Kapil Dev - Great in India only?

[Evermind]

Multiple being 2?

And you missed the fact that around the same time ('86\87-'95) West Indies drew rather a lot of series and extremely fortuitously won a couple more?

Seriously, West Indies stopped being pre-eminant the way they had been '76-'86 after that '86 blackwash. Thereafter, their record read...

1-1 in Pakistan
1-1 in New Zealand
1-1 in India
1-1 at home to Pakistan (and damn near lost 0-2, were only saved by a 42* from a tailender)
4-0 in England, against a rabble, who had lost near enough everything from that blackwash onwards
3-1 in Australia, against not much more than a rabble, who had won 1 series in 5 years (that 1 very fortuitously)
3-0 at home to India - need no more explanation to your good self
2-1 at home to England but that's one of Test-cricket's great injustice series. At the very least it should have been 2-2, if not 2-1 to England
1-1 in Pakistan
2-1 at home to Australia, who were by then resurgent - one of 2 good performances of the period
2-2 in England
A one-off victory at home to South Africa - very, very fortunate after a final-innings collapse
2-1 in Australia - again, should have been 2-2, were very fortunate not to lose the First Test which was drawn; that's before we even mention the 1-run-victory game
2-0 at home to Pakistan
A one-off draw in Sri Lanka where only 3 days survived the weather
3-1 at home to England - just 1 dropped catch from 2-2 (the Ambrose running riot was enabled by said dropped catch)
1-1 in India
1-0 at home to a very, very average New Zealand
1-2 at home to Australia, though could quite easily have been 2-1 but for that dropped catch by Browne
2-2 in England
1-0 in New Zealand - read above New Zealand case
2-3 in Australia - beaten by the better side for the first time since '75\76
Only won 1-0 at home to India in 5 Tests. Appalling performance
Only won 1-0 at home to Sri Lanka in 2 Tests. Appalling performance.
Then it was the 3-0 in Pakistan and it was all downhill from there - very, very rapidly.

That's 2 losses in 22 games - both against Australia. It's a damn good record.

 

[social]

or they're poor\reasonable in the Kapil-Srinath\any-number-of-others mould.

So a guy that takes 400 test wickets is poor/reasonable?

That has to be amongst the most ridiculous statements I've ever heard

 

[R_D]

So a guy that takes 400 test wickets is poor/reasonable?

That has to be amongst the most ridiculous statements I've ever heard

You'll find at least one in every thread, all of them by Richard too.

As for Kapil's Captaincy.
In the world cup final even when WI's were curising along he kept the field up and kept the attacking fields which eventually paid off. Probaly that was a common thing those days, nothng different, You wouldn't see that anymore soon as 2 batsman are going nicely the field is all spread out for them to push the ball around.

 

[Richard]

So a guy that takes 400 test wickets is poor/reasonable?

That has to be amongst the most ridiculous statements I've ever heard

Try reasonable, pal...

Where on Earth did I suggest either Kapil or Srinath were poor?

 

[Richard]

You'll find at least one in every thread, all of them by Richard too.

Bull****.

 

[Richard]

That's 2 losses in 22 games - both against Australia. It's a damn good record.

Presuming you mean series not games - it's nothing like the "invincibles" they are sometimes painted as and had been between 1976 and 1986 - there are at least 3 of those 20 series that could have been lost, scorelines are not always an accurate reflection of the cricket played in the series, and only 2 victories over any team other than one you'd expect a half-decent side to thrash every day of the week (eg India\Sri Lanka at home, England\Australia when they were utterly rubbish).

I was not saying West Indies were a poor side in that time, just that they were nowhere near as good as they had been the 10 years previously.

 

[adharcric]

Where on Earth did I suggest either Kapil or Srinath were poor?

They're either the Imran\Wasim brilliant or the Donald\McGrath visiting-smash-and-grabber, or they're poor\reasonable in the Kapil-Srinath\any-number-of-others mould.

 

[Richard]

IE, Kapil and Srinath were reasonable, virtually every other Indian seamer ever has been poor.

Sorry if I'm sounding too much like Manan there, but he does speak the truth.

 

[social]

Try reasonable, pal...

Where on Earth did I suggest either Kapil or Srinath were poor?

Try above

However, giving you the benefit of the doubt and allowing that you think Kapil's record was just "reasonable", by that criteria Murali's record of 600 odd wickets in spin-friendly conditions is no better. Likewise, Kumble's record would have to be worse.

 

[adharcric]

Srinath reasonable? Sure. Kapil? No way. Anyways, we've done this one to death so let's not debate it any more. I clearly think you're wrong but that won't change anything.

 

[R_D]

Bull****.

oh there's plety of them around i just can't be arsed looking for them.
Every now and than you should consider reading what you write, rather than just hitting that submit post button.

 

[Richard]

Maybe you should consider contributing something constructive to threads rather than just criticising other people's general performance.

 

[Richard]

Try above

However, giving you the benefit of the doubt and allowing that you think Kapil's record was just "reasonable", by that criteria Murali's record of 600 odd wickets in spin-friendly conditions is no better. Likewise, Kumble's record would have to be worse.

Srinath reasonable? Sure. Kapil? No way. Anyways, we've done this one to death so let's not debate it any more. I clearly think you're wrong but that won't change anything.

Kapil was not exceptional. Not a chance. He was better than Srinath but he was not someone who managed an average of 24-25 in the subcontinent (nor was he someone like Imran who was good enough to average 20-21 and it's not fair to compare them).

See?

 

[adharcric]

Kapil was not exceptional. Not a chance. He was better than Srinath but he was not someone who managed an average of 24-25 in the subcontinent (nor was he someone like Imran who was good enough to average 20-21 and it's not fair to compare them).

See?

Imran was exceptional. Kapil was good. Srinath was reasonable.

 

[Salamuddin]

Richard, out of interest hpow do you rate Munaf Patel and Sreesanth vis a vis Javagal Srinath ?

 

[Richard]

Neither have played anywhere near enough cricket to do so though Munaf especially seems extremely promising where I'm standing.

It's just a case of "wait and see".