You know what really grinds my cricketing gears?

[indiaholic]

I dont think the trade-off is that stark. The really good players manage to dominate when conditions are helpful and they find a way to make it work when they are not. They are not going to be mediocre everywhere.

 

[Black_Warrior]

I've just gotten myself all in a tizz about the lack of test matches played in Australia. Each year they should play 8 tests, Perth, Brisbane, Melbourne, Sydney, Adelaide, Cairns, Darwin and Hobart. Heck - even chuck one in in Alice springs. Then we could play a 5 test series against one nation and a 3 test series against another. Why can't this be done? Does gate takings really earn cricket much money, compared to tv rights. With all these virtual tv tools crowds aren't an issue - they could be photo shopped in.

8 tests is 40 days of cricket. We should have this instead of crappy domestic cricket on tv. They could still fit in their big **** and crappy ODI stuff and make a ton in tv rights. Australia needs to play in Cairns and Darwin to make them used to humid hot conditions so we can go over to the sub continent and not be so crappy.

The ONLY negative I can see is 40 days of the channel 9 commentary team. But 40 days might push them over the edge into silence, and commentary the way it was in the old days.

Agreed. I was bummed when they reduced the original 4 match series against South Africa to 3 because they didn't want to play 7 test matches this year

 

[Black_Warrior]

Alright alright. We get it *****. Ashwin is a great bowler. We'll take out his average in England, Australia and South Africa when comparing him with Yasir

 

[harsh.ag]

Just really troublesome to write off players who have dominated in one set of conditions based purely on failures in other conditions.

There is a difference between writing off someone and saying they aren't great, though, especially if, by great, you mean in comparison to the truly greats.

 

[Gnske]

It's not that straightforward tho.

Some players absolutely dominate in one set of conditions and suck in other ones. They have built their game to be extremely suited to one set of conditions, which leads to them being extremely unsuited to others

Some other players are capable of putting in equal performances all over without really dominating in any one sphere.

To rank the former player below the latter player really bothers me, especially since the first player is likely to be a lot more use to a team who plays atleast half their games in conditions that suits them.

On top of that, there is so many factors that influence how a player adapts. Who does he have with him in the dressing room in terms of coaches/mentors? How much time did he have to adapt? Was he playing 7 tests across 8 and a half weeks, or 3 tests over 10 weeks? How old was he when he visited those conditions? How many chances did he get to perform in those conditions? What role was he given, or what situations did he find himself in? Was he doing a job for the team that is more valuable that the scorecard would eventually suggest? Were his successes/failures down to his skill or being in good form/the lack of skill of the opponents?

Just really troublesome to write off players who have dominated in one set of conditions based purely on failures in other conditions.

But what does this have to do with Bangladesh?

 

[TheJediBrah]

It's not that straightforward tho.

Some players absolutely dominate in one set of conditions and suck in other ones. They have built their game to be extremely suited to one set of conditions, which leads to them being extremely unsuited to others

Some other players are capable of putting in equal performances all over without really dominating in any one sphere.

To rank the former player below the latter player really bothers me, especially since the first player is likely to be a lot more use to a team who plays atleast half their games in conditions that suits them.

On top of that, there is so many factors that influence how a player adapts. Who does he have with him in the dressing room in terms of coaches/mentors? How much time did he have to adapt? Was he playing 7 tests across 8 and a half weeks, or 3 tests over 10 weeks? How old was he when he visited those conditions? How many chances did he get to perform in those conditions? What role was he given, or what situations did he find himself in? Was he doing a job for the team that is more valuable that the scorecard would eventually suggest? Were his successes/failures down to his skill or being in good form/the lack of skill of the opponents?

Just really troublesome to write off players who have dominated in one set of conditions based purely on failures in other conditions.

Not sure what you're overall point is with this. If someone says that Bowler X is terrible or this reason then that's obviously harsh. But there's nothing wrong with saying "Bowler X is not a great" or something to that effect if they can't perform in all conditions.

Otherwise you're not giving the extra credit to bowlers that can perform in all conditions that they deserve.

 

[artvandalay]

Yea Ashwin and Jadeja are as good as the spin quartet already.

