punjabi_khota Posted June 24, 2011 Posted June 24, 2011 We were also richest country before industrial revolution or the most educated in the BCs. So usko leke nachein ab ?
The Outsider Posted June 24, 2011 Posted June 24, 2011 There is nothing profound with the 'average Indian'. It's simply that people you might have interacted with don't follow the sport closely. Plus the fact that the newer generation, is in general, more ignorant about history and historical contexts and likes to get it's information from quick fix solutions like half baked, poorly researched 'articles' and 'blogs' on the internet rather than spend time reading books and articles by people with well founded knowledge in some area, in this case cricket.
Lurker Posted June 24, 2011 Posted June 24, 2011 We were also richest country before industrial revolution or the most educated in the BCs. So usko leke nachein ab ? Where did you pull that stat from? The closest to this that I have read is the research by Nichloas Kristoff (NYT) and I dnt recall him saying that, but yes we did have a large GDP no questions about that. By the by I am sure you are smart enough to realize comparison within the same century with 500 year old comparisons. If not keep going, have already heard 1000 years slavery retort in the same thread already :winky:
nballa Posted June 24, 2011 Posted June 24, 2011 the average indian is physically very frail and it shows in their attitude.
punjabi_khota Posted June 24, 2011 Posted June 24, 2011 Where did you pull that stat from? The closest to this that I have read is the research by Nichloas Kristoff (NYT) and I dnt recall him saying that, but yes we did have a large GDP no questions about that. I think it is pretty well established that between 1000-1500 AD, India's GDP was ~ 30% of world GDP, above China and Europe. I don't remember the source right now, but some time ago I spent some time verifying this stuff. Maybe I can pull something up later. Point is, the current generation can hardly relate to 1920s (or even 50s) sports glory, and this current success is the first time for most of us that India is dominating overall and winning on regular basis abroad.
Sachinism Posted June 24, 2011 Posted June 24, 2011 the average indian is physically very frail and it shows in their attitude. :adore:
Lurker Posted June 24, 2011 Posted June 24, 2011 the average indian is physically very frail and it shows in their attitude. :hysterical::hysterical: With all these beating down of "average Indian" I feel sorry for this chap. Who is he? Does ihe even exist?? As it is most folks on this message board must be "exceptional Indians" who are broad shouldered with aggressive atitude and ability to run through a barn door.....only reason they are pulled behind is due to this idiot "average Indian"...who does not exist!
Lurker Posted June 24, 2011 Posted June 24, 2011 I think it is pretty well established that between 1000-1500 AD' date=' India's GDP was ~ 30% of world GDP, above China and Europe. I don't remember the source right now, but some time ago I spent some time verifying this stuff. Maybe I can pull something up late.r[/quote'] Please do. The closest I have read is Thunders from East and yes our GDP was huge but not the world's leader, we were second behind China. Of course India then is not India today with 1 country instead of 700 states including Pakistan and Bangladesh. I would be still be interested in reading that stuff, specially if it is from a credible agency. See if you can get it.
Pagalpanti Posted June 24, 2011 Posted June 24, 2011 Fortunately I started following cricket when the golden Era of Indian cricket began in 2002-03. Honestly though India are no.1 but they are not dominant team like the Australia of pre-2007 and West Indies of past. We're best of the current lot not by a lot. We're yet to win a series in Australia and South Africa. We were in winning position in 3rd test but gave it away, we still don't have that killer instinct in us to enforce win.
desi pride 1234 Posted June 24, 2011 Posted June 24, 2011 the average indian is physically very frail and it shows in their attitude. we are still a poor country where everyone cannot afford food every day, right? but the same so called average physically very frail indian is the one who joins in the army and most of us wont, the same average indian who goes to vote for every election and we watch tv because its a holiday. show respect to ur fellow indians brother:icflove:.
