Choker from the start?

Gambit · October 17, 2007

SO let me get this straight. Jadeja plays a grand total of 16 games against Australia, India win 7 of those. A success rate of 43.75% SRT plays a grand total of 54 games and India win 16 of those. A success rate of 29%. And you Sir have the galls to tell me that it is SRT who is responsible for India's success? Doesnt that seem funny to you? It sure does to me.

Why are you skirting the issue? Please list matches where Jaddu performed and SRT did jack against OZ where we won.

Okay so up above you lean on SRT's influence on Indian win but as soon as it comes to Test it becomes a case of Total average!! Double standards I think so. I repeat what I have mentioned before umpteen times. When it comes to test victory against the greatest side in the world VVS outscores SRT by twice in batting average and has more runs even though he has played less games.

Your heavily outscoring argument went for a toss after I showed you how SRT outscored Laxy after his debut. And double standards? I didn't bring test cricket into this. You did. As I said before, IMO it's almost impossible for a single batsman to win a test but in ODIs, it is possible. I posted overall stats of RD,SCG and Yuvi against Australia. Not in matches won.

kabira · October 17, 2007

Sachin has been influential in victories against Australia in ODIs nobody can deny that...his overall average is also good...no one is close 2nd (Jadeja is exception, avg. skewed by not outs) In Tests, your argument that Laxman averages more when India wins has no meaning..What about his average when India lose or draw...Sachin scored @50+ in down under when India lost each and every game...He scored 100 at perth, which VVS can only dream off...Sachin scored not out double hundred in Sydney, wouldn't his average go up if we had won that game..

Lurker · October 17, 2007

Why are you skirting the issue? Please list matches where Jaddu performed and SRT did jack against OZ where we won.

I am skirting the issue? Hello, the last I checked you were not even aware that someone named Jadeja existed. Whether you like it or not the man has better overall, and better average in matches won as compared to SRT. I find all this - list matches where SRT did jack - freaking hilarious. So in the match in which Jadeja scored 100 plus Sachin comes into the picture because he took wickets :hysterical::hysterical: In other words had Sachin not taken wickets Jadeja's century was a piece of cr@p. I am sure you must consider all the innings of SRT that eventually did not lead us to win as cr@p as well!

Your heavily outscoring argument went for a toss after I showed you how SRT outscored Laxy after his debut.

What argument? I clearly wrote this

Lets use that line of argument in Test cricket now(against the same team - Australia). SRT's performance in Test matches won 7 Tests 509 runs@42 VVS's performance in Test matches won 5 Tests 816 runs@90.67 VVS has more runs in less Tests VVS has twice the average VVS has same number of 100s and more 50s in less innings! So lets use the same logic, against the same opposition and say SRT is worse a bat than VVS when it comes to Test cricket?

If you are unable to defend how Sachin comes out 2nd best....and that too by miles..dont attack me, feel free to attack your idol here.

And double standards? I didn't bring test cricket into this. You did. As I said before, IMO it's almost impossible for a single batsman to win a test but in ODIs, it is possible. I posted overall stats of RD,SCG and Yuvi against Australia. Not in matches won.

I didnt say you brought in Test cricket. I am the one who did it. It was to show very clear how using your logic - matches won by a certain player against Australia - be a criteria then Sachin is heavily outscored by VVS in Test cricket. Hardly my fault if you can't defend your own point of view. xxx

yoda · October 17, 2007

Sachin has been influential in victories against Australia in ODIs nobody can deny that...his overall average is also good...no one is close 2nd (Jadeja is exception, avg. skewed by not outs) In Tests, your argument that Laxman averages more when India wins has no meaning..What about his average when India lose or draw...Sachin scored @50+ in down under when India lost each and every game...He scored 100 at perth, which VVS can only dream off...Sachin scored not out double hundred in Sydney, wouldn't his average go up if we had won that game..

