Is Dravid record safe from jaya?

[Sir john]

catches link dravid 210 catches mahela 197 still have 4 test.

[Stuge]

He might cross 200 ..thats it. Sent from my XT535 using Tapatalk 2

[velu]

who cares.. SJ :poink:

[Sir john]

who cares.. SJ :poink:

:--D:((:((:((

[Sachin=GOD]

No.

[singhprakash72]

How does it matter ....we subcontinental folks get too much worked up on individual record. In the end how much of your team is force which should take care of all the records by itself.

[Midfielder]

How does it matter ....we subcontinental folks get too much worked up on individual record. In the end how much of your team is force which should take care of all the records by itself.

Exactly. Cricket is a team sport and there is no I in the team. Screw the records, it is about W's.

[sachin34357]

14 catches in 4 tests are impossible unless he keeps the wickets

[nevada]

14 catches in 4 tests are impossible unless he keeps the wickets

+1

[BlueBee]

14 catches in 4 tests are impossible unless he keeps the wickets

++

[CSK Fan]

How does it matter ....we subcontinental folks get too much worked up on individual record. In the end how much of your team is force which should take care of all the records by itself.

Exactly. Cricket is a team sport and there is no I in the team. Screw the records' date=' it is about W's.[/quote'] Is it a sub-continent thing? Really? Nope, but the sub-continent fans are the ones who most talk about this and self-loathe when the entire world does this Aussies revere Don Bradman's average to a bigger extent than any sub continent fans has ever done for any player. Taylor even famously declared on 334, as a homage to Bradman and intentionally did not surpass his highest score. Can you think of any other cricketing decision being taken for pure sentiment, like this? Was Bradman's record not a factor in declaring of a team's score in a test match? This was a retired player who should not have had any influence on an ongoing match. Yet, the main reason for the declaration at that point, and not before or after, was that record. This happens throughout all sports and countries. Records are a means of respecting players and admiring them. This is the legacy they leave behind. If we cannot respect the players and the legacy they left behind, we cannot respect the game either or have any kind of emotional attachment with it. Not to mention, every time Dravid's records are mentioned, the fact that he was an Indian and that the record belongs to India also comes up. This brings ten times more name for the country than any win against Bangla or WI or SL, which one will not even remember after a month, can do Since history, records have been a facet of sports. Sports go much beyond mere wins or losses, otherwise, we would just win the toss and declare the winners. Sports is also about a fan's bonding with the players. The love they have, the respect they have, even the hate they have. This is why human beings follow sports. And records are a good way to remember a player and pay respect to the facet he excelled in And I have only heard sub-continent people try to put down their own who have excelled in a facet, and talk of achievements with self-loathing. Communism doesn't work, in life or in sports. Individuals also need to shine and be applauded and encouraged. Which makes others want to follow them and be like them. This is why today we have a batting legacy (and not bowling). Neither human nature, nor human mind can comprehend things on a group level. We are not designed for that.

[putrevus]

Is it a sub-continent thing? Really? Nope, but the sub-continent fans are the ones who most talk about this and self-loathe when the entire world does this Aussies revere Don Bradman's average to a bigger extent than any sub continent fans has ever done for any player. Taylor even famously declared on 334, as a homage to Bradman and intentionally did not surpass his highest score. Can you think of any other cricketing decision being taken for pure sentiment, like this? Was Bradman's record not a factor in declaring of a team's score in a test match? This was a retired player who should not have had any influence on an ongoing match. Yet, the main reason for the declaration at that point, and not before or after, was that record. This happens throughout all sports and countries. Records are a means of respecting players and admiring them. This is the legacy they leave behind. If we cannot respect the players and the legacy they left behind, we cannot respect the game either or have any kind of emotional attachment with it. Not to mention, every time Dravid's records are mentioned, the fact that he was an Indian and that the record belongs to India also comes up. This brings ten times more name for the country than any win against Bangla or WI or SL, which one will not even remember after a month, can do Since history, records have been a facet of sports. Sports go much beyond mere wins or losses, otherwise, we would just win the toss and declare the winners. Sports is also about a fan's bonding with the players. The love they have, the respect they have, even the hate they have. This is why human beings follow sports. And records are a good way to remember a player and pay respect to the facet he excelled in And I have only heard sub-continent players try to put down their own who have excelled in a facet, and talk of achievements with self-loathing. Communism doesn't work, in life or in sports. Individuals also need to shine and be applauded and encouraged. Which makes others want to follow them and be like them. This is why today we have a batting legacy (and not bowling). Neither human nature, nor human mind can comprehend things on a group level. We are not designed for that.

Spot on excellent points.

