• 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.

What are you looking forward to in 2007 ?

Turbinator

Cricketer Of The Year
Again, a string of ODI wins is nowhere near the effort required to win in a place like Australia, or England.

Like I said, its upto you what you hold more important, but the effort and ability required is not even close.
Having those string of ODI wins and then beating Australia is very hard too, not as hard as a win in Australia or England, but nevertheless hard.

EDIT: Maybe if I had 2-3 WC wins, then yes I would've valued a win in England or a draw in Australia more.
 
Last edited:

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Look, it goes like this alright

Tests
Twenty20 (we've only ever lost 2 games in this, after all)
Successful "A" tours
Under-19 team
Warm-up tour matches
<daylight>
ODIs

Nothing to do with our current ranking or anything :p
 

Mr Mxyzptlk

Request Your Custom Title Now!
It's true that the cream tends to rise to the top in tournaments like the World Cup, meaning that the best team does generally win the tournament and can claim a level of superiority on that basis. However, given the way international cricket stands presently, a team must beat several mediocre and merely good teams to get the honour of beating the best team and claiming the title. It means that every game is important to the ultimate success, but it doesn't mean that each individual victory is an oustanding reflection of the team's quality.

A Test series against the cream that has already risen to the top - Australia, or England in England, India in India etc. - is a greater measure of the quality of a team. And victory in such a series is a stronger claim to bragging rights and superiority. It's 5 gruelling days of cricket when one outstanding period of play or one bad period of play isn't generally the deciding factor of a match.
 

Pratters

Cricket, Lovely Cricket
Sometimes I wonder if it wasn't a double edged sword. Yes it shot up interest, but it also shot up ODI interest a lot more than Test, and it leads us to this day where were play a seven game ODI series against England and only three tests.

Would have preferred lesser interests if it meant playing a lot more tests than we do.
It is tougher to win test matches than it is to win one dayers. The problem with the infra structure, pitches and millions of things which I will not specify or describe because it would occupy too much space remain as it was 50 years back. I was reading a piece written by Vijay Merchant on the problems with Indian cricket in a a Wisden Cricketers Almanack from around 50 years back and it is sad that we have similar problems now like we used to earlier.

As we were unlikely to win because of the problems, it was unlikely that test cricket would gain popularity in India. So it is not because of the one day win that test cricket is not that popular. Test cricket is still very popular though and India does see far more crowds in tests than in some other test nations. So the world cup 83 win helped test cricket more than harmed it where India is concerned.
 

Turbinator

Cricketer Of The Year
^ I agree with Pratyush in the sense that so many people say test cricket isn't popular in India, but however, we do see a large crowd coming in a lot of the times, larger than majority of the other nations.

Compare the attendance differences between the ODI series and the Test series in the following recent tours.

India in West Indies
Sri Lanka in New Zealand
India in South Africa
West Indies in Pakistan

So it's not just India that produces lower attendance during Tests. This might be because of the great cricket culture present in India, any kind of cricket they find, they'll watch it.
 

Barney Rubble

International Coach
Look, it goes like this alright

Tests
Twenty20 (we've only ever lost 2 games in this, after all)
Successful "A" tours
Under-19 team
Warm-up tour matches
Charity games
Testimonials
<daylight>
ODIs

Nothing to do with our current ranking or anything :p
You forgot a couple of things. :D
 

Turbinator

Cricketer Of The Year
So, all in all, yes I do consider Tests more important than ODIs, and without a doubt there is more skill involved in Tests.

However, the WC to me and to quite a lot of people is more than just an ODI tournament. It holds a special significance in our hearts (that was cheesy) and to us a WC is just that, a WORLD CUP (the biggest stage in cricket where you have to face the whole world before you can be crowned champions).
 

LA ICE-E

State Captain
the 2 world cups (ie. world cup and 20/20world championsip)
for me to watch will be wc > 20/20wc > 20/20 > odi > test
in value will be wc> test > 20/20wc > odi > 20/20
 
Last edited:

Johnners

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Theres really not a whole lot on the Australian Calender but the WC is always a highlight.

The tests against SL & Ind will be watched with intent to see who's made the team after several retirements and how they fair. Also, i'm hoping to see a special Sachin Summer (but Australia still win)
 

adharcric

International Coach
I wouldn't trade the world cup 83 win for any thing India has achieved in the test arena. Nothing comes close to 1983.
Agreed. That is partially due to the fact that India hasn't really achieved too much in the test arena, unfortunately. The '83 World Cup victory was our true moment of glory partially because we hadn't had too many dominant or glorious moments before that.
 
Last edited:

adharcric

International Coach
It's true that the cream tends to rise to the top in tournaments like the World Cup, meaning that the best team does generally win the tournament and can claim a level of superiority on that basis. However, given the way international cricket stands presently, a team must beat several mediocre and merely good teams to get the honour of beating the best team and claiming the title. It means that every game is important to the ultimate success, but it doesn't mean that each individual victory is an oustanding reflection of the team's quality.

A Test series against the cream that has already risen to the top - Australia, or England in England, India in India etc. - is a greater measure of the quality of a team. And victory in such a series is a stronger claim to bragging rights and superiority. It's 5 gruelling days of cricket when one outstanding period of play or one bad period of play isn't generally the deciding factor of a match.
Spot on. Conquering Australia in their backyard is definitely a greater challenge than winning the World Cup, but the latter has a unique charm to it. In essence, World Cup champions have defeated every other nation and truly made a claim to superiority. Although defeating the world champions in their backyard is a remarkable achievement and practically suggests that you are the best since you've defeated the best, a World Cup victory has it's own aura since you literally face all the nations on a grand stage and emerge on top. The former poses a greater challenge but both lead to a feeling of superiority in international cricket.
 

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
Nobody has won a test series in Australia since 1992/93. Nobody other than the West Indies has done it since the 1986/87 Ashes. Nobody other than the West Indies and England has ever done it.

There's no question that it's a far greater achievement than winning a World Cup, regardless of which form you prefer. Not to say the World Cup is insignificant, but in terms of difficulty it's just no contest.
 

adharcric

International Coach
Definitely. A World Cup victory still has its own charm to it though. As for which one I would prefer, that's tough. Before McWarne retired, it would be the victory in Australia easily. Now, it would be the victory in Australia by a decent margin. I wouldn't call it a no contest in terms of what I would prefer, but certainly in terms of difficulty.
 
Last edited:

The Sean

Cricketer Of The Year
Nobody has won a test series in Australia since 1992/93. Nobody other than the West Indies has done it since the 1986/87 Ashes. Nobody other than the West Indies and England has ever done it.

There's no question that it's a far greater achievement than winning a World Cup, regardless of which form you prefer. Not to say the World Cup is insignificant, but in terms of difficulty it's just no contest.
NZ 1985/86 - it was painful, but it happened. One RJ Hadlee almost single-handedly ripped us apart, with a little help from Martin Crowe.
 

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
NZ 1985/86 - it was painful, but it happened. One RJ Hadlee almost single-handedly ripped us apart, with a little help from Martin Crowe.
Yeah, forgot about that one. Regardless, nobody has done it in what will be 15 seasons by the time India arrive, so it would be a fair accomplishment. ;)
 

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
In fact, no one wins in England either, at least recently. Even that is a huge achievement, bigger than the WC. Hell, for the Indian team, winning in WI was a bigger achievement even though everyone wins there now.
 

DCC_legend

International Regular
Cant wait for the Windies tests!! might be goin to the lords test but am deff goin to the durham 3rd tes!! cant wait!
Also i cant wait to get back to playin cricket again!!
 

Top