 

[wellAlbidarned]

there's a difference between being a h4x bowler in home conditions and unpickable overseas and being a h4x bowler but serviceable (e.g can hold up an end and pick up wickets at 35-40ish) overseas. The former is why ashwin/jadeja cop ****.

 

[vcs]

But h4x at home and shite overseas >> serviceable everywhere, therefore Ashwin/Jadeja >> Lyon

 

[TheJediBrah]

But h4x at home and shite overseas >> serviceable everywhere, therefore Ashwin/Jadeja >> Lyon

First part is debatable, second part is obvious though. Lyon is absolute ****

 

[Daemon]

A snake could count the number of matches Lyon has won for Australia on it's hands

 

[OverratedSanity]

Yea Ashwin and Jadeja are as good as the spin quartet already.

They need to do at least something meaning outside the SC imo.

 

[Victor Ian]

Lyon is not absolute ****. He plays for Australia,... post Warne... with captains who do not know how to utilise spin bowlers because at state level, they are an after thought. If he played for India, played most of his games there, and got to bowl the majority overs in each innings he played, I think you'd find he'd be awesome with a well honed and trusted technique.
All you can do is compare apples with apples, and comparing Lyon with Australia's other apples shows that he is actually quite good (Warne was not an apple, but a banana). Granted, Ashwin is a better bowler than Lyon in the subcontinent, but if Ashwin were to have gone through the Australian system, he very well may not even be playing test cricket. Give Lyon his dues, dammit!

 

[harsh.ag]

Lyon is not absolute ****. He plays for Australia,... post Warne... with captains who do not know how to utilise spin bowlers because at state level, they are an after thought. If he played for India, played most of his games there, and got to bowl the majority overs in each innings he played, I think you'd find he'd be awesome with a well honed and tr.
All you can do is compare apples with apples, and comparing Lyon with Australia's other apples shows that he is actually quite good (Warne was not an apple, but a banana). Granted, Ashwin is a better bowler than Lyon in the subcontinent, but if Ashwin were to have gone through the Australian system, he very well may not even be playing test cricket. Give Lyon his dues, dammit!

If Lyon played in India, he might have never made it to any Ranji side tbf.

 

[Victor Ian]

If Lyon played in India, he might have never made it to any Ranji side tbf.

So you really think a guy who averages (this incomplete year) similar to what Ashwin averages in Australia (against Australians lol-spin technique) would not have made your Indian side? You know I'm right - You should know I am not belittling Ashwin - and you know that Lyon is playing the hardest gig any offspinner can gigify while Ashwin is playing among the easiest. There is no need to respond. Just nod your head at the computer screen.

 

[harsh.ag]

So you really think a guy who averages (this incomplete year) similar to what Ashwin averages in Australia (against Australians lol-spin technique) would not have made your Indian side? You know I'm right - You should know I am not belittling Ashwin - and you know that Lyon is playing the hardest gig any offspinner can gigify while Ashwin is playing among the easiest. There is no need to respond. Just nod your head at the computer screen.

Lyon is playing the hardest gig any offspinner can gigify and coming out behind noted SAPO (South Africa's Premier OffSpiner) JP Duminy.

 

[Victor Ian]

Lyon is playing the hardest gig any offspinner can gigify and coming out behind noted SAPO (South Africa's Premier OffSpiner) JP Duminy.

Lyon doesn't get to bowl to Australians. Every other offie gets this free -10 deduction to their averages and +2 wpm. Lyon is a long way from being 'the best', but he is derided only in ignorance of contributing factors beyond his control.

 

[harsh.ag]

Lyon doesn't get to bowl to Australians. Every other offie gets this free -10 deduction to their averages and +2 wpm. Lyon is a long way from being 'the best', but he is derided only in ignorance of contributing factors beyond his control.

Probably derided in full knowledge of those factors by many too.

I don't think he's shite. But he may truly have never played Ranji if he grew up in India because that's just probability.

 

[Howe_zat]

threads remaining stickied for too long.

 

[cnerd123]

threads remaining stickied for too long.

Maybe PEWS thinks there is another ODI scheduled