CricAddict
Cricketer Of The Year
Yeah, I was so happy at that time that we scored 500+ and then that happened.That record-making match, where Jayasuriya and Mahanama tortured our clueless bowling, was the epitome.
Yeah, I was so happy at that time that we scored 500+ and then that happened.That record-making match, where Jayasuriya and Mahanama tortured our clueless bowling, was the epitome.
We constantly lost to Pakistan too at that time (Except WCs of course ). Any win over Pak/SL was seen as an upset.I remember a patch after world cup when we lost constantly v sri Lanka in odis. There was a banner that India could not even think of beating lanka. And it was true at the time.
Harbhajan did well on that Galle minefield. But other than that he never bowled as well as in India. Similarly all Sri Lankan spinners struggled with the SG and it's large seam.Harby averaged 28 during the 2008 tour, and specifically took 10 wickets in the same match Sehwag scored his double so idk where your coming up with the Harbhjan was taken to the cleaners bit. Harby also missed out on the most bowler friendly track of his 2010 tour where Mishra came in and took wickets afterwards.
And as you mentioned, SL's batting line up this passed tour was the weakest it's been since forever. So that also has to be taken into consideration.
LOL Galle was not a minefield, low scoring games don't automatically become minefields, India in 08 simply couldn't play Mendis and Murali (other than GG/Sehwag), and it wasn't because the pitches were minefields. Also I was only countering your point about Harbhajan being taken to the cleaners which is inaccurate, he had his share of good and bad games. Obviously he wasn't as good as in India, I never claimed otherwise.Harbhajan did well on that Galle minefield. But other than that he never bowled as well as in India. Similarly all Sri Lankan spinners struggled with the SG and it's large seam.
Galle 08 was a very difficult pitch.LOL Galle was not a minefield, low scoring games don't automatically become minefields, India in 08 simply couldn't play Mendis and Murali (other than GG/Sehwag), and it wasn't because the pitches were minefields. Also I was only countering your point about Harbhajan being taken to the cleaners which is inaccurate, he had his share of good and bad games. Obviously he wasn't as good as in India, I never claimed otherwise.
Nah, everyone thinks it was because of Sehwag's innings in comparison to everyone else, but really it was a good pitch if you applied yourself well enough, I remember Vaas getting Tendulkar simply by setting him up instead of the pitch playing tricks, and guys like Karthik charging out of insecurity. Things like that were the cause of low scores, not the pitch.Galle 08 was a very difficult pitch.
Let's put it this way. indian spinners were not good on pitches which provided only a bit of spin and generally good for batting. Murali kept exploiting them while Kumble and Harbhajan failed to do it, hence SL had better spinning prowess than India. When it came to Galle it offered so much spin, that the above advantage Murali had just nullified. Murali and Ashwin bowling on Galle track of this series wouldn't have shown any difference in their class. The class would become apparent if they were to bowl on that green track. Murali would have run through the Indian line up, even on that pitch. Harbhajan's all good games came on square turners. On thr other hand Kumble was very unfortunate. I have seen him bowling some mind numbing legbreaks on our tracks, but his best years happen to co-incide with jayasuriya and Aravinda in the God mode. Kumble would have decimated current SL lineup even on that green track in SSC.LOL Galle was not a minefield, low scoring games don't automatically become minefields, India in 08 simply couldn't play Mendis and Murali (other than GG/Sehwag), and it wasn't because the pitches were minefields. Also I was only countering your point about Harbhajan being taken to the cleaners which is inaccurate, he had his share of good and bad games. Obviously he wasn't as good as in India, I never claimed otherwise.
Meh, Vaas is probably the second best bowler after Kapil Dev if non-Pakistani Asian team bowling considered. Vaas working up a batsman is a non-shocker for me, because that'show he get's people out. But I remember Ishant Sharma getting 4 or 5 wickets in the second innings and some balls raring up and some keeping low.Nah, everyone thinks it was because of Sehwag's innings in comparison to everyone else, but really it was a good pitch if you applied yourself well enough, I remember Vaas getting Tendulkar simply by setting him up instead of the pitch playing tricks, and guys like Karthik charging out of insecurity. Things like that were the cause of low scores, not the pitch.
Which is a lot different than saying "Harbhajan and few other minor spinners were taken to cleaners in SL" is what I'm saying. Anyhow we can agree to disagree with the Galle track, seems like practically any track that isn't a complete road = square turner/minefield on this forum.Let's put it this way. indian spinners were not good on pitches which provided only a bit of spin and generally good for batting.
Ya, but for a start he's a much better batsman than Watson.But it all depends on his fitness though. He doesn't appear to be that different from Watson in being injured if he has to bowl 15 overs in a game.
Neither are remotely a good call as neither are close as batsmen to him or bowl enough.Ya there was a time when people thought Watson would be the next mini-Kallis. But Mathews is a much better call than that was.
I did not think Mathews would average 45+ when he first started batting. But looks like he might end up averaging 55+. If he can average 55 for SL, then I have no issues putting him in the same Pedestal with Kallis, or even little higher because he can open up bowling attacks.Neither are remotely a good call as neither are close as batsmen to him or bowl enough.