Cricket stuff that doesn't deserve its own thread

[Gob]

Marshall also played in more than half of the games of either tour to Australia as well.

Fantastic player Malcom Marshall was. One of the very best

 

[stephen]

Only 2 cricketers have been part of 4 different test series victories against Australia without losing or drawing a single series.

Malcolm Marshall and Ravindra Jadeja. Both ATGs have done it twice at home and twice away.

Didn't Jadeja play in 2014?

 

[Prince EWS]

Didn't Jadeja play in 2014?

Nah they played Ashwin and Karn Sharma.

 

[honestbharani]

Could have actually been 1-1 had we actually played Ashwin when it mattered in Adelaide. Virat and his wrist spin boner cost us in his very first game as captain.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Could have actually been 1-1 had we actually played Ashwin when it mattered in Adelaide. Virat and his wrist spin boner cost us in his very first game as captain.

Would have been 4-0 if they wickets weren't so ****

As it stands we should be grateful it wasn't 0-0

 

[Gob]

Would have been 4-0 if they wickets weren't so ****

As it stands we should be grateful it wasn't 0-0

This is going to escalate in to a mindless debate of four pages

 

[TheJediBrah]

This is going to escalate in to a mindless debate of four pages

lol yeah true but it's just some of the cringiest logic people go with on here and I try to call it out whenever I can

like NZ fans talking about the 0-0 series in 2001 "we almost won the game at Brisbane" while completely ignoring that the only reason they weren't thrashed was rain and Aus declaring twice.

Exact same logic with the Aus/Ind 2014 game in Adelaide. "It could have been 1-1" implies that the series was close, which it emphatically was not.

And come on, they won their last 2 series in Australia, don't do us dirty by taking 2014 away from us too

 

[honestbharani]

This is going to escalate in to a mindless debate of four pages

u assume I will respond everytime to the rubbish? I can surprise too, you know.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Could have actually been 1-1 had we actually played Ashwin when it mattered in Adelaide. Virat and his wrist spin boner cost us in his very first game as captain.

The other problem with this logic becomes apparent if you genuinely recall the game. Australia declared twice 7 down and 5 down and half of those wickets were declaration slogging. If you replace Karn Sharma the only difference is going to be maybe it takes Australia slightly longer to get to the declaration scores and at best the game is more likely to be a draw.

Unless you think Jadeja would have taken 13-30 or something close then there's no way it would help India's chances of winning. In fact I would say the opposite, that the only reason India were given a generous target on day 5 was because Aus scored quickly enough to set it up and Karn Sharma was a part of that.

 

[honestbharani]

The other problem with this logic becomes apparent if you genuinely recall the game. Australia declared twice 7 down and 5 down and half of those wickets were declaration slogging. If you replace Karn Sharma the only difference is going to be maybe it takes Australia slightly longer to get to the declaration scores and at best the game is more likely to be a draw.

Unless you think Jadeja would have taken 13-30 or something close then there's no way it would help India's chances of winning. In fact I would say the opposite, that the only reason India were given a generous target on day 5 was because Aus scored quickly enough to set it up and Karn Sharma was a part of that.

Well, I desisted twice and since this is more of a question, I will answer you.

I am not saying Australia would have surely lost or the game would have played out exactly as it did if Ashwin played. BUT, from an Indian fan's PoV, the logic Virat used to pick Karn and how the pitch and the match ended up playing, it was obvious Ashwin would have made a difference HAD the game went exactly the same way with respect to how everyone else played. It is a criticism of Virat's captaincy as an Indian fan and something that every team's fan does every time. And if you can't discuss ifs and buts in a cricket forum, there is literally nothing else to do.


tl;dr - I used exaggeration to make a point, get over it.

 

[Starfighter]

Are we talking about the same Ashwin that Joe Burns was hoisting back over his head for fun in Sydney, only got slog wickets and took 2/128 at Brisbane? Yes. He might have been a bit more economic and that's it.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Well, I desisted twice and since this is more of a question, I will answer you.

I am not saying Australia would have surely lost or the game would have played out exactly as it did if Ashwin played. BUT, from an Indian fan's PoV, the logic Virat used to pick Karn and how the pitch and the match ended up playing, it was obvious Ashwin would have made a difference HAD the game went exactly the same way with respect to how everyone else played. It is a criticism of Virat's captaincy as an Indian fan and something that every team's fan does every time. And if you can't discuss ifs and buts in a cricket forum, there is literally nothing else to do.


tl;dr - I used exaggeration to make a point, get over it.

Oh I have no issue with your complaint of team selection or tactics. It was just a strange assumption to make a claim that it "could have been 1-1" when if anything Karn Sharma being so **** was one of the main reasons India even had a chance in the game on day 5.

Didn't mean to offend you but it was just a really, really poorly thought out comment on your part

 

[honestbharani]

Are we talking about the same Ashwin that Joe Burns was hoisting back over his head for fun in Sydney, only got slog wickets and took 2/128 at Brisbane? Yes. He might have been a bit more economic and that's it.

And can bat much better than Karn which would have mattered too.

 

[TheJediBrah]

And can bat much better than Karn which would have mattered too.

No it wouldn't have. If India made more runs, Aus would have just batted longer before declaring and setting up a chase.

 

[honestbharani]

No it wouldn't have. If India made more runs, Aus would have just batted longer before declaring and setting up a chase.

which would have again had an impact on the result. Jeez man, let it go.

 

[TheJediBrah]

which would have again had an impact on the result. Jeez man, let it go.

Don't be such a child. You made a dumb comment. Accept it.

 

[Starfighter]

And can bat much better than Karn which would have mattered too.

Way to miss the point. Jeez you're desperate.

 

[honestbharani]

Way to miss the point. Jeez you're desperate.

. Cant accept simple facts, calls someone else desperate. Sure.

 

[Burgey]

Don't be such a child. You made a dumb comment. Accept it.

That's the standard MO though. Bit surprised you bothered with it tbh, despite how appropriate and proportionate your response to the stupidity of the post was.

 

[honestbharani]

That's the standard MO though. Bit surprised you bothered with it tbh, despite how appropriate and proportionate your response to the stupidity of the post was.