No Ashes for India and Pakistan

[Fusion]

What an absurd discussion. The Ashes has a long history, We (India/Pakistan) have only started on the road. Its extremely unfair to compare the two CRICKETING rivalries.

Let it mature, and lets resume this debate 15 years from now!!

I just don't get why people keep equating LONGER with BETTER. Yes we all know Ashes has a longer tradition. That does NOT mean it's the better rivalry or that Ind/Pak rivalry can't compare. And going back to the original point of this thread, two dull draws in this series does not mean we need to write the obituary for Ind/Pak rivalry (however sarcastically).

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

I just don't get why people keep equating LONGER with BETTER. Yes we all know Ashes has a longer tradition. That does NOT mean it's the better rivalry or that Ind/Pak rivalry can't compare. And going back to the original point of this thread, two dull draws in this series does not mean we need to write the obituary for Ind/Pak rivalry (however sarcastically).

It's not that longer = better. In 15 years, the Ashes will still be older, but India and Pakistan might have a decade or more of high quality, competitive cricket behind them. That gives a history to the rivalry more substantial than political tensions, and adds something to it. Right now the only cricket history the teams have is decades of sporadically played and poor quality draw-filled series, interspersed with the odd classic series or classic match. The last series before this one was a step in the right direction. This series is a step back.

 

[C_C]

Right now the only cricket history the teams have is decades of sporadically played and poor quality draw-filled series, interspersed with the odd classic series or classic match. The last series before this one was a step in the right direction. This series is a step back

In all fairness, three of the last four series (including this one) were enthralling affair encompassing highest quality cricket. And if the last 15 years are the benchmark, the last 3 IND-PAK series have provided more entertainment than pretty much every single Ashes series barring the most recent one.

 

[marc71178]

But why should the benchmark be set at 15 years though?

Why not the last 5 years or the last 50 years?

 

[C_C]

But why should the benchmark be set at 15 years though?

Why not the last 5 years or the last 50 years?

This comming from a person who views 'today as in this very moment' when proclaiming the might of Harmison ?
Piffle Piffle.


PS: 15 years- make it 10/20. Doesnt matter. Point was to show an established trend backed up by multiple sampling, of which the samples are well spaced.
Ie, in short, it has consistency to it.

 

[luckyeddie]

When India play Pakistan in a one-dayer, you could fill any stadium in the world. In test matches, about 12 turn up.

Doesn't seem very Ashes-like to me.

 

[marc71178]

This comming from a person who views 'today as in this very moment' when proclaiming the might of Harmison ?
Piffle Piffle.

Is there not a difference between current and historically any more?

PS: 15 years- make it 10/20. Doesnt matter. Point was to show an established trend backed up by multiple sampling, of which the samples are well spaced.
Ie, in short, it has consistency to it.

So why take a sample then? There is plenty of an established trend, but you've decided to ignore that...

 

[C_C]

Is there not a difference between current and historically any more?

Ofcourse there is, given that you have enough of a sample space to form a *current* trend. Else all you are talking about is 'form at the moment' and the very last over bowled/faced.

So why take a sample then? There is plenty of an established trend, but you've decided to ignore that...

Because there are trends within trends.

 

[Sanz]

Yeah keep looking for trends within trends until you find something to suit your argument.

 

[C_C]

Yeah keep looking for trends within trends until you find something to suit your argument.

Sorry but i dont form my argument first and then look for evidence- that is called data mining.
The argument is straightforward and simple- Ashes is older but IND-PAK has been more entertaining for some time now, this latest series not withstanding.

 

[Deja moo]

The argument is straightforward and simple- Ashes is older but IND-PAK has been more entertaining for some time now, this latest series not withstanding.

bingo. Its that simple a concept.
Let the others watch Mumbai play Maharashtra. They've been playing every year for 50 years after all

 

[Sanz]

bingo. Its that simple a concept.
Let the others watch Mumbai play Maharashtra. They've been playing every year for 50 years after all

Except the fact that Mumbai and Maharashtra have not been playing each other every year for 50 years. And yes I would rather watch Ashes than the current Indo-Pak series.

 

[C_C]

Except the fact that Mumbai and Maharashtra have not been playing each other every year for 50 years. And yes I would rather watch Ashes than the current Indo-Pak series.

Well i would rather watch 98-99, 2004 and 2005 series involving IND-PAK over the last 7-8 Ashes series, not including the most recent one.

 

[Sanz]

The argument is straightforward and simple- Ashes is older but IND-PAK has been more entertaining for some time now, this latest series not withstanding.

Not only Ashes is older but has produced better cricket over all compared to what India-Pak cricket has produced. 1998-99 series was an aberration. Ind-Pak have played more boring and dull series in 25 years than Eng-Aus have played in 125 years.

I said 25 years because India pak didn't play any cricket between (1961-1978 and 1990-1998)

 

[Sanz]

Well i would rather watch 98-99, 2004 and 2005 series involving IND-PAK over the last 7-8 Ashes series, not including the most recent one.

1998-99 I agree, Not sure about 2004, 2005 series. From Performance perspective they were rather ordinary series. I would even have 1986 series (India lost) and 1989 (drawn) above the 2004 and 2005 series.

 

[Deja moo]

Except the fact that Mumbai and Maharashtra have not been playing each other every year for 50 years. And yes I would rather watch Ashes than the current Indo-Pak series.

As I said, people are quick to form conclusions based on one single series.
And Mumbai and Maharashtra might not have played every year, but definitely a lot more than India have played Pakistan, thus fulfilling your critereon for a good rivalry.

 

[C_C]

1998-99 I agree, Not sure about 2004, 2005 series. From Performance perspective they were rather ordinary series. I would even have 1986 series (India lost) and 1989 (drawn) above the 2004 and 2005 series.

Well i find the 2004 and 2005 series involving IND and PAK to be considerably more entertaining than the droll Ashes series through the 90s or early 2000s. Only last Ashes series i found more entertaining and of higher quality than 2004 and 2005 series.

 

[Sanz]

As I said, people are quick to form conclusions based on one single series.
And Mumbai and Maharashtra might not have played every year, but definitely a lot more than India have played Pakistan, thus fulfilling your critereon for a good rivalry.

First of all, No Mumbai and Maharashtra have not played more than Ind-Pak, Second longetivity isn't the only criteria.

As for judging by a single series, then I am not. My assessment is based 2004, 2005 and current series. If you can leave the Jingoism involved between the Ind-Pak fans, you will notice that last 2 Ind-Eng series were more entertaining and competitive than recent ind-pak series (2004, 2005, current).

 

[C_C]

Not only Ashes is older but has produced better cricket over all compared to what India-Pak cricket has produced. 1998-99 series was an aberration. Ind-Pak have played more boring and dull series in 25 years than Eng-Aus have played in 125 years.

I said 25 years because India pak didn't play any cricket between (1961-1978 and 1990-1998)

Well like i said, compare the past 4 IND-PAK series(including this one) and the past 7-8 ashes. You'd find that in terms of entertainment and quality of cricket, all but the current IND-PAK series superseed all but the latest Ashes series over that timeframe.
Until the last series, Ashes was a dying and one sided affair for the entire playing careers of some players.

 

[Sanz]

Well i find the 2004 and 2005 series involving IND and PAK to be considerably more entertaining than the droll Ashes series through the 90s or early 2000s. Only last Ashes series i found more entertaining and of higher quality than 2004 and 2005 series.

Throughout 90s ?? I think Eng competed well in second half of 90s. In 2000s yes it was one sided barring the last series.