Selfish Hayden cost Australia '05 Ashes

[Bumper]

I suppose you are now going to proclaim that the 82 and 91 were NOT match winning because they are 2 digit scores or some such ridiculous theory ?

The runs he scored when Anil Kumble scored a 100 ? Or when every top order bat scored a 50 ? Yeah those runs are good, but you dont need to back a player who has failed for 2 years to score runs when everybody else also manages to! If SRT had managed to save a test in Durban or play an influential innings (like KKD) in Capetown, those innings would have been worth the backing he gets. Those would be comparable to the ones Dravid played, not scoring 60s & 70s when Kumble & Sreesanth stitch together a 80 run partnership.

[Bumper]

To negate the boldfaced bit... http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/249216.html - I1, he and VVS were the only two to really make any sort of contribution as the side crumbled http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/64006.html - I2, he and VVS were responsible for saving the game after the deficit. With the exception of him and Laxman, no other player reached 30. http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63988.html - I2, the lone real act of defiance/grit while the rest went down tamely http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63951.html - 68/4 before lunch. Century from there alongside Sehwag. Two fine knocks from those two, capitulation from the rest. http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63962.html - I1 - He and Laxman make runs in response to a big score, everyone else sits in the dressing room and watches after failing. http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63870.html - I1 - he made the highest score. Agarkar made the second highest. you KNOW that has to be bad. http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63866.html - Wow, another solo ton in a nothing cause because nobody else had spine? I could go on, but it's too much work actually delving into his glory years and sifting through the knocks there...

Salil you missed my point, am talking about his last 25 innings! Not what he did in the 90s & early 2000s

[bharat297]

Feel free to read my whole post & answer all the qns i raised, instead of clinging on to the ones you want to answer.why is it that every non-performer (that included Laxman, duh!) has been dropped while Sach is not ? And do i care why Brian Lara wasnt dropped by WI in 1999 ? Care to list Lara's relative standing in their batting lineup during this time ? Was he the worst batsman in their team ? Even if he was, i wouldnt want to follow the example of WI, who has been losing everything since 1999. Quoting examples, is not your strength, is it ?:haha:

Well, we already mentioned Hayden and Australia and so far you havent given me a reason why he wasnt dropped after Ashes 05. So I guess ignoring questions that you cant answer must be your strength. When we also mentioned the example of Gilly, you said that it was because he is a keeper(even though there are 2 better keepers in Aust. than him) and the fact that Australia are winning (which i guess means Jogi walks into the T20 side from now on ) . So I went and found an example of a side that wasnt winning, in the West Indies and showed how they stuck behind Lara. Now of course West Indies struggled since then but are you seriously suggesting that they struggled because the kept Lara, whose last few years were some of the best cricket he played. The reason Sachin was given leniancy is primarily because his main poor patch since 2004 was a period of 6-8 months in which he was in between injuries . Lets look at what has happened in the 6 tests since his return from injury(excl. Bangladesh) Ganguly - 6 matches, 463 runs @ 46.3 - 4 fifties Sachin - 6 matches, 427 runs @ 35.6 - 4 fifties Laxman - 6 matches, 385 runs @ 42.8 - 4 fifties Jaffer - 6 matches, 370 runs @ 30.8 - 1 century, 2 fifties Karthik - 4 matches, 364 runs @ 52.0 - 4 fifties Dhoni - 5 matches, 313 runs @ 39.12 - 1 fifty Dravid - 6 matches, 251 runs @ 22.8 - 2 fifties From that list only 2 players are actually outperforming Sachin atm and that is Ganguly and Karthik. Dravid and Jaffer have less runs and lower averages (but despite that Jaffer is batting OK), and Laxman and Dhoni bat at 6 and 7 and primarily with the tail, which allows for more not outs (evident by the fact that they average higher despite considerably less runs).

[Bumper]

bharat I'll make this an extremely simple exercise for all of you! I want each of you to tell me what you consider as a "success metric" for SRT in the next 3 BIG series he is set to play. What is it ? Let me hear. If he does not meet your own criteria, would you agree he must be dropped ?

[Ram]

^ Another attempt to reduce this to a numbers game. How can anyone ever come with a "success metric" for 3 consecutive series without knowing the proper context of the runs scored and when they were scored ? Beats me !

