India: Deserved of No. 1?

[Turbinator]

India's gonna' kick some SA ass! Destroy these pansies!

EDIT:

 

[G.I.Joe]

HA. Well i know alot of people have said odly over the years that Australia dominating the game has been unpopular. But this is FIRST time i'm hearing the Windies dominance for 19 years was unpopular, no way man..

How anyone could get that from my post, I don't know. Care to explain how you derived 'WI were unpopular' from that?

What It meant was that people have seen two all time great teams dominate everybody and keep the #1 spot to themselves all this while, so they can't get a grip that that sort of dominance is not necessary to become #1. All it takes is for a team to put in better overall performances than the rest, it doesn't have to be a team that beats the pants off everybody everywhere. And India have done that.

Ha, oh dear. As Zinzan said, you making something out of nothing yo. Go grab a cold beer of something son..

Nah, you guys can't get your heads round the concept.

 

[Shri]

How anyone could get that from my post, I don't know. Care to explain how you derived 'WI were unpopular' from that?

He misread unipolar as unpopular maybe? You should get a cold beer, he should take his hands off the beer.

 

[Zinzan]

Boycott's glossing over a major thing here - when that arbitrary someone at ICC comes up with a ranking it is based on the performance against all teams home and away over several years. It isnt like they draw a lottery or base on last months performance.
.

Nah, thats a rounabout way of saying that you'll determine the validity of the rankings based on your own perception of matters from time to time. Numbers are meant to be taken literally, we aren't talking calculus or Mohammad Yousuf's ( or Vettori's?) average here. If a team wins by 3 runs, it means they won by 3 runs. It doesn't mean that the scoreboard shouldn't be taken literally, and that the other team might have actually won, if it pleases you so.

Haha, there really are some precious drama-queens out there . Boycott's audio piece is total non-issue ffs, I actually thought he was pretty diplomatic in his explanation. However in hindsight, unless he categorically stated "the ratings are 100% correct & India are without a shadow-of-doubt the best Test side atm" these overly-sensitive thin-skinned folks will carry on in playing the victim card. Bunch of ladies tbh.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Haha, there really are some precious drama-queens out there . Boycott's audio piece is total non-issue ffs, I actually thought he was pretty diplomatic in his explanation. However in hindsight, unless he categorically stated "the ratings are 100% correct & India are without a shadow-of-doubt the best Test side atm" these overly-sensitive thin-skinned folks will carry on in playing the victim card. Bunch of ladies tbh.

Bollocks, considering your history of taking umbrage at anything remotely resembling criticism of a new Zealander. And for some reason, you've shown yourself thick skinned enough to make the most posts alongwith got_spin in this thread on what you term a 'non issue'. Pot. Kettle. Black. Panties. Twisted.

 

[Turbinator]

Bollocks, considering your history of taking umbrage at anything remotely resembling criticism of a new Zealander. And for some reason, you've shown yourself thick skinned enough to make the most posts alongwith got_spin in this thread on what you term a 'non issue'. Pot. Kettle. Black. Panties. Twisted.

Haha. I love this guy!

 

[Zinzan]

Bollocks, considering your history of taking umbrage at anything remotely resembling criticism of a new Zealander. And for some reason, you've shown yourself thick skinned enough to make the most posts alongwith got_spin in this thread on what you term a 'non issue'. Pot. Kettle. Black. Panties. Twisted.

Lol, I'd like to think I'm one of the most realistic NZ cricket fans out there, in fact I've been criticized on occasions by other NZ fans for being too critical of the team. For the record, I believe barring the minnows, we're about the worst test side going around atm & the only argument I've been venomously opposed to recently was Bags labeling Vettori no better than a 'bits & pieces player' (a comment Bags later admitted he didn't really mean). What other examples of umbrage from me are u referring that could even closely compare with this babyish over-reaction by you & others because not everyone else in the world is prepared to say that India are undoubtedly the no.1 test side currently

Lets put all this into perspective shall we & let others decide whether your being precious or not..

Since the ICC came out with these latest rankings, 2-3 separate threads were started within about 24 hrs from "India are the no 1 test side" to "do they deserve the title?" & possibly another I can't recall.

If you'd actually bothered to read my posts in both threads in their entirety you'd realise that I haven't been saying they're undeserving of the title at all, but am merely suggesting there are 2-3 teams atm that are close, so it's hard for anyone to categorically state that India are definitely the best - period . Do I really believe in my heart or hearts that India are the no.1 test side atm,.... no I don't. perhaps you'd like me to lie & say that I do for your benefit, I'm not sure.

Now to Boycott. In the audio he effectively (very much like me) stated that whilst he doesn't think they're undeserving of the title, you can't always take these rankings literally because there are always other factors they don't consider (which is true)..

So for you to then jump in with your handbag flapping about is precious, whether you like it all. And it's a cop-out to somehow try to turn it around on me when all I've done is throughout these threads is to provide the argument that I'm still "unconvinced".

If these ratings are gospel to you, then you should take satisfaction that India are rated no.1, but don't be so precious to demand that others have to believe this too, when clearly it's very much a debatable point.

With regards to got_spin, his arguments were different again, so not sure what your implying there

 

[Cruxdude]

There was one topic started by an Indian guy. This and the other topic was started by jboss a saff. Stop making up stuff.

 

[Zinzan]

There was one topic started by an Indian guy. This and the other topic was started by jboss a saff. Stop making up stuff.

It doesn't change my general point & has since been edited

 

[Cruxdude]

To make an analogy to tennis. India is not the Federer of 2006. It is hte Federer of 2009. The number one in a tight pack. That Federer came back to 1 is great. That India has at last achieved this is great.

