• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

India Or Pakistan

wich team would u want to win if u not indian or pakistani

  • pakistan

    Votes: 30 50.0%
  • india

    Votes: 24 40.0%
  • any

    Votes: 6 10.0%

  • Total voters
    60

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
Richard said:
Oh, no, I used StatsGuru, to dig-up his proper average.
So statsguru isn't on Cricinfo then?


Richard said:
No, no, all that counts for Test-cricket is what is worthy of being called Test-cricket.
In 100 years time, what figures will be etched in the record books?
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
SJS said:
Hey Richard,
What made you think I was addressing you or any of your posts man ?? :)
Err... let me think, now... :)
Nah, like I said, I was just clearing-up any possible misunderstandings. :)
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
And either way, the only Test record these players have is the one on Cricinfo's player pages.

Unless you're going to redefine the whole idea of Test Cricket (in which case I'd like to see where the ICC have given you authority to do such a thing)
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
I'd like to see how many people think Bangladesh and Zimbabwe-post-WC2003 matches are worthy of being called Tests.
Because it's not very many in my experience.
Just because ICC have got yet another thing wrong doesn't mean we have to blindly accept that.
Nor does it mean we can't correct the records on the CricInfo pages and elsewhere.
 

tooextracool

International Coach
C_C said:
Richard- Pathan is anything but ordinary....he isnt a performer yet but he is a great talent.
He has the right equipment to become an alltime great bowler IMO....and when it comes to newbies,stats are irrelevant really. Lots of players have had a superb start and then petered down to mediocre levels while a lot of players have a very slow start and blossom into great players.
Whether Irfan would be a great or not is yet to be seen but he has everything that makes him a potential great. Not only is he new, he is also very very young.
Incidentally, after 8 matches( since you dont consider BD proper opposition-and neither do i), Irfan compares thus far against some of the alltime great bowlers:

vs McGrath (better ave, more wickets)
vs Imran Khan(better ave, more wickets)
vs Marshall( aveage-39, 1 more wicket)
vs Hadlee( better ave, exactly same # of wickets)


And whats more, he debuted at a FAR younger age than any of these bar Imran Khan.
He has brisk pace ( consistently bowls at 86-87mph, top speed just a few metres short of 90mph), has a lethal delivery that comes into the righthanded batsmen, a stunning yorker and an excellent bouncer........ordinary is not a word i would chose for Pathan....unproven is more like it.
did any of those players get to play against b'desh at the start of their careers?
ive said it over and over again, there isnt a more overhyped player in the world than pathan, you can pick him as long as you want, hes not going to succeed until he makes improvements.
 

Swervy

International Captain
Richard said:
What matters is what bowlers become, and what averages become.
when actually, really when it comes down to it, averages dont really mean much anyway..points of interest, nothing more nothing less.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Averages, a carefully analysed breakdown of them, can show almost everything about a player.
And besides that, what makes averages are what makes-up cricket.
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
tooextracool said:
did any of those players get to play against b'desh at the start of their careers?
ive said it over and over again, there isnt a more overhyped player in the world than pathan, you can pick him as long as you want, hes not going to succeed until he makes improvements.
Would you care to be specific about these improvements?
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Basically tec thinks he needs to add a little pace.
Whether or not that's possible I don't know, but there's no denying he's nothing special ATM.
I personally feel he needs to be more consistent with his accuracy.
I mean, he can bowl 22 overs for 48 then 10 for 50.
 

C_C

International Captain
did any of those players get to play against b'desh at the start of their careers?
Irrelevant and utterly faceteous, since i compared their stats WITHOUT bangladesh into consideration. NExt time, read a bit more carefully.

ive said it over and over again, there isnt a more overhyped player in the world than pathan, you can pick him as long as you want, hes not going to succeed until he makes improvements.
Actually there is- James Anderson...I figure even I could treat him like a dumping post....
and to answer your questions about improvements, well DUH.
every single great-bradman inclusive- have had to improve their game through the years....no one comes into cricket completely a finished article and stays that way till the end of their careers.... all one said is Pathan has the talent to be an alltime great and he is showing the right signs in terms of attitude and maturity.
Saying any more would be indulging in hyperboles and saying any less would be being a tosser.
 

C_C

International Captain
Umm...word is that Pathan is carrying an injury....he was well down from his pace he showed in the BD/AUS series where he was consistently in the high 80s.....last test he struggled to cross 80mph sometimes....
This is becomming a troubling trend for India- playing players who arnt at 100%.
 

tooextracool

International Coach
C_C said:
Irrelevant and utterly faceteous, since i compared their stats WITHOUT bangladesh into consideration. NExt time, read a bit more carefully.
good on him then. i believe all of those bowlers got that average down significantly only a few games later, we'll see if pathan can do that.



C_C said:
Actually there is- James Anderson...I figure even I could treat him like a dumping post.....
what the hell are you talking about? how many people actually believe that anderson deserves to be in the side right now let alone think that hes an all time great?

C_C said:
and to answer your questions about improvements, well DUH.
every single great-bradman inclusive- have had to improve their game through the years....no one comes into cricket completely a finished article and stays that way till the end of their careers.... all one said is Pathan has the talent to be an alltime great and he is showing the right signs in terms of attitude and maturity.
Saying any more would be indulging in hyperboles and saying any less would be being a tosser.
no, because almost all those bowlers would have succeeded regardless of whether they made improvements or not, they would certainly have not been all time greats, but still they would have been decent test class bowlers. i can assure you that if pathan carries on bowling like this, hes certainly going to find it hard to stay in the side, let alone test class.
 

