Teja.
Global Moderator
The world rejected your findings.
and the w***d rejected being part of your post.The universe rejected your findings.
Last edited by a moderator:
The world rejected your findings.
and the w***d rejected being part of your post.The universe rejected your findings.
But India has also the best W/L record among all teams as well.Yeah, pretty much.
Funnily enough I put India higher on my perceived quality list than I did on my achievements list, although that was basically just because Pakistan lost their whole bowling attack.
FWIW, team bowling averages in the last 2 years (exl. games against BD)
England 31.24
Australia 32.96
South Africa 33.37
Pakistan 37.06
India 39.89
Sri Lanka 42.97
New Zealand 45.24
West Indies 49.22
Now it's a flawed measure for a few reasons, but I still think it's telling. India certainly deserve to be ranked #1 as a team but they have got there through factors other than bowling. To say that they've performed as the 4th or 5th bowling attack is definitely fair enough IMO; winning series certainly doesn't mean you have a top three attack.
the world
I was the first to make her stay. GAGF.DWTA.
This kallisball meme is the most dire thing I've witnessed on the Internet, ever.
DWTA.I was the first to make her stay..
DWTA.
z
Apparently no one can bowl and the batting has massive weaknesses at all positions excluding #4, and #5. And Sachin never wins games. So the results then can only be true because the BCCI fixes games, obviously.If these same people who say India is #1 because of its batting only, and have a #5 or #6 bowling attack ever denounce India's batting as having lots of weaknesses I'll call them on it. Gambhir, Sehwag are FTBs, Dravid is past it and not having a 6 etc.
It's so inconsistent. Otherwise people are suggesting India are #1 on the back of Laxman and Sachin only. But then Sachin never wins his team games, and Laxman isn't a great.
****, India must be #1 because of the BCCI. It's the only explanation
On second thoughts, Banning him would mean losing his avatar, so he can stay.
That would be the sehwag and Dilshan slog fest.England has had only 1 series against the top 5 where it averaged less than 38 per wicket, and that was the just concluded Ashes where it avged 29 per wicket against Australia. Just for comparison sake, India have had 4 such series. (All figures since 2008).
What is more befuddling about India's bowling numbers is that in the 09 home series they averaged nearly 41 per wicket against Sri Lanka, even though they won the 3 test series 2-0
Join the Ravens and you'll have access to much more than that avatar in the club forum, tbhOn second thoughts, Banning him would mean losing his avatar, so he can stay.
Ravens? Cricsim?Join the Ravens and you'll have access to much more than that avatar in the club forum, tbh
Is it? I don't care for bowlers averaging 60 if such test matches produce results though. I am not in favor of constant minefields which produce 150 plays 150 type either. High scoring result matches perhaps are the most entertaining of the lot.That would be the sehwag and Dilshan slog fest.
I thought they were redefining test cricket.
Rejecting UDRS probably comes into it as well.If these same people who say India is #1 because of its batting only, and have a #5 or #6 bowling attack ever denounce India's batting as having lots of weaknesses I'll call them on it. Gambhir, Sehwag are FTBs, Dravid is past it and not having a 6 etc.
It's so inconsistent. Otherwise people are suggesting India are #1 on the back of Laxman and Sachin only. But then Sachin never wins his team games, and Laxman isn't a great.
****, India must be #1 because of the BCCI. It's the only explanation