If Bumrah takes 10/120 he's averaged 12 runs a wicket. If India are bowled out for 150 and 60 they've averaged 10.5 runs a wicket, which isn't that much less. If Bumrah's team-mates had been able to match his own performance (rather than averaging infinity) the match would've been a lot closer.
Wrong, sorry.
Thats fair.
With every bit of contextualisation, I think picking all 10 wickets when your fellow bowlers are getting thrashed and have 0 to show between themselves; is a World Class performance.
Your explanation doesn't back up your premise. The very example of Ajaz's 10/119 doesn't fit your idea. If we look at that match, Somerville and Rachin combined for 0/100 and conceded two runs an over more. Ajaz had to work against that. Your Yadav analogy, which is your subjective impression of play, doesn't even hold in this case. You're also discounting that batting varies (or do you seriously think if India could've bowled at themselves they'd've been bowled out for 62?). Ultimately a bowling attack has to perform collectively in some manner.
Not watched Ajaz enough to know how good he is but it's also true that India have been woeful against spin especially when Kohli, Pujara and Rahane constituted the batting core post 2020. Cricinfo had a lot of stats then on their collective awfulness.
It was a 2 match series lol.
I’ll take your word for it. You’ve seen them more often in more conditions. Whenever I’ve seen Kohli, Rahane and Pujara v Aus they’ve been impressive. Ajaz took his wickets against India’s best available team that was probably ranked No.1 at the time. Considering all circumstances and contexts it was a great effort.
Don't. Pujara was a genuinely great player of spin and Kohli is far from poor, though has habit of getting out badly. Only Rahane among them was better in swinging away conditions.
That trio was great until covid.
Re Pant, it's genuinely the batting though that's the X factor. Saha was a Great glovesman, and while I think Pant's scoring rate is a plus, the batting was better back then. Legitimately Bumrah is the main difference, but he has also been playing since 2018 (though away).
Yeah, the contention confuses me. They don't dominate like the early 2000s side (who arguably played on flatter pitches too) but they're not terrible. And like, everyone else is worse.
2016-19 had Kohli, Rahane, Pujara doing bulk of scoring with KLR, Dhawan, Vijay scoring a bit as well. They would score lots of 100s between them.
Re 2016-19; Vijay had phases he was really great at, and Nair, Mayank, Shaw, Rohit, etc all scored runs, especially at home; whenever there was window. 21-23 was just very poor batting though.
I cannot decide which one of the two gems above is funnier.
Yup. 21-23 apart from Rohit, Pant and Iyer did somewhat well.
1. Kohli averages 60+ home, even now. He is not a great player of spin, but him being a bad one is peak stupidity. Sehwag also had habit of poor dismissals, yet that won't stop you to rant how he was the best.
In my opinion going into test series India didn't even had one left hander to tackle left arm spin that time.