C_C

International Captain
what the hell are you talking about? how many people actually believe that anderson deserves to be in the side right now let alone think that hes an all time great?
And who the hell said anything about Pathan being an alltime great ? definately not me.
And aye, Pathan would get in the ENG side as well....he and hoggard could form a beautiful opening combo in english conditions.

no, because almost all those bowlers would have succeeded regardless of whether they made improvements or not, they would certainly have not been all time greats, but still they would have been decent test class bowlers. i can assure you that if pathan carries on bowling like this, hes certainly going to find it hard to stay in the side, let alone test class.
Disagree.
ANYBODY who fails to raise their game a 3-4 years within debut almost invariably drop out of the team(that is, if the team is competitive and IND pace unit is pretty competitive)...
Another key thing you are forgetting is that Pathan is significantly younger than most of that list during debut
 

tooextracool

International Coach
C_C said:
And who the hell said anything about Pathan being an alltime great ? definately not me.
so all this time you've been talking about how he has the potential to become an all time great, not to mention comparing his record to the all time great bowlers. and ive seen several other people who've put his name down amongst the top 5 bowlers today, and some who've put him on their world XIs.

C_C said:
And aye, Pathan would get in the ENG side as well....he and hoggard could form a beautiful opening combo in english conditions.
i seriously doubt it. if pathan bowled the way he has been so far in his career for england, hed been dropped by now.



C_C said:
Disagree.
ANYBODY who fails to raise their game a 3-4 years within debut almost invariably drop out of the team(that is, if the team is competitive and IND pace unit is pretty competitive).
err no, you could go on averaging a shade under 30 all your career, as many bowlers have done, and still keep a place in your side. bowlers like vaas for example have certainly maintained the same average for an extremely long period of time.


C_C said:
Another key thing you are forgetting is that Pathan is significantly younger than most of that list during debut
so what? young doesnt automatically equal improvement, as people like anderson would tell you.
 

C_C

International Captain
so all this time you've been talking about how he has the potential to become an all time great, not to mention comparing his record to the all time great bowlers. and ive seen several other people who've put his name down amongst the top 5 bowlers today, and some who've put him on their world XIs.
I hate saying the blitheringly obvious but here goes.
Pathan HAS the potential to be an alltime great. He is NOT an alltime great RIGHT NOW.
Kapische ?

The records of great bowlers at similar stage was quoted when dolts where slagging him because of his current average for comparison.
Top 5 bowler today ? no way. Top 15? Perhaps...but that is no big shakes these days.

i seriously doubt it. if pathan bowled the way he has been so far in his career for england, hed been dropped by now
For who ? Anderson ? 'wunderkid' wishes. Jones ? well if Jones manages to stay on two legs most of the time and spend less time on the physio's table then perhaps.

err no, you could go on averaging a shade under 30 all your career, as many bowlers have done, and still keep a place in your side. bowlers like vaas for example have certainly maintained the same average for an extremely long period of time.
And how much competition does Vaas have for his spot ?
If there is competition(and there certainly is in IND pace dept.) then you dont survive without improvement. Period.
And the current bowler Pathan is, he is good enough to average 30-ish in Test
cricket....ofcourse i expect him to average near 20 by the time he is done but thats a different story.
Even then, Vaas and others who averaged 20 had to improve after debut or else they would be history. Vaas is 10x the bowler he is than he was 10 years ago.

so what? young doesnt automatically equal improvement, as people like anderson would tell you.
No it doesnt. But equivalent performance at a much younger age means you have a high chance of success IF you work at it because you got more time. Plus it means that as far as bowlers go, he is less developed currently than a 23-24 year old debutant like McGrath or Ambrose would be.
 

tooextracool

International Coach
C_C said:
I hate saying the blitheringly obvious but here goes.
Pathan HAS the potential to be an alltime great. He is NOT an alltime great RIGHT NOW.
Kapische ?

The records of great bowlers at similar stage was quoted when dolts where slagging him because of his current average for comparison.
Top 5 bowler today ? no way. Top 15? Perhaps...but that is no big shakes these days.
so you think that someone has the potential to become an all time great even though hes never done anything in his entire career. thats a real jump isnt it? what would make more sense would be to say something like, he has the potential to become a very good bowler in the future, but ATM hes not really worth talking about. which is something that i would concur with.


C_C said:
For who ? Anderson ? 'wunderkid' wishes. Jones ? well if Jones manages to stay on two legs most of the time and spend less time on the physio's table then perhaps.
even though hes been fit and playing for quite a while now?
and really, i wonder how many bowlers in england arent capable of averaging 40 odd in test match cricket.



C_C said:
And how much competition does Vaas have for his spot ?
so your saying that vaas isnt test class then? you have to remember that theres a major difference between being test class and not playing because there are better players in the side. one could argue that bell is test class, but because of the competition he probably wont make the test side.

C_C said:
If there is competition(and there certainly is in IND pace dept.) then you dont survive without improvement. Period.
And the current bowler Pathan is, he is good enough to average 30-ish in Test
cricket....ofcourse i expect him to average near 20 by the time he is done but thats a different story.
no i certainly dont, i expect him to average 40 throughout his career(Without improvement), unless he constantly comes across green wickets, something that im extremely doubtful about in this day and age

C_C said:
Even then, Vaas and others who averaged 20 had to improve after debut or else they would be history. Vaas is 10x the bowler he is than he was 10 years ago.
is that why his average has actually gone up rather than down since his first few tests?



C_C said:
No it doesnt. But equivalent performance at a much younger age means you have a high chance of success IF you work at it because you got more time. Plus it means that as far as bowlers go, he is less developed currently than a 23-24 year old debutant like McGrath or Ambrose would be.
equivalent performance???
do you actually think that anyone and everyone who averages 40 odd is going to become an all time great simply because another all time great did so at an older age?
 

Top