***Official England in India***

[Richard]

Again I disagree, and I did provide my rationale as to why in that previous post. Pretty much the for the same reasons I picked England as favorites to chase 294 against New Zealand at Manchester earlier this year in the 4th dig (even though they were dismissed for around 200 in the 1st innings) & picked New Zealand as favorites against Bangladesh chasing 317 to win in the last innings in Oct. I just didn't think the English bowlers were good enough to bowl India out cheaply for a 2nd time in those conditions.

The thing is, though, that often applies. Often, you'd think the batsmen should be good enough to score lots against the bowling. But a great many batsmen become considerably lesser in the sitution in question, because they feel under huge pressure when chasing a substantial total.

That as much as the fact that most pitches deteriorate (to varying degrees) is as important as that in terms of why such massive fourth-innings' are so rare.

It's very rare to see batsmen either negate or not feel the usual degree of pressure chasing such a large total. And it's to Tendulkar and Yuvraj (less so Sehwag's) credit for not doing.

 

[Richard]

Look, If all others things were considered equal, you are absolutely right in picking a team in England's position at the close of Day 4, I wouldn't argue that point for a second. However, in this instance all other things weren't even. India clearly have an amazing batting lineup at their own conditions (despite their remarkably poor 1st innings showing) & England, a very average Bowling attack, especially in those conditions. Thats the point your missing.

To give you a more extreme example of what I mean, lets take the Aust v Bang 1st test in 2006. Half way through that test, Bangladesh had a 1st innings lead of 170ish. Would you have picked Bangladesh as favorites to win at that point? I very much doubt it.

For the record, I'm not suggesting the same gulf exists between India & Eng as Aust & Bang, but still believe India are a considerably stronger team in their own conditions.

There's no question that they are. However, England had played above (and to a much greater extent India below) themselves and England were in a position of overwhelming power. The fact that you'd have expected India to have been the stronger side pre-game goes out of the window once most of the game is completed.

 

[Richard]

Comparing Gilchrist and Dhoni is about as ridiculous as suggesting that he's a glorified tailender. In fact, I think it's downright stupid to suggest he's a glorified tailender.

And extraordinarily enough, no-one compared Gilchrist and Dhoni's own merits - at least, not suggested they were similar. The suggestion of simiarlity was between the top-order above them.

It's not unusual to see certain CW members read stuff into words that they'd like to be there which isn't so as to have something to try to shout down.

 

[Richard]

Mid 30s is excellent for a solid keeper, just making the point that I don't think he'll quite be a Gilchrist at test level

Tbh don't think we'll be seeing another Gilchrist for many a year

We won't, in all likelihood. That we'll never see another Gilchrist is far from inconceivable.

Genuine Test-class batsmen who can nonetheless keep wicket to a good standard (Stewart, Gilchrist, Sangakkara) are precious rarities, never mind genuine wicketkeepers who for a time bat as well as anyone in history. Andy Flower was a better batsman than any of those three, but his wicketkeeping was short of the required standard and he only did the job as often as he did because there was no-one better. Even Sangakkara has been decided (not by himself, he prefers keeping wicket) to be carrying too large a burden and has been relieved of the wicketkeeping gloves. This has happened not once but 3 or 4 times.

 

[shashy]

If Dhoni is a glorified tailender, then so is Flintoff.

 

[krkode]

If his keeping stays Test quality then a batting average of mid 30's is excellent. Can't see why people would expect more.

Agreed. For a team that's had Mongia, MSK Prasad, Dinesh Karthik, Sameer Dighe, and Parthiv Patel as wicket-keepers in the last almost 2 decades, having someone who can bat like Dhoni is a sheer blessing. Here is a guy, who, for a change can actually win matches with the bat on a fairly regular basis.

IMO, Dhoni ends up with a test batting career ala Stephen Fleming. Very few centuries, lots and lots of half-centuries which makes sense considering his batting position. Obviously things might change if he becomes a full-time batsman some time in the future. One thing Sangakarra and Stewart have in common, I think I read, is they both have significantly better batting records when they didn't keep. The same would likely be true for Dhoni.

In ODI's, I see him becoming a kind of Bevan-esque character. Don't think he'll end up with anywhere near Bevan's average, but he seems to have the temperament to turn games around and not give in to collapses. I remember when Mendis was wreaking havoc on the Indian lineup in ODIs, he was one of the few you could count on to at least hang in there for a while and try to make something of the game. Imagine he'll end up averaging between 40 and 45.

 

[Furball]

In ODI's, I see him becoming a kind of Bevan-esque character. Don't think he'll end up with anywhere near Bevan's average, but he seems to have the temperament to turn games around and not give in to collapses. I remember when Mendis was wreaking havoc on the Indian lineup in ODIs, he was one of the few you could count on to at least hang in there for a while and try to make something of the game. Imagine he'll end up averaging between 40 and 45.

Agree with this part.

One of the hallmarks of India's performance in the last year or so in ODIs is the number of times Dhoni is there at the end in successful chases.

IIRC, not long ago he was averaging 100+ in successful chases.

edit: Just checked statsguru, and Dhoni averages 106 in Indian wins batting 2nd. Bevan averaged 86.

 

[aussie]

it never was...

