Which Indian team do you think will win in a 5 test series ?

[vcs]

For instance, Kohli really struggled against Moeen at Southampton recently when there was rough outside the offstump for the right-hander. I was hoping Rahane would shield him from Moeen in that partnership because he looked much more comfortable against that line of attack. Whereas Kohli looked totally convincing against Rashid/Anderson/Stokes compared to Rahane. Different players have different strengths/weaknesses.

 

[sunilz]

You can't say "X is a bad player of spin" if they do badly in one country. You can say they played spin badly in one country, but you can't say in this case Ponting was a bad player of spin when he played it well everywhere but one country.

Was bizarre he never did well in India until his last two tours, when he was pretty much past it, yet in his peak he did nothing there. Weird.

What do you take from Lillee's record given he played one match in SL and three in Pakistan? At a pinch you can bag him for the Pakistan series, yet in his career he bowled 30 overs in SL and 32 in WI, the latter with a stress fracture which ruled him out for a year afterwards. Seems a bit odd to bag him on those numbers as a helpful wicket bully. My understanding is the decks in the WI back in the 70s were pretty helpful to quicks anyway. To the point where one visiting test skipper capitulated and forfeited his country's second innings rather than face up to it.

Didn't Philip Hughes die 4 years ago . Would you blame any captain from protecting his bowlers if opposition team start targetting their body ?
Full Scorecard of West Indies vs India 4th Test 1976 - Score Report | ESPNcricinfo.com

 

[sunilz]

Any way why would Burgey bring an Indian team into discussion when we are talking about AUS players . I would request CW mods to publicly warn Burgey to not bring Indian players into discussion whenever some Indian poster discusses AUS cricketers . I have been warned on this thread itself to not target the nationality of the posters . Otherwise it would mean that CW has different rules for different posters.

 

[h_hurricane]

Knowledge is saying Lillee did poorly in the SC and WI.

Wisdom is understanding context is important and that the same old dim witted attempts at nationalistic dickwaving are ****ing tiresome.

His tours to SC and WI happened in 1973,1980 and 1984(spaced across 11 years). They did not happen within a 1 year period or something like that where injuries, poor form etc are genuinely acceptable.

Lillee in SC and WI - 6 wickets at 90
Ashwin in SENA - 48 wickets at 42
Jadeja in SENA - 32 wickets at 40
Yasir Shah in SENA - 28 wickets at 58

Expect Lillee to progressively improve his record in SC and WI if he had played as much as others he mentioned here, but they will not look much better.

Was Lillee a great bowler ? Certainly yes
Was Lillee a favorable track bully ? Unfortunately yes.

And where did this nationalistic thing come in between ?

 

[h_hurricane]

Didn't Philip Hughes die 4 years ago . Would you blame any captain from protecting his bowlers if opposition team start targetting their body ?
Full Scorecard of West Indies vs India 4th Test 1976 - Score Report | ESPNcricinfo.com

Yeah, Bedi would have looked stupid there if he had his team mates killed. Also WI tracks in 1970s were quite helpful for the WI bowlers who knew how to bowl on them. Not for opposition bowlers who did not know how to get batsmen out.

 

[Burgey]

You have a far better argument wrt to Ponting in India than you do this one about Lillee. I don't know how you can possibly say his record in the WI should count against him in this argument because:

a. the only time he toured there he bowled in one test with literally a spinal stress fracture; and
b. the decks in the WI were far more pace bowler friendly then than they are now.

Likewise, he played one match in SL. I mean, if he'd taken 7 fer 60 in the first innings of that match, would he qualify as an all-wicket bowler in your eyes because he rifled out SL just after they'd been admitted? It's a pretty ordinary approach.

As I mentioned earlier, he's certainly right to be marked down on his poor series in Pakistan in the early 80s, but I think relying on two other tests 11 years apart as a basis for this (or any) contention is questionable tstl.

 

[Burgey]

Any way why would Burgey bring an Indian team into discussion when we are talking about AUS players . I would request CW mods to publicly warn Burgey to not bring Indian players into discussion whenever some Indian poster discusses AUS cricketers . I have been warned on this thread itself to not target the nationality of the posters . Otherwise it would mean that CW has different rules for different posters.

