When will India become Number Uno?

[Richard]

As I say, irregularly large suffering from dropped catches is the biggest factor which has caused me to think his scorebook figures do not tell the entire story, but SJS will no doubt tell us much more, as he has done several times in his time here.

 

[SJS]

As I say, irregularly large suffering from dropped catches is the biggest factor which has caused me to think his scorebook figures do not tell the entire story, but SJS will no doubt tell us much more, as he has done several times in his time here.

Well. Thanks for the compliments guys. Don't know how much I deserve it. Anyway, I remembered I had written of Gupte in detail in an earlier thread. The advanced search of CW makes it less tedious to find these things, so here it is.

By the way, I have also opened up that thread on this page since I think it has plenty of good stuff on Indian cricket.

On Subhash Gupte from the thread - India All Time XI

Well he is surely the greatest orthodox leg spinner of all time India have produced.

That much we can say without much chance of contradiction with the unorthocox, medium pacers of Kumble and Chandra.

Gupte is widely called by those who played with or against him as the finest spinner India produced so we cant just ignore that claim out of hand, Amongst those who swear by him are as great and legendary cricketers as Sir garfield Sobers.

Inspite of Kumble's 600 plus wickets, Bishen's magnificently beautiful bowling and mastery over his subtle craft and Chandra's amazing ability to strike suddenly and venomously and win matches in a short sharp spell, the fact remains that the only other Indian bowler who has been considered amongst the all time greats by opponents Is Erapally Prasanna.

Just as the West Indians are enamoured by Gupte and swear by him, the Australians of the late 60's and early 70's swear by Prasanna. And you may not be fond of Ian Chappel but there are few more knowledgeable students of the game.

I havent seen Gupte bowl but I have heard of how great he was hundreds and thousands of times from those who had played with him. Prasanna I have seen and consider the greatest Indian spinner, I have seen for various reasons which will take some space.

Coming to the problem of putting Gupte's greatness in the context of his figures let me tell you that figures tell you something for sure but they dont tell you everything unless you KNOW it.

Whats the BIG difference between Gupte, Bedi, Chandra, Prasanna, Kumble, and Venkat ? Its the same difference as between Andy Roberts and the other great West Indian fast bowlers who followed. He had very modest, if any support at the other end. And yet so many of those who saw him at his peak consider Roberts the greatest of the many great West Indian fast bowlers.

Roberts for most of his peak as a fast bowler, bowled with medium pacers of modest caliber at the other end. By the time Holding developed into a world class fast bowler, Roberts' career was on the wane. Hence iplayers like Lillee, Imran, Lloyd, Trueman, Bailey and Mallet among others rate him higher than those who followed him in-spite of his figures being, comparatively, less impressive.

Bedi, Prasanna and Chandrashekhar were in a period when India had no pace bowlers to talk of but they had each other and Venkat waiting to play now and then. Between them they made the greatest spin attack ever assembled in one Test nation. This did help though Kapil arrived ten years late for India to really benefit from a truly awesome attack.

Kumble when he arrived had Kapil with some juice left in him, Prabhakar close to his best, Venkatpathy Raju who joined the same year and Javagal Srinath who made his debut the next year. By the time Kumble flowered around mid-90's, Srinath was a world class bowler. Before Srinath went Harbhajan had become a top flight off spinner and there were a host of young medium pacers knocking at the Test doors. Not to mention that India by now had become one of the great batting sides in the world which was important because Kumble didn't have to always defend very modest scores.

Gupte had the worst in this respect.

The only single bowler whose career, briefly, ran parallel to Gupte's was Vinoo Mankad. The others were nothing to write home about. Gupte made his debut in Dec 51, was promptly dropped and included exactly 12 months later in Nov. 1952. From then till 1956, he played 20 Test matches, mankad played in 19 of them.

In these 19 Tests, Gupte took 94 wickets at 23.5 each.

Mankad was to play no more for India till recalled in 1959 to lead the country against Alexander's West Indies. I think the 3rd captain in 4 Tests. Mankad was already 42 years old and bowled only in the first innings when he took four wickets while Gupte took one. Gupte took another four in the second as West Indies thrashed India once again.