This is absurd. Sachin has been influential in victories against Australia in ODIs, BUT you won't say that VVS has been influential in victories against Australia in tests. You will bring his average in tests lost, Sachin's average in tests lost, yada yada yada. Yea, Sachin scored 100 at perth, which VVS can only dream off. By the same token Sachin can only dream of playing a knock like the 281. I don't understand why people have a single tracking mind. Give credit where it is due.

kabira · October 17, 2007

>, BUT you won't say that VVS has been influential in victories against Australia in tests. You will bring his average in tests lost, Sachin's average in tests lost, yada yada yada. Test match is won by bowlers...when you compare Tests with ODIs you are comparing apples to oranges.. thats what I was trying to explain in my post..that score like 248* was wasted because we could not take 4 more wickets..would n't sachin's average go up in matches that we won against aussies..

yoda · October 17, 2007

>, BUT you won't say that VVS has been influential in victories against Australia in tests. You will bring his average in tests lost, Sachin's average in tests lost, yada yada yada. Test match is won by bowlers...when you compare Tests with ODIs you are comparing apples to oranges.. thats what I was trying to explain in my post..that score like 248* was wasted because we could not take 4 more wickets..would n't sachin's average go up in matches that we won against aussies..

Test match is won by bowlers, so wonder why we talk batting in tests at all, EVER?

Gambit · October 17, 2007

I am skirting the issue? Hello, the last I checked you were not even aware that someone named Jadeja existed. Whether you like it or not the man has better overall, and better average in matches won as compared to SRT. I find all this - list matches where SRT did jack - freaking hilarious. So in the match in which Jadeja scored 100 plus Sachin comes into the picture because he took wickets :hysterical::hysterical: In other words had Sachin not taken wickets Jadeja's century was a piece of cr@p. I am sure you must consider all the innings of SRT that eventually did not lead us to win as cr@p as well!

What a cop out. No list for matches where Jaddu performed and SRT did jack against OZ where we won provided. Point proven.

What argument? I clearly wrote this Lets use that line of argument in Test cricket now(against the same team - Australia). SRT's performance in Test matches won 7 Tests 509 runs@42 VVS's performance in Test matches won 5 Tests 816 runs@90.67 VVS has more runs in less Tests VVS has twice the average VVS has same number of 100s and more 50s in less innings! So lets use the same logic, against the same opposition and say SRT is worse a bat than VVS when it comes to Test cricket? If you are unable to defend how Sachin comes out 2nd best....and that too by miles..dont attack me, feel free to attack your idol here.

First of all, why do you think I am attacking you? Secondly, for the billionth time, I am telling you IMO it's almost impossible for a single batsman to win a test but in ODIs, it is possible. I posted overall stats of RD,SCG and Yuvi against Australia. Not in matches won. So where did my logic come from? If you had said, of late, India don't win tests against OZ without a contribution from Laxy, I would have whole heartedly agreed with you. But your logic was wrong.

I didnt say you brought in Test cricket. I am the one who did it. It was to show very clear how using your logic - matches won by a certain player against Australia - be a criteria then Sachin is heavily outscored by VVS in Test cricket. Hardly my fault if you can't defend your own point of view.

Your heavily outscored went for a toss for overall matches. And at no point did I compare SCG's,Yuvi's or RD's averages in matches won against OZ with SRT's nor did I at any point mention SRT's average in matches won against OZ. I have consistently mentioned contributions. India find it very very difficult to win an ODI against OZ without SRT's contribution.

Lurker · October 17, 2007

What a cop out. No list for matches where Jaddu performed and SRT did jack against OZ where we won provided. Point proven.

Fair enough if that makes you happy. I dont want to reiterate whatever I have mentioned 200 times already, if you havent gotten it by now you wont get it in 201st reply either.

First of all, why do you think I am attacking you?

You have certainly been a tad hostile in this thread what with all the "I have outscored your argument" etc etc. You do realize I can pay back immediately in coin. If you have a fair point let me agree to it, empty chest thumping or degrading others is not the way to go.

Secondly, for the billionth time, I am telling you IMO it's almost impossible for a single batsman to win a test but in ODIs, it is possible. I posted overall stats of RD,SCG and Yuvi against Australia. Not in matches won. So where did my logic come from? If you had said, of late, India don't win tests against OZ without a contribution from Laxy, I would have whole heartedly agreed with you. But your logic was wrong.

