India ATG Team- Open Voting

[SJS]

than Mankad's 5

Why Mankad SJS? He's a popular choice in these Indian sides, but I'm never sure why.

Basically because he lends balance. He was the only genuine all rounder we ever had who could have played for the side if he was only a batsman or only a bowler. This is a very rare quality. He was our best all time left arm spinner till Bedi came on the scene and he was the holder of the world's highest first wicket partnership (alongwith Pankaj Roy) till just a few years ago.

Some very celeberated Indians could not get on to the Lord's honours board and Mankad got there both for a century and a five wicket haul in the same match !!

Opening the innings he top scored with 72 against an attack which included Fred Trueman, Alec Bedser, Jim Laker and Rollie Jenkins. India forlded for just 235 after he and Roy had put on over a hundred for the first wicket.

Then when England battered India for 537 runs, he bowled 73 overs ! They cost him 196 runs and he took five wickets. The England batting side read

• Hutton,
• Simpson
• May
• Compton
• Graveney
• Watkins
• Evans

When India batted again with an innings defeat looming large, he lost his opening partner this time for a blob. Mankad then took charge of the celeberated England attack and when the score was 270 for 2 he got out for 184. Over two thirds of the runs scored by his team. India collapsed thereafter for the addition of just another 108 runs. No one else in the side made reached fifty.

With England needing less than 80 to comlete the formalities of a win, Mankad came on to bowl after just one over with the new ball and bowled 24 consecutive overs for 32 runs and in partnership with off spinner Ghulam Ahmed made England struggle to reach the score of 79 for 2 in the 50th over !!

. . . and he had been pulled out of the leagues to play in that series.

He did not do much in the next two Tests.

In the series before this he had been consistency personified taking

• 7 wkts in the 1st test,
• 4 in the second,
• 6 in the 3rd,
• 5 in the fourth and
• 12 in the 5th

His 34 wickets in the series cost under 17 each. In addition he averaged just under 32 with the bat.

At his peak between 1951 and 1957 he played 29 Tests averaging 38 with the bat and 28 with the ball. These included three centuries and a double PLUS seven five wkt hauls in an innings and two ten fors in a Test.

He was good. His figures have to be seen in the context of where India stood in cricket at that time. When he retired at the end of the 58-59 season,

• Only Umrigar with 2268 and Hazare with 2192 had scored more than Mankad's 2109 runs in Tests
• Only Umrigar 6 and Hazare 7 had scored more Test hundreds than Mankad's five.
• No one came close to his 162 test wickets in 44 Tests. Gupte was second with 117 (26 Tests)
• He had take more catches (33) than anyone else for India and this included wicket keepers. Umrigar 20 and Phadkar 21 were next.
• Of the bowlers who played in at least ten Tests, only Gupte 27.33 and Ghulam Ahmed 30.17 had a better bowling average than Mankad's 32.3
• He was only the fourth player in the game to take 100 test wickets and score 2000 test runs. Only Rhodes, Miller and Bailey had done this till then. Only Miller had got 150 Test wickets with 2000 Test runs before him

As I said, we need to look at his figures in context. Also as I mentioned, he gets considered because he balances the side. Before Sehwag came into the picture, I have seen some people using him as an opener with Gavaskar to solve another area where India has had a shortage of specialists.

So, while his figures do not rank with those of the top all rounders from other parts of the world or the figures we are now getting used to, Many people, including some all time greats have used Learie Constantine in XI's selected by them. Look at Sir Learie's figures and you will wonder why but read about him and it sounds different.

Remember two Bedi Chandra (or Pras) with Kumble and Srinath make for a terribly long tail. :o(

 

[Red]

Much appreciated SJS. You are a champ.

It seems Mankad spent much of his career opening the batting which I didn't know. And he was fairly successful as an opener. I never knew that.

And he was a slow left arm bowler. For some reason I always thought he was a right arm quick/medium. Hmmm....

 

[SJS]

This piece was written by John Arlott on Mankad while covering the 1946 England tour by India.

VINOO MANKAD - the bowler

His rebellius, straight black hair gleaming, laughter richly present in his deep set eyes, he bustles powerfully through his short run and bowls with a thick arm - the orthodox left hander's spinner leaving the bat, or, when least expected and with no change of action, the ball that goes with the arm. And the ball bowled, he is tense to scamper to mod-on or mid-off to stifle the single at conception. Give him the ball for he wants to bowl again, his over will last little more than a minute and he has so much to do. There is no time for expressions of regret or surprise or disappointment, there are many ways to dismiss a batsman and he will try them all. Throw a bail high full toss, or the spinner, tossed higher but pitching no further up, the in swinger at almost medium pace, or spin to a length and watch = but never become automatic, never bowl the aimless ball, never let the batsman rest.

