India in England Jun-Sept 2014

[PokerAce]

MSD with his two stumpings today now has the most ever Int'l stumpings (Tests + ODIs) of all wicketkeepers. Congratulations.

MSD 131 and Sangakarra 129. Since both the top two keepers are still playing (though Sanga doesn't always keep wickets nowadays), perhaps they will over take each other and few times before they hang their gloves.

 

[Deleted member 9102]

England winning the World Cup or any other trophy in the one day format wouldn't change my perception... The Ashes will always be the number one event in cricket for me.

 

[richowebbo]

We've already had the Ashes v the World Cup debate. I'm telling you, as England fans we would always -always - put winning the Ashes above winning the World Cup.

The reason we don't care about ODIs is not because we're no good at them. It's just not something that gets the juices flowing for us.

I said the same thing Skater, but others didn't believe me. I have little interest in ODI. Obviously it'd be great to win the WC, but I won't be overly upset at not winning. We've always been pretty poor at ODI's.

Someone on here said that the reason we put the Ashes over the WC is because we've never known the joy of winning a WC. I can't agree with this because for me, nothing is better than beating the Aussies!

 

[PokerAce]

I just read a funny tweet -

Virat scoring some runs is not a surprise as he has made a technical adjustments.

Since Anushka left he has been using his wrists a lot more


Its just a joke so relax, I dont endorse slating Anushka for Virat's form, and have made that know at various points on this board. The joke is still funny

 

[PokerAce]

Off Topic - But really shocking scenes on TV coming in right now from Pakistan ... feel for the ppl trapped in the govt. action.

 

[richowebbo]

another abject performance. All to easy for India.

 

[SaiSrini]

I just read a funny tweet -

Virat scoring some runs is not a surprise as he has made a technical adjustments.

Since Anushka left he has been using his wrists a lot more

Its just a joke so relax, I dont endorse slating Anushka for Virat's form, and have made that know at various points on this board. The joke is still funny

I know this is a joke, but this "Virat-Anushka" thing is being stretched just like any other juicy gossip. The media wasn't as aggressive before they are now, but even then, Ganguly had this thing with Nagma (former South Indian actress; currently Bengali actress) and people went on and on about him not scoring because of the Nagma factor. Its just so cliched now.

 

[PokerAce]

I said the same thing Skater, but others didn't believe me. I have little interest in ODI. Obviously it'd be great to win the WC, but I won't be overly upset at not winning. We've always been pretty poor at ODI's.

Someone on here said that the reason we put the Ashes over the WC is because we've never known the joy of winning a WC. I can't agree with this because for me, nothing is better than beating the Aussies!

I have a very different opinion on this.

In the Bilateral series that take place the ODIs are of little consequence. All Bilateral series are about the tests, and much less about the ODI series that invaribly preceedes or follows a bilateral test series. All Bilateral tours are about the tests. The ODIs hardly matter, and infact I don't remember many bilateral ODI series involving Ind but I do remember nearly all test series and their results. That just shows that bilateral ODI series are not even comparable to bilateral test series. In any bilateral series the tests are the real deal. ODIs are a sideshow for the most part. T20s on any bilateral make even less sense to me and are the closest thing there is to absolutely meaningless cricket. A group of school children playing cricket makes more sense to me than Int'l T20 cricket. T20 should not even be played at an Int'l level let alone have an ICC event. In any bilateral series its all about the tests.

However there is another side to ODIs and that is when it is not part of bilateral series - Tournaments. The two biggest tournaments cricket has to offer WC and CT are both ODI format, and while it is okay to not care for bilateral ODIs, not caring for the major tournaments makes absolutely no sense to me.

Sure there is the never ending test championship, which no one quite knows when it starts or ends and is just perpetually going on, where the scoring system doesn't exactly make any sense to anyone either, and there is never any finality to it. It just forever goes on, forever rolling and at any given point in this never ending system, some team is at top and is that team is hailed as the #1 test side, and presented a mace, and that is a great feeling when that side happens to be your national side, but its hardly a real tournament by any stretch.

So saying I don't care for ODI cricket eqauls saying I don't care for my side ever winning a major cricket tournament, which is something I don't understand. I want India to win every test series, but at hte same time I want Ind to do well in the major tournaments.

Also you can't be sad over not winning a world cup. You can at best hope for a good run, to say the semis or Finals. That is par of the top sides. What happens then on is something to be cherished not expected. No team goes into the world cup saying I will definitely win, each side, depending on what its stature is, tries to outdo the expectations. So while SA or SL, will be hoping to at least make the final, INd hoping to atleast make the semis, Afghanistan will try to reach the second round, that will be a great achievement for it. If you fail to achieve this min requirement then one could be disappointed. No team goes into any WC in any sport thinking they will definitely win or will be disappointed. No world cup in any sport is just about the winner. Its just about outdoing the min expectations for any team in any WC. For one side getting to the SF is par while for another getting to the QF is setting the bar too high.