India's previous series in the West Indies ha been six years ago in the Carribean and they had managed to draw four of the five Tests with Gupte being the outstanding bowler with 27 wickets. Valentine who took 28 for West Indies was the only bowler to take more. Mankad was the next best Indian bowler and his wickets cost him 24 runs per wicket more !!

This time they decided that the pace of Hall and Gilchrist had to be met with dead wickets. All that did was that the Indian bowlers were slaughtered in four of the five games while Hall and Gilchrist with sheer pace took 56 wickets between them at 17 apiece.

Windies ran up consecutive scores of 443 for 7, 614 for 5, 500 and 644 for 8 decl in the last four Tests to win three of them by 203 runs, an innings and 336 runs and 295 runs !!

Gupte toiled on those dead tracks to bowl 312.3 overs. The next three Indian bowlers Borde ramchand and Mankad bowled ten overs less !! between the three of them.

Gupte whose 4 for 86 in the first Test had helped restrict the Windies to a very modest 227 and whose fabulous 9 for 102 in the second Test got them, single handedly, for 222, still managed the series with nothing to show but the toil of bowling day in and day out on dead wickets.

After 15 wickets at 19.99 each in the first three innings of the series, he bowled 210 overs in the next five innings for just 7 wickets for almost 90 runs each. It broke his spirit.

He had dead wickets to contend with, and for fellow bowlers, as we have seen

- Borde, primarily a batsman - an allrounder of sorts,
- Mankad also an allrounder and well past his use by date,
- Ramchand again a bits and pieces player with 33 Test wickets in his career,
- Polly Umrigar again primarily a batsman,
- Surendranath a very modest bowler with 26 wickets in his Test career,​

These were the five main bowlers for India in this series and between them they bowled 457 overs. Ramchand with 5 wickets at 49.4 was the most successful of the lot.

Four bowlers in the series took over ten wickets three of them bowled fast to medium pace in the series (Sobers too most of the time).

Hall 30, Gilchrist 26, Gupte 22 and Sobers 10.

Sometimes figures have to be seen in the wider context.

I think that if Gupte and Mankad had bowled in tandem for longer (more over lap) and/or if there had been a third bowler of some note in the Indian side of the fifites, we would be seeing completely different figures of Subhash Gupte.

I have stressed a lot on this series to stress the difference the lack of a balanced attack means. That is why Gupte, Andy Roberts and even kapil Dev for a large part of his early career and Richard Hadlee are such remarkable bowlers.​

 

[Uppercut]

Interesting that you consider Prassana the best Indian spinner- don't know if you noticed, but he came up in a discussion not long ago here on (allegedly, since i've never seen him) great players with average-looking figures. Anything to say on the subject?

 

[SJS]

Interesting that you consider Prassana the best Indian spinner- don't know if you noticed, but he came up in a discussion not long ago here on (allegedly, since i've never seen him) great players with average-looking figures. Anything to say on the subject?

Figures can tell you everything you already firmly believe you know. They rarely tell you everything that you need to know to "know better"

 

[Precambrian]

Thank you very much. But can you tell me why his record is not so impressive against the Australians and English? And comparing with Kumble, who too had his share of roads to contend with?

 

[Uppercut]

Figures can tell you everything you already firmly believe you know. They rarely tell you everything that you need to know to "know better"

I do like that line. It sort of sums up why i steer completely clear of any discussions comparing one player before my lifetime to another. Not because i have no interest in such players, to the contrary.

 

[SJS]

I do like that line. It sort of sums up why i steer completely clear of any discussions comparing one player before my lifetime to another. Not because i have no interest in such players, to the contrary.

Well. First and foremost, he didn't play too much against the Australians. Just three Tests in 1956-57. He averaged 32.8 in that series, no stunning performance but remember he averaged 35.0 against the West Indians and almost all the great West indians of those years, Sobers, Worrell, Weekes, etc rated him the world's finest spinner. Clearly the batsmen who played him looked at what he did to them at the crease rather than the final bowling averages. When sides are weak, as India undoubtedly was in those times, the bowlers show the least productive results (not always indicative of their actual strength) while the batsmen still get to show off their prowess every now and then.

I havent read any accounts of that series against the Australians so I do not have any idea of how he bowled. Maybe he just had a bad series. It can happen.

