If anything it's a lot down to our selections & sometimes brain dead strategies! Structurally the game's probably never been better in India, no one comes close to our depth in 3 formats combined.Whereas India have structural problem .
If anything it's a lot down to our selections & sometimes brain dead strategies! Structurally the game's probably never been better in India, no one comes close to our depth in 3 formats combined.Whereas India have structural problem .
By structural I meant poor selection .If anything it's a lot down to our selections & sometimes brain dead strategies! Structurally the game's probably never been better in India, no one comes close to our depth in 3 formats combined.
On the bolded part, I already said in my post that I will play the same could would game.How likely would England get out for a sub-200 score if the pitch was easier to bat on? England's attack would get a breather and then would take out NZ chasing a likely mountain.
England made a mistake in enforcing the follow-on and they should pay for it with not winning the series and having their ranking affected.
Point is, end of NZ's first innings, there wasn't a compelling reason to have them bat again. It would only give them a sniff to get back in the game whereas 200 runs ahead, even a sub-par England score 2nd innings score would be very difficult for NZ to chase.On the bolded part, I already said in my post that I will play the same could would game.
What you say could have happened too. But what I am saying is, that might not have happened as well. Hypotheticals don't always play out like we expect them to. Cricket will be boring otherwise.
I probably said it before but 2018 was the closest series I have seen with such a lopsided final result. India had chances to win in all but one of the test matches (and that one was basically marred by rain leading to different conditions for the two teams) - we just didn't have any batsman stand up other than Kohli.2018 not really. 2022 yes. Might have even won in Trent bridge.
NZ could've chased 500 or blocked out for the draw. With the great overhead conditions at the time for seamers and the weather forecast, the follow on was the right decision.Point is, end of NZ's first innings, there wasn't a compelling reason to have them bat again. It would only give them a sniff to get back in the game whereas 200 runs ahead, even a sub-par England score 2nd innings score would be very difficult for NZ to chase.
Having Bhuvi might have flipped a few matches. His loss is very tragic as he is one Indian fast bowler who was decent with the bat.I probably said it before but 2018 was the closest series I have seen with such a lopsided final result. India had chances to win in all but one of the test matches (and that one was basically marred by rain leading to different conditions for the two teams) - we just didn't have any batsman stand up other than Kohli.
I am still hopeful Hardik can make a comeback to test cricket.Having Bhuvi might have flipped a few matches. His loss is very tragic as he is one Indian fast bowler who was decent with the bat.
Lord's 2014, Sydney 2015, Wanderers 2018. Even Cape Town 2018 had a decent partnership with Hardik.
And he was lethal with the ball in helpful conditions - Eng 2014, WI 2016, SA 2018. Eden Gardens vs NZ 2016.
Losing Hardik and Bhuvi both is a great loss to Indian test cricket.
Yes, but the current attack with the same line-up and Siraj alone instead of Bhuvi is slightly better, isn't it?Hardik was a mirage but Bhuvi was the real deal. Bowling attack of Bhuvi, Bumrah, Shami and Ishant/Ashwin with Jadeja at 7 would have been the best in business
Siraj in time can be really great, at the moment he seems bit too rawYes, but the current attack with the same line-up and Siraj alone instead of Bhuvi is slightly better, isn't it?
Siraj hasn't hit the highs of Bhuvi.Yes, but the current attack with the same line-up and Siraj alone instead of Bhuvi is slightly better, isn't it?
Ishant in his Kohli era was a true worldclass bowler.Tbh even post 2015 Ishant was great. Current Siraj is a downgrade compared to him.
he’s hit a rough patch recently after a good start but will bounce back. his potential is much bigger than Ishant or Bhuvi‘s ever wasTbh even post 2015 Ishant was great. Current Siraj is a downgrade compared to him.
praise Gillespie for thatIshant in his Kohli era was a true worldclass bowler.
Bhuvi was quite conditions dependant tbh. Needed the ball moving around to provide any penettation, so that average is a little misleading . Siraj has the potential to be a really valuable all conditions bowler.Bhuvi is more than a decent bat now that I have checked stats. he has a fc 100 and 11 50s in fc, averages 27 which is 6 more than Jansen
thats close to bowling all-rounder territory. even his test avg of 22 is very decent