• 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.

No Ashes for India and Pakistan

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
Deja moo said:
Why not ? It was a given that Australia would win every series.
It wasn't a given. It was obviously very likely, but Australia never even managed a whitewash. In 1997 Australia were down 1-0 after two tests. In every series bar 89 and 94/95 England won a test. To suggest that any of the Ashes series in the last 15 years have offered nothing to cricket is ridiculous. They were certainly not close series, but they had results, they were well contested, and they provided memories and interest to the crowd, and they added to both the rivalry between the sides and the game of cricket itself.

This current series offers nothing. No contest, no result, no achievements of any consequence. It is a step backwards for India and Pakistan, and makes the good work done in the last few series between the sides look like an aberration. That's the point.
 

Deja moo

International Captain
FaaipDeOiad said:
It wasn't a given. It was obviously very likely, but Australia never even managed a whitewash. In 1997 Australia were down 1-0 after two tests. In every series bar 89 and 94/95 England won a test. To suggest that any of the Ashes series in the last 15 years have offered nothing to cricket is ridiculous. They were certainly not close series, but they had results, they were well contested, and they provided memories and interest to the crowd, and they added to both the rivalry between the sides and the game of cricket itself.

This current series offers nothing. No contest, no result, no achievements of any consequence. It is a step backwards for India and Pakistan, and makes the good work done in the last few series between the sides look like an aberration. That's the point.
Actually, the point is that people are equating the playing conditions in this particular series with an entire rivalry itself. Rivalries exist between two teams, and needs to be assesed independantly of other factors, and India-Pakistan have fit the bill in that respect more appropriately than Australia-England over the past 20 years. You need poor pitches to bring down the level of the Ind-Pak cricket, whereas the Ashes has been predictable more often than not over the last couple of decades in spite of all the build up and the England-flattering-to-deceive-yet-again routine.
 

Fusion

Global Moderator
Sanz said:
NO, rivalries due to political tensions are UGLY and I want no part of it. Its like having Britain and Argentina rivalry in soccer (is there any ?).
.

So since you said that the Pakistan/India rivalry grew out of animosity, you probably have not enjoyed a single Pak/Ind match upto now? Look I'm not saying that the ONLY reason to enjoy a rivalry or watch a match is because of political tensions. What I'm saying is that it doesn't make the rivalry any less because of it. Obviously I didn't enjoy all the refusal to play each other phase either, like you pointed out. India and Pakistan's rivalry may have grown initially because of the political tensions (and that aspect may still be true to an extent today), but it has evolved into much more since then. I believe the contests and results OVERALL alone are enough for the rivalry to grow and prosper. And once again, just because the Ashes tradition is longer, doesn't necessarily make it better.
 

Sanz

Hall of Fame Member
Fusion said:
So since you said that the Pakistan/India rivalry grew out of animosity, you probably have not enjoyed a single Pak/Ind match upto now? Look I'm not saying that the ONLY reason to enjoy a rivalry or watch a match is because of political tensions. What I'm saying is that it doesn't make the rivalry any less because of it. Obviously I didn't enjoy all the refusal to play each other phase either, like you pointed out. India and Pakistan's rivalry may have grown initially because of the political tensions (and that aspect may still be true to an extent today), but it has evolved into much more since then. I believe the contests and results OVERALL alone are enough for the rivalry to grow and prosper. And once again, just because the Ashes tradition is longer, doesn't necessarily make it better.
You continue to harp on things I never claimed. IMO There is no tradition in Indo-pak rivalry, it has developed purely out of political problems betweent he two countries hence, when it comes to tradidion, there is no competition between ashes and Ind-pak series.

I have enjoyed Ind-Pak cricket and I dont need any rivalry to enjoy Wasim Akram bowling to SRT or Sehwag batting against Pakistan.
 

Neil Pickup

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Sanz said:
Its like having Britain and Argentina rivalry in soccer (is there any ?)
Yes, it's massive. But also has a lot to do with Diego Maradona's hand-of-god goal, and the penalties and Beckham's red in St Etienne 98.
 

