sachin might find form anytime.....and in form sachin is better than ponting.....atleast definitely in india.Scaly piscine said:Regardless that is of little relevance because the taff has gotten Ponting out twice cheaply - and honestly, do you think Sachin *now* is better than Ponting?
Actually it is like that, especially if you saw how he bowled in the Ashes.chicane said:and so what if waqar and wasim werent in their primes.....its not like jones can be called better than them even then.
i know hes good.....but...Scaly piscine said:Actually it is like that, especially if you saw how he bowled in the Ashes.
twisting reality?Barney Rubble said:Well if you're going to twist the reality of events to suit your own arguments then there's not really much point in me debating with you.![]()
i dont think there is much evidence of tendulkar being capable of playing high quality swing bowling, and almost everytime hes been confronted with it hes failed miserably.viktor said:ok. we could split hairs on that one. The point I was trying to make is that Tendulkar is capable of playing high quality swing bowling. I thnk you would agree, maybe not unequivovally (inspite of your sig.).
indeed he hasnt, but as i said earlier, he still has time to learn, udal whether or not he is a marginally better bowler or not doesnt have a future with england and we will almost certainly never see him in an england shirt after the tour of india.marc71178 said:He's done little in the last few years to suggest he can though.
collingwood's bowling is so bad that its as good as non-existent. certainly i can never see how collingwood can ever be even remotely close to a replacement for flintoff.marc71178 said:Collingwood went as the closest like for like cover for Flintoff.
Bear in mind that Bell made his debut against the Windies, did nothing wrong and then didn't make the touring party.
flintoff has definetly proven himself with the ball in the sub continent and while Jones has not exactly proven himself, he did have quite some success on the A tour to India in 04.viktor said:Absolutely valid point. I, neither said nor implied that either of the pair were. In fact what I am saying is that if just as Pathan and Dhoni haven't been proven outside the subcontinent, Flintoff and Jones haven't proven themselves inside it.
where does this 'better batsman' come from? there is absolutely no evidence anywhere for such a claim. Jones is the better test batsman perhaps, but i can argue all day about why test and ODI batting is completely different. Chris read in his short stint in ODI cricket showed that he was not only capable of playing the sensible innings of hitting the ball into gaps, but was also capable of hammering the ball all over the park if necessary. jones has shown that he can do neither.aussie said:1. Well its not as if Jones doesn't have the ability to get his average up in ODI's after all he is a better batsman that read..
no the argument is that chris read should be in the ODI side ahead of Jones and prior.aussie said:2. true but it wouldn't have made much sense having 2 keepers in the team in both form of the game.
no one saw potential with the ball in pakistan except you. most saw him getting slaughtered in all games bar one.aussie said:3. Its not all about stats, fletcher and co clearly saw potential in Plunks bowling & we all saw it in Pakistan
which bears testiment to the quality of our national selectors.aussie said:4. True but, england would never do that...
oh really?tooextracool said:i dont think there is much evidence of tendulkar being capable of playing high quality swing bowling, and almost everytime hes been confronted with it hes failed miserably.
how many greats do you know off who failed in the subcontinent?R_D said:Kind of funny how Sub-continent players have to prove themselves outside sub-continent to be considered good players while players from outside sub-continent who struggle their can be considered one of greats of modern area.
I wouldn't call a strike rate of 92 at an avg of 31.5 proving himself in India especially if you add the 5.2 batting avg. his economy rate was good though.tooextracool said:flintoff has definetly proven himself with the ball in the sub continent and while Jones has not exactly proven himself, he did have quite some success on the A tour to India in 04.
thats very questionable. for one waqar was making his debut in that series, and i dont know off too many bowlers that start off in their prime. wasim while he had been playing long before that, based on his record at least, it appears that he only started to bowl consistently well after that. and its hardly fair to say that sachin smashes them all over the place while he was averaged 35 in the series.honestbharani said:They admit it. Waqar and Wasim both said that they were astonished to see a 16 year old boy SMASH them. Anyways, if you think Sachin can't play reverse swing, there is not much I can say, except that you are in a very very small minority.
thats doubtful, wasim was definetly at least well short of his best pace and while he was still performing somewhat better than waqar towards the end of his career, he was still far more inconsistent to be considered to be in his prime.honestbharani said:Waqar wasn't, Wasim was.
no one said that he is.chicane said:and so what if waqar and wasim werent in their primes.....its not like jones can be called better than them even then.
have you seen waqar in his prime? i somehow doubt that you have.Scaly piscine said:Actually it is like that, especially if you saw how he bowled in the Ashes.
Of the top of my head...tooextracool said:how many greats do you know off who failed in the subcontinent?