 

[PokerAce]

I know this is a joke, but this "Virat-Anushka" thing is being stretched just like any other juicy gossip. The media wasn't as aggressive before they are now, but even then, Ganguly had this thing with Nagma (former South Indian actress; currently Bengali actress) and people went on and on about him not scoring because of the Nagma factor. Its just so cliched now.

Yes I know ppl jump at personal life of cricketers the second they stop performing, and I am not a big fan of it either. The joke was still funny so I shared it.

 

[Skater]

I have a very different opinion on this.

In the Bilateral series that take place the ODIs are of little consequence. All Bilateral series are about the tests, and much less about the ODI series that invaribly preceedes or follows a bilateral test series. All Bilateral tours are about the tests. The ODIs hardly matter, and infact I don't remember many bilateral ODI series involving Ind but I do remember nearly all test series and their results. That just shows that bilateral ODI series are not even comparable to bilateral test series. In any bilateral series the tests are the real deal. ODIs are a sideshow for the most part. T20s on any bilateral make even less sense to me and are the closest thing there is to absolutely meaningless cricket. A group of school children playing cricket makes more sense to me than Int'l T20 cricket. T20 should not even be played at an Int'l level let alone have an ICC event. In any bilateral series its all about the tests.

However there is another side to ODIs and that is when it is not part of bilateral series - Tournaments. The two biggest tournaments cricket has to offer WC and CT are both ODI format, and while it is okay to not care for bilateral ODIs, not caring for the major tournaments makes absolutely no sense to me.

Sure there is the never ending test championship, which no one quite knows when it starts or ends and is just perpetually going on, where the scoring system doesn't exactly make any sense to anyone either, and there is never any finality to it. It just forever goes on, forever rolling and at any given point in this never ending system, some team is at top and is that team is hailed as the #1 test side, and presented a mace, and that is a great feeling when that side happens to be your national side, but its hardly a real tournament by any stretch.

So saying I don't care for ODI cricket eqauls saying I don't care for my side ever winning a major cricket tournament, which is something I don't understand. I want India to win every test series, but at hte same time I want Ind to do well in the major tournaments.

Also you can't be sad over not winning a world cup. You can at best hope for a good run, to say the semis or Finals. That is par of the top sides. What happens then on is something to be cherished not expected. No team goes into the world cup saying I will definitely win, each side, depending on what its stature is, tries to outdo the expectations. So while SA or SL, will be hoping to at least make the final, INd hoping to atleast make the semis, Afghanistan will try to reach the second round, that will be a great achievement for it. If you fail to achieve this min requirement then one could be disappointed. No team goes into any WC in any sport thinking they will definitely win or will be disappointed. No world cup in any sport is just about the winner. Its just about outdoing the min expectations for any team in any WC. For one side getting to the SF is par while for another getting to the QF is setting the bar too high.

If England were to win the World Cup next March (laughable, I know, but go with me), and then win the Ashes in August I really don't think many will remember the World Cup win. As I've been trying to say, and it might be difficult for you to understand, but beating Australia for us is everything. Nothing, and I mean nothing at all, compares to winning the urn.

 

[PokerAce]

If England were to win the World Cup next March (laughable, I know, but go with me), and then win the Ashes in August I really don't think many will remember the World Cup win. As I've been trying to say, and it might be difficult for you to understand, but beating Australia for us is everything. Nothing, and I mean nothing at all, compares to winning the urn.

I am sure the WC win won't just be forgotten in the light of the Ashes win, just like that. Its part of cricketing history.

I totally respect the Ashes, and I know that even with Indo-Pak rivalry (which personally I would say exceeds that of Eng/Aus), there is no series that is as Iconic as the Ashes in Test Cricket, or even close to it.

But even with Indo-Pak rivalry as big as it is, if in the same scenario if India or Pakistan were to win world cup, and then later on in the year there was an Indo-Pak test series, and the same Ind or Pak side (whichever it was) that won the WC also won the test series, they would still rate the World Cup win much much higher than the test series win. That test series would be not be forgotten either, still cherished, but it would not even come close to the WC win. There will be another test series later in the yaer or next year or in two yaers, and many many more that a player will play, but a player on an average gets just 3 shots at winning the world cup.

So I guess its something that, I am not going to understand Still wish you guys well in the Ashes next year.

 

[Deleted member 9102]

I can understand the inability to understand (great sentence ) the way we think about the Ashes being the pinnacle of cricket in England.

In football for instance I think it would be crazy for two teams to prioritise winning a contest between themselves every two years, compared to a tournament to battle for the title of becoming 'World Champions' that occurs every four. England beating Germany 5-1 in 2001 was amazing, but I would take a World Cup win EVERY TIME over that result.

I can see how strange it must seem from the outside, but there is something special about the Ashes to us English fans. Growing up, the dream for pretty much every English cricketer is to play in the Ashes at Lord's, not to win a World Cup.

 

[PokerAce]

I can understand the inability to understand (great sentence ) the way we think about the Ashes being the pinnacle of cricket in England.

In football for instance I think it would be crazy for two teams to prioritise winning a contest between themselves every two years, compared to a tournament to battle for the title of becoming 'World Champions' that occurs every four. England beating Germany 5-1 in 2001 was amazing, but I would take a World Cup win EVERY TIME over that result.