Lets take this one by one. 1) In Test it is impossible for a single batsman to win. Specially against a world-champion team like Australia. By that account VVS runs are so much more important. He has taken India to win on more occassions in Test period(do you still want me to rake up 90 plus compared to 42). 2) Secondly your overall stats of SCG,RD,Yuvraj are useless. I have shown you how Jadeja's stats are better than SRT. Dont qualify it with some other BS now. 3) You started this discussion, as far as I can remember, about Sachin's impact on India winning LOI. So I will use that criteria in Test as well. Why should I change it to overall career average? Just because it suits SRT? If you can not hold on to your logic then why start it in the first place? xxxx

Lurker · October 17, 2007

This is absurd. Sachin has been influential in victories against Australia in ODIs, BUT you won't say that VVS has been influential in victories against Australia in tests. You will bring his average in tests lost, Sachin's average in tests lost, yada yada yada. Yea, Sachin scored 100 at perth, which VVS can only dream off. By the same token Sachin can only dream of playing a knock like the 281. I don't understand why people have a single tracking mind. Give credit where it is due.

Indeed. List of hypocracy: 1) Test match is important, LOI is mickey mouse cricket. (errr okay) 2) LOI is important but only against Australia (errrrr alrighty) 3) LOI against Australia is important but only when we won... (whatever dude) 4) Test matches against Australia dont count when we win (Yep sure right). Stick to one line. If some of you are getting carried away by how Sachin has won us games in LOI(meaningless lottery draw cricket mind you) then have the courtsey to say how VVS has done lot more damage in Test(the real deal) xxx

Gambit · October 17, 2007

You have certainly been a tad hostile in this thread what with all the "I have outscored your argument" etc etc. You do realize I can pay back immediately in coin. If you have a fair point let me agree to it, empty chest thumping or degrading others is not the way to go.

I said "went for a toss". Man, you are someone who's debated with BB,DR,CC and one little "went for a toss" phrase was hostile. I use that a lot. Fine, if you felt I was hostile, let me clarify I wasn't.

Lets take this one by one. 1) In Test it is impossible for a single batsman to win. Specially against a world-champion team like Australia. By that account VVS runs are so much more important. He has taken India to win on more occassions in Test period(do you still want me to rake up 90 plus compared to 42).

Of course VVS' runs are worth their weight in gold against Australia. But in test cricket, very rarely do you see a batsman winning a game on his own(for example, cracking a double chasing 450+ etc). 281 was turned into a match winning knock, from a terrific match saving one, by Bhajji was bowled Australia out within 2 sessions. As I said earlier, I talked about contributions, not averages. If you had said, of late, India don't win tests against OZ without a contribution from Laxy, I would have whole heartedly agreed with you. But your logic was wrong.

2) Secondly your overall stats of SCG,RD,Yuvraj are useless. I have shown you how Jadeja's stats are better than SRT. Dont qualify it with some other BS now.

What did I say when you showed me Jadeja's stats? Did I not say this: Good find. So there was actually 1 bat who did well against Australia apart from SRT. Pity only 4 50+ knocks though. And like I keep telling you, in only 1 of the wins against OZ that Jadeja played in had SRT failing. See the relation again. Without SRT doing well in a game against OZ, India struggle to win. You failed to prove a list for Jadeja's performances where SRT failed.

3) You started this discussion, as far as I can remember, about Sachin's impact on India winning LOI. So I will use that criteria in Test as well. Why should I change it to overall career average? Just because it suits SRT? If you can not hold on to your logic then why start it in the first place?

Why should we talk about tests? When did I say my logic in ODIs extends to Tests as well? Your fault for assuming so. In case you've forgotten, you win a test by taking 20 wickets. Not the same in ODIs. And hence, very rare for a single batsman to determine the outcome of a test.

