flair in batting

[Deja moo]

It's a shame that not everyone can watch cricket on cable TV, isn't it?

It is.
It is also a shame that people post about it even if they have'nt watched it.

 

[Eclipse]

It is.
It is also a shame that people post about it even if they have'nt watched it.

There is nothing wrong with commenting on it. It's just when people like Richard for example feel they know more than anyone about a particular match player etc.. when they havent even seen much of the player / match in question.

 

[Deja moo]

There is nothing wrong with commenting on it. It's just when people like Richard for example feel they know more than anyone about a particular match player etc.. when they havent even seen much of the player / match in question.

Yeah, but when he himself admitted to not having watched Geraint Jones bat, why comment on it then ?
Theres nothing wrong about not having watched him bat, after all, he is new.

 

[Eclipse]

Yeah, but when he himself admitted to not having watched Geraint Jones bat, why comment on it then ?
Theres nothing wrong about not having watched him bat, after all, he is new.

To be honest I was just commenting on your post in a general sense.

 

[Mr. P]

There is nothing wrong with commenting on it. It's just when people like Richard for example feel they know more than anyone about a particular match player etc.. when they havent even seen much of the player / match in question.

Yes but Richard is what we call an 'extreme' case.

 

[marc71178]

ROFLOL.

Have you seen Ponting pull?

Does he use Warnies technique?

 

[marc71178]

So?? That's because they're a better team, they have a far better bowling attack. Head to head -

Sehwag better than Langer
Hayden better than 2nd Opener
Dravid better than Ponting
Tendulkar better than Martyn
VVS better than Lehmann
Gilchrist better than Ganguly

So that makes it 4-2 for India.

In your eyes - I wouldn't have gone for Sehwag and would call the number 3 a draw.

Also, add in at 7 Katich beats Patel, then the Aussies have Warne, Kasp and Gillespie who can all handle a bat...

 

[marc71178]

i will have to disagree on that

You fiddled your order to move SRT to 3.

 

[marc71178]

Langer better than Yuvraj (Only because Yuvraj has to prove himself, signs look very good though)

Oh I agree, I mean his whole career is at 6 or 7 so far, which really makes a difference to his opening ability...

VVS better than Lehmann (A considerable gap again)

Or maybe not?

Very close, and on figures Lehmann would take it.

So now if you eliminate the 2nd pening spot from the comparison, it's 3-2 again, if not it's 3-3 but still India.

Yes, lets eliminate the 2nd opening slot, because nowadays sides only play 1 opening batsman...

 

[marc71178]

And on what basis are you so confidently saying Langer is better than Yuvraj?

Your'e so confident the other way though?

On what basis, because Yuvraj is Indian?

 

[marc71178]

With Sehwag and Yuvraj(if he comes good), I don't see how the Australian openers are far ahead.

They're far ahead because they're proven, and you're relying on a big if.

 

[marc71178]

Then how do you explain India having a better recent Track record head to head against Australia? And that too when the bowling was not as good.

Of course Australia weren't missing their first choice bowling attack were they?

 

[marc71178]

Yeah but this pair have a lot of potential as well.

Based on what?

Yuvraj has absolutely no record as an opener, so there is nothing to base this "potential" on.

 

[marc71178]

That's where you're wrong I never said they are better, I only said the Australian openers aren't so far ahead of the Indians. And this theory does have some logic.

How does it have logic when comparing one of the most successful pairs of all time with 1 converted middle order batsman who has admittedly been a reasonable success and one completely untried converted middle order batsman?

 

[marc71178]

Sometimes we had openers who fell quickly exposing the middle order to the new ball.

Right, and if the middle order were so great, this wouldn't pose a problem.

Also doesn't say much about the openers - so much for the best in the World!

 

[marc71178]

i agree on this thing but can u bring a stat that does not include ban and Zim series for both coutries

Well for that you remove opening stands of 14, 13, 7 and 43 for Aus (thus increasing their average considerably)

For India you remove none of them.

 

[marc71178]

Yeah and you just go ahead with those stats and believe what you want. We have had problems with openers, somehting which is very crucial, if you must be told so.

Yes, and it is crucial, but then is overlooked when you try to defend against people saying Australia's batting line-up is better

 

[marc71178]

just look into this all can see our middle order doesnot
depend on opening pair(cricinfo numbers game)

Is that meant to be backing Australia or slating them?

 

[marc71178]

And incase you've been asleep and are not aware, India are beginning to find a solution to their opening problem and that's whythe batting has performed so well over the past 7 odd tests.

Which is rendered irrelevant if they then change the opening pair (as seems likely)

 

[Mr. P]

LOL marc 14 posts in a row!