Coming to England. He played them in eight Tests. The first was his debut Test which was his debut Test and he was struggling to impress his seniors in the side. Two other Tests were the last two of his career when he was 42 and well past his best. He should never have been played. He never played them at his peak, the other five being in 1959, when he was in his 40th year.

Lets look at these games a bit more closely.

Debut Test - 1951 :
He was treated by the seniors with the near contempt that juniors were treated in those times in India. England played 160 overs in the first innings and Gupte bowled only 13 of them. In the second he bowled just five overs out of 120. Not the best way to bowl a leg spinner and not the ideal way to bring in a youngster. The 57 runs he conceded in those 18 overs do not appear to be much and would make no difference (beyond the second decimal) to a career as long as, say, Anil Kumble, but in Gupte's short career and to his figures against England they do.

In England 1959 :
As I have said before, Gupte was in his 40th year but bowling pretty well. On the entire tour he took 95 first class wickets at 26.58 making him the leading bowler of the side.

In the Test matches, he took 17 wickets but at 34.64. He was still India's best bowler, even in the Test matches, but it is interesting to look at those Tests in more detail.

The final results:-

• 1st Test : England won by an innings and 59 runs
• 2nd Test : England won by eight wickets
• 3rd Test : England won by an innings and 173 runs
• 4th Test : England won by and 171 runs.
• 5th Test : England won by an innings and 27 runs

Just look at that massacre. England hardly batted a second times. In five Test matches, India took only 58 English wickets - Just over 11 wickets per Test.

Close Catchers:
A side which is so badly mauled by the opposing batsmen does not hem in the opposite batsmen with close catcher (forget the standards of Indian fielders in those days). Attacking bowlers like Gupte had to contend with defensive fields. What do you do with your beautifully spinning leg breaks and cleverly disguised googlies without a cordon of close fielders to take the edges and bat pad deflections. And remember, padding up with a big stride, almost never got you an "out" verdict till slow motion television replays and ball tracking techniques made umpires a laughing stock in the recent decades.

Lets look at individual matches.

- 1st Test : 4 for 102 in England's only innings
- 2nd Test : 3 for 62 in the first innings and just 6 overs in the second as England cantered to a comfortable win
- 3rd test : 4 for 111 in England's only innings
- 4th Test : 2 for 98 and 4 for 76
- 5th Test : 1 for 119 in England's only innings.​

One bad Test in four. Isn't that what this is. In a side that was slaughtered.

Support at the other end :
Here are the other bowlers who bowled for India in that series.

- Ramakant Desai (fast medium)
- Surendranath (Medium pace)
- Polly Umriigar (Medium Pace - Middle order batsman and part time bowler)
- Bapu Nadkarni (Left arm spin - mainly contaiment)
- Chandu Borde (RALS - Middle order batsman and part time bowler)​

How many poorer attacks can you recall ?

1961 England at Home - End of a Career
As I mentioned earlier, at the age of 42, well past his prime, Gupte played two tests in this series. He took 7 wickets in those two games at 36.7 but even that included a five for 90 in the second Test (Gupte's first of the series) which forced England to follow on. A rare occurrence in their matches against India in those days. But as I said before Gupte should not have been played that series. He was finished.

 

[rooey123]

judging by the way most of the indian players and fans go about their buisness you would think they were already number one.

but to answer your question. they can be number one soon. but they need to work hard.

 

[SJS]

judging by the way most of the indian players and fans go about their buisness you would think they were already number one.

but to answer your question. they can be number one soon. but they need to work hard.

You are wrong and you generalise unfairly. I too am an Indian fan and I dont even agree with you when you say "they can be number one soon. but they need to work hard". They wont, not in my life time and I think I have a few decades to go. And this is what I have said here before.

With so much money flowing in to Indian cricket and a more professional approach being undertaken by their cricket board it is only a matter of time before India becomes the best cricketing nation.

So when do you guys think there will be this transfer of power from Aus to India?

Oh yes. Its also a matter of time before Bangladesh becomes numero Uno ..... maybe a matter of 500 years ... its a matter of time

India is NOT going to be number one not because they are complacent but because they aren't good enough. And they are going to get worse.

