Tony Greig's all time best Indian Test XI

[Dissector]

That's kind of the point. At best you can argue that Waqar was a bit better than Imran as a bowler whereas Imran was a far better batsman. The same with Mankad and Bedi.

 

[Richard]

Don't know much about Mankad of the Vinoo variety, TBH. Head plenty about Ashok, though.

 

[Sanz]

Don't know much about Mankad of the Vinoo variety, TBH. Head plenty about Ashok, though.

You have been reading wrong books on Indian Cricket History.

 

[Richard]

Or perhaps I haven't - yet - read far enough back.

Before the 1970s and late 1960s, there are only a tiny handful of Indians I know much about, Merchant, Armanath, Nissar, Gupte and Hazare being a few.

 

[Sanz]

Or perhaps I haven't - yet - read far enough back.

Before the 1970s and late 1960s, there are only a tiny handful of Indians I know much about, Merchant, Armanath, Nissar, Gupte and Hazare being a few.

First of all the way you wrote about Vinoo Mankad was very offensive, it sounded like someone is describing Rice or something e.g. rice of Basmati Variety.

If you have read anything about Ashoke Mankad, you must have atleast heard something about 'Mankad of Vinoo Variety'. Ashoke was son of Vinoo and almost every cricket story on Ashoke Mankad starts with Vinoo's and how talented he was. Not to forget, it is almost impossible to not hear anything about 'Mankad of Vinoo Variety' when he has a particular dismissal type on his name.

You keep posting nonsense after nonsense, when people question you, you come up with excuses that it was either in jest or that you have not read about it. Hell if you have not read up then why not just shut up and read what others are posting.

 

[adharcric]

First of all the way you wrote about Vinoo Mankad was very offensive, it sounded like someone is describing Rice or something e.g. rice of Basmati Variety.

 

[short shorts]

Don't know much about Mankad of the Vinoo variety, TBH. Head plenty about Ashok, though.

First tour to England, he ended up scoring 1120 runs at 28 and took 129 wickets at 21 in all first class matches. He also hit a bright 63 at Lords on Test debut, and in his second Test match at Old Trafford took 7 for 146.

First tour to Australia, at 39 years of age, 900 runs at 39 and 61 wickets at 24 in all first class matches. 116 in the third Test at Melbourne, taking on Lindwall and Miller to become the first Indian centurion against Australia. Mankad repeated that feat with his 111 in the fifth Test also at Melbourne. The man was a class act against pace bowling.

England in India, 34 wickets at 16. Figures of 12/108 in India's first ever victory over England at home.

First Series against Pakistan, 8/52 in the first test and another 5-for in the third.

New Zealand in India, Mankad became the first Indian to score 2 double centuries in a series.

Then there is Mankad's test - 1952, an English side featuring Len Hutton, Dennis Compton, Peter May, Tom Graveney, Alec Bedser, Godfrey Evans, the fiery Fred Trueman, and spin twins Jim Laker and Tony Lock. India lost 3-0, but Mankad stamped his class all over the second test at Lords. Scored 72 opening the batting, bowled 5/131 in 73 overs, then opened the batting again, flogged the bowlers in an innings of 184 in just 4 hours (this after bowling 73 overs), then as England chased 78 for victory, bowled 23 overs for just 35 runs. He was on the field for 17 of the 25 overs of play possible. All this when he was 35 years old.

India only won 5 of the 44 tests he played in, but he averaged 112 with the bat and 13 with the ball in those 5 tests. World War 2 denied him cricket between the ages 22 to 29, it would have been a treat to watch him if he had had a full career.

 

[Richard]

First of all the way you wrote about Vinoo Mankad was very offensive, it sounded like someone is describing Rice or something e.g. rice of Basmati Variety.

If you have read anything about Ashoke Mankad, you must have atleast heard something about 'Mankad of Vinoo Variety'. Ashoke was son of Vinoo and almost every cricket story on Ashoke Mankad starts with Vinoo's and how talented he was. Not to forget, it is almost impossible to not hear anything about 'Mankad of Vinoo Variety' when he has a particular dismissal type on his name.

You keep posting nonsense after nonsense, when people question you, you come up with excuses that it was either in jest or that you have not read about it. Hell if you have not read up then why not just shut up and read what others are posting.

WTF?

I've heard of Vinoo Mankad, and I'm well aware Ashok is his son. I just have read nothing more than a few bits and pieces about his deeds, whereas I've read a fair amount about Ashok.

As for being offensive in my terminology... that's, quite simply, unutterably stupid on your part. Exactly as with the recent Murali thing, you're trying to make something out of nothing. And I've completely ceased to be bothered with your nonsense.

 

[Richard]

First tour to England, he ended up scoring 1120 runs at 28 and took 129 wickets at 21 in all first class matches. He also hit a bright 63 at Lords on Test debut, and in his second Test match at Old Trafford took 7 for 146.

First tour to Australia, at 39 years of age, 900 runs at 39 and 61 wickets at 24 in all first class matches. 116 in the third Test at Melbourne, taking on Lindwall and Miller to become the first Indian centurion against Australia. Mankad repeated that feat with his 111 in the fifth Test also at Melbourne. The man was a class act against pace bowling.

