What is wrong with Indian cricket?

[HippoSucks]

Damn, you've forced me to post one of my most controversial theory's. Was Bradman really that good? One thing in Australia as big (probably bigger) as Bradman at the time was Pharlap (a freakish race horse), both came to fame during the Great Depression, maybe the competion wasn't up to scratch at the period, I say probably, but I mean definately. The 1st world war ended 15 years earlier, many fathers were lost, most kids who would've been peaking as cricketers were forced to be the bread winners for their families, the cricketing gene pool during bradmans era was at Rock bottom, just like horse racing, Just IMO.

You can argue that Bradman's statistics are overstated due to the weak opposition, lack of interest in cricket etc. But in that case why don't other batsman boast 90+ averages?

[MCGGG]

You can argue that Bradman's statistics are overstated due to the weak opposition' date=' lack of interest in cricket etc. But in that case why don't other batsman boast 90+ averages?[/quote'] Cricket was a rich mans game during that time mate, most kids didn't have the privelige of playing sport because they had to eat, I'm not saying he wasn't exceptinaly talented, but mate, he never faced the likes of Akram, IMO he was a 55-60 average bat playing against spuds, and he faced the same spuds over and over, and over again.

[Old guy]

Guys ..seriously this topic is cursed :hysterical: Find older threads and read 100 + pages to your hearts content ..

[HippoSucks]

Guys ..seriously this topic is cursed :hysterical: Find older threads and read 100 + pages to your hearts content ..

Alright.

Cricket was a rich mans game during that time mate' date=' most kids didn't have the privelige of playing sport because they had to eat, I'm not saying he wasn't exceptinaly talented, but mate, he never faced the likes of Akram, IMO he was a 55-60 average bat playing against spuds, and he faced the same spuds over and over, and over again.[/quote'] Check this post out though. In essence, he takes Bradman's average and then subtracts from it some amount roughly equivalent to how much of an advantage he had back then compared to now. I think his calculations are pretty reasonable, and Bradman still ends up having an average in the mid 70s. http://rohangaitonde.blogspot.ca/2011/04/don-bradman-how-good-was-he.html

[MCGGG]

It does not matter ..he can only play against competiton he had also this is reason I do not like comparing players from different era but let's not derail this you can search some legendary thread on this topic :giggle:

Umm, excuse me? Did you bother to read the post I quoted? And mate, what I posted isn't overly controversial, and who cares if you don't like comparing players from different era's? If it generates rational discussion what's the harm?

[HippoSucks]

Umm, excuse me? Did you bother to read the post I quoted? And mate, what I posted isn't overly controversial, and who cares if you don't like comparing players from different era's? If it generates rational discussion what's the harm?

I think what he [sabby2013] is saying is that Bradman had no choice but to play in those conditions, so we can't take anything away from his achievements. And to be honest, I hate comparing batsman before the 1970s with the ones now because the sport was very different back then.

[MCGGG]

Alright. Check this post out though. In essence, he takes Bradman's average and then subtracts from it some amount roughly equivalent to how much of an advantage he had back then compared to now. I think his calculations are pretty reasonable, and Bradman still ends up having an average in the mid 70s. http://rohangaitonde.blogspot.ca/2011/04/don-bradman-how-good-was-he.html

Of course we'll never know, but as I said it was just a theory.

[Old guy]

Umm, excuse me? Did you bother to read the post I quoted? And mate, what I posted isn't overly controversial, and who cares if you don't like comparing players from different era's? If it generates rational discussion what's the harm?

It's off topic and you can create thread on new topic but problem is there are already thread son his so you should search them and read them and after that post if you still want to .. Also I read that post and I honestly do not see connection . I am just asking for this topic to not derail another tread when there are probably dozen or more thread on same topic .

[rkt.india]

that is not even what I am saying but you say fast bowling need genetics ..please explain how we cannot even produce proper spinners if system is so good ? Why most batsmen has big technical faults and this Echo succeed work hard on their own and learn quickly in national team to become good .. It's not just genetics ..I am not even gonna argue there is difference in fitnes on whole but when you are win to sports you can always select fitter people and guys like umesh shows it's possible .. I know many people here who work on their body since school days and I feel culture is changing and peole are getting fitter ..

