If the time period is since 2003, there is NO DEBATE. Sehwag wins hands down. Ur only point of contention here seems to be including 2002, which isnt really something u can decide on , as i made the claims. At this point, am bored to be honest as we have started recycling the same facts. I find myself repeatedly having to clarify/justify the same points. At this point we have two options: a) U accept the starting point of the comparisons to be beginning 2003 & we continue OR b) End this debate, as 2002 isnt part of my claims. Your call.

[Sooda]

The bigger question as far as 'Sachin vs Sehwag' is concerned- Who is FATTER??

[Holysmoke]

forget all that, i just dont think sehwag is mentally fit to be in the team.. He is not showing the willingness to learn.. by the way he got out against bangladesh.. SRT on the other hand knows his limitations.. and has shown us a desire to score runs.. and come back to form. For me, the debate ends right there.

[Gambit]

Bumper, I am sick and tired of stating the same thing again and again and again. You will not budge from your position no matter what I come up with and probably vice-versa. Forget this.

[Gambit]

This was an epic SRT v Sehwag debate. Thankfully, both are in the team now.

[Chandan]

But will Bumper and Yoda ever admit that they were proved wrong by Tendulkar?

[Gambit]

But will Bumper and Yoda ever admit that they were proved wrong by Tendulkar?

I think Bumper,Lurker and all the others who were on SRT's case back then were justified for doing so as SRT was batting like a pauper. But they did go OTT in their criticism on lots of occassions.

[Kohum]

What a debate !!!

[Chandan]

I think Bumper' date='Lurker and all the others who were on SRT's case back then were justified for doing so as SRT was batting like a pauper. But they did go OTT in their criticism on lots of occassions.[/quote'] No. Criticising a player when he fails to perform is very justified. But to say that he is finished, will never perform, should retire etc is not justified in my opinion. This is what I asked Rohit Brijnath on one of his criticising article of Sachin if he would ever admit that he was wrong in assessing Sachin? Well, after Sachin proved him wrong, he wrote another piece that how wrong he was in his previous assessment!

[Anakin]

Well, too much dependency on pure numbers without context, hell-bent belief in omnipresence of SRT when it comes to anything negative and being closet-worshipers for someone else will never result in right realistic views anyways.

[Predator_05]

Epic ? It's full of garbage. Honestly, who gives a **** about who was better in 2002 or 2004. But this thing is still a lot better than the stuff on the forums these days

[Holysmoke]

Ahh. I remember this :--D. This was what ICF was like before Fineleg.

[Predator_05]

This was a much better debate --> http://www.indiancricketfans.com/showthread.php?t=2412&highlight=donald