Gautam Gambhir

[NUFAN]

As I said after the first or second test Australia vs India - Gambhir and Sehwag will finish up as the best Indian opening partnership in history.

Gambhir is absolutey terrific.

 

[Prad100w]

And why should that be the criteria for success ? Even someone like Tendulkar had tough time staying on those wickets.

Well yes, Judging by those wickets is not fair enough because even the home batsmen were troubled eventhough they came on top. However i would be more happy with Gambhir making runs on alien conditions like the ones in England, Newzealand, South Africa or Australia(Its pretty flat there nowadays) than on a pitch in the subcontinent because he was raised on these kinds of wickets. And the real challenge would be excelling on overseas wickets just because quality players do excel on all conditions.

 

[Burgey]

And why should that be the criteria for success ? Even someone like Tendulkar had tough time staying on those wickets.

For the same reason Indian fans make success there a pre-requisite for greatness? And Australian fans do the same here?

 

[susudear]

Ghambir is better than Katich. He will end up with a better average than Katich.

 

[Burgey]

Ghambir is better than Katich. He will end up with a better average than Katich.

I think he probably will too.

 

[Bees]

Surely he's not better than McKenzie.

:: sighs ::

 

[NUFAN]

Surely he's not better than McKenzie.

:: sighs ::

He's so much better than McKenzie IMO.

 

[Bees]

Haha, I know... I'm just rueing his form in this series so far.

 

[Jono]

Let him perform outside the subcontinent and judge, no reason why he cant do well like he has performed in India. But his real test will be the tests in NZ, if they prepare wickets like they did last time when India toured there in 2003.

LOL. If NZ prepare wickets like that again (it was due to the weather I believe) the BCCI will crush the NZ Cricket Board.

For the same reason Indian fans make success there a pre-requisite for greatness? And Australian fans do the same here?

Nah, he's not saying runs in NZ is a prerequisite for greatness. But rather runs on the wickets that were prepared in 2002/03 in NZ. They were the most bowler friendly wickets test cricket has seen in the last decade.

 

[Sanz]

For the same reason Indian fans make success there a pre-requisite for greatness? And Australian fans do the same here?

So Aussie fans make success in NZ a pre-requisite for greatness ?

 

[Xuhaib]

Brilliant player.

 

[Smudge]

LOL. If NZ prepare wickets like that again (it was due to the weather I believe) the BCCI will crush the NZ Cricket Board.
.

And the Indian team will crush the Black Caps - it would most definitely not be in our best interests to produce seamer-friendly tracks, considering the Indian seam attack at the moment.

Besides, that was an extreme summer in terms of rainfall in NZ.

 

[Richard]

LOL. If NZ prepare wickets like that again (it was due to the weather I believe) the BCCI will crush the NZ Cricket Board.

It's interesting, thinking about this a bit more - pretty much whatever pitches the series is played on, India have the upper hand and should take out the series. Obviously, flat pitches, India will annihilate NZ, because their batting is tenfold better. Turning ones you'd have to say it'd be ridiculously unlikely that Vettori could outbowl Harbhajan and Mishra.

Seaming ones, well, Zaheer Khan and Ishant Sharma (and maybe Munaf Patel) should outbowl whoever turns-up for NZ (be it Mills, Southee, Martin, Oram or whoever - though all of those could pose plenty of problems to the Indian batsmen, needless to say). But I'd still say the gap would be smallest on seamers, and I'd still say NZC would do best to order such pitches. Though obviously not quite to the extent we had in 2002/03, which I believe was influenced to some extent by the prevailing weather as well as NZ's needs.

 

[silentstriker]

For the same reason Indian fans make success there a pre-requisite for greatness? And Australian fans do the same here?

I think if you are talking about 'all time great', as in making an all time side, then all the little failures have to be magnified as you're competing against the best cricketers who have ever lived, who may or may not have those failures. On the other hand, if you're merely talking about a very good, even a great player, but not talking him up as an all time player, then such things are expected and it's not a big deal.

