England In India - October 2011/12

[cricketlover172]

It should be a matter of shame that not one English batsman averages 50 in Sub-continent in last 20 years
Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

Whereas all of Tendulkar, Ganguly and Dravid average above 60 in England.

Even Agarkar and Kumble have a test century in England.

 

[lewissaffin]

It should be a matter of shame that not one English batsman averages 50 in Sub-continent in last 20 years
Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

Whereas all of Tendulkar, Ganguly and Dravid average above 60 in England.

Even Agarkar and Kumble have a test century in England.

You don't seem to register Bangladesh as part of the sub-continent.

With Bangladesh added to your search, Alastair Cook averages 57.75 in 18 innings.

 

[War]

It should be a matter of shame that not one English batsman averages 50 in Sub-continent in last 20 years
Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

Whereas all of Tendulkar, Ganguly and Dravid average above 60 in England.

Even Agarkar and Kumble have a test century in England.

And your point?

 

[cricketlover172]

And your point?

How lifeless sub-continental pitches are according to certain English member here and how difficult it is to bat in England .

 

[angryangy]

Flat tracks are everywhere, as are selfish batsmen; 1st Match: England v India at Lord's, Jun 7, 1975 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[cricketlover172]

That is rather tragic to say the least . I still remember the Lord's test against India in 2007 when England were a wicket away from clinching the first test . But rain poured down for the next one and a half days , it not only saved India the test match , but also won them the series .

You forgot that India didn't ask England to follow on in 3rd test at Oval because India had series in the bag and played for a draw. Why do English fans look for some pathetic execuses ?

 

[cricketlover172]

Momentum plays a huge role in test cricket . Had England won the first test , who knows what might have happened to India's confidence and the mood in the dressing room? Instead , they were high five going to the second test and eventually won the match and thereby the series . England on the other hand would have been vastly devastated after throwing everything in that first test only to salvage a draw in the end . That wasn't an excuse at the first place let alone a pathetic one .

Yes , India have never been denied a victory due to rain.

Chennai test 2004 vs Australia comes to the mind and eventually India lost the series 2-1.

 

[War]

How lifeless sub-continental pitches are according to certain English member here and how difficult it is to bat in England .

Ok. Well fact is sub-continent pitches are flatter than England over the last 20 years & historically, thats fairly common cricket knowledge.

In the last 20 years however in various India tours to England in 1990, 1996, 2002, 2007. Then quality of the England pace attacks have been horribly mediorce & thus the greatest era of India batsmen (Tendy/Dravid/Laxman/Ganguly/Azharruddin) have cashed in accordingly & average 50+. Coincidentally your batsmen didn't face Gough/Caddick @ their peaks, nor Flintoff & the Ashes quarter @ their peaks in English conditions.

This summer when IND come will be the strongest English home pace attack this current great era of IND batsmen would have faced & first quality ENG pace attack since an IND team toured here since 1982. When Willis/Botham where the new-ball pair.

----------

Ian botham forgot that England haven't beaten either IND,SL or SA away or home in last 4 years. And no ranking system is not faulty.

I wasn't referring to that portion of Botham statement. Since i dont agree with his assertion which is clearly just told you that ENG should become # 1 if they beat this summer. I also believe they have to win away to IND, SA & SRI first.

My point was suggesting that obvious fact that up until 2002, cricket never had a ranking system for more than 50 years & all erudite cricket fans worldwide could still tell you, who was the best team in the world - just by using their eyes & sensible reasoning.

England won't beat India . Keep your delusions to yourself.

Ha ok so as far as you see it, it is impossible for the current England team to beat India @ home this summer?.

And rankings is faulty in the sense that how Swann is no.1 spinner in the world ?
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

Harbhajan has taken 53 more wickets against stronger teams, with a better average. So since Harbhajan plays for no.1 team, he gets less points than Swann for doing well .

I think its pretty obvious Swann has been the # 1 form spinner since his breakout series vs S Africa in winter 2009. No other spinner has been consistently winning games for teams like Swann in the last 2 years.