 

[SJS]

Gupte in the eyes of those who played with and against him​

Madhav Mantri - Good support from the other spinners from the other end and the poor quality of India's close in fielders - Pakistan 1954-55

Originally when the fixtures were arranged, they had decided to play on four turf wickets and one matting wicket. But just before the tour a team from there [Pakistan Services and Bahawalpur Cricket Association] visited India. In the festival game against the Bombay Cricket Association, they had no clue on the turf wicket, as Subash Gupte picked up all ten wickets in an innings. They immediately changed their plans and decided to play three Tests on matting and only two on turf.

Gupte still finished as the highest wicket-taker for India, but he was bowling so well that on turf wickets he might have been unplayable. He never took any time to settle into his length and would bowl the first ball on the spot where he intended. The Pakistanis tried everything to upset his rhythm.

In the first Test at Dacca, Gupte came on to bowl first-change on the first day. Idris Beg, the famous umpire, called the very first ball a no-ball even before Gupte finished his delivery stride. Gupte was completely stunned, as he had never bowled a no-ball in his career before that. In fact, he did not bowl no-balls even in practice. I went to the umpire and told him, "You are going to appear in the Wisden record books, for being the only umpire to have ever no-balled Gupte". It worked out well for us. He didn't call a single no-ball after that!

Ghulam Ahmed began the series very well, and, along with Gupte and Vinoo Mankad, formed a great trio. The main problem that all the three spinners faced was lack of catching support. In those days, the senior players stood in the close cordon, and the youngsters were made to run around the boundaries. The lack of agility of the senior players cost these spinners many wickets.

GS Ramchand - Good support, good fielders and great batting opposition on perfect batting tracks - West Indies 1953-53

In contrast to Ramadhin, our legspinner Subhash Gupte did very well on that tour. He got 27 of the 62 wickets that we picked up in the series. What made Gupte so effective was that he deceived batsmen with his flight, and had a good wrong'un. He got fine support at the other end from Vinoo Mankad, and the two of them were backed up by brilliant fielding. It was said that the 1952-53 team was the best Indian fielding side to visit the West Indies, with JM Ghorpade, CV Gadkari, Polly Umrigar, DK Gaekwad, Madhav Apte and myself......

Bowling to the Three Ws was no joke. They were merciless. You got one out and another W emerged. Our only hope was to keep them relatively quiet. Gupte and Mankad both bowled their hearts out; Gupte bowled 65 overs and Mankad 82 in the first innings of the final Test, in which all the Three Ws got hundreds.....

Gupte commanded greater respect than Vinoo. To this generation, I would say that Gupte was as good as Shane Warne.

Erappalli Prasanna - playing Gupte in his final first class game in India at the age of 45

I was fortunate enough to be part of the South Zone side that played the Duleep Trophy semi-final against Central Zone in 1963. Subhash Gupte was in the Central team. It was his final first-class match in India, and it was in that game that I felt the effect of his genius.

On a turning final-day wicket in Bangalore, he was close to unplayable. I still remember how he flighted the ball and teased as I tried to bat out time to force a draw. We were lucky that he got just one wicket in that game. The way he was bowling, he could have wrapped us all up easily. In my estimation Gupte is the greatest spinner the game has produced.

Despite his greatness he was a very simple man. Talking to him was an education like none other. Ask Sir Garfield Sobers about him, he'll tell you he was the greatest spinner he's seen. He had flight, control, spin ... everything.

Sir Garfield Sobers

Warne was also a Cricketer of the Century, but Sobers picked Subhash Gupte as his all-time favourite slow bowler. "Warne's a great, but the best legspinner I've ever seen is still Gupte," he said. "He could do things that I still don't believe all these years later."

Chandu Borde : Fellow cricketer and leg spinner - writing on Gupte's death in 2002

easily the finest leg-spinner I have ever come across. In fact I would go as far as saying that he was one of the greatest bowlers India has ever produced.....You should have been there in Kanpur in 1958, then you would understand what I mean. His guile and flight were second to none. Very few batsmen in the world picked his googly," said Borde. "On a placid wicket in Kanpur, against a very strong West Indian side, he made the batsmen dance. Nine for 102 he picked up; I'll never forget that day.
​

 

[DaRick]

Sehwag is only 29!! Aus will lose the like of ponting,hayden,hussey much before India lose sehwag.

