• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

***Official*** India in England

Pratters

Pratters

Cricket, Lovely Cricket
Jono made a very pertinent point. A series is team versus team. People talked of Warne v Tendulkar during India-Australia test series earlier, then McGrath v Tendulkar forgetting how the game is played between 22 players and more so in tests, it is the stronger team which wins in the end. Being strong is not just about the 11 players (else the ICC World XI would have competed much better against Australia). A strong team can win despite hindrances, drawbacks and face up to multiple challenges.

Whoever wins, wins because they were the better team in the series and I hope we can accept that much once the series is over and done with.
 
A

Anil

Hall of Fame Member
Pratyush said:
You shouldn't forget Ganguly Anil... In English seaming conditions, he can be very useful.
Click to expand...
well he is accurate, but his gentle seamers need a fair bit of help from the track to be really effective in terms of taking wickets, and it also depends on how much he is used...because the primary function for ganguly and tendulkar is batting, they might just be used sparingly as bowlers...it also depends on whether we bat or bowl first...the longer they bat, the lesser they might be used to bowl, neither of them are getting any younger, you know....
 
adharcric

adharcric

International Coach
Well said Pratyush. Disagree with Jono on one point though - for those of us who are trying to see if Tendulkar still has it, it does make a difference who the opposition bowlers are. By the way, I'm not implying that a Tendulkar ton "won't mean much" on this tour. Panesar is a very good (nearly world-class?) spinner, Sidebottom has been a big threat recently, Anderson took 6 for 79 in the Mumbai test last year and Broad is a young seamer who will generate bounce and may surprise the Indians.
 
Last edited:
Pratters

Pratters

Cricket, Lovely Cricket
Anil... Ganguly can be very useful in cloudy English conditions when it suits his kind of bowling and if used intellegently.

Just looked over his stats in England as well:

in England 6 49.5 189 6 3/71 3/54 31.50 3.79 49.8 0 0

Just 50 overs but has got 6 wickets. Not too much to read into them but he could have to play some role in the series as a bowler I would imagine given we are not particularly strong in the pace bowling front and England provides support to the traditional swinger.
 
Last edited:
honestbharani

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Jono said:
I can't believe people are making the exact same mistake they made last year when England went over to India.

So what if they're missing some players, it a) hardly makes India a guaranteed winner, and b) hardly makes the series less important.

Underestimate England at your own peril. I distinctly remember Anderson running through a few Indian batsman last year.

And what's even worse is this crap regarding "oh if Tendulkar scores now against the likes of Plunkett, Tremlett etc. it won't prove that he's still got it." For Christ's sake, Tendulkar's job in the team is to score runs, not prove to some people on the internet and some Cricinfo columnists that he is still a great batsman. If he scores runs, whether its against Flintoff and Hoggard, or whether its against Plunkett, he's still doing it for India, and if I see responses such as "well it doesn't prove much now does it?" if Tendulkar tons up in this series I'll blow up. Yet I bet if Dravid tons up, it'll be just pure brilliance.

No I'm not taking a shot at Rahul, obviously he's India's best batsman and has nothing to prove, and has scored against the best attacks, but what I'm saying is that this tour isn't about whether Tendulkar can score against the England attack away from home. Its whether team India can win away from home.
Click to expand...
I see where you are coming from, Jono, but I think you are over reacting a tad here.


I don't think anyone will say that Sachin shouldn't score runs against this bowling line up. It will be important runs even if comes against lesser quality attack just like it was when he made that 240 odd against Australia. The runs will help India to do well in the series and as far as that context is concerned, these will be important runs.


But the whole debate of best batsmen and how much value can you attach to runs scored against these attacks, that is a different thing and context. We shouldn't mix up these two. And honestly speaking, I thought the original poster was trying to say that Sachin is in a "damned if he does, damned if he doesn't" position as far this series is concerned, which is unfortunately true. Not because of any fault of his, just that some cricket fans and some sachin fans are like that.
 
Jono

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
adharcric said:
Well said Pratyush. Disagree with Jono on one point though - for those of us who are trying to see if Tendulkar still has it, it does make a difference who the opposition bowlers are. By the way, I'm not implying that a Tendulkar ton "won't mean much" on this tour. Panesar is a very good (nearly world-class?) spinner, Sidebottom has been a big threat recently, Anderson took 6 for 79 in the Mumbai test last year and Broad is a young seamer who will generate bounce and may surprise the Indians.
Click to expand...
How would Tendulkar plundering a Flintoff on one ankle suggest he was back? And as far as I'm concerned, if he slapped Harmison around it wouldn't mean much anyway.

There's so many variables. What if Anderson bowls out of his skin, but Sachin ends up making a century? Is that suddenly less of an accomplishment than if Sachin happened to face a half-fit Flintoff, or Hoggard having a bad day? Not really as far as I'm concerned. You have to actually watch the innings and the bowling, and not go on name value.

Good/great bowlers can bowl well too, and mediocre bowlers can have days where they bowl tremendously. Let's actually watch the cricket before judging. Just like if someone looks at Gilchrist's ton vs. Bangladesh last year it'd seem like a regular Gilly ton against a weak team, when it was clearly far from that.
 
honestbharani

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Jono said:
How would Tendulkar plundering a Flintoff on one ankle suggest he was back? And as far as I'm concerned, if he slapped Harmison around it wouldn't mean much anyway.

There's so many variables. What if Anderson bowls out of his skin, but Sachin ends up making a century? Is that suddenly less of an accomplishment than if Sachin happened to face a half-fit Flintoff, or Hoggard having a bad day? Not really as far as I'm concerned. You have to actually watch the innings and the bowling, and not go on name value.

Good/great bowlers can bowl well too, and mediocre bowlers can have days where they bowl tremendously. Let's actually watch the cricket before judging. Just like if someone looks at Gilchrist's ton vs. Bangladesh last year it'd seem like a regular Gilly ton against a weak team, when it was clearly far from that.
Click to expand...
oh... that was ur point?



Then I agree completely. There is no way we can actually judge the quality of some runs scored before they have actually even been scored. :p
 
adharcric

adharcric

International Coach
adharcric said:
it does make a difference who the opposition bowlers are.
Click to expand...
Let me rephrase ... the quality of the opposition bowlers does make a difference. Did you read my entire post? Panesar-Sidebottom-Anderson-Broad could very well be a "quality attack" in this test (or series) depending on how they bowl. Generally, big-name bowlers are considered a threat because they are likely to perform at a high level. Harmison bowling rubbish wouldn't make Tendulkar's knock "classy"; I've already said that his absence is not an excuse at all. Hoggard and Flintoff have been top performers recently, when fit. Obviously, the England attack will not become a strong attack just because the two of them, injured and all, step on the field and take the ball.

I do realize what you are saying ... and I agree with that. Good challenge ahead for India.
 
wpdavid

wpdavid

Hall of Fame Member
I've only just read that Hoggard's out. What is it with English bowlers ffs????

This must be our least experienced attack for eons - maybe on a par with the last 3 tests of the SA series in 2003 after Gough retired, although at least Kirtley & Bicknell were experienced county performers. Still, it's a huge opportunity for Broad & Anderson to make life difficult for the selectors.

Funniest thing is my prediction after the 2005 Ashes that England's first choice XI would still, in all likelihood, be their first choice side in 2009 apart from Giles and, maybe, Harmison. We now have four of that XI in the side, of whom Strauss' form in free-fall and Vaughan is likely to be injured at any moment.
 
P

Pup Clarke

Cricketer Of The Year
2 hours to the start. Are any of you Indian fans staying up?, What time is it in India?, and can you watch the game on TV?.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top