***Official*** New Zealand in Zimbabwe & Zimbabwe/New Zealand/India ODI Tri-Series

[shaka]

Kumble has been unimpressive in the series.

 

[Arjun]

Kumble has been unimpressive in the series.

He's done better against better teams, so it shouldn't matter.

 

[shaka]

consistency in getting wickets around the world against "test playing nations" is what counts.

 

[Steulen]

By now Blignaut must be close to being the Test batsman most deserving of ton. Again closing in and running out of teammates. Sad really...

 

[shaka]

so you think he has been playing well in the series?

 

[Arjun]

Easy win for India, but it didn't look clean. So often we see fans take a swipe at Yuvraj, but at least he's often looked a potential world-class batsman, but with strange temperament. The same can't be said of Karthik- he's looked dreadful with the bat, for someone picked as a wicketkeeper for his batting alone.

 

[Steulen]

Good enough .

He's a good lower order slogger in the Kemp / Klusener mould. Too bad he's used as a front-line bowler. Find a few decent bowlers, use Blignaut as a batting allrounder and he could be very useful.

Having said that, his Test bowling stats aren't that much worse than Pathan's, so he must actually be a walking god

 

[Sanz]

Pathan may have got a big-ten in this so-called match but that doesn't make him a better strike bowler than Zaheer- the more experienced hand has done better against better teams. Hopefully the selectors realise that.

Are you kidding ? Zaheer and Ashish Nehra are finished as test players. Pathan tool 21 wickets in two tests compared to Zaheer's 9.

 

[Steulen]

Are you kidding ? Zaheer and Ashish Nehra are finished as test players. Pathan tool 21 wickets in two tests compared to Zaheer's 9.

He has a point, though, that the difference in Pathan's performance against minnows and against genuine Test teams is too big to ignore.
As long as his 'genuine' Test average hovers around 40, he's no better than Blignaut in my book.

 

[Sanz]

He has a point, though, that the difference in Pathan's performance against minnows and against genuine Test teams is too big to ignore.
As long as his 'genuine' Test average hovers around 40, he's no better than Blignaut in my book.

I was just arguing Arjun's suggestion that Zaheer is a better striker bowler than Irfan. Zaheer's performance sine the World Cup 2003 are - 163.22 (Pak), 43 (BD), 57( SA), 36.8(Aus), 76 (pak), 42.6(Aus), 49.75 (NZ). Hardly the strike bowler Arjun is suggesting. I agree he was a great prospect until 2003 but something went terribly wrong and he lost his way. Zaheer's avg. against genuine test teams is better because of his performance in pre-world cup series where he looked good.

Dont get me wrong, by no means I am suggesting that Irfan is a great/good bowler. To me he is still a decent prospect and has a long way to go before I can consider him good but atm he certainly seems better than Zaheer.

 

[honestbharani]

Easy win for India, but it didn't look clean. So often we see fans take a swipe at Yuvraj, but at least he's often looked a potential world-class batsman, but with strange temperament. The same can't be said of Karthik- he's looked dreadful with the bat, for someone picked as a wicketkeeper for his batting alone.

You think that his wicketkeeping is worse than Dhoni? That should be the only reason he should be dropped. And for batting, he got a beauty of a catch and the only ball that swung the whole day in the first test. He looked bad in the second, but again, it was a tough pitch and Streak was doing amazing things with the new ball, even Dravid looked clueless against him.

 

[Anil]

Obviously, I should have guessed it anyway.

are you seriously comparing dravid to ganguly as test batsmen? there is no comparison, there hasn't been for a long time now...

 

[SJS]

are you seriously comparing dravid to ganguly as test batsmen? there is no comparison, there hasn't been for a long time now...

You are absolutely correct. In fact, , there hasnt been, for the discerning (which includes you ). from the very first test for both when Dravid missed a century on debut by four runs and Ganguly scored a fluent 132.

Dravid has always been the better test player. It was as a one day player that Ganguly was ahead of Dravid for long but that's also behind us now, or so it appears. Although for the sake of Indian cricket I hope Ganguly gets back some of his past one day form. But with him getting emroiled so messily in this unsavoury and unholy mess, it is difficult to imagine him playing freely again. He is so intent to put runs on the board with no thought whatsoever of what the team needs that the great one day player that Ganguly undoubtedly was may be lost to us for ever.

I wish a well wisher would have the sense to understand what Ganguly (forget India) needs to further his own interests as a player and gave him the wise counsel that he so desperately needs.

As long as there are those who are willing to fight on his behalf to undo the "injustice" to which they think he is the victime and as long as there are those who use him to further their own agenda and as long as Ganguly cant see through this, his own cause is hopeless. Worse, I daresay, than that of Indian cricket.

 

[Anil]

Frankly, there hasnt been, for the discerning from the very first test for both when Dravid missed a century on debut by four runs and Ganguly scored a fluent 132.

Dravid has always been the better test player. It was as a one day player that Ganguly was ahead of Dravid for long but that's also behind us now, or so it appears. Although for the sake of Indian cricket I hope Ganguly gets back some of his past one day form. But with him getting emroiled so messily in this unsavoury and unholy mess, it is difficult to imagine him playing freely again. He is so intent to put runs on the board with no thought whatsoever of what the team needs that the great one day player that Ganguly undoubtedly was may be lost to us for ever.

well i was not implying that he was ever better than dravid in tests even though he used to be a very fluent player in the late 90s and had a very impressive start to his test career and really blossomed in one dayers, dravid was always the better technician and he always had a wide range of strokes, it's just that he was too defensive-minded and severely limited his stroke play at the start of his career, now he knows how to pace his innings according to the needs of his team in both tests and one dayers...as for discernment, i am sure that you know more about cricket than i do...

 

[SJS]

well i was not implying that he was ever better than dravid in tests even though he used to be a very fluent player in the late 90s and had a very impressive start to his test career and really blossomed in one dayers, dravid was always the better technician and he always had a wide range of strokes, it's just that he was too defensive-minded and severely limited his stroke play at the start of his career, now he knows how to pace his innings according to the needs of his team in both tests and one dayers...as for discernment, i am sure that you know more about cricket than i do...

You totally misunderstood Anil,

I was just agreeing with what you said. It was not aimed at what you said.

PS Maybe I should have started with, " You are absolutely correct. In fact there hasnt been from the...."

But thats what was implied.

 

[SJS]

Post ammended with ambiguity removed

 

[Anil]

Post ammended with ambiguity removed

not really required, but thanks..i wasn't hurt or anything....but i did think you got the impression that i was saying gangs was better than dravid in the distant past...just wanted to make my position clear...