Is Moeen Ali the best ever test no-rounder?

[Jayro]

Tbf Flem - and it's not to stretch, you did say just because three countries have a very good pool of rugby ( and you believe) if all those players divert their mind to give sole attention to playing cricket like some country ( I have no doubt you meant subcontinents-) it's going to be so long if I really put my mind to exploit the fallacy --- first off - not 90 percent of people play cricket in India - yes they watch it on TV, but the number of people playing cricket has come down drastically if you compare from 90's which was a peak from my knowledge , ...... Now if you are using a players ability to be good at rugby or other games as a yardstick that he will become very big at cricket also, that's where the fallacy of your logic becomes blatant , not necessarily, some of the top notch players that India have produced namely - Tendulkar, Gavaskar, Dravid, Laxman, kumble( to name a few) would not have been world class rugby players,,, and yet they were champion cricketers, I don't think speaking of other players - a Mcgrath would have been a champion rugby player too or good enough to play for Australia , or an Ambrose would have been as good at rugby too --- do you believe Muralidharan would have make a champion rugby player as well? ,,,, the specious logic in you post was something like saying " Dogs have legs and tails, cats have legs and tails therefore all the dogs are in fact cats "

 

[mr_mister]

If my uncle had balls he'd be my aunt

 

[Lillian Thomson]

If my uncle had balls he'd be my aunt

If he hasn't got any surely he already is your aunt.

 

[Starfighter]

If my uncle had balls he'd be my aunt

Would he?

 

[Teja.]

Maori and the Pacific is definitely an untapped well for NZC (and the ACB in Australia). Hopefully Crowe himself saw sense before the end since Taylor was his #1 student.

The relative lack of strong class based schooling system here has probably helped widen the player base relative to England and South Africa, but there are still class divides. Facilities and money is probably the major limitation here, papered over by the DIY approach to practicing sport in NZ (you might have a coach at school, but you go home and practice way more or during lunchtime sport).

I'm guessing India has a near opposite problem? Potential players for days (even if only 10% can think of playing, that's 100 million people), cricket has the largest share of interest but it's a task just to sift through the people playing with their friends and give the best opportunities?

The long and short is that it doesn't. While the BCCI is rich, the influence of the wealth of cricketing boards for the most part starts at FC level and peaks closer to international level. The money the BCCI makes is not even a drop in the ocean in terms of addressing the issue of sports infrastructure in India. The economic and geographical barriers at the grass root level are just too tall.

The quality of infrastructure and the competition for it depends far more on the per capita wealth of the nations themselves and in that regard, NZ is just absolute leagues ahead of India. About 95% of the country is too poor and the youth from that portion with a few exceptions automatically gets btfo'd from playing 'proper' cricket with pads, helmet and even a half decent ball. Outside that, even among the middle class, we don't have any semblance of robust welfare/social security system which means that most kids after the age of 13-14 are heavily discouraged from participating in sport as they spend 3-4 years in preparation for nation wide entrance examinations with absurd levels of competition to get into a decent college so they have a shot at a viable career. For the ones who make it past these factors, there is an incredible level of competition for the very limited amount of cricket infrastructure per capita.

Only once you are good enough to be on the fringes of FC cricket is when the benefits of the BCCI's wealth (scouting great talent at this stage who are potential international stars, providing them with great infrastructure and remuneration at FC level) comes into the picture. There are of course exceptions to this and IPL scouting, in particular, is reaching more and more remote parts of the country to scout untapped talent every season.

 

[_00_deathscar]

Tbf Flem - and it's not to stretch, you did say just because three countries have a very good pool of rugby ( and you believe) if all those players divert their mind to give sole attention to playing cricket like some country ( I have no doubt you meant subcontinents-) it's going to be so long if I really put my mind to exploit the fallacy --- first off - not 90 percent of people play cricket in India - yes they watch it on TV, but the number of people playing cricket has come down drastically if you compare from 90's which was a peak from my knowledge , ...... Now if you are using a players ability to be good at rugby or other games as a yardstick that he will become very big at cricket also, that's where the fallacy of your logic becomes blatant , not necessarily, some of the top notch players that India have produced namely - Tendulkar, Gavaskar, Dravid, Laxman, kumble( to name a few) would not have been world class rugby players,,, and yet they were champion cricketers, I don't think speaking of other players - a Mcgrath would have been a champion rugby player too or good enough to play for Australia , or an Ambrose would have been as good at rugby too --- do you believe Muralidharan would have make a champion rugby player as well? ,,,, the specious logic in you post was something like saying " Dogs have legs and tails, cats have legs and tails therefore all the dogs are in fact cats "

Just imagine how good India would be at football if all our top cricket players played football instead!