Uh...I wasn't necessarily referring to India losing Sehwag. Just losing the likes of Kumble, Ganguly, Dravid, Tendulkar and possibly Laxman, to boot. Sehwag is part of the stand-out six, which is why I referred to him.

 

[SJS]

From the Wisden obituary :

Sir Everton Weekes had recently said Gupte was "easily the best leg-spin bowler of all time", and certainly between 1953 and 1956 he was peerless. In 15 successive Tests for India he beguiled his way to 82 wickets at 23.57, averaging a wicket every 70 balls. At a comparable stage in his Test career, Shane Warne's strike-rate was 75.....

Subhash Gupte was small and slight. But he had a high arm action and the wrist-spinner's predilection for experimenting with flight and rotation. Unlike some, he possessed the control and patience to afford his variations. His legspinner, nicely looped, turned on the flattest pitches, while a scurrying top-spinner and two googlies provided sufficient chicanery. The googly he bowled with a lower trajectory was for batsmen to read; the other, from his customary high trajectory, came laced with overspin and dipped and bounced deceptively.

Unhappily, his close catchers struggled to pick his repertoire almost as much as the batsmen, so chances often went begging. He would have taken all ten wickets, instead of nine for 102, against West Indies on jute matting at Kanpur in 1958-59 had the wicket-keeper Naren Tamhane not dropped Lance Gibbs. It was the first time an Indian bowler had taken nine wickets in a Test innings - and still India lost by a large margin. There was one ten-wicket return in his career bag, however: for the Bombay CA President's XI against a visiting Pakistan Services and Bahawalpur side in December 1954, at a cost of 78 runs. ....

Though few of the pitches (in the Windies 1952-53) helped bowlers and Weekes was rampant, averaging over 100, Gupte took 27 wickets at 29.22 in the five Tests, including seven for 162 at Port-of-Spain, and ended the tour with 50 at 23.64. India's other bowlers managed 35 between them in the Tests and 57 overall. Back on the subcontinent he picked up 21 Test wickets on the mat and turf in Pakistan and then 34, while his team-mates took 30, against the touring New Zealanders....

Gupte was considered the best of his kind when India went to England in 1959, but the strain of carrying India's attack was beginning to tell. Gerry Alexander's West Indians had recently made him pay 42.13 apiece for his 22 wickets; India's next highest wicket-taker claimed only five and Gupte's workload of 312 overs was almost three times that of anyone else. Though he remained India's leading wicket-taker, he did not always come up to expectation on the hard pitches of that sun-baked English summer. And the Indians' slothful fielding didn't help; he was patently dispirited by the poor standard.....

Gupte missed that winter's Tests against Benaud's Australians because he was coaching in the West Indies. When Pakistan visited India in 1960-61, his brother replaced him halfway through the series. But the old familiar flight and fizz were much in evidence when he was recalled for the Kanpur Test against Ted Dexter's MCC side in December 1961. He took the first five wickets and, for the first time, India made England follow on. But the comeback did not last long. During the next Test his room-mate, Kripal Singh, phoned the hotel receptionist to ask her for a date. She complained to the Indian management who, claiming they did not know who made the call, suspended both players. Even worse, the Indian board president, himself an acquaintance of the lady, told the selectors not to pick Gupte for the forthcoming tour of the West Indies. Bitter and disillusioned, Gupte quit India for good at 33 and emigrated to Trinidad, where he worked in the sugar refinery​

 

[tooextracool]

Undoubtedly, which is why I say I doubt many would have questioned his potential as a Test bowler. However, fact of the matter is, he didn't play much and when he did he was no more than pretty good. This is different to being a proven performer who no-one doubts the capabilties of. Very occasionally, people simply inexplicably fail to produce the goods at a certain level or game-form.

I'm not entirely sure about that TBH. They were obviously always going to beat Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, so 4 of those 15 aren't of the remotest relevance. On at least 2 occasions of the other 11, they were saved by lost play and would almost certainly have lost had time been made-up (Second Test in Aus and Second Test in SL). And although not losing a single game is a decent performance, you'd expect anyone to beat India and SL away, and beat West Indies. I think it's more a case of Bond happening to be fit when NZ were playing series they'd expect to win than his performance inspiring team-mates. On the second home-SL instance, even the expected didn't happen.

