***Official*** India in England

[Scaly piscine]

Most of the relevant Cricinfo staff are based in England aren't they with their commentary coming from watching TV coverage? That would explain some of it. I'm not sure about the domestic stuff, I would have guessed the scores come through from via a 3rd party - ie Cricinfo just relay them?

And I'm not just referring to the commentary in earlier posts, the way these meaningless tour games get the top headline virtually every day for instance is ridiculous.

 

[viktor]

Well, kill me if I'm wrong, but isn't our FC of a much higher standard than Indian stuff?

Sure.

 

[adharcric]

Ishant Sharma clearly does not belong in test cricket at the moment. I'm usually supportive of making an exception for talented, developed prospects but Ishant had virtually no meaningful cricket experience, unlike Raina, Chawla and to an extent VRV. He isn't even ready for the one-day side yet, don't know how he got here. Hopefully VRV and Pathan fare well on the A tour, but at least RP Singh looks decent again. Somebody mentioned grooming prospects through the A team - excellent idea that I've been ranting about for a while but the BCCI only organized an A tour once in a blue moon.

 

[silentstriker]

I'd disagree tbh, but then again, I don't know that much about the Indian FC scene

So how can you say it's of a lesser standard?

But it is, mainly due to a lack of overseas players in India, which forces players to deal with various styles of play and really polishes players into a finished product.

Neither hold a candle to the Aussie scene though.

 

[silentstriker]

Gagandeep Singh

 

[open365]

So how can you say it's of a lesser standard?

But it is, mainly due to a lack of overseas players in India, which forces players to deal with various styles of play and really polishes players into a finished product.

Neither hold a candle to the Aussie scene though.

He didn't, he asked if it was.

And i don't really argree with the whole Australian FC scene being better than England's, i suppose a lot depends on how you rate domestic competitions, but i reckon county cricket generates a lot more interest world wide than Australia does and we certainly get better attendences.

No sure about the quality of play, but you have to take into account that we have 3 times as many professional teams in the league.

 

[silentstriker]

He didn't, he asked if it was.

And i don't really argree with the whole Australian FC scene being better than England's, i suppose a lot depends on how you rate domestic competitions, but i reckon county cricket generates a lot more interest world wide than Australia does and we certainly get better attendences.

No sure about the quality of play, but you have to take into account that we have 3 times as many professional teams in the league.

Speaking purely from a quality of play perspective when I say 'higher level', not interest generated.

 

[viktor]

Gagandeep Singh

He is not even on the A tour..can't figure out why.

 

[silentstriker]

Because he is not fast or tall. But taking 230 wickets in 55 matches @ S/R of 48 and an amazing average of 20.14 is no small accomplishment.

And doing it on Indian pitches is nothing short of exceptional. He was picked for a tour to Bangladesh but was dropped without getting a single game.

 

[open365]

Speaking purely from a quality of play perspective when I say 'higher level', not interest generated.

Well i'd probably say you were right, but imo comparing them is slightly unfair, as we have 18 sides to spread the quality players around whereas Aus have 6.

 

[silentstriker]

Well i'd probably say you were right, but imo comparing them is slightly unfair, as we have 18 sides to spread the quality players around whereas Aus have 6.

No, it is fair because they are both first class competitions. It is not Australia's fault that other countries like England and India are diluting their talent pool by having too many sides, so when an Australian player comes to the Test side the jump in terms of talent level is much smaller than the players of other countries. That's why Aussie players tend to be closest to being a finished product than anyone else.

Shane Warne said that some of the domestic games in Australia are much harder than most Test matches. That is disgraceful if you're another Test playing country IMO.

 

[Pup Clarke]

Gagandeep Singh

Haha, outrageous figures for an Indian seamer on the supposed flat Indian pitches. Anyone reason as to why he isn't even in the A tour?.

 

[short shorts]

My guess would be that Yuvraj and Harbhajan used up the quota for Punjab, them being contracted players. I can think of no other reason in the cesspool that is Indian cricket.

 

[adharcric]

Because he is not fast or tall. But taking 230 wickets in 55 matches @ S/R of 48 and an amazing average of 20.14 is no small accomplishment.

And doing it on Indian pitches is nothing short of exceptional. He was picked for a tour to Bangladesh but was dropped without getting a single game.

Quite sure that he's just as tall and just as fast as Ranadeb Bose, tbh. Don't know why he (as well as Badrinath) still hasn't gotten an opportunity. The tragedy is that he seems to have already peaked in the domestic circuit and within a few years, he might just be on the decline ...

 

[adharcric]

Shane Warne said that some of the domestic games in Australia are much harder than most Test matches. That is disgraceful if you're another Test playing country IMO.

Haha yeah, disgraceful it is.

 

[Richard]

A guy named Nikhil was suggesting England on cricinfo "India's inability to dismiss the tail: I reckon England should play 9 bowlers and 2 bits-n-pieces players against India in the tests. They'll score about 700/2 and then knock India twice over in no time."

Haha what the hell?

Must've been Nichiani.

 

[Richard]

And really, even this thread is a lot more active that a lot of the Test match threads, so you can hardly blame them for concentrating on what the people want....

Abso-bloody-lutely.

Beginning to wonder if this series wasn't meriting of a separate forum, TBH.

 

[Woodster]

No, it is fair because they are both first class competitions. It is not Australia's fault that other countries like England and India are diluting their talent pool by having too many sides, so when an Australian player comes to the Test side the jump in terms of talent level is much smaller than the players of other countries. That's why Aussie players tend to be closest to being a finished product than anyone else.

Shane Warne said that some of the domestic games in Australia are much harder than most Test matches. That is disgraceful if you're another Test playing country IMO.

England have 18 sides and Australia have 6, however, the population of England is three times the size of Australia, so it is understandable they 3 times as many sides.

Australia bridge the gaps in standard much better than we do in England, but it is more to do with the whole structure of Australian cricket even before they reach first-class standard.

 

[Richard]

Shane Warne said that some of the domestic games in Australia are much harder than most Test matches. That is disgraceful if you're another Test playing country IMO.

And Shane Warne's just an arrogant bull****er. Sure, a few years ago a full-strength WA vs a full-strength NSW would've been one hell of a game (Slater, both Waughs, Haddin, McGrath, Bracken, Clark vs Hussey, Campbell, Langer, Katich, Goodwin, Martyn, Gilchrist, Angel) but most Test sides would beat most Aussie domestic sides if given decent acclimatisation, warm-up etc.

 

[Richard]

Well i'd probably say you were right, but imo comparing them is slightly unfair, as we have 18 sides to spread the quality players around whereas Aus have 6.

As Paul (Woodster) says, England have more people so need more teams to give equal opportunity.

If things were organised better (ie, major and minor counties merged) things would probably work-out better than they have been doing of late.