Laxman or Mark Waugh were very good players, and maybe even great players, but not all time players. So you have to judge him by the comparative standards that you're setting. If Laxman were competing against Ricky Ponting, Laxman's record wouldn't look so hot, and his failures would be used against him. Ricky Ponting, on the other hand, wouldn't look so hot if you're comparing him with Don Bradman. And so forth.

So I think it's fair enough that people point out failures in certain conditions/environments when judging whether they are an all time great player (that term has to be defined too, I take it as having a legitimate chance of being selected in an all time test XI).

And the Indian team will crush the Black Caps - it would most definitely not be in our best interests to produce seamer-friendly tracks, considering the Indian seam attack at the moment.

Besides, that was an extreme summer in terms of rainfall in NZ.

Perhaps, but I think NZ would still be best off preparing those types of wickets. As Richard said, it's still the best shot. I'm not convinced that guys like Gambhir can succeed on wickets like that, let alone the Dhonis of the world. If I were NZ, I'd definitely be trying very hard to create those wickets. It doesn't make sense to not play to your strengths, or at least, to minimize your weakness. If they made really seaming pitches, I'd back then to win a couple Tests, and maybe I'd bet on them to even take the series, especially as India will be short on non-subcontinental match practice when they come over there.

 

[Cevno]

LOL. If NZ prepare wickets like that again (it was due to the weather I believe) the BCCI will crush the NZ Cricket Board.

Nah, he's not saying runs in NZ is a prerequisite for greatness. But rather runs on the wickets that were prepared in 2002/03 in NZ. They were the most bowler friendly wickets test cricket has seen in the last decade.

Why would the BCCI crush NZ cricket board if such wickets were prepared?
The TV companies might but i doubt the BCCI would be overly bothered.

But i certainly believe the ICC and the match referee should be bothered if such wickets are prepared in the same way that they show concern over spinning tracks in India.Though they are less one sided(In terms of bat and bowl) than many fast bowlers paradises arround the world.

 

[Richard]

No-one from ICC has the slightest right to show any "concern" over any wicket anywhere, as long as it isn't dangerous. The condition of the wicket, provided it is safe to reasonable degree, is entirely the responsibility of the home side and they're entitled to do everything in their power to enable it to favour their team's strengths (and it disappoints me whenever any team does not do this). They're the ones who lose the TV revenue if the game finishes early.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Exactly. I hate the notion that home field advantage is poor sportsmanship.

 

[G.I.Joe]

In my ideal world, I wouldn't mind seeing NZ and India produce seaming and turning tracks that produce even 100 meets 100 matches.

In the real world, South Africa and Australia have a mighty whinge and we see pitches that produce 434-438 matches.

 

[Cevno]

No-one from ICC has the slightest right to show any "concern" over any wicket anywhere, as long as it isn't dangerous. The condition of the wicket, provided it is safe to reasonable degree, is entirely the responsibility of the home side and they're entitled to do everything in their power to enable it to favour their team's strengths (and it disappoints me whenever any team does not do this). They're the ones who lose the TV revenue if the game finishes early.

Have to agree with this.
But the ICC seem to consider spinning pitches more dangerous than those which favour faster bowlers due to some reason.

Recently a track like kanpur against the saffers was warned by the icc when most of the balls of the track were not vivious at all.At the same time the ahmedababd track on which the match ended in the same number of days and the ball had varying pace and bounce of track on the first day was not considered dangerous .
Similarly kicking tracks helping the spinners are warned by the ICC while the tracks offering extra bounce and pace and movement for the fast bowlers are not when in fact those can be more dangerous.
It is this inconsistency which bugs me .If They have a set standard then it should be the same for all type of tracks.Tracks on which playing four/five pacers is the norm but on which you may have to play 3/4 spinners is not ok. As if spinners are lesser part of the game than the pacers.And most of the time on such tracks the match gets finished early due to inabilty to play spin(kanpur test) rather than too many devils in the pitch(as gangulty showed).

 

[Cevno]

Exactly. I hate the notion that home field advantage is poor sportsmanship.

I completely agree with that.
The home nation should have complete freedom as to what kind of wicket it produces.

My comment was more to do with wanting consistency,rather than agreeing with this "poor sportsmanship" or "fair pitches" notion.