 

[Zinzan]

To make an analogy to tennis. India is not the Federer of 2006. It is hte Federer of 2009. The number one in a tight pack. That Federer came back to 1 is great. That India has at last achieved this is great.

So you do acknowledge that on one hand that it's a really tight race between those 2-3 top teams, yet on the other hand you find it so apparently 'objectionable' & 'unreasonable' for someone else to take the contrary view on it.

That's why I call it 'precious', because surely you guys must be able to see that there is a perfectly decent argument to the contrary in this debate. It'd be different if someone was trying to claim Chris Martin's a better batsman than Tendulkar, that would be a non argument & would deserve dismissal, but the question of whether India are no.1 actually deserves debate and doesn't deserve dismissal.

 

[aussie]

How anyone could get that from my post, I don't know. Care to explain how you derived 'WI were unpopular' from that?.

Ha ye my mistake.

What It meant was that people have seen two all time great teams dominate everybody and keep the #1 spot to themselves all this while, so they can't get a grip that that sort of dominance is not necessary to become #1. All it takes is for a team to put in better overall performances than the rest, it doesn't have to be a team that beats the pants off everybody everywhere. And India have done that.

.

No to be the best team in the world performances over a LONG period a time, no other way. England 1951-1958, Windies 1976-1995 & 63-68, AUS 95-2006/07.

Indian being ranked # 1 is just a statistic - its clearly even betwen AUS/SA/IND ATM no clear best. Some of you Indians here on CW are getting too worked up about it yo haa. Damn i got my Asian friends here in Englands who support IND are they aren't reacting like this..

 

[Zinzan]

Damn i got my Asian friends here in Englands who support IND are they aren't reacting like this..

Yup, same with the Indian guys I work with

 

[Cruxdude]

So you do acknowledge that on one hand that it's a really tight race between those 2-3 top teams, yet on the other hand you find it so apparently 'objectionable' & 'unreasonable' for someone else to take the contrary view on it.

That's why I call it 'precious', because surely you guys must be able to see that there is a perfectly decent argument to the contrary in this debate. It'd be different if someone was trying to claim Chris Martin's a better batsman than Tendulkar, that would be a non argument & would deserve dismissal, but the question of whether India are no.1 actually deserves debate and doesn't deserve dismissal.

I have never said anything about your views being unreasonable or objectionable. Please read my previous posts before making comments.

Your comments about Indian fans being precious is laughable. You started the whole thing by making a comment designed to provoke people.

Signifies a weak era in Test cricket to me when a side with the bowling attack they have reaches no.1

 

[Zinzan]

You started the whole thing by making a comment designed to provoke people.

On the contrary, I didn't start anything. The comments I made were in direct response to the negative reaction originally to any arguments to the contrary.

I've nothing else to say on the matter except that like Aussie, the Indian guys I work with don't get so defensive in debating it.

 

[jeevan]

Haha, there really are some precious drama-queens out there . Boycott's audio piece is total non-issue ffs, I actually thought he was pretty diplomatic in his explanation. However in hindsight, unless he categorically stated "the ratings are 100% correct & India are without a shadow-of-doubt the best Test side atm" these overly-sensitive thin-skinned folks will carry on in playing the victim card. Bunch of ladies tbh.

Stop with your condescension-laced name calling, will you! Since when has it been 'precious' to disagree with someone's opinion and then factually rebut it.

I'm not asking Boycott (or you) to say or believe any thing regarding the Indian team being #1. I am, however, pointing out that his opinion of the ranking system to be superficial and his main critiques on it to be somewhat mis-directed. (IOW in five years if the Pakistan or SL team ascends to the top of the rankings, and Boycott makes these same comments - my critique would still be the exact same one).

Should I now mimic your style and hurl epithets regarding your (dis)ability on reading & comprehending the English language?

 

[jeevan]

On the contrary, I didn't start anything. The comments I made were in direct response to the negative reaction originally to any arguments to the contrary.

I've nothing else to say on the matter except that like Aussie, the Indian guys I work with don't get so defensive in debating it.

Another thing you're largely mistaken about, this time wrt the folks here.

E.g. I, for one, am hardly apologetic about the absence of much-fancied superstars in the Indian bowling lineup (your original critique). Harsha Bhogle is another, so I'm not alone. When apparently workman-like units sometimes have two bowlers who can bedevil the best-performing batsman of the period (reference to Harbhajan,Ishant,Ponting) and find a way of bowling out any side any where twice a match, the facts hardly need 'defending'.

Unless, by it, you meant the opposite of being offensive (as in the random usage of unflattering adjectives), in which case the usage of the word appears incorrect but you might have a point.

End of discussion with you!

 

[honestbharani]

HA. Well i know alot of people have said odly over the years that Australia dominating the game has been unpopular. But this is FIRST time i'm hearing the Windies dominance for 19 years was unpopular, no way man..

dude... did u even understand what GIJ was trying to say?

 

[honestbharani]

Well you seem to discount the fact that sub continent teams have more of an adjustment to make when playing in Australia, SA and England. While the conditions in these places were not drastically different from each other. I am not saying India was a great team. We were crap but the fact that the other teams were better of abroad earlier is because the conditions are not so different between them.

Australia were crap in INdia for a good number of years too...

 

[honestbharani]

zinzan and Aussie, if you think India DO NOT deserve to be #1 in the world, make your points.. THAT is the debate, AFAIC.. If you think they do, then why the hell are you even arguing in a thread titled "India: Deserved of No.1?"..


And yes, please do stop with the condescending name calling.. I find most of the Indian posters here much more knowledgable and fair in opinions than aussie and you... Unless you can factually PROVE why India DO NOT deserve to be #1, your arguments are nothing. All you are saying is maybe there are better sides around. Well, maybe there are, but unless India plays them there is no real way to judge anything and that is the end of that.