[Sir john]

Itna bada lectur :blink:

[Vilander]

Is it a sub-continent thing? Really? Nope, but the sub-continent fans are the ones who most talk about this and self-loathe when the entire world does this Aussies revere Don Bradman's average to a bigger extent than any sub continent fans has ever done for any player. Taylor even famously declared on 334, as a homage to Bradman and intentionally did not surpass his highest score. Can you think of any other cricketing decision being taken for pure sentiment, like this? Was Bradman's record not a factor in declaring of a team's score in a test match? This was a retired player who should not have had any influence on an ongoing match. Yet, the main reason for the declaration at that point, and not before or after, was that record. This happens throughout all sports and countries. Records are a means of respecting players and admiring them. This is the legacy they leave behind. If we cannot respect the players and the legacy they left behind, we cannot respect the game either or have any kind of emotional attachment with it. Not to mention, every time Dravid's records are mentioned, the fact that he was an Indian and that the record belongs to India also comes up. This brings ten times more name for the country than any win against Bangla or WI or SL, which one will not even remember after a month, can do Since history, records have been a facet of sports. Sports go much beyond mere wins or losses, otherwise, we would just win the toss and declare the winners. Sports is also about a fan's bonding with the players. The love they have, the respect they have, even the hate they have. This is why human beings follow sports. And records are a good way to remember a player and pay respect to the facet he excelled in And I have only heard sub-continent players try to put down their own who have excelled in a facet, and talk of achievements with self-loathing. Communism doesn't work, in life or in sports. Individuals also need to shine and be applauded and encouraged. Which makes others want to follow them and be like them. This is why today we have a batting legacy (and not bowling). Neither human nature, nor human mind can comprehend things on a group level. We are not designed for that.

I will add an other insinuated point as well.. :sherlock: As such its apparent that records in cricket are as much or even more worthy as any other sport, and they bring laurels to the country that the cricketer belongs to, for instance SACHIN ( god i love him), he has so many RECORDS,, he greatest.:hatsoff:

[Sir john]

no catch taken by jaya so far

[Stuge]

Itna bada lectur :blink:

Question bhi tu mushkil haina ... Plus,it gives you a chance to score some ICF paisas :winky:

[maniac]

13 more to go now

[Midfielder]

Is it a sub-continent thing? Really? Nope, but the sub-continent fans are the ones who most talk about this and self-loathe when the entire world does this Aussies revere Don Bradman's average to a bigger extent than any sub continent fans has ever done for any player. Taylor even famously declared on 334, as a homage to Bradman and intentionally did not surpass his highest score. Can you think of any other cricketing decision being taken for pure sentiment, like this? Was Bradman's record not a factor in declaring of a team's score in a test match? This was a retired player who should not have had any influence on an ongoing match. Yet, the main reason for the declaration at that point, and not before or after, was that record. This happens throughout all sports and countries. Records are a means of respecting players and admiring them. This is the legacy they leave behind. If we cannot respect the players and the legacy they left behind, we cannot respect the game either or have any kind of emotional attachment with it. Not to mention, every time Dravid's records are mentioned, the fact that he was an Indian and that the record belongs to India also comes up. This brings ten times more name for the country than any win against Bangla or WI or SL, which one will not even remember after a month, can do Since history, records have been a facet of sports. Sports go much beyond mere wins or losses, otherwise, we would just win the toss and declare the winners. Sports is also about a fan's bonding with the players. The love they have, the respect they have, even the hate they have. This is why human beings follow sports. And records are a good way to remember a player and pay respect to the facet he excelled in And I have only heard sub-continent people try to put down their own who have excelled in a facet, and talk of achievements with self-loathing. Communism doesn't work, in life or in sports. Individuals also need to shine and be applauded and encouraged. Which makes others want to follow them and be like them. This is why today we have a batting legacy (and not bowling). Neither human nature, nor human mind can comprehend things on a group level. We are not designed for that.

That is a cultural problem. You win as a team and lose as a team. Individual glory means nothing. If it is tennis or chess I will give you that but, cricket, hockey, football it means nothing. Lot of sports realize that. In basketball they keep stats for scoring and but do not ignore assists, blocks etc as they all add up. Nothing is more demanding than basketball but focus should be on team.

[vvvslaxman]

Itna bada lectur :blink:

:hysterical:

[CSK Fan]

That is a cultural problem. You win as a team and lose as a team. Individual glory means nothing. If it is tennis or chess I will give you that but, cricket, hockey, football it means nothing. Lot of sports realize that. In basketball they keep stats for scoring and but do not ignore assists, blocks etc as they all add up. Nothing is more demanding than basketball but focus should be on team.

So why are some basketball players still bigger than others and not the teams? Why does one player get adored by everyone more than his team? How is it a cultural problem again, when every country and in every sports this happens? You do win and lose as a team, just like an entire army wins or loses each war. But we still find heroes and people who stand out and whom we support There is nothing cultural or problematic about this, this is the way human nature simply works. You can cry all about being as a team and it makes sense for some time, but you will still have the Messi's who will stand out and win golden balls and boots for their individual performances