SC Ganguly was poor in swinging seaming conditions,think again..

[Vilander]

Just ran an interesting stat. Checked on subcontinental batsmen in AUS,SA,ENG and NZ. This is the list, check Ganguly's position and average. Underrated is an understatement, all above him are legit greats. Even a few below..funny he must be the best 'worst batsman' ever in swinging seaming conditions. :cantstop:

[Vilander]

Considering tests ofcourse.

[Junyfan]

good to see pak legends

[Jersey #10]

another reason why tendy is such a genius! 17 100s and 23 50s @ 51.30

[CSK Fan]

I believe he was more at sea on bouncy tracks (because of his problem with short balls) than on seaming conditions. In fact he flourished in England

[harmuk]

If you take England out and include WI's (which always had a decent pace attack even in the dog years), it paints a different picture for Ganguly but not much for RD, VVS and SRT. Ganguly is simply not in the class of the other three.

[Pagalpanti]

If you take England out and include WI's (which always had a decent pace attack even in the dog years)' date=' it paints a different picture for Ganguly but not much for RD, VVS and SRT. Ganguly is simply not in the class of the other three.[/quote'] Why take England out? Just because it suits Ganguly is a FTB label? :finger:

[harmuk]

Why take England out? Just because it suits Ganguly is a FTB label? :finger:

No. Actually it does not take much filltering to come to the conclusion that Ganguly is not even close to being considered a great batsman. Including England is an anomaly to make Ganguly appear better than what he actually is outside of the sub-continent.

[Ram]

Couple of points - An average of 42.00 in this modern era is not actually that great. Secondly, England was one of Ganguly's favorite haunts. Remember his debut test series there when he scored 2 100s? He scored a 100 in the Headingly test in 2002. In his 2007, in his last tour there, even though he did not get big run, he scored a lot of critical runs and was instrumental in our win then. However, if you discount that, the cupboard is quite bare afterwards.

[Robelinda]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6umjSKTv2ck]SOURAV GANGULY vs GLENN McGRATH - 1996 DELHI.............. - YouTube[/ame]

[diga]

Just ran an interesting stat. Checked on subcontinental batsmen in AUS,SA,ENG and NZ. This is the list, check Ganguly's position and average. Underrated is an understatement, all above him are legit greats. Even a few below..funny he must be the best 'worst batsman' ever in swinging seaming conditions. :cantstop:

Ganguly >> Sanga/Jaya/DeSilva :yay:

[Precambrian]

Couple of points - An average of 42.00 in this modern era is not actually that great. Secondly, England was one of Ganguly's favorite haunts. Remember his debut test series there when he scored 2 100s? He scored a 100 in the Headingly test in 2002. In his 2007, in his last tour there, even though he did not get big run, he scored a lot of critical runs and was instrumental in our win then. However, if you discount that, the cupboard is quite bare afterwards.

Why exclude England? Anomaly or no anomaly, its plain truth he prospered there. And its not as i the ball stopped swinging when Ganguly came into bat, was it? And the opening post is slightly misleading. The sorting is done by numbers, methinks it should have been by average. and then again, 42 isn't that great an average.

[vvvslaxman]

English conditions are not as tough as we make it out to be for two reasons. One England had a crappy team until recently. Second apart from Headingley other pitches were not as difficult. It all depends during what season you play there. At headingley in 2002 Ganguly made 128, Tendlya made 193, Dravid made 148. But Dravid's 148 is much superior to other two centuries because of the swinging conditions on day 1. From day 2 pitch somewhat eased out. He eventually won man of the match. Ganguly's first two centuries were quality. His century at the Gabba was good one. No denying that. But whenever there is a bit of bounce he had some issues. Definitely he is a far superior batsman than guys like Raina, Yuvraj at the test level. But not as good as Sachin or Dravid. His best test innings till date is his match winning 98 not out in Srilanka not his debut innings or any other innings.

[Ram]

Why exclude England? Anomaly or no anomaly, its plain truth he prospered there. And its not as i the ball stopped swinging when Ganguly came into bat, was it? And the opening post is slightly misleading. The sorting is done by numbers, methinks it should have been by average. and then again, 42 isn't that great an average.

We can go back and forth on the numbers, but the fact of the matter remains that, during the first 80% of his career (1996-2006), Ganguly was a suspect batsmen against high quality fast bowling. Back then, you'd look at his career and go 'How the hell does such an accomplished batsmen actually have such a significant weakness?'. It was a bit like Steve Waugh and short-pitched bowling or KP and left-arm spinners. Having said that, when he came back into the team in 2007, he looked a completely different player against pace bowling. If you guys recall, he was one of the saving graces of our defeat in South African in late 2006-2007. He topped the run aggregates against England in England and in that same year, against Pakistan at home, he looked super-accomplished against Shoaib and company (We all remember the test match where Yasir Arafat scythed thru our top order in seaming conditions to reduce us to 64-4 for Yuvraj's counter-attacking 164, but how many of us remember the double 100 that Ganguly got in the same game?) From late 2006 to late 2007, Saurav Ganguly looked a completely transformed player against pace bowling. He seemed to be able to read the length earlier than ever, which helped him negotiate swing and bounce better than ever. Therefore, it was no surprise our loss in Australia in 2007-08 co-incided with Ganguly's dip in form as well.