For his first over in England, Mankad was a good slow left-hander. By the end of the tour there is little doubt that he was the best slow left-arm spinner in the world. His spinner which turned on the most perfect batting wickets in India, sometimes turned too much in Englandbut he had control of degree of spin quite early and it helped him to take many wickets. The surprise quicker balls (the one that went with the arm and the definite in-swinger) beat many batsmen. At one time he threatened to swing too often, but just a word was enough and he became the spinner with the surprise faster ball - a faster ball which could not be detected in delivery. Perhaps his arm was at times a little lower than the purists would wish, but largely it was that his thick muscular arm and shoulder development contrived to exaggerate a tendency to drop the arm.

Always Vinoo was learning, learning to bowl to the left hander (his first major problem) learning to vary his field more than he needed to do for Indian wickets and Indian batsmen, (approaching nearer to uniformity) learning to gauge the pace of wickets, learning to sum up the batsmen encountered for the first time​

 

[NUFAN]

Vinoo Mankad at 6
Amar Singh at 9

 

[Flametree]

Mankad at 6, Gupte at 11.

Though ask me in ten minutes and I'll probably say Sehwag or Laxman at 6 and Bedi at 11....

 

[SJS]

VINOO MANKAD - The Batsman

As a batsman Mankad is careful, watchful in defence but with a hitting power which won him runs and respect in his first Test Match. His late cut is a jab he enjoys, his leg-hitting and his cover drives are his main source of income. He will score many hundreds for he never lacks in interest or concentration : he could be made into an opening batsman but I hope he will not allow this to happen. There are other comparable batsmen but bowlers of his class are are few. In the field he always tried hard, ran well and looked for catches.

At Bradford, keen eyes, set in long Yorkshire heads, watched him hour long, before careful tongues pronounced him right. Only one other cricketer besides Mankad succeeded in taking 100 wickets and scoring 1000 runs in the English cricket season of 1946. That relative standing ranks Mankad fairly in English cricket.

In 1947 Mankad will return to England to play in League cricket where undoubtedly he will be a great success. But it is essential that he returns to India each season there, and that, so long as he is wanted, he should be available for representative Indian teams. Mankad is a player of a type most rare and most needed in Indian cricket. He follows in the traditions of great English professional all rounders. Like them he is a craftsman who lives his art so deeply that it becomes almost an art. When the ball is thrown to him he catches it as naturally as a mason takes up his chisel, apparently unconsciously, yet with a movement which is part of nature.

Like the craftsman he is without duplicity, yet full of the mellow artifice of practice. The type is understandable in England where it may be bred into succeeding generations, but in India, where cricket on an intensive scale is relatively new, it is rare and to be treasured. For Mankad the game was always bigger than his own figures; when he had bowled until his spinning finger was raw and bleeding, he still bowled without complaint - and he never ceased to spin the ball. He has absorbed the strategy of the game as naturally as breathing, but, for all his technical ability, the greatest gift he has to share with cricketers is a bedrock humour which shows a mischief devoid of malice, his kindness springing from understanding. He belongs to cricket, cricket is richer for having him and I am happy to know him for my friend.​

Source : Indian Summer : John Arlott

 

[Blakus]

Mankad
Prasanna

 

[Coronis]

Mankad, Prasanna.

 

[kyear2]

Mohammad Nissar
Erapali Prasanna

Engineer can bat at 6 with Dev at 7. This need needs all the bowling it can get and Nissar's speed would be an asset.

 

[watson]

Vinoo Mankad is in the team no problem but the rest of votes remain mixed;

Prasanna = 4
Chandra = 2
Gupte =1
Bedi = 1
Nissar = 1
Amar Singh = 1

 

[watson]

Vinoo Mankad
Mohammad Nissar

 

[Flametree]

Why is Prasanna so highly rated? Genuine question, don't know that I've ever seen him bowl. He averaged 30.4 compared with Bedi's 28.7 and Chandra's 29.6, bowling in similar situations. Plus Gupte also averaged under 30. Just curious why folk would pick the guy with the highest average over the other two?

Ok, just realised that if you pick Mankad you then get a lefty, a leggie and an offie. Is that pretty much it? For my view, Kumble was enough of a top-spinner almost that any other leggie selected is hardly going to allow the batsmen to become too comfortable with bowlers of a similar style...

 

[NUFAN]

Vinoo Mankad at 6
Amar Singh at 9

Changing my Amar Singh vote to Chandra.

I love his story and his match winning ability and makes me not care about playing only two quicks.

Chandra, Kumble and Mankad is a good spin attack.

 

[watson]

Why is Prasanna so highly rated? Genuine question, don't know that I've ever seen him bowl. He averaged 30.4 compared with Bedi's 28.7 and Chandra's 29.6, bowling in similar situations. Plus Gupte also averaged under 30. Just curious why folk would pick the guy with the highest average over the other two?

Ok, just realised that if you pick Mankad you then get a lefty, a leggie and an offie. Is that pretty much it? For my view, Kumble was enough of a top-spinner almost that any other leggie selected is hardly going to allow the batsmen to become too comfortable with bowlers of a similar style...

Here is Ashley Mallet's take on Prasanna;

The Indian offspinner Erapalli Prasanna was a small, rotund chap, with little hands and stubby fingers. Not the size of hand you'd think would be able to give a cricket ball tremendous purchase.