 

[honestbharani]

The long and short is that it doesn't. While the BCCI is rich, the influence of the wealth of cricketing boards for the most part starts at FC level and peaks closer to international level. The money the BCCI makes is not even a drop in the ocean in terms of addressing the issue of sports infrastructure in India. The economic and geographical barriers at the grass root level are just too tall.

The quality of infrastructure and the competition for it depends far more on the per capita wealth of the nations themselves and in that regard, NZ is just absolute leagues ahead of India. About 95% of the country is too poor and the youth from that portion with a few exceptions automatically gets btfo'd from playing 'proper' cricket with pads, helmet and even a half decent ball. Outside that, even among the middle class, we don't have any semblance of robust welfare/social security system which means that most kids after the age of 13-14 are heavily discouraged from participating in sport as they spend 3-4 years in preparation for nation wide entrance examinations with absurd levels of competition to get into a decent college so they have a shot at a viable career. For the ones who make it past these factors, there is an incredible level of competition for the very limited amount of cricket infrastructure per capita.

Only once you are good enough to be on the fringes of FC cricket is when the benefits of the BCCI's wealth (scouting great talent at this stage who are potential international stars, providing them with great infrastructure and remuneration at FC level) comes into the picture. There are of course exceptions to this and IPL scouting, in particular, is reaching more and more remote parts of the country to scout untapped talent every season.

There is also the little matter of there being very little recreational cricket for kids in the major cities. Its the other reason you see more and more players emerge from outside of the traditional urban strongholds. There just is no place to play cricket anymore. I am kinda glad my childhood was in the 90s.

 

[Spark]

It's my strong belief that above a certain critical mass, population size more or less doesn't really matter any more for ability to find elite sporting talent, or at least any marginal gains accrue so slowly that they're swamped by cultural factors, institutional factors, history etc etc.

Like, the core impediment to Australia developing more high-level talent isn't it's population size. It's AFL.

 

[Flem274*]

When did this thread become so utterly dire?

when i posted in it

The long and short is that it doesn't. While the BCCI is rich, the influence of the wealth of cricketing boards for the most part starts at FC level and peaks closer to international level. The money the BCCI makes is not even a drop in the ocean in terms of addressing the issue of sports infrastructure in India. The economic and geographical barriers at the grass root level are just too tall.

The quality of infrastructure and the competition for it depends far more on the per capita wealth of the nations themselves and in that regard, NZ is just absolute leagues ahead of India. About 95% of the country is too poor and the youth from that portion with a few exceptions automatically gets btfo'd from playing 'proper' cricket with pads, helmet and even a half decent ball. Outside that, even among the middle class, we don't have any semblance of robust welfare/social security system which means that most kids after the age of 13-14 are heavily discouraged from participating in sport as they spend 3-4 years in preparation for nation wide entrance examinations with absurd levels of competition to get into a decent college so they have a shot at a viable career. For the ones who make it past these factors, there is an incredible level of competition for the very limited amount of cricket infrastructure per capita.

Only once you are good enough to be on the fringes of FC cricket is when the benefits of the BCCI's wealth (scouting great talent at this stage who are potential international stars, providing them with great infrastructure and remuneration at FC level) comes into the picture. There are of course exceptions to this and IPL scouting, in particular, is reaching more and more remote parts of the country to scout untapped talent every season.

Do you think the IPL's scouting war will be adopted by the BCCI?

Maybe more a question for the Indian politics thread, but is India looking at introducing more social safety nets or are they moving in the other direction like several first world nations with their attitude towards social help?

 

[Flem274*]

Tbf Flem - and it's not to stretch, you did say just because three countries have a very good pool of rugby ( and you believe) if all those players divert their mind to give sole attention to playing cricket like some country ( I have no doubt you meant subcontinents-) it's going to be so long if I really put my mind to exploit the fallacy --- first off - not 90 percent of people play cricket in India - yes they watch it on TV, but the number of people playing cricket has come down drastically if you compare from 90's which was a peak from my knowledge , ...... Now if you are using a players ability to be good at rugby or other games as a yardstick that he will become very big at cricket also, that's where the fallacy of your logic becomes blatant , not necessarily, some of the top notch players that India have produced namely - Tendulkar, Gavaskar, Dravid, Laxman, kumble( to name a few) would not have been world class rugby players,,, and yet they were champion cricketers, I don't think speaking of other players - a Mcgrath would have been a champion rugby player too or good enough to play for Australia , or an Ambrose would have been as good at rugby too --- do you believe Muralidharan would have make a champion rugby player as well? ,,,, the specious logic in you post was something like saying " Dogs have legs and tails, cats have legs and tails therefore all the dogs are in fact cats "

dude you probably should have clicked to stop serious replying to me when i self roasted like 5 posts ago. i find multi-talented athletes like jordie barrett and shane warne really interesting to discuss but i also couldn't resist sliding the current cw meme in there.

let it go.

