Gollum Posted April 2, 2014 Posted April 2, 2014 India have been better in ICC events because of flat pitches ... take those out and Pakistan edges India ... not by a whole lot but enough. So Australia 1985 , England 1983, RSA 2003/7 were flat. And remind me how Pak have done in WI,Aus. Pak were better from mid 80s to early 2000s I admit
Soorma_Bhopali Posted April 2, 2014 Posted April 2, 2014 So Australia 1985 , England 1983, RSA 2003/7 were flat. And remind me how Pak have done in WI,Aus. Pak were better from mid 80s to early 2000s I admit no .mid 80s - 1986 onwards till mid-1990s ( 1993-1994) only ..we won all major encounters after that including bilaterals
Soorma_Bhopali Posted April 2, 2014 Posted April 2, 2014 lovely to see West "Indians " - Sunil Narine , Badree ,Dinesh Ramdin play a major part in dumping Pak out of World T20 ..:haha:
Dil Dil India Posted April 2, 2014 Author Posted April 2, 2014 It is the new excuse of pakaupassion fans. In fact, the latest is that only WCs from 1992 should be counted. 5 ICC Trophies - 2 ICC Trophies. Well some lame excuses are in order to explain that gulf. I guess one of them is discounting every trophy that India have won, in which case Pakistan are leading the trophy count by 2. :haha:
Muloghonto Posted April 2, 2014 Posted April 2, 2014 Typical cop out by citing a period. No one said India were better in the 1990s nor am I talking about just the present. If we're talking currently Pakistan's last away series win was before India's last away series win (excluding Bangladesh and Zimbabwe) and Pakistan have not won a test series since early 2012; let's not go down that road or have the folks at pakaupassion tell you otherwise. Don't give a cop out by citing periods where India sucked or pretending as if we are talking about the present. We're talking overall 1947-2014. India have won 5 major trophies to 2 with Pakistan taking a decade more than India to win the biggest one, being second to India to another and never having won the third. That is dominance. Tests are a different story though. If you are talking overall, then I would say this: 1947-present time: Tests : Pakistan ODIs: India T20s: India
deathmonger Posted April 2, 2014 Posted April 2, 2014 I'd take the H2H with a pinch of salt. In the coming years due to the economy and infrastructure we will reinforce ourselves and become better and better while Pakistan will keep sliding. This can already be seen in the quality of the youngsters coming through from both systems. The H2H will be reversed in a decade or so and we'll have added two-three more WC/WT20/CTs to our trophy cabinet while Pakistan will have added none.
TNAmarkFrmIndia Posted April 2, 2014 Posted April 2, 2014 BCCI would have to arrange multiple series over several years with PCB just to equal that record against Pakistan, more than they did against Sri Lanka.
bones Posted April 2, 2014 Posted April 2, 2014 Please cut out the T20 and ODI stats, that is not cricket. Even **** teams like WI and England have won those events. Pakistan over recent years have been playing away from home a lot, so that isn't ideal. Overall as a test side they have a better record and that edges it. India will soon catch up on that front and overtake, primarily because they are able to play more matches in ideal conditions for their side. India also have better batsmen to cope withe condsitions in England, SA and Aus, but they've been a massive let down for the fans recently. Tests matter, so if I had to score it would be 5/10 for Pakistan and 4/10 India. India will go up to 5/10 soon though.
Dil Dil India Posted April 2, 2014 Author Posted April 2, 2014 Winning World Cups doesn't matter since when? Between 1983-1992 and post 2011? :hysterical: Jeez, some of you are so predictable.
bones Posted April 2, 2014 Posted April 2, 2014 Winning World Cups doesn't matter since when? Between 1983-1992 and post 2011? :hysterical: Jeez' date=' some of you are so predictable.[/quote'] If you asked most cricket fans, what is a greater and more difficult achievement, winning a test series in Australia or a World Cup, they will always pick the test series in Aus. Pakistan and SL have won world cups, joke world cups, but neither I'm sure have won a test series in Aus. The point is, in most sports winning Slams/World Cups etc is the pinnacle, in cricket it isn't. The pinnacle is winning a test series in Aus.
deathmonger Posted April 2, 2014 Posted April 2, 2014 If you asked most cricket fans, what is a greater and more difficult achievement, winning a test series in Australia or a World Cup, they will always pick the test series in Aus. Pakistan and SL have won world cups, joke world cups, but neither I'm sure have won a test series in Aus. The point is, in most sports winning Slams/World Cups etc is the pinnacle, in cricket it isn't. The pinnacle is winning a test series in Aus. Yeah, and Pakistan have won series in Oz? There isn't a country Pakistan have won in that India hasn't won in. Not vice versa.