Of course it didn't. As I say, I'm not for one second questioning his ability, merely his performance. I have always maintained that people have overstated the calibre of his actual performance.

Your analysis seems to be based on statistics rather than actually watching him bowl. For the number of FC games that Bond had played he was light years ahead of any other fast bowler in his time bar perhaps Mohammad Asif. Had he been fortunate enough to play as many games as Walsh or Mcgrath there is no telling how many records he might have broken.

 

[tooextracool]

Limited talent pool- Yes. There is clearly a lack of depth.

But I wouldnt say the top NZ talent is 'inferior' to that of India. In fact in areas such as fast bowlers and allrounders, it could be argued as superior.

I would argue that India's top fast bowlers are infinitely more talented than NZs current crop. However, one has to admire the likes of Ian O'Brien, Jacob Oram and Kyle Mills who continually make the most of their limited talents by exercising the kind of discipline that should be exemplary for any other bowler around the world. If the likes of Ishant Sharma,
Zaheer Khan, RP Singh and Sreesant had half of the discipline that these bowlers share, theres no telling what they might achieve, but on raw talent there isnt much doubt in my mind that Ishant and co are vastly superior to all those bar Bond.

 

[SJS]

I have been reminded by a friend, who is older and whose opinion on the game I respect and most importantly, who watched Gupte for most of his career, that Gupte was NOT past his best in that last home series against England. That he was bowling with great guile and control. He watched the Delhi Test (Gupte's last) where England, replying to India's 466 in the first innings scored 256 for 3 in response with Puller and Barrington playing Gupte mostly with their pads.

I had also forgotten to mention that against Australia Gupte had great trouble from Neil Harvey, the great Aussie left hander who probably played him the best of all the batsmen Gupte bowled to.

 

[Goughy]

I would argue that India's top fast bowlers are infinitely more talented than NZs current crop. However, one has to admire the likes of Ian O'Brien, Jacob Oram and Kyle Mills who continually make the most of their limited talents by exercising the kind of discipline that should be exemplary for any other bowler around the world. If the likes of Ishant Sharma,
Zaheer Khan, RP Singh and Sreesant had half of the discipline that these bowlers share, theres no telling what they might achieve, but on raw talent there isnt much doubt in my mind that Ishant and co are vastly superior to all those bar Bond.

Hmm and you are usually so moderate.

IMO this is why Indian supporters will continue to be disappointed. They use terms that cant be measured and have unrealistic expectations of their players.

To call India quicks 'infinately superior' and possessing far more 'raw talent' is not accurate.

Having watched them all, Im struggling to know what those terms mean. As I certainly dont see it. Indian is producing some promising seamers recently but noone has looked 'infinately superior' to anyone or as amazing natual talents.

This legion of fast bowling talent also doesnt a) have anyone that averages under 30 and b) anyone that looks amazing (Ishant may have a very good future and there a good cricketers there)

No doubt if Chris Martin was born in Kolkota rather than Christchurch then his percieved raw talent would increase.

 

[tooextracool]

Hmm and you are usually so moderate.

IMO this is why Indian supporters will continue to be disappointed. They use terms that cant be measured and have unrealistic expectations of their players.

To call India quicks 'infinately superior' and possessing far more 'raw talent' is not accurate.

Having watched them all, Im struggling to know what those terms mean. As I certainly dont see it. Indian is producing some promising seamers recently but noone has looked 'infinately superior' to anyone or as amazing natual talents.

This legion of fast bowling talent also doesnt a) have anyone that averages under 30 and b) anyone that looks amazing (Ishant may have a very good future and there a good cricketers there)

No doubt if Chris Martin was born in Kolkota rather than Christchurch then his percieved raw talent would increase.