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Lurker]

bharat I'll make this an extremely simple exercise for all of you! I want each of you to tell me what you consider as a "success metric" for SRT in the next 3 BIG series he is set to play. What is it ? Let me hear. If he does not meet your own criteria, would you agree he must be dropped ?

Let me go first. Sachin has 1347 runs in past 25 tests, 38 innings @35.4 I say I would let him play till 25 tests becomes 40. That would mean about 60 innings. I would like at the end of this 60 innings to have Sachin's average at 50(still 5 less than his 54). In other words in this 60 innings he should have scored 60*50 = 3000. He has already scored 1347 so he needs to score 1653 in next 22 innings@ 75. If he does that I will say he earned the right to play 40 tests simply because he was that good for 17 years, if he doesnt then he was simply not worth the leeway. xxx

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[bharat297]

The runs he scored when Anil Kumble scored a 100 ? Or when every top order bat scored a 50 ? Yeah those runs are good, but you dont need to back a player who has failed for 2 years to score runs when everybody else also manages to! If SRT had managed to save a test in Durban or play an influential innings (like KKD) in Capetown, those innings would have been worth the backing he gets. Those would be comparable to the ones Dravid played, not scoring 60s & 70s when Kumble & Sreesanth stitch together a 80 run partnership.

Hahahaha ... are you serious? No im not kidding, I can not believe you actually said that. That is priceless. Now I will explain this to you ... hopefully you get it. Kumble and Sreesanth bat LOWER down the order than Sachin . This means they come in AFTER sachin. This means Sachin got his runs BEFORE Kumble and Sreesanth. I honestly never thought I would have to explain that. In the 2nd test in England he came in when India were 2 for about 140 odd, and still trailing by 50 runs. His partnership with Ganguly, make no mistake, was the most crucial of that particular Indian innings as it took India into a commanding position of being 3/350 or something when Sachin got out (unfairly too). In the 3rd test, he came in when India were about 2/180 or something and left when India were well past 400. Only once he got out did Dhoni, Kumble, Sreesanth and Zaheer do the bulk of their scoring. P.S. You still havent answered the Hayden question

[Bumper]

So let me guess .... your definition of a match winning performance is : 1. Everyone needs to have a rocket stuffed up their backsides atleast in the 1st innings 2. Team needs to be in dire sheet 3. Even better if we are facing a substantial deficit and ideally in a 4th innings 4. And when all the above are true SRT should make a humoungous contribution ... only then will you be satisfied and convinced. Sorry Bumps I disagre with such nit-picking and its probably done because you dont like SRT (which is fair your prerogative) .. I however dont subscribe to such things. Cheers.

No! For your recollection, this is how the conversation went: 1) First you quote the averages 2) I refuted your averages with an inference that all other non-performers have been dropped 3) You countered saying Dravid has made only 118 runs more 4) I responded to that by pointing that 118 runs is significant and even if we were to ignore all stats & just look at the player subjectively, Dravid has stood tall as a batsman and played an innings worthy of an alltime great, which is the kinda innings thats worth backing a great player for. 5) You have come back with two 50s, when everyone else have scored 50s. This tells me that SRT cannot be expected to score when people around him finds it tougher to score. Which means he is NO BETTER THAN THE AVERAGE PLAYER & HENCE MUST BE TREATED LIKE ONE, WHEN HE IS OUT OF FORM. As for prerogatives, isnt it fair to say that you will not accept sacking SRT no matter how poor he gets from here ? Which is why the question, what according to you is the success metric for SRT in the forthcoming series ? why is it that all of you are avoiding this qn, if you really believe that he is a great player & will turn his form around ?

[Lurker]

:haha: Lurker baba ... Ek hazaar aur lagay dete .... kahe kanjoose kar rahe ho babuwa ... I mean there have been a grand total of 2 batsman EVER in the entire history of the Game that have made soo many runs in soo few Innings ... heck SRT didnt do it even in his prime nor did SMG or Sobers ... so yeah thanks for confirming your dislike towards SRT.

And of course I can expect you to start casting judgement assertion without any sane rationale :sad_smile: Here my question to you: Q > Lets go back to last 25 tests. The last of these Tests was played in Pakistan and at that time Sachin's numbers were 112 Tests 181 innings 9459 runs@58.4 (effective 161 innings, took away Not Outs) Now if I had asked you then how would you see Sachin after 40 more tests, that is at the end of 152 tests and effective 237 innings, what would your answer be? xxx

[bharat297]

Oh i see ... so players are not allowed to have form slumps between during a period when they have had 2 major injuries . Anyone going to answer the Hayden question?

