cricketing narratives that aren't true

[Burgey]

Is that a narrative you think is false?

Isn't he that Yankee motivational speaker?

 

[Shri]

He'd probs be the best seam/"pace" bowler in India, depending on how you view Dev.

No he won't. That would either be Nissar or Amar Singh. Besides, if he were to beat other bowlers to the XI and represent India, he would at least have to be a bowler who did well in India when he came here to be selected in the first place, because we obviously play most of our games at home. But since he averages 145 runs per wicket after three tests here having taken 13 wickets, he would have probably turned out to be a nothing bowler at the FC level, if he played in Indian pitches, and wouldn't have been considered for selection in the first place. And it only gets worse, because he averages 66 in Sri Lanka and 46 in Bangladesh. Forget India, Broad would have been a complete and utter failure no matter where he played in Asia.

But sure lets talk more about how Girly McGirlface is better than bowlers who actually didn't mind toiling in hard conditions unlike a low effort bowler who was not even good enough to average sub 25 at home.

 

[Burgey]

No he won't. That would either be Nissar or Amar Singh. Besides, if he were to beat other bowlers to the XI and represent India, he would at least have to be a bowler who did well in India when he came here to be selected in the first place, because we obviously play most of our games at home. But since he averages 145 runs per wicket after three tests here having taken 13 wickets, he would have probably turned out to be a nothing bowler at the FC level, if he played in Indian pitches and wouldn't have been considered for selection in the first place. And it only gets worse, because he averages 66 in Sri Lanka and 46 in Bangladesh. Forget India, Broad would have been a complete and utter failure no matter where he played in Asia.

But sure lets talk more about how Girly McGirlface is better than bowlers who actually didn't mind toiling in hard conditions unlike a low effort bowler who was not even good enough to average sub 25 at home.

 

[Black_Warrior]

thread because of the comment that pakistan's batting is likely their strong suit now even though the narrative is they can only bowl and can't bat at all

)

Wow The ShadySlim actually read a post by me and got a thread idea based on it

But yeah this narrative that Pakistan can't bat is sooo out of date and annoying and even most Pakistanis themselves still believe it and that makes it more frustrating. I remember Rameez kept saying during the England series how Pakistan can't post big totals and don't score big hundreds. I wanted to throw my bat at the TV if only it would hit him.


And the other instance was when I said recently in a group with a lot of Indian fans that Pakistan currently have a stronger batting line up in Tests. Let's just say it didn't go down very well laugh:

 

[Black_Warrior]

Yea cricket really needs to raise it's analysis game. Mainstream reporters are too lazy.

And this narrative is false. You just need to find the right pieces mate. Plenty of excellent analysis being done on Cricket today..

 

[Black_Warrior]

Ganguly being vastly superior to Dhoni as a Test captain.. he was certainly superior in some facets but going purely by results, you can make a decent argument for both of them.

Correct. Ganguly is apparently this excellent captain because of his overseas record but he did not win a series in England, Australia or South Africa, just like Dhoni. He drew a series in England and Australia, when they were at their weakest, and Dhoni got hammered in England (when they had their greatest side in decades) and Australia when they were still a stronger side than the 03 one sans McGrath and Warne

 

[OverratedSanity]

Correct. Ganguly is apparently this excellent captain because of his overseas record but he did not win a series in England, Australia or South Africa, just like Dhoni. He drew a series in England and Australia, when they were at their weakest, and Dhoni got hammered in England (when they had their greatest side in decades) and Australia when they were still a stronger side than the 03 one sans McGrath and Warne

Not entirely accurate. Ganguly doesn't get credit because of necessarily winning loads of series abroad... he gets credit because India, after ages, started genuinely competing overseas and not disgracing themselves, and because of winning the 01 series against the greatest team ever. Also because he took over when the stink of Azharuddin's match fixing was still fresh and managed to turn things around.