Since Kumble's retirements i have heard many Indian fans on this forum & in general complain that Harbhajan has stepped up properly. While in general hasn't lived up to worldwide hype that many felt he would attain after his dream 2001 series vs Australia.

But having said that i personally think regardless of rankings. I dont think their is a stadout spinner in worldcricket right now in the post Warne/Murali/Kumble retirements.

Ability wise Imran Tahir, Swann, Harbhajan, Ajmal are all well matched.

Both Anderson and Swann played against weakest pakistan and WI team in England, took lots of wicket and climbed on rankings.
Here ranking system is faulty. Players from no.1 team are expected to bowl like Mcgrath and Warne.

Yes Anderson took easy wickets against Pakistan (not windies last summer). But he then went to Australia & proved himself, so he deserves his high ranking.

Overall though yes just like the team ranking system. The players ranking system isn't perfect either, since it just judges temporary form. I dont take it seriously either, since i rate players by the old adage form is temporary - class is permanent

 

[cricketlover172]

Ok. Well fact is sub-continent pitches are flatter than England over the last 20 years & historically, thats fairly common cricket knowledge.

In the last 20 years however in various India tours to England in 1990, 1996, 2002, 2007. Then quality of the England pace attacks have been horribly mediorce & thus the greatest era of India batsmen (Tendy/Dravid/Laxman/Ganguly/Azharruddin) have cashed in accordingly & average 50+. Coincidentally your batsmen didn't face Gough/Caddick @ their peaks, nor Flintoff & the Ashes quarter @ their peaks in English conditions.

This summer when IND come will be the strongest English home pace attack this current great era of IND batsmen would have faced & first quality ENG pace attack since an IND team toured here since 1982. When Willis/Botham where the new-ball pair.

----------



I wasn't referring to that portion of Botham statement. Since i dont agree with his assertion which is clearly just told you that ENG should become # 1 if they beat this summer. I also believe they have to win away to IND, SA & SRI first.

My point was suggesting that obvious fact that up until 2002, cricket never had a ranking system for more than 50 years & all erudite cricket fans worldwide could still tell you, who was the best team in the world - just by using their eyes & sensible reasoning.




Ha ok so as far as you see it, it is impossible for the current England team to beat India @ home this summer?.




I think its pretty obvious Swann has been the # 1 form spinner since his breakout series vs S Africa in winter 2009. No other spinner has been consistently winning games for teams like Swann in the last 2 years.


Since Kumble's retirements i have heard many Indian fans on this forum & in general complain that Harbhajan has stepped up properly. While in general hasn't lived up to worldwide hype that many felt he would attain after his dream 2001 series vs Australia.

But having said that i personally think regardless of rankings. I dont think their is a stadout spinner in worldcricket right now in the post Warne/Murali/Kumble retirements.

Ability wise Imran Tahir, Swann, Harbhajan, Ajmal are all well matched.



Yes Anderson took easy wickets against Pakistan (not windies last summer). But he then went to Australia & proved himself, so he deserves his high ranking.

Overall though yes just like the team ranking system. The players ranking system isn't perfect either, since it just judges temporary form. I dont take it seriously either, since i rate players by the old adage form is temporary - class is permanent

Well not a single English batsman average above 45 in last 50 years if you remove runs scored even in draws(flat tracks)

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

So it just means that English batsman are mediocre rather than pitch being very difficult to bat.


India faced Gough and flintoff in India. Batsman did well . We won the series in 2001 and drew in 2006 and won in 2008.

Perhaps you forgot that fraser was also a very good bowler in English condition as well as Anderson and sidebottom. None of these are world-class bowlers but depend on pitch and weather.


As i have written earlier even if you remove the runs scored in draw matches quite a few batsman average above 50. Which means they are world class rather scored on feather bed tracks.English batsmen are simply not good enough.