 

[Flem274*]

It's my strong belief that above a certain critical mass, population size more or less doesn't really matter any more for ability to find elite sporting talent, or at least any marginal gains accrue so slowly that they're swamped by cultural factors, institutional factors, history etc etc.

Like, the core impediment to Australia developing more high-level talent isn't it's population size. It's AFL.

I'm inclined to agree but only because of the trend itself, not necessarily identifying the root cause because I don't know it tbh. Realistically either the subcontinent or England, depending on how you weight population v infrastructure, should dominate. They've all had really good teams but the two most overpowered sides have been the relatively tiny West Indies and Australia with a dash of South Africa having a long run at #1 recently.

Teja's 95% number (and I know he's talking ballpark) was interesting to me since I did some jam math and the remaining 5% works out to 50 million, just smaller than England. That's still an amazing pool but does line up expectation vs actual results a lot more sanely.

 

[Jayro]

Just imagine how good India would be at football if all our top cricket players played football instead!

Speaking of football, our master race are very well perched at rank 121 in world ; apparently the supreme athletic genes either don't work in the most popular game or get switched off on a football field.

 

[Shady Slim]

Speaking of football, our master race are very well perched at rank 121 in world ; apparently the supreme athletic genes either don't work in the most popular game or get switched off on a football field.

you know at one point a guy brainwashed a whole country calling them a superior race, now what is a superior race, whole idea is a farce , be educated enough and do some research before doling out tawdry thoughtless statements like this

 

[Starfighter]

you know at one point a guy brainwashed a whole country calling them a superior race, now what is a superior race, whole idea is a farce , be educated enough and do some research before doling out tawdry thoughtless statements like this

I interpreted it as being in jest myself.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Speaking of football, our master race are very well perched at rank 121 in world ; apparently the supreme athletic genes either don't work in the most popular game or get switched off on a football field.

Just played their 1st game in about 2 years - a 2-1 win over Curacao. Chris Wood (a leading scorer in the Premier League) was one of the goal scorers.

For some absolutely useless trivia NZ were the only undefeated side at the 2010 World Cup thanks to 3 draws (and not getting out of their pool) including 1-1 vs Italy.

 

[TheJediBrah]

It's my strong belief that above a certain critical mass, population size more or less doesn't really matter any more for ability to find elite sporting talent

Assuming all other factors stay the same (quality of living, resources etc.) then this shouldn't be the case. More population = bigger talent pool = better overall talent.

As you alude to however that isn't the case in reality because those other factors don't stay the same. The countries with higher population, well India I guess, don't have the same opportunities and resources for all the people living there as the the smaller countries do.

 

[GIMH]

you know at one point a guy brainwashed a whole country calling them a superior race, now what is a superior race, whole idea is a farce , be educated enough and do some research before doling out tawdry thoughtless statements like this

Eh, clearly he’s being sarcastic in reference to earlier posts, no?

 

[Spark]

Assuming all other factors stay the same (quality of living, resources etc.) then this shouldn't be the case. More population = bigger talent pool = better overall talent.

As you alude to however that isn't the case in reality because those other factors don't stay the same. The countries with higher population, well India I guess, don't have the same opportunities and resources for all the people living there as the the smaller countries do.

That's not quite what I'm getting at. My point is that the difference in elite talent, at least in these international team sports like cricket or soccer, when your population is 50 million vs 500 million is not "ten times more", all else being equal. It's only a little bit more at most and any gains are tiny compared to what having a pre-existing sporting culture and organic, grassroots institutions gives you.

International soccer is probably a better demonstration of this. Having a huge population is no substitute for having a core group of highly engaged fans from childhood who play street football and having pathways, even if very informal, for identifying talents and getting them into whatever system may exist. Above a certain threshold, it really no longer matters that much beyond how many material resources you can throw at the problem (and even then, there's a limit to that).

 

[Shady Slim]

I interpreted it as being in jest myself.

Eh, clearly he’s being sarcastic in reference to earlier posts, no?

yeah but i'm still going to mock him in light of his earlier dreadful post as is my prerogative

 

[Prince EWS]

yeah but i'm still going to mock him

I think we got that.