 

[Shady Slim]

Wow The ShadySlim actually read a post by me and got a thread idea based on it

everybody wants to be wanted

 

[Black_Warrior]

Nah it isn't. You look at a guy dominating in ODIs, you assume they are 'talented' and good at all things batting. They get into the test side and stink up the place. What do you do to maintain your story? a) He is just unlucky or needs more time to settle down or b) assume he is not working hard enough or blame ipl riches. Option a works when your sample size is small. We shift to b after that.

Or you start with being **** in ODIs and people say "oh it's because you're not suited to the pressure of run rates, you would make a great test batsman because you're oh so talented"

 

[Black_Warrior]

Not entirely accurate. Ganguly doesn't get credit because of necessarily winning loads of series abroad... he gets credit because India, after ages, started genuinely competing overseas and not disgracing themselves, and because of winning the 01 series against the greatest team ever. Also because he took over when the stink of Azharuddin's match fixing was still fresh and managed to turn things around.

I do believe Ganguly is a good captain for all those reasons you mentioned. But whenever I have seen Ganugly-Dhoni captaincy come up, people always refer to Ganguly's overseas record and Dhoni's 0-8 in 2011 which I feel is an unfair comparison.
Huge difference between England 2011 and England 2002

 

[Shri]

Not in your lawn though.

 

[Flem274*]

-brendon mccullums duck was what sealed the world cup final

150/3 or whatever it was was a solid launching pad. sure starc was incoming and elliott was realistically the only one left capable of standing in his way but that game had life in it until james faulkner showed up.

-fast bouncers being the difference in the 5-0 ashes

ryan harris would have won it for australia on his own anyway. best fast bowler they've produced since lillee retired not called glenn mcgrath.

 

[Black_Warrior]

-fast bouncers being the difference in the 5-0 ashes

Elaborate please. I am not saying that fast bouncers was the difference, but I do believe that MJ was the difference in the first test and second test. From then on wards, England were just broken as a team.

 

[fredfertang]

England haven't won the Ashes 5-0 yet

 

[Flem274*]

i'm saying that if they weren't perishing to compulsive hook shots they would have nicked off to ryan harris bowling unfair deliveries (and they did - dat cook dismissal)

johnson was very important but he wasn't the only important role. it was a dual act but people only focus on johnson. harris was just as important.

 

[Black_Warrior]

True and Harris was a very good bowler. But just have a look at that England batting line up. That was pretty much the same side that became number 1 and formed England's greatest side in decades. You would think they would still be able to negotiate Harris and Johnson (pre series I am saying). So for them to fall apart like the way they did, you have to attribute some of that to the way Johnson routed them in Brisbane.

I guess the way I would put it would be that there was more to Mitchell Johnson in 2013 Ashes than just fast bouncers. Guy could always bowl fast bouncers..even when he was crap.

 

[Furball]

i'm saying that if they weren't perishing to compulsive hook shots they would have nicked off to ryan harris bowling unfair deliveries (and they did - dat cook dismissal)

johnson was very important but he wasn't the only important role. it was a dual act but people only focus on johnson. harris was just as important.

Johnson wrecked the English middle order at Brisbane then destroyed them at Adelaide. Australia could've picked a bowling attack from CW for the remaining 3 Tests and won after that.

 

[Julian87]

I get what Flem is saying. Harris went under the radar for pretty much all of his cricket. Was on course to be one of the better ODI bowlers if we ever actually used him, for example. But you just can not detract from the Johnson factor in that series. I've never seen anything like it or the fandom of the fast bowling that came with it.

 

[Burgey]

One of he best things about that Johnson series is it gives people who never saw Thommo an idea of why those who did speak about how ****ing terrifying he was for about three years in the 70s.

 

[Black_Warrior]

One of he best things about that Johnson series is it gives people who never saw Thommo an idea of why those who did speak about how ****ing terrifying he was for about three years in the 70s.

I didn't need Johnson to remind me of that tbh. I witnessed this as a kid.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQlpeSLWC0g