Sanz

Hall of Fame Member
Deja moo said:
and India-Pakistan have fit the bill in that respect more appropriately than Australia-England over the past 20 years.
20 years ?? out of which we didn't play for 14-15 years. What a rivalry, really. In 70s and 80s India Pak used to play quite frequently but the results used to be marred by gross umpring by the home team(pre 1986 series).

As far as ODIs go, there is no rivalry, Pakistan has owned our behinds for almost 20 years.
 

Fusion

Global Moderator
Sanz said:
You continue to harp on things I never claimed. IMO There is no tradition in Indo-pak rivalry, it has developed purely out of political problems betweent he two countries hence, when it comes to tradidion, there is no competition between ashes and Ind-pak series.

I have enjoyed Ind-Pak cricket and I dont need any rivalry to enjoy Wasim Akram bowling to SRT or Sehwag batting against Pakistan.
So what exactly defines tradition for you? Is it simply the length of time two teams have played each other? Haven't Pak/Ind played each other for decades now? Sure that doesn't hold upto the Ashes, but that's still tradition (if going by length of time). Or more appropiately, shouldn't tradition be carved out of great matches/moments in a rivalry? Like you stated, Wasim Akram bowling to SRT, or Imran bowling to Gavakar is immensely enjoyable, and hence adds to the tradition of Ind/Pak. Perhaps I'm not getting the meaning or concept of what you're stating. My opinion, in short, is that the Ashes may have a LONGER tradition, but that doesn't mean much to me in terms of what makes a good rivalry.
 

Sanz

Hall of Fame Member
Fusion said:
So what exactly defines tradition for you? Is it simply the length of time two teams have played each other?
For starters :- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ashes

Please read and tell us it just about no. or years or no. of test matches.

Haven't Pak/Ind played each other for decades now? Sure that doesn't hold upto the Ashes, but that's still tradition (if going by length of time). Or more appropiately, shouldn't tradition be carved out of great matches/moments in a rivalry?
Exactly and how many great matches/moments India-Pak have had in last 50 years ? We dont even play on a regular basis, when the friendship wave is going on we play 3 series in 2 years else we play 3 tests in a decade. So much for the rivalry.


Like you stated, Wasim Akram bowling to SRT, or Imran bowling to Gavakar is immensely enjoyable, and hence adds to the tradition of Ind/Pak. Perhaps I'm not getting the meaning or concept of what you're stating. My opinion, in short, is that the Ashes may have a LONGER tradition, but that doesn't mean much to me in terms of what makes a good rivalry.
How many times did we see Akram bowling to SRT in a series ? Now compare that to Mcgrath's Aussies vs. Sachin's India. Right now IND-Aus rivalry is bigger and better than this so called India-Pak which is a rivalry based more on JINGOISM and political animosity than real Cricket. Gavaskar-Imran rivalry was great and it was more of a personal rivalry than a team one. Ashes has been good for most part (except the 90s and some other one sided series).

I can't call it a rivalry especially when I was deprived of watching the greatest Pakistani attack of my generation against the greatest Indian batting lineup. You may call this a rivalry or whatever, I dont.
 

Fusion

Global Moderator
Sanz said:
Exactly and how many great matches/moments India-Pak have had in last 50 years ? We dont even play on a regular basis, when the friendship wave is going on we play 3 series in 2 years else we play 3 tests in a decade. So much for the rivalry.
.
I guess I will politely disagree with you. Even though Ind/Pak didn't play each other as often as they could have, there's still a good body of work to chose from and plenty of great moments as well. To me, the Pak/Ind rivalry is as good as any in the world (nonwithstanding the lean patches it goes through, just like other rivalries). I will respect your opinion that you disagree and leave it at that.
 

Sanz

Hall of Fame Member
onemangang said:
Personally for me, Indo_Aus series doesn't even get close to Indo-Pak series.
Obviously the current Indo-Pak series ranks way above than any of the Ind-Aus we have played in last 6 years.:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
 

SJS

Hall of Fame Member
Slats4ever said:
india and pakistan shouldn't even try to compete or compare themselves with the ashes. The reasons the ashes is what it is, is because of it's history being the longest in the game.

.
I am afraid I totally disagree.

These two tests do not take away from what the potential of an Indo-Pak contest is.If there is a history behind the Ashes, there is one behind the Indo-Pak series though one of fifty odd years. But there is more.

