_Ed_
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Should have been out for 7 when he scored his double ton, tbf: https://www.cricket.com.au/news/dou...e-new-zealand-australia-first-test/2016-02-12
-
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.
In the right place at the right time!
- Thread starter karan_fromthestands
- Start date
Nintendo
Cricketer Of The Year
"Name some individuals in cricket who got a lot of success "on paper", but that doesn't reflect how good/bad they were because of XYZ reasons" was the definition given by OP, Voges average flatters him ALOT and he wouldn't have averaged near that over a full career/ if he didn't bully Windies and NZ at home. Not saying he's a bad player, just not a 60 average test batsmen.
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Ok, you'll notice that when I quoted your post I bolded the words "bullying minnows at home", as that was the only part that I was responding to. As I said myself as well, yes his average flatters him, that wasn't what I was disagreeing with. I was just pointing out that bullying minnows at home was not an accurate statement at all.
Flem is right too, the luckiest thing about Voges was being selected right when he was in ridiculously good form.
Bahnz
Hall of Fame Member
Ken Rutherford for the wrong place at the wrong time category. Not that he was a great player in any event. But getting picked as an 18 year old to go to the West Indies and play against test cricket's greatest ever fast bowling attack at the absolute peak of their pomp was a hospital pass if there ever was one. Couldn't even get dropped because half the batting lineup had been sent to the hospital by the 4th test of that series and he was needed to make up the numbers. After the tour he played a few random games here and there (managed to scrap a couple of 50's against Australia) before finally getting another run against - you guessed it - the west indies.
Averaged 12 after his first 10 tests (was still only 21 at the time) and his career never really recovered.
Averaged 12 after his first 10 tests (was still only 21 at the time) and his career never really recovered.
This was glorious. Ponting spitting the dummy and Duncan Fletcher giving him a send off from the coach's seat. Admittedly England's tactics of resting bowlers for shifts then bringing on one of the best fielders in the country was probably not 'in the spirit of cricket' but you're entitled to still be able to judge whether a single is a single or not. That was not.
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
For a series famous for systemic ball tampering a few substitute fielders is hardly going to be the real issue
karan_fromthestands
State Captain
I feel like Suresh Raina and Sreesanth didn't deserve to be in the 2011 WC final that India won. It's no secret that Dhoni favoured Raina(as told by Yuvraj). And Sreesanth over Ravichandran Ashwin was just baffling to me, Ashwin was such a good limited overs bowler at that time, plus he could bat too. Being in the WC winning playing XI is a great feather in the cap to have, and I thing Sree and Raina simply didn't deserve it. They were in the XI because of favouritism + weird decision making.
Last edited:
sunilz
International Regular
What ?
India weren't winning QF/SF if not for Raina. Did you even watch the match?
karan_fromthestands
State Captain
Yes I did. Just my opinion though. And I don't think the team would have lost the QF/SF without him. He didn't do badly tbh, and this is one of my unpopular opinions.
ankitj
Hall of Fame Member
We weren't winning the cup without Raina. He was crucial. Decision to replace Yusuf Pathan with Raina in the XI in late stages of the world cup was spot on from Dhoni. Raina despite all his limitations was a very situationally aware player and could play according to the situation. A lesser Yuvraj.
karan_fromthestands
State Captain
I am not vouching for Yusuf here tbh, I haven't followed him that much and read a little more about him after his recent retirement, only reason Yusuf had made it to the squad was because of his purple patch just before the WC. I personally feel Raina shouldn't have been in the 15, let alone the playing XI for the 2011 WC. Rohit Sharma and Yusuf should have been fighting for a spot in the team. Again, we did win and I have nothing against Raina, loved his batting. But if not for MSD, he wouldn't have made it to the team. And since it was home conditions, in his absence someone else would have performed without a doubt. Again, totally understand if you(and everyone else) have a different view on this.
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
Agree about Sreesanth but MSD's thinking was that a fast bowler is more likely to trouble SL than another spinner. And Raina was the reason we won the KO games. Yusuf was useless. Rohit was not even in the 15 and we wont have made it beyond QF had it not been for Raina.
ankitj
Hall of Fame Member
I wouldn't be so sure. Raina didn't just tonked a few boundaries in easy conditions, he played with lot of application twice when team was in a very precarious situation while being the last specialist batsman in.
karan_fromthestands
State Captain
I like Raina's style of play and in no way I am trying to put him down here. And what you guys are saying might be correct, I just have a very different opinion on this. I've been posting on this in bits and pieces but here's what I really felt about the entire thing -
Yusuf was probably never the right choice at number 7. Maybe if he was slotted in at number 5-6 he might have worked coz most of his impactful innings came when he walked in early. So yes, I am not really trying to say that Yusuf was a better choice tbh.
I always felt that in 2011 WC, MSD should have played at number 7 with all the experience he had and allowed the guys to fight it out for the number 6 position. That would have opened up other names instead of just Raina and Yusuf for selection. I think that in those conditions Rohit Sharma at 6 and MSD at 7 would have been ideal.
It's just a POV, I don't expect a lot of people to agree because of how the QF and SF went, and that's OK.