We have still produced good batsman. Yes system has issues, but more than that is we lack bowling talent. Look at SL, they always seem to produce better bowlers despite their system hasn't been great.

[Old guy]

We have still produced good batsman. Yes system has issues' date=' but more than that is we lack bowling talent. Look at SL, they always seem to produce better bowlers despite their system hasn't been great.[/quote'] They have much better system at school level which is very competitive Also you think Sri lanka has more diverse genetics than India..that is bad example actually .

[MCGGG]

I think what he is saying is that he had no choice but to play in those conditions' date=' so we can't take anything away from his achievements. And to be honest, I hate comparing batsman before the 1970s with the ones now because the sport was very different back then.[/quote'] Yes mate, but my point is most didn't have a choice to play at all, just like most horse trainers had to find other means of work, the greatest race horse of all time (according to Us Australians) appeared during the depression.

[MCGGG]

It's off topic and you can create thread on new topic but problem is there are already thread son his so you should search them and read them and after that post if you still want to .. Also I read that post and I honestly do not see connection . I am just asking for this topic to not derail another tread when there are probably dozen or more thread on same topic .

Fair enough mate, I honestly didn't mean for this thread to go off topic, and, I don't know where the search button is lol, I appoligise.

[Old guy]

Fair enough mate' date=' I honestly didn't mean for this thread to go off topic, and, I don't know where the search button is lol, I appoligise.[/quote'] Just google it with name of website :)

[MCGGG]

Seriously guys, the 2 biggest Australian sporting icons appeared during the depression, it's a bit of a coincidence.

[express bowling]

India has dominated ODIs to a large extent. We have been sub-par in test matches. The biggest reason for this is because , in tests, bowling is more important than batting. No matter how good the batsmen are...you have to pick wickets. We, as a nation, have no interest in bowling. We just love batting and only batting. That is the biggest reason for our subpar performance in cricket, especially in tests. Everybody everywhere in India just wants to bat. Whether it is club level, state level or test level...everyone, even the designated bowlers want a bat in their hand. It is immaterial whether it is a green top, spinning pitch etc. Even the bowlers have no interest in the art and practice of bowling. This disinterest has little connection with pitch, weather, physique etc. Even the spectators turn off the tv when we are bowling well. At locality level cricket, players get angry with their bowlers if they dismiss the opposition cheaply, because there won't be enough runs for them to bat for long. As long as this remains , we will never dominate test cricket. A lot of thought process needs to go into how to generate interest in bowling. What incentives are required, what marketing needs to be done. We badly need a bowling icon. Just look at Anil Kumble. He has taken 600+ test wickets but he is not a superstar. Most fans have more interest in mediocre batsmen like Siddhu, bad batsmen like Srikanth than they have in Kumble.!!!! Robin Utthappa is more popular than Kumble !!!!!!

[jonas10]

Biggest problem is grass roots development. Youre right there are 1 billion people the majority of which live in villages. However you look at the compositon of team and 80% are from urban areas. There is no sports development in rural areas to nurture that talent.

[termination]

Nah' date=' I don't think so, [b']could be the climate though, who would want to be a fast bowler in 50 degree heat on dust bowls.

Is pakistans climate different from ours.And also australia is not cold either.

[termination]

Fast bowling has a lot to do with genetics.

If its to do with genetics than pak should also be struggling to produce them.

[rkt.india]

They have much better system at school level which is very competitive Also you think Sri lanka has more diverse genetics than India..that is bad example actually .

This example wasnt related to genetics because SL too dont do produce great pacers, it was a general comment as SL keep producing good spinners.

[G_B_]

ok fast bowlers are genetics issues (even if we assume they are) whats stopping India from producing 7 world class batters who can bat well in any conditions? Its not as if fast bowling is the only metric.