I'd bring it up because some idiot is making an assertion that wickets in the WI were flat as tacks in the 1970s, when the evidence suggests otherwise. It's directly relevant to one of aspects of the discussion.

Edit: and not an aspect which I raised, btw.

 

[OverratedSanity]

That Pakistan series had notoriously pace-unfriendly picthes too iirc. 11 wickets taken by the quicks all series.

 

[Burgey]

Yeah but I think by his own admission he bowled some very ordinary stuff.

 

[OverratedSanity]

I'd say a more valid criticism of Lillee/Chappell than the HTB thing is that they picked and chose their tours.

 

[sunilz]

I'd bring it up because some idiot is making an assertion that wickets in the WI were flat as tacks in the 1970s, when the evidence suggests otherwise. It's directly relevant to one of aspects of the discussion.

Edit: and not an aspect which I raised, btw.

So you accept that pitches in WI were extremely bowler friendly . So please also tell me would runs scored by Gavaskar in this series you brought up in your earlier discussion should be counted or not
India in West Indies Test Series, 1975/76 Cricket Team Records & Stats | ESPNcricinfo.com

I am bringing this up because you were arguing in best openers thread that Gavaskar struggled against good bowlers.

 

[Burgey]

Of course they "count." The great Bernard Julien and Vanburn Holder will always be rightly remembered as "the unplayables."

I didn't say he struggled against good bowlers, I said his record flatters him at first glance. For example, he toured here against a WSC-less team in 1977 and against a Rebel-tour less side here in 85-86, and averaged a zillion, as he should. He toured here in 81 against a full strength side with WSC players back and averaged 28. He also averaged 28 across five matches for the ROW team here in 71/72, which aren't regarded as tests, but did involve him playing a series out here against the test XI. So you look at his record and say "Wow, this **** averages 51 in Australia, I'll have him in an ATG touring side to come here", but you need to put things into context. It's not that hard to work out for most people, is it?

 

[h_hurricane]

a. the only time he toured there he bowled in one test with literally a spinal stress fracture; and

Ashwin was injured in the recent test in Edgbaston and he has been given a dressing down by everyone(rightfully so). Why would Lillee be given benefit of doubt. Injuries are part and parcel of one's career. It is up to the player involved to manage it. It cannot be used as an excuse for poor performance. Or,why play at all if injured ?

b. the decks in the WI were far more pace bowler friendly then than they are now.
I did not dispute this.

Likewise, he played one match in SL. I mean, if he'd taken 7 fer 60 in the first innings of that match, would he qualify as an all-wicket bowler in your eyes because he rifled out SL just after they'd been admitted? It's a pretty ordinary approach.

All he could manage was 3/100 against a minnow opponent in its dayboo days. If you take out this test match from his SC and WI record, it will look even worse.

As I mentioned earlier, he's certainly right to be marked down on his poor series in Pakistan in the early 80s, but I think relying on two other tests 11 years apart as a basis for this (or any) contention is questionable tstl.

I used this as a criteria because reasons like flat decks(in Pak not WI), injuries are cited for his poor performance. Guy got 11 years to improve himself. Either he should have played more in alien conditions(he didn't for reasons not entirely unavoidable) or should have performed better in the limited occasions he played.

 

[sunilz]

Of course they "count." The great Bernard Julien and Vanburn Holder will always be rightly remembered as "the unplayables."

You do know that even good bowlers look ATG on bowling friendly wickets . For example current Indian pace attack of Bumrah/Shami/Ishant have taken more wickets in a year than any pace attack in history of cricket because they bowled on mostly bowler friendly surfaces . Now i know you would mock these bowlers but this is the first time in nearly 100 years that an AUS batsman has failed to score century in home tour . Before you bring weakened batting line up argument all of Shaun marsh, Mitch marsh, Khwaja scored century in ashes last summer .
https://cricket.yahoo.net/news/most-wickets-taken-pace-trio-020000184

Never judge a bowling attack by its name particulary on bowling friendly surfaces . Until 2017 , IND was the only Asian country to win a test series in WI . So those runs scored by Gavaskar meant a lot . Didn't Lyon and Okeffe wreaked havoc on 2017 tour to IND ?. And they are no Warne/Murali.

