The best side in their best form with quality players win overseas.
Did i ever question this?
NO it is not its your view whatever stats you gave are not conclusive enough, its selective quoting, Versatility doesn't mean winning a series i can lose a series/match still be a versatile batsman.
Ha, now that's a interesting definition of "selective quoting". So you are selecting all those various series I listed based on a simple research on cricinfo/cricketarchive, didn't actually happen - but is selecting quoting?
To be honest the Stats while provide you some idea never tell the full story, Player composition, captaining errors ,weather, how they lost etc , also the two teams that have actually punched Hard away are arguably two of the best teams of their era WI and Aus.
Also historical facts never hold good with current gen lot has changed from protective gear to rules.
Maybe i've been watching a different set of cricket in recent years then, since i didn't realize that Asian teams have been winning test/odi/t20 series in AUS/ENG/SA/NZ/WI nor have AUS/ENG/SA/WI/NZ been visa versa throughout the sub-continent in recent years.
I did say there are lots of players outside SC who play spin well as there are those who play Pace well who are from SC. sunny,imran,srt,mahela,aravinda de silva,dravid etc
I was always speaking specifically about the few non-asian players who due to their environments in their respective countries - grew up being naturally good players of spin.
So you mentioning those asian players is largely irrelevant, to the general point being made.
Im not arguing Sehwag was great against Pace on helpful surface (have to dig and verify it for sure you never know )but he wasnt dropped because of that right now he cant even play spin of club bowlers that's reflex catching up. may be we should agree to disagree on this, its your view.
which is
Yea i don't want to argue about Sehwag, boring topic being done to the death. But i'm pretty sure if you dig, you will not find him few if any series, he scored big runs vs top quality pace on helpul services.
Also if his failures in SA, ENG, AUS 2011 and vs ENG/AUS in IND 2012/2010 was failures vs good pacers which caused him to be dropped, then i don't know what is.
wow,He defnitely performed well in a generation of Lee,Bond,tait,nel,Akthar,steyn etc dont say to me they didnt know how to bounce a batsman.
Sehwag can definitely hook and pull.
Oh come on man, find one little youtube clip of him playing a pull shot?. Really?
I can waste time also i find a youtube clip of a young Ricky Ponting hitting sixes vs Harbhajan for sixes, which would make him look like he was playing spin well too - but of course that wouldn't mean he was.
Sehwag was a off-side player. If he played through the leg side competently it was flicks. He was never good at playing horizontal pull/hook shorts, when good fast bowlers targeted him with bodyline bowling in tests.
But of course it is common knowledge that the 2000s era was an era of flat pitches of a large portion of poor fast bowlers. So this fault of Sehwag was never regularly tested.
Again yuvi, I have seen him play short ball as better as anyone when in form.
jaff isnt really the greatest player after all, but he left shortball well,they were not dropped because they cant handle short ball, but loss of form due to lot of factors.
Well i never said Jaffer & Yuvraj got dropped solely because they couldn't play the short ball. But a combination of that and as you said other factors, such a poor technique for test cricket.
A few lads in aus from the ind tour, i have to dig more to present you with proper facts on this matter will get around it in a few days.
I watched all of AUS tours to IND since 1998, no AUS bat was ever dropped after the defeated tours. The closest one was Langer after the 2001, he didn't start the 2001 Ashes, but this was not because he failed in India. It was more due to the fact the in previous series vs Windies & NZ his form was poor & back then AUS depth was so strong, someone was always challenging and he lost his place.
Could it also be the fact that you dont have consecutive subcontinent tours that often, So even if its difficult to play spin it doesnt matter cause the next series is against SA or NZ on faster pitches and you have a good record there.
One series failure mostly doesnt get players dropped two series in a row does, also most subcontinent tours are short ,mostly with 2 or 3 tests to have lasting impact on career. The players you mentioned while not great players of spin were only troubled on very helpful conditions against quality spinners. The amount of times they go through this ordeal would be lesser than the amount of times they have to face quality pacers in helpful conditions.
I remember Martyn putting a daddy hundred with a Double century stand with Gillespie against harbhajan in india.
Yes in some ways non asian teams don't usually play back to back series in the sub-continent. But the few times i recall it happening with the teams i support (AUS/ENG) i still don't recall a batsmen being dropped for good, after those struggles.
In 2001, ENG had back to tours of Pakistan/Sri Lanka, winning both. Every ENG player except Thorpe was batting to score vs the spin - but all survived into the 2001 home season.
Not exactly back to back - but in 2004 AUS toured SRI/IND in between hosting SRI at home.
2012 ENG entire year was based on the full sub-continent test. Started the year in PAK/SRI back to back first, WI/NZ @ home, then ended in India.
2005/06 - ENG winter tours were to PAK & IND.
Don't know of any AUS/ENG bat who obviously were not the best vs spin careers ending have their struggles on none of these tours.
I'm can't remember off hand if WI/SA/NZ have ever had similar back to asian tours.
Your personal view and you are reinstating that.
I didn't say its not a personal view of mine, buts its also shared by many. However the evidence to support this viewpoint is overwhelming.
The only thing that the batsman fear the most is getting out doesnt matter how, esp with today's protective gear.
Oh so you really believe the ENG/SA batsmen facing Mitchell Johnson in the last 6 tests, despite all these brilliant modern protective gears, aren't being intimidated then?
Hence why i said environment variable, it is true that fast bowlers have extra options in that regard,but how many fast bowlers can do all of that well is questionable and how many times have they did it successfully.
But the questions was who is difficult to play not who is effective in all conditions.
Also there are dead pitches were spinners are more effective than pacers.
All of the great fast bowlers in the game from Larwood in the 1930s to Steyn in modern times have showed the have the supreme versatility to bowl equally well on helpful and dead tracks. So we are talking about 30-40 blokes throughout test history.
Dead pitches is where fast bowlers get reverse swing, i.e all those dead Pakistan pitches where Sarfrraz/Imran/Wasim/Waqar learnt and perfected the art on. All those dead Indian pitches where great windies fast bowlers such Wes Hall, Andy Roberts, Marshall, Holding took 25-30 wickets in series.
The "effectiveness" point is related to who is more difficult to play, its not a separate issue. Good/very good/world class Fast bowlers who can reverse swing the ball can bowl still be dangerous to a batsman in a spinners domain (dustbowl, dead wicket, turner).
But a good/very good/world class spinner cannot be effective in a fast bowlers domain (green top, wet wicket) - he becomes a defensive option.
Thus the the batsman is always challenged in all conditions by the he aforementioned fast bowlers - but not the spinner.