Pras, as he was affectionately called, bounced up to the wicket and got very side-on. He was short, so he tended to toss the ball up, and he spun it so hard it hummed. Unlike the majority of spinners, he could entice you forward with tantalising flight or force you back, and often got a batsman trapped on the crease. His changes of pace weren't always as subtle as Warne's, but Pras broke the rhythm of batsmen better than any spinner I've seen - especially with that quicker ball, which perplexed the best players of spin bowling in his era.

He possessed a mesmerising quality in that he seemed to have the ball on a string. You'd play forward and find yourself way short of where you expected the ball to pitch. In Madras once, I thought I'd take him on and advanced down the wicket only, to my horror, find that Pras had pulled hard on the "string" and I was miles short of where the ball pitched. I turned, expecting to see Farokh Engineer remove the bails, only to see the ball, having hit a pothole, climb over the keeper's head for four byes.

Pras was one of the few spinners to worry the life out of Ian Chappell, for he could trap him on the crease or lure him forward at will. Doug Walters, on the other hand, played the offspinners better than most - perhaps because his bat came down at an angle and the more you spun it, the more likely it was to hit the middle of his bat.

In 49 Tests Prasanna took 189 wickets at an average of 30.38. For a spinner who played a lot on the turning tracks of India, his average is fairly tall, but Pras was a wicket-taker and he took risks, inviting the batsman to hit him into the outfield. He always believed that if the batsman was taking him on and trying to hit him while he was spinning hard, dipping and curving the ball, he would have the final word.

For his tremendous performances in Australia in 1967-68, I place Prasanna if not above, at least on par with another genius offspinner, the Sri Lankan wizard Muttiah Muralitharan.

Ashley Mallett : Ashley Mallett on the five best spinners he has seen | Cricinfo Magazine | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[watson]

Changing my Amar Singh vote to Chandra.

I love his story and his match winning ability and makes me not care about playing only two quicks.

Chandra, Kumble and Mankad is a good spin attack.

Good call I reckon. Will follow suit despite the fact that both Chandra and Kumble are fastish leggies.

 

[watson]

Mankad = tons
Prasanna = 4
Chandra = 4
Gupte =1
Bedi = 1
Nissar = 1

 

[watson]

Something to think about.....

It was a diet by spin for opposition batsmen, and yet there was plenty of variety in the menu to choose from. Bedi was the classical left-arm spinner with a smooth action and fantastic deception; Chandrasekhar was as unorthodox as Bedi was orthodox, bowling sharp topspinners, googlies and legspinners at almost medium pace; Prasanna and Venkataraghavan were both offspinners, but while Prasanna was guileful and crafty, Venkat was accurate and relentless. Together they defined the Indian bowling attack, on turning tracks at home and in seaming conditions abroad.

The overall stats for three of those four spinners are pretty similar: Bedi led in terms of matches played, wickets taken and bowling averages, but Chandrasekhar and Prasanna weren't far behind. Venkat's stats suffered in comparison to the other three - he averaged less than three wickets per Test - but his career economy rate of 2.27 shows he was tough to score off.

Chandrasekhar's average was slightly higher than Bedi's, but his strike rate was easily the best among them all. At his best he was probably the most unplayable of them, and he was the only one among the four who averaged more than four wickets per Test. India didn't win too many overseas Tests during that time, but when they did, Chandrasekhar had a significant role to play in each: in five overseas wins he took six in an innings five times, and averaged 17.14.

Stats from the past: The era of India's spinners | Highlights | Cricinfo Magazine | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[SJS]

India's Erappalli Prasanna, the best spinner I have faced in Test cricket. A tiny man, he was a master of flight. In fact, his small stature probbly gave him an advantage over taller off spinners like Gibbs and Mallett, for 'Pras' alays threw threw the ball high in the air. Most times batsmen expected a juicy half volley or even a full toss as the ball left his hand, but such was his control of flight that the ball always managed to arrive a fraction shorter than the batsman had anticipated.

Prasanna was an attacking spinner, always always giving the batsman the impression that he was out to get their wicket. Most slow bowlers use seven men on the on side whenthey want to keep the runs down but when Prasanna used the same field he would have three men close in catching positions on the leg side. With 'Pras' it was always attack - even in defense.​

Ian Chappell in his autobiography Chappelli

 

[NUFAN]

Keep it up SJS, really enjoying these teams and I must admit hearing his reasoning for not selecting a player such as Trevor Goddard (who CW generally likes) is fascinating.

Eric Rowan seems like a great selection, but I'm not sure about Athol Rowan. He doesn't scream out 'great player', maybe Heine should have been selected anyway.

 

[SJS]

Keep it up SJS, really enjoying these teams and I must admit hearing his reasoning for not selecting a player such as Trevor Goddard (who CW generally likes) is fascinating.

Eric Rowan seems like a great selection, but I'm not sure about Athol Rowan. He doesn't scream out 'great player', maybe Heine should have been selected anyway.

Thanks but I have deleted it from here since it was posted in this thread by mistake.
You can read the rest of it Here