I can see how strange it must seem from the outside, but there is something special about the Ashes to us English fans. Growing up, the dream for pretty much every English cricketer is to play in the Ashes at Lord's, not to win a World Cup.

There is only way in which I could explain this, and that is that the 'Ashes', got a seperate legacy due to the series having its own historic starting point and its own special trophy that has made it stand out from the rest for ages, which in many ways is what the world cup is to the rest of the country. It is a competition unlike any other.

I guess the Ashes is that to Eng fans (I wonder what the Aussie fans have to say). The Ashes predates the WC by nearly a 100 years and long before Eng players grew up wanting to win the world cup, they had been growing up hearing stories of heroics in the Ashes, and wanting to win the Ashes more than anything else, long before there even was a World Cup. Then the World Cup came along, and somehow the Eng cricket stakeholders, still hold the Ashes as the thing to win. When I think of it that way it sort of makes sense, well a little more than when I don't think of it this way.

But again when I compare it to Indo-Pak rivalry it again doesn't quite work. Even before there was a World Cup, there were Indo-Pak tests and I am sure with the political history of Ind/Pak, the Cricketers wanted to beat Pakistan more than anything else, before the World Cup came along. But once WC did come along Ind/Pak kind of realised that as much as they hate each other and love beating each other, the WC is definitely the bigger award.. When Ind won the WC, Pak wanted one too. I am not saying Pak wanted the WC only cos India had one. I am sure they wanted a WC anyway and that Ind had one and they didn't was an extra factor. Thats how things evolve I suppose. I find it odd that with Aus having won 4 WCs Eng don't want to equal or overtake them in that regard, because clearly the Eng - Aus rivalry is huge. Also remember there was a phase when hockey was bigger in India and Pak than cricket was, and even then Ind/Pak would rather win the hockey world cup or Gold than beat each other.

Having said all that yes, I do understand that the Ashes predates the WC by nearly 100 years, and long before any cricket grew up wanting to win the WC, they were growing up wanting to win the Ashes, and that has kind of not changed as new tournaments, came into being.

 

[richowebbo]

I have a very different opinion on this.

In the Bilateral series that take place the ODIs are of little consequence. All Bilateral series are about the tests, and much less about the ODI series that invaribly preceedes or follows a bilateral test series. All Bilateral tours are about the tests. The ODIs hardly matter, and infact I don't remember many bilateral ODI series involving Ind but I do remember nearly all test series and their results. That just shows that bilateral ODI series are not even comparable to bilateral test series. In any bilateral series the tests are the real deal. ODIs are a sideshow for the most part. T20s on any bilateral make even less sense to me and are the closest thing there is to absolutely meaningless cricket. A group of school children playing cricket makes more sense to me than Int'l T20 cricket. T20 should not even be played at an Int'l level let alone have an ICC event. In any bilateral series its all about the tests.

However there is another side to ODIs and that is when it is not part of bilateral series - Tournaments. The two biggest tournaments cricket has to offer WC and CT are both ODI format, and while it is okay to not care for bilateral ODIs, not caring for the major tournaments makes absolutely no sense to me.

Sure there is the never ending test championship, which no one quite knows when it starts or ends and is just perpetually going on, where the scoring system doesn't exactly make any sense to anyone either, and there is never any finality to it. It just forever goes on, forever rolling and at any given point in this never ending system, some team is at top and is that team is hailed as the #1 test side, and presented a mace, and that is a great feeling when that side happens to be your national side, but its hardly a real tournament by any stretch.

So saying I don't care for ODI cricket eqauls saying I don't care for my side ever winning a major cricket tournament, which is something I don't understand. I want India to win every test series, but at hte same time I want Ind to do well in the major tournaments.

Also you can't be sad over not winning a world cup. You can at best hope for a good run, to say the semis or Finals. That is par of the top sides. What happens then on is something to be cherished not expected. No team goes into the world cup saying I will definitely win, each side, depending on what its stature is, tries to outdo the expectations. So while SA or SL, will be hoping to at least make the final, INd hoping to atleast make the semis, Afghanistan will try to reach the second round, that will be a great achievement for it. If you fail to achieve this min requirement then one could be disappointed. No team goes into any WC in any sport thinking they will definitely win or will be disappointed. No world cup in any sport is just about the winner. Its just about outdoing the min expectations for any team in any WC. For one side getting to the SF is par while for another getting to the QF is setting the bar too high.

I'm running out of ways of explaining this, I really am!

I support the England 11 a side team. I don't follow the English 5 a side team. I don't like 5 a side football.

Saying I don't care for ODI doesn't mean I don't want my team to win a major tournament, it just means I would be happier at them winning a format I enjoy watching.

 

[PokerAce]

I'm running out of ways of explaining this, I really am!

I support the England 11 a side team. I don't follow the English 5 a side team. I don't like 5 a side football.

Saying I don't care for ODI doesn't mean I don't want my team to win a major tournament, it just means I would be happier at them winning a format I enjoy watching.

Just read the post I wrote just above your post. That may explain the Ahses thing better, but its still hard for an outsider to to Understand.