Fair enough if that makes you happy. I dont want to reiterate whatever I have mentioned 200 times already' date=' if you havent gotten it by now you wont get it in 201st reply either.[/quote'] Likewise. You and me are regurgitating the same arguments. This will end with you not acknowledging SRT and India winning correlation in ODIs and me banging on and on and on about it. Agree to disagree?

Lurker · October 17, 2007

Of course VVS' runs are worth their weight in gold against Australia. But in test cricket, very rarely do you see a batsman winning a game on his own(for example, cracking a double chasing 450+ etc). 281 was turned into a match winning knock, from a terrific match saving one, by Bhajji was bowled Australia out within 2 sessions. As I said earlier, I talked about contributions, not averages. If you had said, of late, India don't win tests against OZ without a contribution from Laxy, I would have whole heartedly agreed with you. But your logic was wrong.

Not sure where the logic is wrong except perhaps in your eyes. Anyway you slice and dice VVS's contribution towards Indian test win over Australia outscores Sachin by miles. That was my argument but if you want to hold your nose aise nahin waise, I say fair enough.

What did I say when you showed me Jadeja's stats? Did I not say this: Good find. So there was actually 1 bat who did well against Australia apart from SRT. Pity only 4 50+ knocks though. And like I keep telling you, in only 1 of the wins against OZ that Jadeja played in had SRT failing. See the relation again. Without SRT doing well in a game against OZ, India struggle to win. You failed to prove a list for Jadeja's performances where SRT failed.

I adressed this issue very clearly that I find this whole viewpoint hilarious. When Jadeja scored a century Sachin took 5 wickets. What does one have to do with other? Did Jadeja get an easy 6 because Sachin was gonna take 5 wickets later? Did Sachin take a wicket cos Jadeja had already scored a century?? The two issues are not related at all. In similar vein, in one match Sachin scored century while Jadeja scored 71. So now I should credit Jadeja for that!! See the fallacy of that argument?

Why should we talk about tests? When did I say my logic in ODIs extends to Tests as well? Your fault for assuming so. In case you've forgotten, you win a test by taking 20 wickets. Not the same in ODIs. And hence, very rare for a single batsman to determine the outcome of a test.

Okay lets not talk about Test, fair point that. Allow me to categorically state that SRT is a big effing loser and thank goodness he was not in India's 20/20 team so kicked off Aussies butt(without SRT) and went on to become World Cup Champions. The greatest batsman, ney choker of our era, sulked at how he missed the team while the Young brigade celebrated woohoo!! Good, lets drop Test..lets only play 20/20 and keep the geriatric out. Happy now? You go by LOI I go by 20/20 and twain shall never meet. And I would certainly be pointing out your bluff the next time you chant "test cricket is the real deal". Personally I have spent ample time on this thread and I am done. Peace! :pray:

xxx

Holysmoke · October 18, 2007

Allow me to categorically state that SRT is a big effing loser and thank goodness he was not in India's 20/20 team so kicked off Aussies butt(without SRT) and went on to become World Cup Champions. The greatest batsman, ney choker of our era, sulked at how he missed the team while the Young brigade celebrated woohoo!!

Stop making stuff up. Proof?

Bumper · October 18, 2007

Tendulkar has top scored in the following finals bringing India glory: 66 v WI - Calcutta, Wills World Series Final (3rd team was NZ) 67 v RSA - Mumbai, Titan Cup(3rd team was Australia) 95 v Pak - Dhaka, 1st final Independence Cup (3rd team was BD) 134 v Aus - Sharjah, Coca Cola Cup(3rd team was NZ) 128 v SL - Colombo, Singer Final(3rd team was NZ) And I'm not even including 523@87 in the 1996 world cup and 673@61 in the 2003 world cup! Lurker, please find me multiple instances of Yuvraj winning grand finals. Also, please find me any Indian batsmen with more than 5 match winning+top scoring knocks in ODI finals against non minnows. Let's see how many such batsmen exist. Also feel free to find any non Aussie batsmen as well.