[Lurker]

^^ You mean me Bharath?

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Mr. Wicket]

How can anyone ever come with a "success metric" for 3 consecutive series without knowing the proper context of the runs scored and when they were scored ? Beats me !

Indeed. As I've said before, there's too much in cricket that just cannot be boiled down to statistics. Some things need to be seen to be understood and appreciated. If people can't do either - their loss. Let them keep questioning Tendulkar every time he bats, and complain when he makes an 80 or 90 that someone else in the side made a 40 or 50 or a hundred. I'll just give up on arguing and try to appreciate that calibre of batting.

[bharat297]

^^ You mean me Bharath?

You, or anyone really

[Lurker]

You' date=' or anyone really[/quote'] I had answered this before, maybe you missed it. 1) As compared to Hayden's slump of 16 Tests, Sachin has now played 25 tests@35. In other words almost 50% more games. 2) Hayden responded the slump with series of 89 and 53. Now a question to you. Since you compared Hayden and Sachin, could you compare them over a 25 test period starting with hayden's slump period so we can do an apple to apple comparison? Fair? xxx

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Bumper]

Indeed. As I've said before' date=' there's too much in cricket that just cannot be boiled down to statistics. Some things need to be seen to be understood and appreciated. If people can't do either - their loss. Let them keep questioning Tendulkar every time he bats, and complain when he makes an 80 or 90 that someone else in the side made a 40 or 50 or a hundred. I'll just give up on arguing and try to appreciate that calibre of batting.[/quote'] You are talking as if he is producing these 80s & 90s every 2nd innings! If he is producing quality innings frequently wouldnt it be easy for him average 40 in the next two series ? (And even the appreciation factor that you mention, is hardly true about a Sachin's innings these days). Come on, no one is asking him to average a phenomenal 50 or 60 (which you should have expected from him, for backing him for this long, but am not even asking for that). Just a decent 40. How hard is it to acknowledge that a decent 40 is the most reasonable expectation for backing this man for so long ? The fact that so many here are hesitating tells me that none of you are confident that it will happen, which in itself should answer the qn on whether its worth backing him any longer.

[Bumper]

Those are once in a lifetime kinda innings (Jamaica 2006) ... if you seriously think such innings can be reproduced at will ... you are being plain naive. And what about RD's boo-boo in the 3rd Test at England where he was single handedly responsible for drawing that match from a winning position by all accounts ?

Once again, you are totally missing the context (either purposely or inadvertently). The above mentioned Dravid's innings is part of the 25 inning slump that you quoted in which he averaged 41.xxx Since you initiated the comparison between Dravid & Sachin, we got into comparing their relative slumps. (We shouldnt even be comparing SRT with Dravid IMO, which is a diff matter) While comparing the relative slumps, we either have to argue statistically (in which case Dravid clearly emerges better) or subjectively, which requires scrutinising the kind of innings these two have played in this time. The point am making is simple. Dravid has played the kind of superman-esque innings that would merit such prolonged backing (tho he may never need it), whereas SRT has managed NOTHING MORE THAN AN AVERAGE BATSMAN in this time & hence MUST BE TREATED LIKE ONE.

didnt I say ( in a different thread ) that if he had to be dropped it was after the Eng Series and the man actually decided to skip the WI tour even though he could have played it as the selectors left it to his choice ? Are you seriously saying that what he did Two yrs ago should be held against him ? Dont you see how illogical it is when right now if any batsman is out of form it is Dravid ? Becuae you fail to move beyond the Avg = Whole and Sole parameter for measuring greatness .. BTW do you agree that AK = Best batsman according to your theory of Averagism over a series ?

Boss, you are driving in circles here. Every test series failure could be dismissed with arguments like these. When we look at the collective picture you are dismissing it saying 2 yrs are irrelevant. When you look at the current series, you are dismissing that too, stating too little sample as your excuse. The point am making is relatively simple. For someone who has been backed for TWO years, the time to deliver is NOW. We have THREE BIG back-to-back series. It aint getting bigger than this for us. Why should his failures in the upcoming series escape scrutiny ?