I was making a comparison based on raw talent and I do not think that the likes of Ian O'brien, Jacob Oram, Martin, Gillespie and Kyle Mills are particularly talented as they are military medium pace who truth be told wouldnt worry tailenders batting without helmets. My argument however is not that the NZ bowlers are substanitally inferior in terms of performance to the Indian bowlers but in terms of potential. Whilst Oram and O'brien have been phenomenally accurate (surprisingly in the latter's case), all 5 of those listed require the bowling conditions to be massively in their favor to be a wicket taking threat and can be described as 'workman like' whereas this charge cannot be levelled at the Indian bowlers who are capable of creating their own opportunities on good days in any conditions. The key word of course being 'capable'.

Now I have been a harsh critic of many of the Indian bowlers in the past. However, I think that there is a genuine reason for excitement for the bowlers in the Indian ranks at present because there are truly some fairly decent bowlers going around. Given the current bunch of bowlers currently in the reckoning for the national side, I would venture to suggest that there should be more optimism regarding the future comapred to a few years ago when the likes of Balaji, Nehra, Pathan etc were floating around. Pathan really was the only one who was really hyped up, despite the fact that he never looked remotely better than James Franklin or any of the other left arm swingers going around.

Looking at the current crop of bowlers, I have an immense amount of respect for Zaheer Khan. I still believe that there are quirks in his action at delivery point that prevent him from getting the kind of accuracy that is required to be a top drawer bowler, but having witnessed some of his performances in England last summer when he was easily the best bowler on either side, I have been extremely impressed with his performances since his return to the Indian side for the tour of SA a year and a half ago. Being able to swing the ball both ways at pace is going to cause even the most prolific batsmen problems around the world and his ability to do so puts him in an exclusive bracket of bowlers today. Its unfortunate though that his new found ability has only really kicked in so late in his career and that he seems to be perennially injured. I do believe that his stint with Worcestshire did wonders for him.

Im perhaps not quite sold on Ishant Sharma just yet, however there is little doubting in my mind that with his height and the bounce that he gets out of most surfaces he provides the kind of variety to the Indian bowling that they have longed for. For someone who is just 20, he appears to have reasonable accuracy and again its a case of discipline, grooming and fitness levels to see how he goes.

There was an article recently about one Munaf Patel, who completely blew away the England batting card on their last tour of India in a practice game against BP XI. I had the opportunity to watch that game and it is truly mind boggling to see how far he has regressed since then for all those who watched him bowl then including the England players were impressed with his ability to bowl at a very brisk pace and get the ball to reverse by serious amounts. I guess Munaf provides the perfect example of exactly what a young fast bowler should not do, but it still amazes me that someone who looked the part on his debut could look so distinctly ordinary just a couple of years later. He is still only 25 though and the signs are that he is getting closer towards the kind of form that resulted in his debut.

I also hope that in the near future, the likes of Praveen Kumar makes it into the test side as I truly believe that he has a lot of potential despite the lack of pace in his bowling. His bowling style is not too dissimilar to Kapil Dev and it takes some skill to come up with the kind of figures that he has in domestic cricket in India.

It is hoped that most of these bowlers do not go the 'Munaf' way which is definetly possible in Indian cricket especially with the media hype and sponsorships that really get into players heads. However, I cannot vision too many countries having a more talented crop of bowlers to choose from around the world than Z Khan, I Sharma, P Kumar, RP Singh, M Patel and S Sreesanth.

 

[Richard]

Your analysis seems to be based on statistics rather than actually watching him bowl.

Well given I saw a sum-total of 5 of his 13 Tests against Test-class teams, you'd be more right than wrong. But I don't think anyone is disputing, for example, that any good seam-bowler should and did do well in the NZ-India series in 2002/03?

For the number of FC games that Bond had played he was light years ahead of any other fast bowler in his time bar perhaps Mohammad Asif. Had he been fortunate enough to play as many games as Walsh or Mcgrath there is no telling how many records he might have broken.

I haven't (in this thread, perhaps, even if I may have sort of done 4 years ago) disputed that at all.

 

[Uppercut]

It comes down to what you mean by "all-time XIs". If we were picking teams schoolyard-style, and i had all of the Indian fast bowlers in history plus Bond to choose from, I'd aim to have Bond in my team for sure. If we were looking at what each player achieved in cricket and picking an XI out of that, he wouldn't. I tend to refer to the former.

 

[Richard]

Yeah, I said a very similar thing regarding the Vijay Merchant question a little while back.