And regarding England beating India, if they best comfortably , then whatever ranking shows i will concede that England are no.1.


So you are saying that England's inability to beat India in last 2 decades has been due to injury. I would say it is due to mediocrity. They are not good as much they think they are.

England will struggle to win a series and your list of execuses will grow on.

----------

In fact, out of all those players to score over 1,000 runs in the last two years, Trott has the lowest strike rate.

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

Averages same as Sehwag in last 31 innings at half the strike rate.

This man is single handedly responsible for dragging test cricket back to the depressing run rates of the 70s and 80s.When he hits that rare four he resembles a turtle poking its head out after a nap.


Most selfish batsman ever.

 

[War]

Well not a single English batsman average above 45 in last 50 years if you remove runs scored even in draws(flat tracks)

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

So it just means that English batsman are mediocre rather than pitch being very difficult to bat.

Im not sure what point you are trying to make here at all.

So what if no ENG batsman in the last 50 years have averaged specifically 50+. All of the likes of Ted Dexter, Ken Barrington, Boycott, Gooch, Thorpe, Gower, Pietersen where all very good/great batsman while averaging 40-45 +.

India faced Gough and flintoff in India. Batsman did well . We won the series in 2001 and drew in 2006 and won in 2008.

Gough never played tests in India @ his peak. In the 2001 series England sent a b-team to IND almost given that series was after the 9/11 attacks when no-one wanted to tour the sub-continent. IND barely won 1-0.

I was specifically responding to fact that you are stressing on the fact that IND batsmen averaging 60+ in England. The best ENG attack the current IND batsmen ever faced that 2005/06 when ENG came back to draw the series 1-1.

IND never faced such a quality ENG attack @ home since i said since 1982.

Perhaps you forgot that fraser was also a very good bowler in English condition as well as Anderson and sidebottom. None of these are world-class bowlers but depend on pitch and weather.

Yes & Fraser only played in the 1990 series & missed the 1996 series. In the 1990 series he was the only good bowler & had no support in a overall mediocre attack.

As i have written earlier even if you remove the runs scored in draw matches quite a few batsman average above 50. Which means they are world class rather scored on feather bed tracks.English batsmen are simply not good enough.

What?.

So you are saying that England's inability to beat India in last 2 decades has been due to injury. I would say it is due to mediocrity. They are not good as much they think they are.

Injury & mediocrity especially in the late 80s n 90s. But since ENG began to improve in the 2000s under Duncan Fletcher first now Flower today. Except for the 2006 series in IND when ENG came back to draw 1-1. When IND toured ENG in 2002 & 2007, it was coincidentally in rebuilding phases for the team.

When IND came here in 2002, the Gough/Caddick new-ball pair which lead England to famous wins in Sri Lanka & Pakistan was already passed their peaks. While when IND came here in 2007, the Ashes winning bowling attack that won the 05 Ashes was also broken up.

Thats why as i said, this summer the current great of IND batsmen (Tendy/Dravid/Laxman) will encounter the best ENG home attack since they all first toured ENG since 1990.

England will struggle to win a series and your list of execuses will grow on.

I have not made any excuses for anything. I have stated facts about the the recent history of the current ENG team

[/COLOR]In fact, out of all those players to score over 1,000 runs in the last two years, Trott has the lowest strike rate.

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

Averages same as Sehwag in last 31 innings at half the strike rate.

This man is single handedly responsible for dragging test cricket back to the depressing run rates of the 70s and 80s.When he hits that rare four he resembles a turtle poking its head out after a nap.


Most selfish batsman ever.

Haha are you serious?. Trott the most selfish batsmen ever???...now you are just trolling foolishly.

Secondly in test cricket your strike-rate is not important. A team like Australia who has been struggling in recent years for their batsmen to occupy the crease & score runs would KILL for a batsman like Trott right now. Your criticism of Trott is utterly ridiculous.

 

[darthlewis1]

Well not a single English batsman average above 45 in last 50 years if you remove runs scored even in draws(flat tracks)

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

So it just means that English batsman are mediocre rather than pitch being very difficult to bat.


