Coronis
International Coach
Obvious misread.
He’s a Kiwi spinner so that would be difficult to accept, no?
-
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.
How would 80s WI and 2000s Australia fare in unbeatable current India?
- Thread starter subshakerz
- Start date
Coronis
International Coach
He excluded Afghanistan’s “home” tests in India against the West Indies, I misread it.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Yes the same way Tahir, O'Keefe, Kuhnemann and Hartley bowled well before him. As in, he got into a good rhythm on a pitch offering more than normal assistance that allowed him to become even more menacing.
This is obvious, it is not to discredit him, but we have a pattern of such performances.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Yeah got it. I misread that too.
capt_Luffy
Cricketer Of The Year
Tahir and O'Keefe were quality spinners on their days, especially O'Keefe; stop bringing him and Harmer. Hartley bowled out a team on the 4th innings taking a 7-fer. Good effort, but India batted bad than anything. Don't remember Kuhnemann.
if there’s a pattern why don’t the numbers reflect this. Spinners from outside averaging 40 doesn’t show any sort of dominance whatsoever
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
This was my point though. That despite much better spinners in Kumbles era, foreign spinners did better in the current era due to pitches.
And by the way, we should separate the eras. I don't think the notable difference in pitch quality was there during Dhonis time.
Last edited:
You didn't have a point. You made an unsubstantiated claim and are now trying to back it up with nothing. Thanks for trying, see you later.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Tahir was an ordinary test spinner if there ever was one. O'Keefe didn't even take a fifer in the rest of his career before or after his 12-fer in Pune. Kuhnemann was playing his second test when his fifer bowled out India on Day 1. Hartley was playing his freaking debut test when he took a 7-fer.
Sure they bowled well but sheesh, the level of gymnastics on display here to downplay the effect of pitches is staggering.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Tahir was an ordinary test spinner if there ever was one. O'Keefe didn't even take a fifer in the rest of his career before or after his 12-fer in Pune. Kuhnemann was playing his second test when his fifer bowled out India on Day 1. Hartley was playing his freaking debut test when he took a 7-fer.
If you think in normal circumstances these bowlers could be taking these wickets, that is just being disingenuous. Sure they bowled well but sheesh, the level of gymnastics on display here to downplay the effect of pitches is staggering.
capt_Luffy
Cricketer Of The Year
I hope they were better than Michael Clarke? No??? And how about the fact that Hartley was tossed around in the next 4 matches? Or why the **** do spinners still averaged 40 when touring?
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
You realise that all your sniping post after post after post is just making you seem incredibly bitter?
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Clarke is actually my point. He was a total product of a lottery pitch. But it didn't happened with such frequency then.
Hartley was found out the rest of the series but that has been Indias MO since the beginning. They have the better spinners with mastery over these conditions, so they can afford to have spicy wickets (generally) knowing that over the course of a series they may lose the odd one if a foreign spinner has a streak but will win in general.
Santner is Roger Harper level spinner who has just ripped through the no.1 team in the world. You want to give most of the credit of that to skill, go ahead if that makes you feel easy.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
I never said they dominated. I said they did notably better than before in this period (2015 onwards, not 2011 btw) and that this is due to the pitch effect which Ashwin and Jadeja clearly benefit from.
PlayerComparisons
International Vice-Captain
So opposition spinners averaged around 42.5 in Kumbles era while opposition spinners averaged around 39.5 in Ashwins era
Kumbles era had better Indian players of spin as well as no DRS which makes up for the 3 point difference. So it doesn’t seem like there’s much difference in the pitches?
Kumbles era had better Indian players of spin as well as no DRS which makes up for the 3 point difference. So it doesn’t seem like there’s much difference in the pitches?
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Not a fan of these raw averages but I think the era we should actually use is 2015 onwards. I don't recall Indian pitches being reported as being notably turning more before then.
And Kumbles combines two eras. The 90s likely had pitch conditions approaching what it has been since 2015 onwards. And the 2000s when they became flatter.
That's too bad, at least it's not the way you post something meaningless one after the other.
Why should we reduce sample sizes? When comparing careers and general eras that are defined by a longer time period than your preferences?
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Because the point isn't comparing careers but comparing the relevant eras when the allegations of special pitches applied. And the era refered to in this thread is when Kohli took over as captain.
Again, what's the point?