Bumper Posted November 7, 2007 Posted November 7, 2007 Do you reckon the Aussies will carry an old f@rt who averages 30, over an extended period of time if they keep losing all the important games (One series loss in the Ashes, several heads rolled) Lets see what your hero does, in the next year. I reckon you can safely add another 15 tests at an avg of 34.25. That would make his mediocre run the longest in history:haha:
Gambit Posted November 7, 2007 Posted November 7, 2007 I dont know why he wasnt sacked. May be because Aussies were winning in this time :haha: His sacking from the ODIs did help, innit ? He came back hungrier & top scored in the world cup. He wasn't sacked because the Aussie selectors backed him given his proven record. Usually people say that what would have happened had an out of form xyz cricketer been Australian? The answer is that had he had a good past record, he would have been given a chance to come out of the slump.
Gambit Posted November 7, 2007 Posted November 7, 2007 Do you reckon the Aussies will carry an old f@rt who averages 30' date=' over an extended period of time if they keep losing all the important games (One series loss in the Ashes, several heads rolled)[/quote'] Care to list the "several heads" which rolled after Australia's 2005 Ashes defeat? Lets see what your hero does, in the next year. I reckon you can safely add another 15 tests at an avg of 34.25. That would make his mediocre run the longest in history:haha: Ok. Put your money where your mouth is. I predict that from now till the end of the tests against RSA, SRT will average over 40. Do you think otherwise?
Gambit Posted November 7, 2007 Posted November 7, 2007 Ponting between Nov 2000 and 3rd test 2001 Ashes series: 11 tests 319 runs@19
Holysmoke Posted November 7, 2007 Posted November 7, 2007 Ponting between Nov 2000 and 3rd test 2001 Ashes series: 11 tests 319 runs@19 And he wasnt really a "Proven" performer at that time....
bharat297 Posted November 7, 2007 Posted November 7, 2007 That would be a correct conclusion if Gilly's primary role in the Aussie test lineup is one of a top order batsman. But he is a wicketkeeper first & batsman next, which is what saved him. Remember a certain Damien Martyn ? The guy had a phenomenal year prior to the Ashes'05. Is he not a proven performer ? He got booted after a couple of bad series. How about Jason Gillespie or Michael Kasprowicz ? Are they not proven performers ? Gilly was persisted for two reasons: 1) He was in the team as a wicket keeper 2) The team was winning all this while. ONLY in an Indian team, non-performers can ride on their stardom for years, even when the team is losing! With Gillespie and Kasrprowics (Kasper is not a proven performer btw) ... they are bowlers. Bowlers can cost you matches, more so than batsman do. I honestly believe that the poor 3rd bowling options of VRV singh and Munaf cost us that series in SAF (even though our batting collapsed in the 2nd innings of the last 2 tests). But in the case of Gilly ... As excellent as Gilchrist is ... he is not the best wicket-keeper in Australia. Both Brad Haddin and Chris Hartley (he plays for Queensland in the domestic comp) are superior glovesmen. Gilchrist is a much much superior batsman, and thats the main reason Australia kept him because of his batting. Australia knew what Gilchrist was capable of so they kept him. As with Damien Martyn's case . Martyn was made a scapegoat for the Ashes loss. It was a very controversial decision primarily because of the bad umpiring decisions he got during Ashes 05. However, selectors felt they could drop him because he (and I am not joking here) does not really gel with the team to a great extent (besides with Ponting and Clarke). This is why Lehmann was kept much longer than he deserved to be, because he got along with the team much more than Martyn did. However, before Ashes 06, when the selectors wanted their best XI to play England, they called back Martyn. In any case, Sachin has done more for India than Martyn did for Australia. And furthermore, since when are we losing consistently in Tests? We have lost 3 series in the past 5 years, of which 1 was to the world champions (and Sachin didnt play in the first 2 matches, when he came back we won 1 and lost 1). Since 2000, we are the 2nd most successful team (2nd to Australia) away from home. We are the only side to have not lost to England since the new millenium, and we are one of 2 sides to have beaten Australia in Australia, since 2000. Also, we are one of 2 sides to have beaten Australia in a test series in the new millenium, and then we are the only side since the West Indians of 1992 (and NZL of 2001 i guess), to have not lost a series to Australia down under. We have been consistently ranked in the top3 in the ICC Test Rankings. Captain! And btw did SA lose as much as we did in the last 2 years ? Try again:lmao: Actually, they did lose as much as we did in the last 2 years (2 series' losses each) since Nov 2005. Seriously, if you're gonna laugh at someone like that ... at least make sure you are correct first. :hysterical:
Gambit Posted November 7, 2007 Posted November 7, 2007 Jayasuriya since April 2005: 13 tests 403 runs@19 And he is in the starting lineup tomorrow!