India faced Gough and flintoff in India. Batsman did well . We won the series in 2001 and drew in 2006 and won in 2008.

Perhaps you forgot that fraser was also a very good bowler in English condition as well as Anderson and sidebottom. None of these are world-class bowlers but depend on pitch and weather.


As i have written earlier even if you remove the runs scored in draw matches quite a few batsman average above 50. Which means they are world class rather scored on feather bed tracks.English batsmen are simply not good enough.


And regarding England beating India, if they best comfortably , then whatever ranking shows i will concede that England are no.1.


So you are saying that England's inability to beat India in last 2 decades has been due to injury. I would say it is due to mediocrity. They are not good as much they think they are.

England will struggle to win a series and your list of execuses will grow on.

----------

In fact, out of all those players to score over 1,000 runs in the last two years, Trott has the lowest strike rate.

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

Averages same as Sehwag in last 31 innings at half the strike rate.

This man is single handedly responsible for dragging test cricket back to the depressing run rates of the 70s and 80s.When he hits that rare four he resembles a turtle poking its head out after a nap.


Most selfish batsman ever.

Yeah all the pitches sewhag has been batting on have been on boring flat wickets in the sub-continent except for the South Africa tour were he averaged 24 with a top score of 63. We'll see how sehwag gets on this summer against the swinging duke's ball.

Test cricket in England is much more exciting compared to these boring 500+ runs per innings draws in the sub-continent.

 

[lewissaffin]

I can see a lot of these Indians (who have never played county cricket - i.e. Kohli, Raina, Pujara, Ashwin) being found out this summer, so long as Anderson is on the money and Tremlett finds some bounce.

India are doubtless a good team and their recent achievements must not be understated. However, the BCCI manipulates the international cricket calendar to suit India's Test match aspirations and I believe, to knock India off their perch, England will need to beat a lot more than the 11-man team that India put out. India aren't as good as they are made out to be.

 

[cricketlover172]

Yeah all the pitches sewhag has been batting on have been on boring flat wickets in the sub-continent except for the South Africa tour were he averaged 24 with a top score of 63. We'll see how sehwag gets on this summer against the swinging duke's ball.

Test cricket in England is much more exciting compared to these boring 500+ runs per innings draws in the sub-continent.

Then why no English batsman averages above 50 in last 20 years in sub-continent. Because they suck. They are plain mediocre.

We know England lost all their last tour in sub-continent , so their list of execuse is building up.

----------

I can see a lot of these Indians (who have never played county cricket - i.e. Kohli, Raina, Pujara, Ashwin) being found out this summer, so long as Anderson is on the money and Tremlett finds some bounce.

India are doubtless a good team and their recent achievements must not be understated. However, the BCCI manipulates the international cricket calendar to suit India's Test match aspirations and I believe, to knock India off their perch, England will need to beat a lot more than the 11-man team that India put out. India aren't as good as they are made out to be.

Having said all of that, we are straying a long way off topic here. England should bat for another 60 runs or so, hold a lead of 150-odd, and have a really good go at Sri Lanka on a potentially useful day five pitch.

Well ECB hosted World cup thrice in a row in England. India and Pakistan jointly made sure that World cup was hosted in sub-continent in 1987. Yet England have never won a World cup despite hosting World cup maximum of 4 times. You can't win even by manipulation because you are mediocre.

 

[cricketlover172]

Im not sure what point you are trying to make here at all.

So what if no ENG batsman in the last 50 years have averaged specifically 50+. All of the likes of Ted Dexter, Ken Barrington, Boycott, Gooch, Thorpe, Gower, Pietersen where all very good/great batsman while averaging 40-45 +.





Gough never played tests in India @ his peak. In the 2001 series England sent a b-team to IND almost given that series was after the 9/11 attacks when no-one wanted to tour the sub-continent. IND barely won 1-0.