Yoda-esque Posted June 24, 2011 Posted June 24, 2011 If RK Laxman's "Common Man" epitomized the Average indian in the 70s and early 80s,how should the average Indian today be depicted ? A yuppie on his way to a call center ??:--D
hitman1980 Posted June 24, 2011 Posted June 24, 2011 the average indian is physically very frail and it shows in their attitude. With full battalion of tank and 1000 soldiers u guys couldn't even capture a longewala post from 120 odd very fragil physical Indian :hysterical: .. No wonder ur country is going down the drain ..
hitman1980 Posted June 24, 2011 Posted June 24, 2011 we are still a poor country where everyone cannot afford food every day' date=' right? but the same average physically very frail indian is the one who joins in the army and most of us wont, the same average indian who goes to vote for every election and we watch tv because its a holiday. show respect to ur fellow indians brother:icflove:.[/quote'] He is not Indian yaar .. he is a paki troll
coffee_rules Posted June 24, 2011 Posted June 24, 2011 1972-73 Test team was considered #1 going by the ICC rankings (by present rules). India had beaten Eng at home and away and had beaten WI away. Ofcourse it had not beaten Aus, but still a great world class team. 60s were the worst of all eras, I think. India had lost something like 17 or 19 consecutive away tests. Post Gavaskar era 1987-88, when India lost in NZ away until we started wiinning in 1992-93 (spin trio) was the worst team India had played in the 70s 80s and 90s. Probably the late 90s team that toured Aus also had a bad performance streak.
flamy Posted June 24, 2011 Author Posted June 24, 2011 Like I said, change the circle you move in/with. Nobody I know behaves that way. Oh yeah and stop pretending you took a poll to use terms like "average Indian feels this way". Then read better. If your source of reading is online message boards then please continue this path of ignorance. We were actually world champions a good 55 years earlier, in 1928. Hockey used to be the game. Of course these days yengsters even wonder why Hockey is national game. Will do, when time allows. For now I encourage you to read and improve your understanding of history :winky: Fabulous! I'm glad there are some Indians out there who are comfortable wearing the World Champions tag.
Guest Gunner Posted June 24, 2011 Posted June 24, 2011 I see you are not only lacking in history, but darn right arrogant about it. Factual?? Seriously? Arent you the one who mentioned 1000 years of slavery etc?? Do you realize, and Google is your best friend for members of your generation, that India used to World Champion in another sports, and when we actually happen to be under a foreign rule. Or did you forget how India won 8 Hockey Olympic Golds? No other country has dominated a sport like India did. Even the US dream team got their *****es whooped after a couple of Basketball gold. Or do you in your esteemed opinion beleive only cricket is the gauze of a nation's(India) chivalry and that essentially world started after 1990? xxx You are discussing irrelevant things now. What does winning in hockey have anything to do with what I said about winning in the 80s in test matches which continues to be a factual truth despite all your protestations. My point was very specific to a simple question he raised on surprise about winning in cricket. The worst part of your post is you launching into a personal tirade based on perceived statements and then bring irrelevant issues into discussion. If India was as good as you make them to be why did they not win more than 11 tests in the 80s? Are you going to give a new definition for being good which doesn't involve winning? It is pretty sad that you chose personal attacks where you could have a had a comfortable discussion with me Lurker saab.
nballa Posted June 24, 2011 Posted June 24, 2011 He is not Indian yaar .. he is a paki troll let us not lose our heads here. by average indian i mean the average techie worker who strives for and attains insulin resistance by the age of 25. the average indian farmer or a soldier is obviously very fit and strong.
The Outsider Posted June 24, 2011 Posted June 24, 2011 You are discussing irrelevant things now. What does winning in hockey have anything to do with what I said about winning in the 80s in test matches which continues to be a factual truth despite all your protestations. My point was very specific to a simple question he raised on surprise about winning in cricket. The worst part of your post is you launching into a personal tirade based on perceived statements and then bring irrelevant issues into discussion. If India was as good as you make them to be why did they not win more than 11 tests in the 80s? Are you going to give a new definition for being good which doesn't involve winning? It is pretty sad that you chose personal attacks where you could have a had a comfortable discussion with me Lurker saab. Didn't India win the World Cup and the World Series in the 80s?
ravishingravi Posted June 24, 2011 Posted June 24, 2011 We were also richest country before industrial revolution or the most educated in the BCs. So usko leke nachein ab ? :hysterical::hysterical:
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now