Muloghonto Posted April 2, 2014 Posted April 2, 2014 If you asked most cricket fans, what is a greater and more difficult achievement, winning a test series in Australia or a World Cup, they will always pick the test series in Aus. Pakistan and SL have won world cups, joke world cups, but neither I'm sure have won a test series in Aus. The point is, in most sports winning Slams/World Cups etc is the pinnacle, in cricket it isn't. The pinnacle is winning a test series in Aus. But most cricket fans would pick LOI/20-20 to watch and that is what matters. Dogmatic cultural opinions aside ( Test cricket being harder = being the only one matters), what really matters to many sportsmen is to perform in the greatest stages of them all, popularity-wise speaking. Some may care more about doing well in formats that are played mostly in front of half-empty arenas for some statistical pedantry. But I can assure you, many cricketers also care just as much, if not more, about winning/performing well in contests where 'all eyes will be on them' literally: that would be wold cups, major tournaments back in the day and generally speaking, ODIs. So i for one, wouldn't put 'winning in Australia/England/South Africa' on a greater pedestal than winning the world cup or CT trophy. ODI has its unique set of skills as well and test success does not garantee ODI/20-20 success either. The pinnacle for most cricket fans is winning the world cup. More people watch it than test series in Australia. That makes it more important.
Debutant Posted April 2, 2014 Posted April 2, 2014 If you asked most cricket fans, what is a greater and more difficult achievement, winning a test series in Australia or a World Cup, they will always pick the test series in Aus. Pakistan and SL have won world cups, joke world cups, but neither I'm sure have won a test series in Aus. The point is, in most sports winning Slams/World Cups etc is the pinnacle, in cricket it isn't. The pinnacle is winning a test series in Aus. Pinnacle is winning the IPL :dontknow: Those tests are for fossils who don't have any work and can keep their asses in a chair for 5 whole days.
Dil Dil India Posted April 2, 2014 Author Posted April 2, 2014 If you asked most cricket fans, what is a greater and more difficult achievement, winning a test series in Australia or a World Cup, they will always pick the test series in Aus. Pakistan and SL have won world cups, joke world cups, but neither I'm sure have won a test series in Aus. The point is, in most sports winning Slams/World Cups etc is the pinnacle, in cricket it isn't. The pinnacle is winning a test series in Aus. Haha, what? England also have won a test series in Australia; so what? Sour grapes from Pak fans. Always and will continue. Anyway, India have a better record in and against Australia in tests. Now watch that benchmark change at the speed of light :)
Muloghonto Posted April 2, 2014 Posted April 2, 2014 One thing i will give the pakis: back when they had the lineup of Anwar-Sohail-Ijaz-Inzy-Malik-Moin/Latif-Wasim-Waqar-Mushie-Saqlain, they were a very very good team that could regularly demolish most oppositions, though tended to be underachievers and inconsistent. That team is probably the pinnacle of a test team fielded by the subcontinent.
Crookbond Posted April 2, 2014 Posted April 2, 2014 Were pakistani umpires umpiring 87 series in India? Were there pakistani umpires in 99 Madras and Eden Gardens? Were there pakistani umpires in Banglore 05? Fact is we won the series in Ind 87. Won two tests in 99 and drew in 05. As for our ODI H2H our best came on Indian soil with Indian umpires. Coming to the OP. We were both rubbish till 70s. Both had their moments in 80s. We were better in 90s. Winning 3 back to back series in Eng won few times in NZ and drew in SA whilst you had that embarrassing record of one win overseas in something like 15 years. In 2000s you were clearly better in both forms. As of now you are slightly better in tests and way ahead in ODIs. Sharamnaak signature. You won just 1 test in 99, not 2.
vijay50 Posted April 2, 2014 Posted April 2, 2014 India have been better in ICC events because of flat pitches ... take those out and Pakistan edges India ... not by a whole lot but enough. That is bull. Pakistan always won in the flat pitches of Sharjah million times.
vijay50 Posted April 2, 2014 Posted April 2, 2014 If you asked most cricket fans, what is a greater and more difficult achievement, winning a test series in Australia or a World Cup, they will always pick the test series in Aus. Pakistan and SL have won world cups, joke world cups, but neither I'm sure have won a test series in Aus. The point is, in most sports winning Slams/World Cups etc is the pinnacle, in cricket it isn't. The pinnacle is winning a test series in Aus. Well, Tendulkar disagrees with you. He said winning World cup was the pinnacle moment of his career.
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