 

[Spark]

a. the only time he toured there he bowled in one test with literally a spinal stress fracture; and

Ashwin was injured in the recent test in Edgbaston and he has been given a dressing down by everyone(rightfully so). Why would Lillee be given benefit of doubt. Injuries are part and parcel of one's career. It is up to the player involved to manage it. It cannot be used as an excuse for poor performance. Or,why play at all if injured ?

b. the decks in the WI were far more pace bowler friendly then than they are now.
I did not dispute this.

Likewise, he played one match in SL. I mean, if he'd taken 7 fer 60 in the first innings of that match, would he qualify as an all-wicket bowler in your eyes because he rifled out SL just after they'd been admitted? It's a pretty ordinary approach.

All he could manage was 3/100 against a minnow opponent in its dayboo days. If you take out this test match from his SC and WI record, it will look even worse.

As I mentioned earlier, he's certainly right to be marked down on his poor series in Pakistan in the early 80s, but I think relying on two other tests 11 years apart as a basis for this (or any) contention is questionable tstl.

I used this as a criteria because reasons like flat decks(in Pak not WI), injuries are cited for his poor performance. Guy got 11 years to improve himself. Either he should have played more in alien conditions(he didn't for reasons not entirely unavoidable) or should have performed better in the limited occasions he played.

Surely two Tests is clearly in the regime of smallsamplesizelol

 

[OverratedSanity]

Surely two Tests is clearly in the regime of smallsamplesizelol

I think it's a fair enough point that he shouldve played more though

 

[sunilz]

On the request of Burgey I am removing Ponting's runs scored in WI because he faced a rubbish bowling line up in 2003 tour where he scored most of his runs
Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

So Ponting averages only 42 overseas if you remove his runs scored in WI . See it doesn't look good when you remove all the matches where player scored runs.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Why do I only remember Omari Banks and Vasbert Drakes as the rubbish bowlers in that series?

 

[sunilz]

Why do I only remember Omari Banks and Vasbert Drakes as the rubbish bowlers in that series?

You missed "mind the windows".

 

[Burgey]

a. the only time he toured there he bowled in one test with literally a spinal stress fracture; and

Ashwin was injured in the recent test in Edgbaston and he has been given a dressing down by everyone(rightfully so). Why would Lillee be given benefit of doubt. Injuries are part and parcel of one's career. It is up to the player involved to manage it. It cannot be used as an excuse for poor performance. Or,why play at all if injured ?

b. the decks in the WI were far more pace bowler friendly then than they are now.
I did not dispute this.

Likewise, he played one match in SL. I mean, if he'd taken 7 fer 60 in the first innings of that match, would he qualify as an all-wicket bowler in your eyes because he rifled out SL just after they'd been admitted? It's a pretty ordinary approach.

All he could manage was 3/100 against a minnow opponent in its dayboo days. If you take out this test match from his SC and WI record, it will look even worse.

As I mentioned earlier, he's certainly right to be marked down on his poor series in Pakistan in the early 80s, but I think relying on two other tests 11 years apart as a basis for this (or any) contention is questionable tstl.

I used this as a criteria because reasons like flat decks(in Pak not WI), injuries are cited for his poor performance. Guy got 11 years to improve himself. Either he should have played more in alien conditions(he didn't for reasons not entirely unavoidable) or should have performed better in the limited occasions he played.

He literally had a fractured spine which kept him out of cricket for 18 months, came back from it and regained his place as the best quick going around. I don't want to sound churlish, but carrying a niggle into a game because you're overweight and then being able to play on a test or two later is a very different thing to having an injury which had ended the career of anyone who'd had it before 1973. Just a weird argument to hang your hat on. You'd be far better off just relying on the Pakistan series in 81 and saying "small sample size but it's a hole in his record" than relying on the WI test at all.

For some reason you're wanting to look at the records of blokes like Ashwin, who gets to tour everywhere over a four year period, to someone from a different era who didn't tour as many places or as often. It's just a weird comparison to make. If Lillee had played as many tests in the sort of conditions you're hanging your hat on as Ponting did tests in India, you'd have a good enough selection of matches to say Lillee couldn't bowl in those conditions. But the matches just aren't there to make the comparison a valid one.