England in India, 34 wickets at 16. Figures of 12/108 in India's first ever victory over England at home.

First Series against Pakistan, 8/52 in the first test and another 5-for in the third.

New Zealand in India, Mankad became the first Indian to score 2 double centuries in a series.

Then there is Mankad's test - 1952, an English side featuring Len Hutton, Dennis Compton, Peter May, Tom Graveney, Alec Bedser, Godfrey Evans, the fiery Fred Trueman, and spin twins Jim Laker and Tony Lock. India lost 3-0, but Mankad stamped his class all over the second test at Lords. Scored 72 opening the batting, bowled 5/131 in 73 overs, then opened the batting again, flogged the bowlers in an innings of 184 in just 4 hours (this after bowling 73 overs), then as England chased 78 for victory, bowled 23 overs for just 35 runs. He was on the field for 17 of the 25 overs of play possible. All this when he was 35 years old.

India only won 5 of the 44 tests he played in, but he averaged 112 with the bat and 13 with the ball in those 5 tests. World War 2 denied him cricket between the ages 22 to 29, it would have been a treat to watch him if he had had a full career.

Thanks. Only heard a few bits and pieces of that previously.

 

[pasag]

First of all the way you wrote about Vinoo Mankad was very offensive, it sounded like someone is describing Rice or something e.g. rice of Basmati Variety.

If you have read anything about Ashoke Mankad, you must have atleast heard something about 'Mankad of Vinoo Variety'. Ashoke was son of Vinoo and almost every cricket story on Ashoke Mankad starts with Vinoo's and how talented he was. Not to forget, it is almost impossible to not hear anything about 'Mankad of Vinoo Variety' when he has a particular dismissal type on his name.

You keep posting nonsense after nonsense, when people question you, you come up with excuses that it was either in jest or that you have not read about it. Hell if you have not read up then why not just shut up and read what others are posting.

WTF?

I've heard of Vinoo Mankad, and I'm well aware Ashok is his son. I just have read nothing more than a few bits and pieces about his deeds, whereas I've read a fair amount about Ashok.

As for being offensive in my terminology... that's, quite simply, unutterably stupid on your part. Exactly as with the recent Murali thing, you're trying to make something out of nothing. And I've completely ceased to be bothered with your nonsense.

Sanz, I can't see anything offensive about what Richard posted re: 'Mankad of Vinoo Variety'. Also saying "You keep posting nonsense after nonsense, when people question you, you come up with excuses that it was either in jest or that you have not read about it. Hell if you have not read up then why not just shut up and read what others are posting." is unnecessary to say the least.

Richard, there are better ways of responding to things you feel slighted against than saying a post/poster has been "quite simply, unutterably stupid on your part," which is unacceptable. A simple explanation that there was no offence intended would have sufficed.

 

[Sanz]

So there is nothing wrong with phrases like 'Bradman of Don Variety' or 'Sobers of Garfield Variety' ?

 

[pasag]

So there is nothing wrong with phrases like 'Bradman of Don Variety' or 'Sobers of Garfield Variety' ?

Not as far as I can see, no.

 

[JBMAC]

So there is nothing wrong with phrases like 'Bradman of Don Variety' or 'Sobers of Garfield Variety' ?

No Problems at all

 

[Perm]

So there is nothing wrong with phrases like 'Bradman of Don Variety' or 'Sobers of Garfield Variety' ?

Not particularly, just the phrase wouldn't be written that often because there was only one famous Bradman and Sobers, unlike Mankads, whom there were two of (Vinoo and Ashoke)

 

[Richard]

Indeed. "Greig of the Tony variety" or "Smith of the Robin variety" would be more plausible examples.

 

[Richard]

Richard, there are better ways of responding to things you feel slighted against than saying a post/poster has been "quite simply, unutterably stupid on your part," which is unacceptable. A simple explanation that there was no offence intended would have sufficed.

Except it wouldn't, and I'd imagine you know it. The poster in question concocted something from nothing as far as I'm concerned, just to find something to make a fuss about. And it's something you see very often, which tires me immensely. If I'd said "there was no offence intended" I'd simply have got a "yes, there was, you're just trying to play the "in jest" card" or some other rubbish like that which I've been given ad nauseum of late.

 

[Fiery]

Except it wouldn't, and I'd imagine you know it. The poster in question concocted something from nothing as far as I'm concerned, just to find something to make a fuss about. And it's something you see very often, which tires me immensely. If I'd said "there was no offence intended" I'd simply have got a "yes, there was, you're just trying to play the "in jest" card" or some other rubbish like that which I've been given ad nauseum of late.

Why can't you just take pasag's advice?

 

[Sanz]

Not as far as I can see, no.

Okay.

 

[Swervy]

Why can't you just take pasag's advice?

I am pretty surprised he hasnt actually

 

[Richard]

I'm not really "not taking his advice", though, am I? I'm pointing-out something.