-
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.
The famed Indian batting line up !!
- Thread starter SJS
- Start date
tooextracool
International Coach
he played a lot more games at 4 than he did at 5, and certainly 5 isnt very far from 6 either......Deja moo said:
Deja moo
International Captain
So you mean to say that 53 innings is a lot , while 33 is just microscopic?tooextracool said:
That he averages significantly less at 5 than at 4 pints to a statistical quirk- one of those things which just happen. If you can tom tom about the average at4 , people are fully justified in pointing out his average at 5 .
tooextracool
International Coach
nope but id say that his performances at 4 are more conclusive than his performances at 5.Deja moo said:
so you think batting one position lower doesnt make any difference then?Deja moo said:
if you ask me it certainly does, because 4 means that more often than not you will bat in the middle overs, while 5 means that there will be many more occasions when you bat in the last 10 overs or so.
and if batting one position lower doesnt make such a difference, why does tendulkars average lower by about 10 runs from 4 to 5?
why does richards average lower by 10 runs from 3 to 4 and then by 18 runs from 4 to 5?
and what makes you so sure that his average at 4 is a quirk, despite the fact that hes played more games there, while his average at 5 is not?
Arjun
Cricketer Of The Year
The selection of Gautam Gambhir is a good one. He has been one of the most consistent performers as an opening batsman, and is in the top ten, and truly deserves a place in the side. He's not the average opening batsman who just blunts the ball (Das, Ramesh, Connor, Deep "The Drop" Dasgupta), but one who scores runs. He will make a good selection at the top of the order, not just for Tests, but also ODI's. They have to persist with him for at least 2 years, and they cannot lose anything, given the number of exhibition-match ODI series they play these days. By playing a regular opening pair for Tests and ODI's, some consistency may be obtained.
masterblaster
International Captain
I agree, but unfortunately, he'll probably get just 2 test matches instead of 2 years if he doesn't perform.
I rate Gambhir very highly, and I hope he doesn't let me down as it will be a waste of a very productiv opening batsman.
I rate Gambhir very highly, and I hope he doesn't let me down as it will be a waste of a very productiv opening batsman.
Arjun
Cricketer Of The Year
This is why the Indian team never gets a good start in a Test match- they keep chopping and changing openers, and in the process, even the good ones lose out- Chopra, for instance. Worse, their job in an Indian team is not to score runs, but to blunt the ball. Look at opening batsmen of other sides- they score runs. They hit the fours and sixes. They run the singles. Yet they play a long innings. This Gavaskarist and Boycottian approach has to go out of the window. The openers should also play in ODI's, as those of South Africa, Sri Lanka, NZ and other teams do.masterblaster said:
tooextracool
International Coach
i really find it annoying how they keep shifting between nehra and agarkar. how long is it going to be before they find out that they are both useless?amolvaidya79 said:
Deja moo
International Captain
tooextracool said:
When did I ever say that only the position 4 average is a quirk ? What Iam sayign is that you cannot selectively use statistics that support your theory , while ignoring uncomfortable ones.
The crux of the matter is that while Bevan is a damn fine ODI player, he is not the great collossus of the limited over game you make him out to be.
There are many Australians who themselves have said tht Bevan most of the time batted slow trying to stay not out , bolstering his average , even though the situation may not have demanded such an approach.
tooextracool
International Coach
its not exactly selectively using stats, ive clearly stated that hes more suited to the no 4 position, not no 5, you were the one that brought up 5 saying that they are almost the same position. and as ive already shown, its quite possible for players to do a lot worse below or above where they are most comfortable at.Deja moo said:
is it coincidence that he averages above 41 in every position that hes played in? doesnt that suggest to you that hes the sort of player who can play any sort of innings anywhere in the order? not viv richards and not sachin tendulkar can match that.
and that proves what?look at how most indians rate ganguly and decide for yourself whether or not thats the way to go.Deja moo said:
yes there were times when he played slowly, but almost always those innings were on difficult tracks, and if you've watched bevan closely, you'll see that his philsophy is to survive and be there till the end, because if he is, his strike rate will be good enough to get australia through. i've seen several bevan innings where he was 17 off 50 ballls, then watched him score 60 off 100 chasing 220 and getting his team through. of course if somehow he managed to get himself out before that he would castigated for scoring slowly, yet had he won the game, which he has done so very often he would be praised. and believe me the 17 off 50 barely cost australia on most occasions, given how late he came in most of those innings on those tracks, there was hardly any chance of someone down the order doing too much better.