Is Laxman a great batsman?

[thierry henry]

Did you watch the Mohali innings?

Did not edge the ball at all. Did not waft. Barely played and missed. Played the pull absolutely superbly. Pitch was up and down. Was quite frankly astonishing cricket.

Thought you were a guy who didn't rate players on looks anyway?

We don't get the India v Australia series on TV in NZ Actually we generally just get cricket from NZ, Australia, and sometimes England.

I don't rate players on appearances, hence the rather hesitant tone of my previous post. When I have watched VVS, what I've seen is pretty much (a) awesome at pounding Australia and NZ by playing half-forward on flat decks, (b) the worst of the worst flat-footed wafters when playing on horrible pitches in NZ, like, that one time.

I guess the thing that coloured my opinion more than anything was the fact that his best performances have been against Australia, and when you look at that vs his career record, it tends to suggest he is awesome against Australia and pretty much just adequate apart from that. For most people "rising to the occasion" is the mark of a great, whereas I tend to get the sh*ts at players who only turn up when the eyes of the world are on them.

But obviously others have broken it down a bit more and it makes pretty good reading for VVS so my perceptions may have been a little awry.

 

[aussie]

Always regarded him as overrated. I suppose this is yet more evidence that I see cricket almost exactly the opposite to everyone else.

Then again, I've always had the impression watching him that he was particularly poor on pace-bowler friendly surfaces (as in, poorer than his more highly regarded contemporaries), but I can't say I've broken the numbers down to investigate, and from skim-reading this thread it appears his numbers are actually very consistent across the board.

It's really just his technique, people say he's a lovely batsman to watch but to me his technique has always appeared poorly suited to playing really good quick stuff.

Indeed i have gotten this impression as well looking @ the lack of footwork in his technique. Where i always felt he would be vulnerable to inswingers, where only in the 2004/05 series vs AUS did i ever see a opposition bowling attack really expose it.

But that AUS attack in that series was special. You have to really good to really test Laxman their TBF. Since that lack of footwork has always been sort of strenght of his also, where he scores alot of runs through mid-wicket.

 

[Cevno]

I don't Understand how pitches which are turning,have variable bounce can be considered as flat wickets?

The last i checked Spinners were also a part of the game. If the track does not suit pacers more than spinners it does not automatically become FLAT.

 

[Jono]

Yeah its an annoying CW oddity, that one.

 

[vcs]

Cricket is not cricket unless it is played on a 1980's Perth or Sabina Park wicket with 4 quicks steaming in at you. Or so some would have you believe on here.

 

[Migara]

Ban the spinners!

 

[Shri]

Ban the spinners!

Hair tried.

 

[Migara]

Hair tried.

He didn't ban drugs

 

[smash84]

I don't Understand how pitches which are turning,have variable bounce can be considered as flat wickets?

The last i checked Spinners were also a part of the game. If the track does not suit pacers more than spinners it does not automatically become FLAT.

So true. Some of the people try to sound as if only fast bowling is an art and that spin bowling does not exist.

I believe that it adds to the beauty of the game that you have hard, bouncy, and pacy wickets in some parts of the world and square turners in some other parts of the world. It adds to the diversity and requires a different skill set altogether.

World cricket would become boring if all places would have wickets supporting quick bowlers. Mind you the spinning tracks produce some of the best pitches to practice the art of reverse swing.

 

[aussie]

I don't Understand how pitches which are turning,have variable bounce can be considered as flat wickets?

The last i checked Spinners were also a part of the game. If the track does not suit pacers more than spinners it does not automatically become FLAT.

Usually flat pitches which are found in the sub-continent deteriorate on the final days into turners which have variable bounce etc. Which indeed is a bowler friendly condition for spinners. But the conditions/pitch do start of flat & its harder for quicks especially to take wickets on them for eg, which is why only the great/very good bowlers who havehad the ability to revese-swing the ball get accolades for taking wickets on such surfaces.

 

[Shri]

Usually flat pitches which are found in the sub-continent deteriorate on the final days into turners which have variable bounce etc. Which indeed is a bowler friendly condition for spinners. But the conditions/pitch do start of flat & its harder for quicks especially to take wickets on them for eg, which is why only the great/very good bowlers who havehad the ability to revese-swing the ball get accolades for taking wickets on such surfaces.

The best pitches in the world to get early reverse swing too. Fast bowlers outside Asia have no ****ing idea about these pitches' advantages and suck at using them, thats all.

 

[Sanz]

I don't Understand how pitches which are turning,have variable bounce can be considered as flat wickets?

The last i checked Spinners were also a part of the game. If the track does not suit pacers more than spinners it does not automatically become FLAT.

I also don't understand how people make an assumption that only non-subcontinent pitches are pace friendly and If a player does not do well there he is automatically considered an average player.

 

[Sanz]

Usually flat pitches which are found in the sub-continent deteriorate on the final days into turners which have variable bounce etc. Which indeed is a bowler friendly condition for spinners. But the conditions/pitch do start of flat & its harder for quicks especially to take wickets on them for eg, which is why only the great/very good bowlers who havehad the ability to revese-swing the ball get accolades for taking wickets on such surfaces.

It would be nice to get some real statistics supporting such a hypothesis instead of simply making stuff up.

 

[Migara]

Shh! Batsmen who cannot play on greentops are ****. Batsmen who cannot play on dustbowls of course are victim of black magic.

 

[Jono]

I also don't understand how people make an assumption that only non-subcontinent pitches are pace friendly and If a player does not do well there he is automatically considered an average player.

It just makes them feel better.

There were two results in the two matches, two out of three matches had a result in Sri Lanka. When South Africa toured India there were two results out of two matches.

 

[vcs]

It just makes them feel better.

There were two results in the two matches, two out of three matches had a result in Sri Lanka. When South Africa toured India there were two results out of two matches.

Results are irrelevant, a match has to end within 3 days and atleast one innings has to end with < 100 runs for a wicket to be considered a "sporting" one.

I got laughed at for suggesting that the England-Pakistan series actually produced some pretty ordinary cricket with sub-standard batting compared to the India-SL series.

 

[Teja.]

Haha, was so ridiculous with people with NFI whining in the tour thread about how flat pitches are in the sub-continent and how boring the matches are when one such match happened in SL. That too was succeeded and preceded by great match.

Will have fun posting about the Adelaide pitch and draws in general during the ashes tbh.

 

[vcs]

Haha, was so ridiculous with people with NFI whining in the tour thread about how flat pitches are in the sub continent and how boring the matches are when one such match happened in SL that too was succeeded and preceded by great match.

Will have fun posting about the Adelaide pitch and draws in general during the ashes tbh.

LOL, and there was talk about batsmen inflating their averages on those wickets as well. We had someone questioning how so many subcontinent batsmen have 50+ averages right now in world cricket, shock horror, they know how to play on wickets they have grown up on.

 

[Jono]

I got laughed at for suggesting that the England-Pakistan series actually produced some pretty ordinary cricket with sub-standard batting compared to the India-SL series.

Eng vs. Pak was such a poor series bar one match. **** batsman hanging their bat out and getting caught behind to pretty good fast bowling may be a nice novelty, but it wears out after the first match.

 

[vcs]

Eng vs. Pak was such a poor series bar one match. **** batsman hanging their bat out and getting caught behind to pretty good fast bowling may be a nice novelty, but it wears out after the first match.

And the one match which had a fascinating period of play (Broad-Trott partnership after England lost half their side for not much) turned out to be fixed.