He was number 1 when he left I think.
He should still have to work his way back up though.
He was number 1 when he left I think.
I think the reason he's number 1 after one match is that his rating was so high when he left that even after losing so many points for missing matches he still comes out as number 1. I don't agree with it but there it is.
Yousuf rarely plays a match winning innings, much like Sachin. They both have a lot of 100's but in losing causes. Steve Waugh on the other hand....
Add to that the fact that his average drops to 51 when you take out games against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, with averages against the 3 strongest bowling attacks of his generation (Australia, Sri Lanka and South Africa) working out at 29, 28 and 29 respectively. Then if you look at his away record with Bangladesh and Zimbabwe taken out his average drops to a very Ian Bell-esque 43, with his 2 highest averages against arguably the 2 worst non-minnow sides in modern Test cricket, West Indies and New Zealand. Think he's pretty much the definition of Ben's 'flat track subcontinental bully' idea. I didn't agree with it in the main, but Yousuf is definitely a fine example of benefitting from playing the majority of his cricket on flat subcontinental tracks. I rate Younis Khan far higher.
Sachin didn't really have the ability to take 20 wickets. It doesn't matter if you score a 1000 runs in every innings of a Test match, you need 20 wickets to win a freaking game. Weak bowling attack = lessened ability to win.and how many of those matches did they lose? over 60% i would bet.
I fail to see why:Yousuf rarely plays a match winning innings, much like Sachin. They both have a lot of 100's but in losing causes. Steve Waugh on the other hand....
and how many of those matches did they lose? over 60% i would bet. Its no point arguing anything about Sachin with Indian people. They all have a raging hard on for him
and how many of those matches did they lose? over 60% i would bet. Its no point arguing anything about Sachin with Indian people. They all have a raging hard on for him
I'm pretty sure Sri Lanka is considered part of the Indian Subcontinent.Well, to be fair, Sri Lanka isn't in the subcontinent. But I agree with you.