Just got time to read this entire thread. Just did some research on the above scorecards. Gambit, I see you deny Jaddu's 100 by pointing to Sachin's bowling efforts. If we use that logic, then none of the above score cards are really valid. 66 vs WI, had ample support from Jadeja who scored 58 & Raju's 4-fer http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/66003.html 67 vs RSA was only a secondary effort in the game. In a low scoring game, Kumble took 4-fer & was the MoM. http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/66067.html 95 vs Pak had ample support from Ganguly who scored 68 http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/66134.html 128 vs SL, had support in the form of Ganguly's 109. http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/66157.html Which leaves SRT's 134 the only lone game winning knock. The next highest score was 58 by Azhar. So it is fair to say that SRT failed to do it himself (except on one occassion), without receiving a significant support from one or two team mates, which was as good or better than his own contributions.:cantstop:

The Outsider · October 18, 2007

So it is fair to say that SRT failed to do it himself (except on one occassion), without receiving a significant support from one or two team mates, which was as good or better than his own contributions.:cantstop:

It is fair to say that you have missed Gambit's point which was naming ANY international cricketer who has top scored in 5 ODI final triumphs, none against minnows. There will always be a support cast, cricket is a team game it's obvious and in today's form Tendulkar is as good a support cast as you will get - a reliable opener, averages in the mid 40s, SR in the 80s, top scores and tops the averages against the best ODI side in history in a bilateral series, safe fielder, good runner between the wickets, a thinking brain to chip in with advice, a major help to guide young batsmen. What is missing is that the supposed main stars are failing. Is it fair to expect someone with 18 years of international sport behind him to continue to play the lead role. In more talented and conducive cricketing environments he would have been exploited as an ideal support cast.

Bumper · October 18, 2007

It is fair to say that you have missed Gambit's point which was naming ANY international cricketer who has top scored in 5 ODI final triumphs' date= none against minnows. There will always be a support cast, cricket is a team game it's obvious and in today's form Tendulkar is as good a support cast as you will get - a reliable opener, averages in the mid 40s, SR in the 80s, top scores and tops the averages against the best ODI side in history in a bilateral series, safe fielder, good runner between the wickets, a thinking brain to chip in with advice, a major help to guide young batsmen. What is missing is that the supposed main stars are failing. Is it fair to expect someone with 18 years of international sport behind him to continue to play the lead role. In more talented and conducive cricketing environments he would have been exploited as an ideal support cast.http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65568.html http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/247507.html http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/236963.html http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/66282.html http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65641.html He has more, but 5 would suffice, as thats what u asked for :haha:

How about one fine, mean batting machine -- Adam Gilchrist.

The Outsider · October 18, 2007

How about one fine, mean batting machine -- Adam Gilchrist. He has more, but 5 would suffice, as thats what u asked for :haha:

Didn't think that you would get stuck on an oversight in my post of mentioning non-Australian as Gambit had done in his OP, and choose to ignore the crux of my post.

Bumper · October 18, 2007

The Outsider · October 18, 2007

Ok, you found one, Kirsten. Good, but once again those questions are mere auxiliary digression from the crux of my post :

There will always be a support cast, cricket is a team game it's obvious and in today's form Tendulkar is as good a support cast as you will get - a reliable opener, averages in the mid 40s, SR in the 80s, top scores and tops the averages against the best ODI side in history in a bilateral series, safe fielder, good runner between the wickets, a thinking brain to chip in with advice, a major help to guide young batsmen. What is missing is that the supposed main stars are failing. Is it fair to expect someone with 18 years of international sport behind him to continue to play the lead role. In more talented and conducive cricketing environments he would have been exploited as an ideal support cast.

Bumper · October 18, 2007

Sanath Jayasuriya. http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/66114.html http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65900.html http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/66328.html http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/66335.html In games, he scored 50+ and was within 10 runs of the top scorer http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65865.html http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/66115.html I have only looked at openers so far and that too in this era. I already see so many names!

Bumper · October 18, 2007

Sir Viv http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65063.html http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65334.html http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65335.html http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65337.html http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65390.html http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65450.html And this man did not even play 200 ODIs, mind you! I can still look for non-Aussie, non-Saffie, non-WI player but dont have the time

Sign In

Choker from the start?

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in