Jarquis
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
The difference between Steyn and Anderson > the difference between Swann and Harris.
The difference between Steyn and Anderson > the difference between Swann and Harris.
Bunkum.The difference between Steyn and Anderson > the difference between Swann and Harris.
Haha, well I suppose we'll just disagree on this point then. I don't think it's close, and I suppose you feel the same way from the other side.I'd much, much rather have Anderson and Swann in my attack than Steyn and Harris.
Don't butt in ****.Should have referred it.
Should have referred it.Gambhir was also wrongly given out lbw...
And what did England do in Perth?How did the weak links in India's attack do in Durban? Ishant took 2/78, which is abysmal in the circumstances. Sreesanth took 4/86, which is better. However both men copped an absolute pasting at Centurion, which changes nothing - a team is only as good as its weakest link. In Ishant and Sreesanth, India have two massive weaknesses in their bowling attack.
And what did England do in Perth?How did the weak links in India's attack do in Durban? Ishant took 2/78, which is abysmal in the circumstances. Sreesanth took 4/86, which is better. However both men copped an absolute pasting at Centurion, which changes nothing - a team is only as good as its weakest link. In Ishant and Sreesanth, India have two massive weaknesses in their bowling attack.
Technically we were 2 wickets away from that scoreline, one in each Test.And if we are going to get into the "they were just one wicket away from losing" arguments, then England were just one wicket away from losing the series in South Africa 3-1.
Harris is mediocre and Swann is very good, but we are talking about Dale freaking Steyn here. Anderson is good, but he is nothing on Steyn. Nothing. Plus there are as many question marks about Anderson in unhelpful conditions as there are about Sehwag and Gambhir in unhelpful conditions.Bunkum.
You're right, it's not close. You're just picking the wrong attack.Haha, well I suppose we'll just disagree on this point then. I don't think it's close, and I suppose you feel the same way from the other side.
How dense van you be Markarse? Aus wouldn't have got to 9 wickets in the 1st place if it was not for 2 wrong decisions.Technically we were 2 wickets away from that scoreline, one in each Test.
Small difference in the fact that when South Africa were in that situation they couldn't get us out... Australia were illegitimately denied a wicket which would've won them the Test and drawn the series when they had India 9 down.
Yeah, I think a few have been taking it a bit too literally in this thread but I don't think it is a bad indicator of a team's strength.I don't buy this 'weakest link' theory. Going by that, considering Ishant Sharma and Sreesanth, India should be ranked #8. Being good vs. great in an area matters, and it can (and does) make up for other deficiencies - you can't just look at the weakest link and frankly, I don't think it's even the most important place to look,
I've never disputed that ffs. Go read my post again and pay special attention to the words "when India were 9 down".How dense van you be Markarse? Aus wouldn't have got to 9 wickets in the 1st place if it was not for 2 wrong decisions.
Anderson's answering those questions in Australia. He's putting in the best series performance by a visiting quick to Australia in a long, long time.Harris is mediocre and Swann is very good, but we are talking about Dale freaking Steyn here. Anderson is good, but there is nothing on Steyn. Nothing. Plus there are as many question marks about Anderson in unhelpful conditions as there are about Sehwag and Gambhir in unhelpful conditions.
Anderson has had a great year, but you're asking who I'd pick overall. Steyn can bowl anyone out, anywhere. If conditions are right, and suit Anderson, the difference is smaller. But that's not what we're asking. I don't see it as remotely close. Harris isn't being asked to, and isn't being set the same fields as Swann. Much of that is due to quality but not all of it. He has done just fine this series for example, and done pretty much what they asked him to do.You're right, it's not close. You're just picking the wrong attack.
The difference between Steyn and Anderson this year has been negligible, and over the past 3 years the difference is between a potential ATG bowler and a world class bowler. That's far smaller than the difference between Swann, a world class spinner, and Harris, a barely Test standard spinner.
Oops. My defense is...well, I am Shri.I've never disputed that ffs. Go read my post again and pay special attention to the words "when India were 9 down".
Steyn's incredible and Jimmeh is pretty damn awesome himself but we're talking about the world's best spinner here. Harris is serviceable but he's nothing on Swann. Nothing. Plus there are as many question marks over Harris at playing cricket as there are over Ishant Sharma.Harris is mediocre and Swann is very good, but we are talking about Dale freaking Steyn here. Anderson is good, but he is nothing on Steyn. Nothing. Plus there are as many question marks about Anderson in unhelpful conditions as there are about Sehwag and Gambhir in unhelpful conditions.