I was specifically responding to fact that you are stressing on the fact that IND batsmen averaging 60+ in England. The best ENG attack the current IND batsmen ever faced that 2005/06 when ENG came back to draw the series 1-1.

IND never faced such a quality ENG attack @ home since i said since 1982.




Yes & Fraser only played in the 1990 series & missed the 1996 series. In the 1990 series he was the only good bowler & had no support in a overall mediocre attack.





What?.







Injury & mediocrity especially in the late 80s n 90s. But since ENG began to improve in the 2000s under Duncan Fletcher first now Flower today. Except for the 2006 series in IND when ENG came back to draw 1-1. When IND toured ENG in 2002 & 2007, it was coincidentally in rebuilding phases for the team.

When IND came here in 2002, the Gough/Caddick new-ball pair which lead England to famous wins in Sri Lanka & Pakistan was already passed their peaks. While when IND came here in 2007, the Ashes winning bowling attack that won the 05 Ashes was also broken up.

Thats why as i said, this summer the current great of IND batsmen (Tendy/Dravid/Laxman) will encounter the best ENG home attack since they all first toured ENG since 1990.




I have not made any excuses for anything. I have stated facts about the the recent history of the current ENG team





Haha are you serious?. Trott the most selfish batsmen ever???...now you are just trolling foolishly.

Secondly in test cricket your strike-rate is not important. A team like Australia who has been struggling in recent years for their batsmen to occupy the crease & score runs would KILL for a batsman like Trott right now. Your criticism of Trott is utterly ridiculous.

What India barely won in 2001 series
Defeated by 10 wickets in first test and 2 comfortable draws in next.

Don't worry , once again you will be in rebuilding phase after India tour because you are no way going to win the series and a big reality check will hit you.

What Ashes winning are you talking about ? Both test match England won in 2005 did not feature Mcgrath. When you met a full strength OZ side you lost 5-0.


We beat a full strength OZ side in 2001 without Kumble . Stop looking for execuse. Your Ashes win in 2005 was because Mcgrath got injured after 1st test.It was beyond the capability of Eng to beat full strength OZ of 1995-2007 in a series. You sucked against Warne. India drew a series in OZ in 2003/04 when they did not have Mcgrath. We nearly drew series in 2004 had it not been for chennai in 2004 series and you are talking as if you did some spectacular work by beating a OZ side without Mcgrath


And i would say , this is the worst attack, they are facing by any major test nation in last 20 years. We have faced Ambrose/walsh, steyn/ Morkel, Mcgrath/Warne/Gillespie,Murali/Mendis, Wasim/waqar, pollock/donald, who are these English bowlers you are talking about.

Win a series against half-fit OZ side and keep it parroting for next 20 years as if no body else has done that.

Strike rate not important in test. Tell this to chappell , smith , Arther who know the importance of scoring quickly. And a team like IND will never allow batsman like trott to enter the team who virtually will make sure that match produces a draw result.

We will see how your fully fit members do . We saw a glimpse of them in WC. We will further see what they are capable of doing.

Haven't won a series for last 16 years and the execuse is injured bowlers.Never seen a injury which occurs as soon as India play .

 

[War]

I can see a lot of these Indians (who have never played county cricket - i.e. Kohli, Raina, Pujara, Ashwin) being found out this summer, so long as Anderson is on the money and Tremlett finds some bounce.

India are doubtless a good team and their recent achievements must not be understated. However, the BCCI manipulates the international cricket calendar to suit India's Test match aspirations and I believe, to knock India off their perch, England will need to beat a lot more than the 11-man team that India put out. India aren't as good as they are made out to be.

Having said all of that, we are straying a long way off topic here. England should bat for another 60 runs or so, hold a lead of 150-odd, and have a really good go at Sri Lanka on a potentially useful day five pitch.

Indeed 100% on point.

Although i'd say Kohli of all the young Indian batsmen i think can handle seaming/bouncy wickets has he showed in S Africa couple months ago.