[CSK Fan]

Why exclude England? Anomaly or no anomaly, its plain truth he prospered there. And its not as i the ball stopped swinging when Ganguly came into bat, was it? And the opening post is slightly misleading. The sorting is done by numbers, methinks it should have been by average. and then again, 42 isn't that great an average.

There is a difference between an England pitch and those in Aus and SA. England pitch has swing and movement. Other two have bounce and pace. Ganguly's problem was always the later.

[The Outsider]

Yeah swinging seaming conditions = a stats guru filter.

[Precambrian]

We can go back and forth on the numbers, but the fact of the matter remains that, during the first 80% of his career (1996-2006), Ganguly was a suspect batsmen against high quality fast bowling. Back then, you'd look at his career and go 'How the hell does such an accomplished batsmen actually have such a significant weakness?'. It was a bit like Steve Waugh and short-pitched bowling or KP and left-arm spinners. Having said that, when he came back into the team in 2007, he looked a completely different player against pace bowling. If you guys recall, he was one of the saving graces of our defeat in South African in late 2006-2007. He topped the run aggregates against England in England and in that same year, against Pakistan at home, he looked super-accomplished against Shoaib and company (We all remember the test match where Yasir Arafat scythed thru our top order in seaming conditions to reduce us to 64-4 for Yuvraj's counter-attacking 164, but how many of us remember the double 100 that Ganguly got in the same game?) From late 2006 to late 2007, Saurav Ganguly looked a completely transformed player against pace bowling. He seemed to be able to read the length earlier than ever, which helped him negotiate swing and bounce better than ever. Therefore, it was no surprise our loss in Australia in 2007-08 co-incided with Ganguly's dip in form as well.

That wasn't my question. Why exclude England in an analysis of his performance against swing bowling in swinging conditions? I don't think he had issues with swing bowling, but his problems were against genuinely quick bowling and on bouncy tracks. He just couldn't pull for his life (much like Raina).

[The Outsider]

That wasn't my question. Why exclude England in an analysis of his performance against swing bowling in swinging conditions?

Every pitch in England is swinging and seaming? Every pitch in India is a dust bowl? What kind of stupid analysis is this - you want to examine Ganguly's performance on swinging and seaming tracks you do a subjective analysis not throw out some crap by filtering venues from stats guru!

[vvvslaxman]

We can go back and forth on the numbers, but the fact of the matter remains that, during the first 80% of his career (1996-2006), Ganguly was a suspect batsmen against high quality fast bowling. Back then, you'd look at his career and go 'How the hell does such an accomplished batsmen actually have such a significant weakness?'. It was a bit like Steve Waugh and short-pitched bowling or KP and left-arm spinners. Having said that, when he came back into the team in 2007, he looked a completely different player against pace bowling. If you guys recall, he was one of the saving graces of our defeat in South African in late 2006-2007. He topped the run aggregates against England in England and in that same year, against Pakistan at home, he looked super-accomplished against Shoaib and company (We all remember the test match where Yasir Arafat scythed thru our top order in seaming conditions to reduce us to 64-4 for Yuvraj's counter-attacking 164, but how many of us remember the double 100 that Ganguly got in the same game?) From late 2006 to late 2007, Saurav Ganguly looked a completely transformed player against pace bowling. He seemed to be able to read the length earlier than ever, which helped him negotiate swing and bounce better than ever. Therefore, it was no surprise our loss in Australia in 2007-08 co-incided with Ganguly's dip in form as well.

His defense vastly improved on his return. He was right behind the ball gave an assured look that he never gave before. he always used to be a chancy, flashy player. He protected his wicket much better than the first part of his career.

[Ram]

That wasn't my question. Why exclude England in an analysis of his performance against swing bowling in swinging conditions? I don't think he had issues with swing bowling, but his problems were against genuinely quick bowling and on bouncy tracks. He just couldn't pull for his life (much like Raina).

I did not mean to exclude England. The only reason I pointed out the so-called England connection is so that we do not let the so-called numbers deflect from the actual point - Which is for a major portion of his career, Ganguly's batting was suspect against high quality pace bowling. Btw, if you think Ganguly's problems against fast bowling surfaced only on fast tracks, you should check out the 2004 test series b/w India and Australia, in India. Glenn McGrath and ran rings around Ganguly on not so fast pitches (Remember Nagpur?).