Bumper Posted November 7, 2007 Posted November 7, 2007 Care to list the "several heads" which rolled after Australia's 2005 Ashes defeat? Like Gillespie, Kapser for example. Were these guys not proven performers ? Ok. Put your money where your mouth is. I predict that from now till the end of the tests against RSA, SRT will average over 40. Do you think otherwise? If he does, i'll stop harping about his form. My prediction is that he will fail to cross an avg of 35 vs Pak & Aus. And may be average 37 vs SA at home, with an overall avg of about 35. Am so sure Tendulkar is suffering from loss of ability not loss of form, as he still manages to cash in on poor attacks like Bangles without fail. The Aussies can carry one or two out of form batsmen, without any significant difference to their overall fortunes. We cannot, our players arent so gifted to keep winning inspite of a passenger in the side.
Bumper Posted November 7, 2007 Posted November 7, 2007 Bumps ... a certain Mike Brearley played for 5 yrs and had a grand career avg of 22 ... Mike Gatting another of those "well respected" luminaries has a career avg of 35 and played 79 freakin test matches. Ever heard of Ponting ? He had 2 yrs of horror run where he avged 32 Lets see if you can survive here after taking down those gentlemen with the same vengence as SRT .... Bheem, was England under Breareley or Aussies with Ponting's terrible run losing non stop like we did ? And wasnt Mike B captain of the English team ? I dont care who in the past were persisted with. If i see my team losing for an extended period of time, I want to have my worst batsman in the team sacked (if he is not playing any other role in the team, such as bowling, wicket keeping or captaincy)
Gambit Posted November 7, 2007 Posted November 7, 2007 Like Gillespie' date=' Kapser for example. Were these guys not proven performers ?[/quote'] Dizzy was dropped midway and not after Ashes was lost. And he had been poor for nearly a year. Kasper missed just 1 series after Ashes and came back for series against SA. And he was never a proven performer. If he does, i'll stop harping about his form. My prediction is that he will fail to cross an avg of 35 vs Pak & Aus. And may be average 37 vs SA at home, with an overall avg of about 35. Am so sure Tendulkar is suffering from loss of ability not loss of form, as he still manages to cash in on poor attacks like Bangles without fail. Hmm. So if he crosses 35 you'll be happy? Let's wait and watch.
Gambit Posted November 7, 2007 Posted November 7, 2007 If i see my team losing for an extended period of time, I want to have my worst batsman in the team sacked (if he is not playing any other role in the team, such as bowling, wicket keeping or captaincy) Umm, we've lost just 3 series since NZ 2003(BG India, in Pak 2006 and RSA 2006-07)
Bumper Posted November 7, 2007 Posted November 7, 2007 Hmm. So if he crosses 35 you'll be happy? Let's wait and watch. An avg of 35 should be a small matter for an all time great, innit ? Lets see what he does. If he fails to average 35 then what ? Would you agree that he must be dropped ?
Bumper Posted November 7, 2007 Posted November 7, 2007 Umm' date=' we've lost just 3 series since NZ 2003(BG India, in Pak 2006 and RSA 2006-07)[/quote'] Drawing a test series vs a second string Eng at home amounts to losing in my books.
Lurker Posted November 7, 2007 Posted November 7, 2007 Jayasuriya since April 2005: 13 tests 403 runs@19 And he is in the starting lineup tomorrow! Hmmm so now we compare SRT with Jayasurya! How the mighty have fallen. By the way why this cut-off for 13 games? If you are going to compare two players, one of which has got an extended run, do the same for both. Jayasurya in the last 25 tests averages 38.25. Not great but easily better than Sachin's 35.4. And trust me no cricket fan in right frame of mind would ever say that Sanath Jayasuriya was a better Test batsman than Sachin but your, and others, penchant of standing by Sachin shall do exactly that. xxx
Bumper Posted November 7, 2007 Posted November 7, 2007 Umm' date=' we've lost just 3 series since NZ 2003(BG India, in Pak 2006 and RSA 2006-07)[/quote'] In 2006 we played Pak & lost, played Eng & failed to win at home (humiliating), vs WI (won without Sachin), vs SA (lost). In this time we carried this old man in poor form.
Gambit Posted November 7, 2007 Posted November 7, 2007 Forget that Gambo ... no one can beat Mike Gatting and Mike Brearleys pathetic records ... they were like out of form for their whole careers .... which was 39 tests for Brearley and 79 for Gatting .... No one ever dares to talk trash about these guys ... infact Gatting is bigged up as a great player and since he missed "that" ball from Druggie ... it was declared as the latest wonder ... :haha: Another one BB. Behind door number 3 we have Stephen Fleming :cantstop: Between Nov 04 and Apr 06(ex minnows): 10 tests 490 runs@30
Bumper Posted November 7, 2007 Posted November 7, 2007 Bumps I see now that you have quietly shifted the Goal post and included the Teams performance also as one of the parameters ? :haha: What goal post ? We just won the T20 world cup. Did anyone care which batsman averaged least or which bowler was the most mediocre ? If we keep winning, we can afford to carry out of one/two form batsmen. If we keep losing, whats the point in carrying passengers ?
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