The fact that Pakistan was carved out of India and the pamgs of the separation and the sufferings od people on both sides of the divide has imbued every encounter between these two sides with an emotional content that the people from other parts of the world cant even begin to understand let alone for the Ashes to replicate. Some of the umpires who have stood in these games have written and talked about the feeling although they too can only feel the 'heat' in the atmosphere not in the hearts !

The players on both sides have so much at stake in these games that some of their best performances are reserved for these. Loss/failure in these games is difficult to live down for most. I know we can talk about this being a bit too much for what is, at the end of it, a sporting contest but the fact remains that this is how it is viewed by a billion and a quarter million people.

This is truly war sand bullets.

Believe me, people outside these two nations can not even begin to imagine what the feelings are amongst ALL Indians and Pakistanis on the morning of an Indo-Pak encounter and not just in cricket.

You may not believe it and may find it a silly sentiment but people on both sides of the border will celeberate even if they do not win a championship as long as the match with the neighbour was won. So many Olympic hocky tournaments and the 2003 cricket world cup are examples.

Chetan Sharma just bowled a full toss, trying a yorker considered the ideal delivery for a last ball but once it was hit, he was condemned for ever. He is stigmatised for ever. This would have been long forgotton if Miandad was not a Pakistani.

Then there is a small matter of the talent in these countries is very exciting at least as on date as compared to the one sided matches that one has been seeing thanks to the depleted englisg stocks for so long(barring the last series) in the Ashes.

No, my dear, I dont agree that the Indo-Pak series do not measure up to the Ashes. But we should not play too often and kill the golden goose or prepare wickets like this and bury it for good.
 

C_C

International Captain
india and pakistan shouldn't even try to compete or compare themselves with the ashes. The reasons the ashes is what it is, is because of it's history being the longest in the game.
Err a few things.

1. History is irrelevant without perspective- ENG-OZ rivalry developed as much out of mutual animosity ( OZ was a prison colony, ENG the pompous colonial mentality) as IND-PAK has.
In that sense, ENG-OZ rivalry is of no different nature than IND-PAK, atleast in its genesis.

2. IND-PAK have played far far higher quality cricket, with far more competitive matches in 3 of the last 4(including current) series than ENG-OZ has managed in the past decade and half, barring the latest one.

3. In relatively small-time persuits, such as sports (ie, not very relevant in the grand scheme of things and is just entertainment), importance can only be relevantly measured in two criterias- quality of the contest and how many people follow it.
Quality of contest lies historically with the Ashes but over the last 15 years has been the sole domain of IND-PAK(Even though they didnt play half as much as ENG-OZ, IND-PAK encounters in 99,2004 and 2005 were far more engrossing). As per how many people follow it, well the Ashes pales into insignificance compared to IND-PAK interest base.

All in all, Ashes has a much bigger claim of being overhyped than IND-PAK.
 

SJS

Hall of Fame Member
Surrounding the pitch, this series, there has been the most absurd ambiguity. So heightened has the speculation been that the PCB were compelled to issue a statement clarifying their official stance on pitch preparation, claiming captain, coach and the management had unanimously asked for "hard, bouncy pitches" for this series. And before the statement, each time, Inzamam repeated only that he wants sporting pitches, as if cancelling out all those other statements where he has publicly called for flat, dead and uncompetitive pitches. Everyone else has backed him up. Yet, still Lahore and Faisalabad have produced pitches that were anything but sporting.


What, then, happened? The PCB has absolved itself of any blame for what happened, as well as the curators, who had to fight nature. But surely someone is responsible for the mess we find ourselves in? Inzamam's own policy towards pitch preparation is shrouded in vagueness. The queries in this series have been so frenzied that Inzamam publicly said he was the captain not the groundsman.


He says often that he only offers advice to groundsmen, but curators and even some PCB officials will privately admit it is more like the ominous `press advice' radical-ish editors received from various military governments for toning down criticism; low on advice, high on demand. He has history as well; at Multan two years ago, the most fantastic ruckus surrounded the baldness of the pitch and specifically whether Inzamam had asked Andy Atkinson, the English curator hired by the PCB for that series, to shave grass off the pitch just before the Test started. Inzamam denied it, Atkinson confirmed it.