In comparison to Lara it was, there was always doubt that in 4th innings chases he didn't have Lara's match winning ability. (did the research when i created the Lara vs Tendulkar thread a few years back). But of course it was always marginal.

 

[honestbharani]

In comparison to Lara it was, there was always doubt that in 4th innings chases he didn't have Lara's match winning ability. (did the research when i created the Lara vs Tendulkar thread a few years back). But of course it was always marginal.

But comparisons are not the be all and end all.....

 

[aussie]

Yes i agree, not a big issue for me personally. But for some fans who still wish to compare them, thats one of the big arguments/differences (and the only one left) for Tendy to vanquish & he did brilliantly.

 

[Anil]

In comparison to Lara it was, there was always doubt that in 4th innings chases he didn't have Lara's match winning ability. (did the research when i created the Lara vs Tendulkar thread a few years back). But of course it was always marginal.

not really other than that brilliant 153* against the aussies, what is another similarly notable match-winning 4th innings performance from lara? that knock created such an aura around lara that it defined his legacy as this great 4th innings player...people forget that even in that knock he had a caught-behind chance put down, the lesson being that even the greatest of players need some luck to create history...tendulkar's 136(?) against pakistan at chennai was as good or when you consider he played with severe back spasms, possibly better...had akram given tendulkar a life when he gave the chance(until then his innings was chanceless), he would almost certainly have put away the 16 more runs needed for victory...before anyone jumps on this, it is not a comparison between their respective careers, i consider both as almost inseparably the greatest in their era...lara to be slightly ahead in terms of sheer natural talent...the choker complaints were always rubbish, tendulkar has been a tough cricketer throughout his career and he has excelled in pressure-cooker situations enough...

 

[Okapi]

Lara's 153 is better because it came against better bowlers.

 

[Anil]

Lara's 153 is better because it came against better bowlers.

it can certainly be argued either way...anyway that was not the point, saying lara's 153* proved that tendulkar was a choker doesn't stand as an argument...

 

[honestbharani]

it can certainly be argued either way...anyway that was not the point, saying lara's 153* proved that tendulkar was a choker doesn't stand as an argument...

seriously.. we need to stop this becoming another Lara V Tendulkar thread... Time to celebrate Sachin and India's win, not to compare A and B...

 

[Uppercut]

seriously.. we need to stop this becoming another Lara V Tendulkar thread... Time to celebrate Sachin and India's win, not to compare A and B...

Personally i've always preferred B. It has more aesthetically pleasing curves.

 

[FBU]

We could see a team that looks like this tomorrow

Cook, Strauss, Shah, Pietersen, Collingwood, Flintoff, Prior, Swann, Broad, Khan, Panesar

 

[shashy]

not really other than that brilliant 153* against the aussies, what is another similarly notable match-winning 4th innings performance from lara? that knock created such an aura around lara that it defined his legacy as this great 4th innings player...people forget that even in that knock he had a caught-behind chance put down, the lesson being that even the greatest of players need some luck to create history...tendulkar's 136(?) against pakistan at chennai was as good or when you consider he played with severe back spasms, possibly better...had akram given tendulkar a life when he gave the chance(until then his innings was chanceless), he would almost certainly have put away the 16 more runs needed for victory...before anyone jumps on this, it is not a comparison between their respective careers, i consider both as almost inseparably the greatest in their era...lara to be slightly ahead in terms of sheer natural talent...the choker complaints were always rubbish, tendulkar has been a tough cricketer throughout his career and he has excelled in pressure-cooker situations enough...

I agree with this. Also, his 119* at Old Trafford was pretty special as well. Not quite match-winning but it still showed guts.

 

[Richard]

One thing Sangakarra and Stewart have in common, I think I read, is they both have significantly better batting records when they didn't keep.

Something I've always wished is that this never got the chance to happen. I really wish Sangakkara had never kept wicket in Tests (despite the fact he became very good at it after a poor start) and I wish Stewart had never played as a specialist batsman after 1993.

Then we'd truly know how good they were. As it is, now we can just guess. And there's no doubt in my mind that the depth of difference is greatly exaggerated by coincidences.

 

[Bobisback]

Something I've always wished is that this never got the chance to happen. I really wish Sangakkara had never kept wicket in Tests (despite the fact he became very good at it after a poor start) and I wish Stewart had never played as a specialist batsman after 1993.

Then we'd truly know how good they were. As it is, now we can just guess. And there's no doubt in my mind that the depth of difference is greatly exaggerated by coincidences.

DWTA

 

[Richard]

not really other than that brilliant 153* against the aussies, what is another similarly notable match-winning 4th innings performance from lara? that knock created such an aura around lara that it defined his legacy as this great 4th innings player...people forget that even in that knock he had a caught-behind chance put down, the lesson being that even the greatest of players need some luck to create history...tendulkar's 136(?) against pakistan at chennai was as good or when you consider he played with severe back spasms, possibly better...had akram given tendulkar a life when he gave the chance(until then his innings was chanceless), he would almost certainly have put away the 16 more runs needed for victory...

This is an interesting one. I've known about Healy missing that chance with 7 needed in the Lara 153* since I first heard about the innings. However, a Pakistani recently assured me that Moin Khan missed a stumping early on in the Tendulkar 136 at Chennai, something I'd never heard of before. Which, well, kinda evens things up really.