Contra
Cricketer Of The Year
Huh?
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
39th Match - India v Zimbabwe (14th March)
- Thread starter James
- Start date
Zinzan
Request Your Custom Title Now!
lol, so rather than just concede that you exaggerated, you come back with that argument? really? :P Their attack is improved yes, but 'friggin good' they are not.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Maybe in seven years.
smash84
The Tiger King
it's friggin good for this tournament is what i meant. Isn't it? Or you think they are average for this tournament?
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
What he's doing now is the quickest possible route to him playing for England. I think he just wants to earn a living and support his family playing country cricket, but seven years is the stand down for England.
It's four years for other countries but it's harder to get in in the first place. Could've been available for NZ in four years if he wanted to I suppose.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Well, two things at play here.
1. The ECB have recently changed their rules from the mandated ICC stand down of four years to seven years.
2. It doesn't apply for associate nation --> full member moves. Paul Stirling could play for England in their next ODI, for example.
Zinzan
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Average amongst the top sides. Probably 4th behind Australia, NZ & SA. They def out-bowled SA in their head to head clash, but SA bowlers were much better vs. Pak at Eden Park than India were today, even though SA lost that game. It was their batsmen who lost that.
I think because India's batting is so strong, their bowling only needs to be average to good (amongst the top teams) to be a really dangerous side, and that's how I see it atm.
Their strong batting helps their bowling even when they bowl first, since opposition teams always feel they need a massive total to put any pressure on.
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
I don't know if that means much. They've already played a couple of those teams and bowled well to them. Any batsman can have a great day, especially these days. You have to look at aggregates, and overall, the Indian bowling unit hasn't been terrible. Which is surprising. Really, all Indian bowling has to be is average, and India will do decently well in the WC.
Last edited:
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Completely agree. I wasn't addressing the big picture argument; merely the IMO faulty logic used to support it. India's bowling has been good in this tournament; Mohit suggesting he's a quality limited overs operator at least in the short term has been huge.
Last edited:
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
Fair enough.
smash84
The Tiger King
Didn't this same Zimbo side also cart SA to 280 odd?
And nah, SA bowlers weren't that good against Pakistan. More like bad batting after Pak got the best start of their tournament.
Sure, any team's other aspects of the game i.e. bowling, fielding, batting might feed off each other. That true for every team. Doesn't mean that India aren't bowling well this tournament.
Zinzan
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Nobody said they're not bowling well. I replied to your singular post asking when India;s bowling became so 'friggin good'.
Usually putting 'friggin' before 'good' implies quite a bit more than just 'good', hence why it was a slight exaggeration regardless of what spin you want to put on it.
Meanwhile .....2 down,. Could this be interesting...