flair in batting

[Waughney]

Anyway like Sudeep said its ridiculous to compare 1 on 1. You have to look at team performances as a whole and matchwinning totals, and on that Australia are ahead.

 

[Sudeep]

What's absolutely ridiculous? Except for the second opening slot, which is unstable ATM. And on what basis are you so confidently saying Langer is better than Yuvraj? If he lives up to expectations then the egg will be on your face, because his talent is clear.

Has been unstable since?

 

[chicane]

3-3, but still India? Explanation?

Read the brackets dear.

 

[biased indian]

yes i never understand why people come up with such inane comparisons.....

for people like u to comment on
if u dont mind dont comment on these things

 

[a massive zebra]

VVS better than Lehmann (A considerable gap again)

Have to strongly disagree. If Lehmann was Indian he would have played over 100 Tests and be one of their best ever batsmen alongside Gavaskar, Merchant, Dravid, Tendulkar, Hazare and Viswanath.

 

[delkap]

read my post 3 above from here ...
make it 5 up now

 

[biased indian]

Anyway like Sudeep said its ridiculous to compare 1 on 1. You have to look at team performances as a whole and matchwinning totals, and on that Australia are ahead.

then compare team india vs team australia

in test we have a better head to head record recently

 

[chicane]

Has been unstable since?

You're talking like you've been stranded in some deserted Island all along.

 

[Waughney]

Listen, I have had this arguement about 100 times with my Indian mates. There are so many aspects you can look at it from, with both sides coming on top on a number of occasions. So lets say Australia = India in the batting department.

 

[Sudeep]

Man to man comparision is completele ridiculous.. Its a team game after all !!
Better comparision could be :

Ind openers (Sehwag/??) to Aus Openers (Langer/Hayden) -- obviously Aus is better
Middle order (Dravid/Sachin/Laxman) to (Ponting/Martyn/Lehmann) -- Ind wins this
Lower order (Ganguly/Patel) to (Katich/Gilchrist) -- Aus wins this
Tail (Pathan/Kumble/Khan/??) to (Lee/Gillespie/Warne/??) Again Aus wins this..

That is why Aus is a better team (This pains me to say this, me being an Indian supporter). Individual brilliance is irrelevant.

Well said.

We have a good side. We have the prowess to be on the top. However, the fact is we're too inconsistent to be World Champs.

 

[Sudeep]

Read the brackets dear.

Hayden better than Sehwag (not by all that much, but is better)
Langer better than Yuvraj (Only because Yuvraj has to prove himself, signs look very good though)
Dravid better than Ponting (Both outstanding, Dravid is better in tests)
Tendulkar better than Martyn (A large gap here)
VVS better than Lehmann (A considerable gap again)
Gilchrist better than Ganguly (By a considerable margin)

See, I beg to differ.

Compare the opening slot, and you'll see Australia are far ahead.

Compare the middle order, and India is better, but see the performances and Australia manage to do well enough with theirs.

Compare the lower middle order, and Australia is much better.

That's 2-1 overall. Not 3-3 (tilting towards India) as you say.

 

[biased indian]

Well said.

We have a good side. We have the prowess to be on the top. However, the fact is we're too inconsistent to be World Champs.

the biggest reason is that aus have a far far better bowling line up
if we had such a good bowling line we would have been able to win the cup last time around

 

[chicane]

Yes, batting line-up doesn't necessarily mean the top 6. What about the bottom 5?

For those who are interested in making a sensible comparison of the batting strength, the line ends at 7. And we got Pathan in the lower order, who matches Warne. Khan can slog as well as Lee and both Kumble and Gillespie can hang around. Balaji can slog better than McGrath.

 

[chicane]

See, I beg to differ.

Compare the opening slot, and you'll see Australia are far ahead.

Compare the middle order, and India is better, but see the performances and Australia manage to do well enough with theirs.

Compare the lower middle order, and Australia is much better.

That's 2-1 overall. Not 3-3 (tilting towards India) as you say.

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

 

[Sudeep]

For those who are interested in making a sensible comparison of the batting strength, the line ends at 7. And we got Pathan in the lower order, who matches Warne. Khan can slog as well as Lee and both Kumble and Gillespie can hang around. Balaji can slog better than McGrath.

You're talking about sensiblity?

What if India are 70-7? Isn't it the duty of lower order batsman to be accomplished enough to counter that situation?

 

[Sudeep]

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

Ifs...

And anyway, Sehwag and Yuvraj are the most reliable batsmen in the whole wide world.

 

[chicane]

Listen, I have had this arguement about 100 times with my Indian mates. There are so many aspects you can look at it from, with both sides coming on top on a number of occasions. So lets say Australia = India in the batting department.

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.

 

[Waughney]

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

They have one of the most succesful combinations in the history of the game!!!!!

 

[Sudeep]

Balaji can slog better than McGrath.

Again we venture into this man to man comparison.

So, are we looking for sloggers? Or lower order batsmen who can stick around with a top order player? I'm not necessarily talking about McGrath's ability to do so.

 

[chicane]

You're talking about sensiblity?

What if India are 70-7? Isn't it the duty of lower order batsman to be accomplished enough to counter that situation?

So remember to read the entire post first, I clearly outlined the two lower orders.