No Ashes for India and Pakistan

[honestbharani]

Bharani - You must be working in IT industry. Now please tell us how many people work in the IT industry compared to other industry and you are right about TCS, Infy etc. But I can tell you that in my firm's (Deloitte) India (Hyderabad & Mumba) people dont work those hours, My younger brother works for Bausch in Banglore, his hours are flexible and 8-9 hours on an avg. and 12 during release. His commute time is about 30 minutes. Another Brother lives in Ghaziabad, works in Delhi (somewhere in CP, works for TCS) and his commute time is 20-30 minutes, Work house about 8-10 every day with 2nd and 4th saturday off .

Point is, making such statement is a gross generalization and nothing else.

I am in the IT industry. My uncle is in a bank. One of my friends is in Tata Indicom. They all work till 8 Pm too, though. The point is, TV is not the only means through which cricket is followed in India and therefore, TRPs don't tell the whole story. BTW, we do have flexible hours in TCS as well.

 

[Sanz]

Except that Bradman was one single player over his entire career, whereas the Ashes involves 2 entire nations, the Ashes team of 1980 is not the same as the Ashes team of 1995. Big and simple difference.

On the same token The Indian/Pakistani team of 2004, 2005 and 2006 series is almost Same. Even the 1998-99 team India had SRT, VVS, Dravid, Kumble, Ganguly, Harbhajan, that's team India of today considering anyone can replace rest of the guys and team India will be equally strong/weak.

 

[Deja moo]

On the same token The Indian/Pakistani team of 2004, 2005 and 2006 series is almost Same. Even the 1998-99 team India had SRT, VVS, Dravid, Kumble, Ganguly, Harbhajan, that's team India of today considering anyone can replace rest of the guys and team India will be equally strong/weak.

Yes, I don't see how that is a contradiction, if that is what you're implying.

 

[Sanz]

I am in the IT industry. My uncle is in a bank. One of my friends is in Tata Indicom. They all work till 8 Pm too, though. The point is, TV is not the only means through which cricket is followed in India and therefore, TRPs don't tell the whole story. BTW, we do have flexible hours in TCS as well.

Well Tata Indicom is basically Tata Teleservices. TCS just took over its IT department (My brother used to work for Tata Teleservices, and now he is in TCS).

I have never said TV is not the only medium and that was not the point, the point is Test matches are a lot less popular than ODIs and its reflected in poor attendance in the stadiums, lower TRP ratings of test viewership etc etc. It doesn't mean no one in India follows the test match , but just that it is significantly lower.

On the other hand England despite having a poor team for more than 15 years has pretty good attendance during test matches.

 

[Tony Blade]

Dont ODIs have better attendances all over the world, though? Apart from the Ashes..

 

[Sanz]

Dont ODIs have better attendances all over the world, though? Apart from the Ashes..

Need we say more..

 

[Deja moo]

Yes, acceptance of Television as a valid medium is a one small step you could take (if you want to, that is)

 

[Sanz]

Ironically that medium becomes invalid during ODIs and people fill stadiums, rooftops, trees whatever they can to get a glimpse..

 

[Deja moo]

Ironically that medium becomes invalid during ODIs and people fill stadiums, rooftops, trees whatever they can to get a glimpse..

So you obviously don't get the difference between tests and ODIs. The quick fix which ODIs offer in a short space of time, which is missing in tests

 

[Sanz]

Jeez Ashes must be a series of 5 ODIs played between Australia and England to have that kind of fans in the stadiums

 

[Deja moo]

Jeez, England-Australia matches must have been of better quality for their in-stadia following to be greater than all those stupid England-South Africa matches

 

[Sanz]

You said it. India Pakistan test rivalry isn't strong enough to bring crowd to the stadiums no matter how good the quality of cricket is. On the other hand, thanks to the rivalry, an Eng-Aus match can fill the stands regardless of the quality of the match and political relationships..

 

[Deja moo]

You said it. India Pakistan test rivalry isn't strong enough to bring crowd to the stadiums no matter how good the quality of cricket is. On the other hand, thanks to the rivalry, an Eng-Aus match can fill the stands regardless of the quality of the match and political relationships..

We're gong round in circles.

What you call 'rivalry', I call Living off past glory, media hype and optimism. As the dictionary definition of the word suggests, there can be no rivalry without competition. Yes, I know you're going to come up with media hype being a contributory factor for Ind-Pak cricket, but theres the required competition in addition too, which makes the difference.

 

[Sanz]

Ind vs. Pakistan - India won 14%, Pak won 21 %, Draw - 64 %

Ashes :- Eng won 31 %, Aus won 41 %, Draw - 28 %

 

[Deja moo]

Ind vs. Pakistan - India won 14%, Pak won 21 %, Draw - 64 %

Ashes :- Eng won 31 %, Aus won 41 %, Draw - 28 %

Last 15 years please ?

 

[Sanz]

What you call 'rivalry', I call Living off past glory, media hype and optimism. .

If it was mere optimism then we wouldn't have watched Ashes 2005. On the other hand what you think of rivalry is mere Jingoism based on the political animosity between two countries.

 

[Sanz]

Last 15 years please ?

Last series only please.

 

[Deja moo]

If it was mere optimism then we wouldn't have watched Ashes 2005. On the other hand what you think of rivalry is mere Jingoism based on the political animosity between two countries.

The only I watched any of the 2005 series was because England finally had a team that could offer any competition. How many of the previous Ashes' did I care to watch with any interest ? none. I can't help it if you selectively concentrate on the Ind-Pak jingoism while ignoring the master-convict roots of the Ashes.

 

[Deja moo]

Last series only please.

Perspective please

 

[Deja moo]

And since you're not ready to see light, tell me Sanz, how many years do you suppose any competitive series has to last for before you would afford it 'rivalry' status ? I would really like to see you put a figure forward instead of all this obfuscation.