But it doesn't necessarily reveal a defensive mindset either, especially in this series. Instead, it probably represents more a strategic miscalculation, an underestimation of basic Indian batting strength. The pitches against England were not a world away from what has been seen here. The weather has undoubtedly played a role but the difference has been exaggerated by the fact that against England, results were forthcoming. Increasingly, it seems that Pakistan thought they could bowl out India on similar pitches, like they had England. The plan overlooked, one, that India has a batting line-up still among the best in the game and two, they are likely to be more used to conditions here than the English were.


This blunder has now sprouted grass in Karachi. Amid all the criticism, it couldn't be any other way for such was the clamour, there just had to be grass. Photographers have laughingly taken pictures of the pitch already, as evidence if the grass is eventually shaved off. Only the length of the blades may now change.


- Osman Samiuddin cricinfo
 

SJS

Hall of Fame Member
This may not be an obituary but these are much stronger words than my 'failed' attempt at sarcasm :)

Pakistan, it seems, are not only terrified of losing, they have also discovered the art of making more excuses of why they are serving up such unappetising fare than George Bush and the so-called weapons of mass destruction.
......
Watching shots of corpulent Inzy resting his injured back with crossed legs is one thing, it becomes tiresome when looking at Younis Khan flog his way into the records without any purpose.

Pakistan seemed to have forgotten that the idea of a five-day Test is to make it attractive and entertaining with some hand-to-hand combat and trench warfare tossed in. All Inzy and the Pakistan management and ground staff are happily doing is the opposite.

What is the sense of such records and statistics if one side is only interested in self-preservation and authorities give away free seats to the public to pack the terraces?
About the best bit of fun on Wednesday was when Shahid Afridi swaggered out to a near hysterical reception from his adoring female fans, ended up almost losing his wicket first ball, then tossing it all away as Zaheer Khan did take his wicket and at one stage sat on a hattrick.

The crowd promptly deserted their freebie seats on the terraces.

At least it relieved us after hours of boredom. Younis Khan must be one of the more lacklustre batsmen in the world to watch.

Not only that, Pakistan have become boring. After they cleaned up England 2-0 it was expected they would be more adventurous. Instead, they have forgotten what it means to win a Test and are driving the five-day game into a grave.


- Trevor Chesterfield
 
Last edited:

Deja moo

International Captain
Sanz said:
20 years ?? out of which we didn't play for 14-15 years. What a rivalry, really. In 70s and 80s India Pak used to play quite frequently but the results used to be marred by gross umpring by the home team(pre 1986 series).
You need to get it out of your head that rivalry = long timeline. Rivalry has less to do with the frequency and a more to do with the actual quality of the clashes when they do occur, along with a bit of needle thrown in. Just because Mumbai have played Maharashtra in the Ranji Trophy almost every year doesnt imply that they have a rivalry (but according to your criteria, they would).

As far as ODIs go, there is no rivalry, Pakistan has owned our behinds for almost 20 years.
Thats fair enough as far as ODIs go. What is Indias record in World Cup matches vs Pakistan ?
 

TIF

U19 Debutant
SJS said:
The possibility of a result.
I do not want to continue this argument, but I had said this earlier that all 3 possible results were possible till midway into the 4th day if the words of diehard Indian and Pakistani fans are to be believed.
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
FaaipDeOiad said:
Irony doesn't apply.

The Ashes might have been one-sided for a decade, but none of the series were a waste of time.
one sided series are a waste of time, AFAIC, esp. if one side takes the ball and runs away with real early in the series, which happened quite often in the Ashes recently. But I will still take such series and matches over the current Ind-Pak series.


That said, I don't think this one series is going to deflate something that has been built on 3 very very good top quality series in the recent past.
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Sanz said:
20 years ?? out of which we didn't play for 14-15 years. What a rivalry, really. In 70s and 80s India Pak used to play quite frequently but the results used to be marred by gross umpring by the home team(pre 1986 series).

As far as ODIs go, there is no rivalry, Pakistan has owned our behinds for almost 20 years.
except in world cups. ;) :D
 

Top