-
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 have the best batting line-up?
- Thread starter Captain Cricket
- Start date
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
No way Symonds is a better bat than Laxman. The others are superior atm, I agree.
Ikki
Hall of Fame Member
You mean despite averaging higher with a better SR in this series and over the past 2 years, there is no way?
Ikki
Hall of Fame Member
Neither are Hussey and Tendulkar. I thought we were talking about form?
By that metric, about 3 years ago - Virender Sehwag was the best batsman in the world. (I think he peaked at #2 in the official rankings). Yet few folks were considering then, that Sehwag was a better test batsman than Ponting, Kallis, Tendulkar and Laxman.
I think the analogy is quite appropriate.
Ikki
Hall of Fame Member
Except the fact that we're comparing players in like positions, and based on form.
You could swap the comparisons if you think it more relevant to compare Laxman with Clarke and Ganguly with Symonds. Essentially, it's the same deal. Every Aussie in their position > Every Indian in the same position.
pasag
RTDAS
Are we? For these things one should take a mixture of form and class to determine who I'd want playing for me tomorrow ie - Laxman.
Ikki
Hall of Fame Member
Well, I am talking about form and so was SS, previously, so that is what I assumed.
I think the point is that this is a flawed and one dimensional way of looking at it.
pasag
RTDAS
Is Symonds in better form when you take into account incorrect umpire decisions? I don't like to go on about these things and I value a players ability to go on when given a chance, but when comparing two players in such a short period these things must come into play, imo.
Ikki
Hall of Fame Member
Basing a comparison on at least 2 years and this series from players in the same position isn't really that flawed or one dimensional.
Ikki
Hall of Fame Member
Last edited:
Jono
Virat Kohli (c)
I've acknowledged clearly that Australia have the better batting line-up, but the ridiculous way of comparing player for player in each position is so inaccurate.
And whilst I think the following methods wouldn't be accurate, calculating aggregate averages over the last 2 years, or aggregate runs, or something similar would be a better way of telling.
Or of course just watching.
And whilst I think the following methods wouldn't be accurate, calculating aggregate averages over the last 2 years, or aggregate runs, or something similar would be a better way of telling.
Or of course just watching.
pasag
RTDAS
Not sure of your point, what I'm saying is both jewels in Symonds crown would not have occurred if not for poor umpiring decisions and therefore the perceived form could very well by a myth of sorts. This is something the stats don't reveal.
Ikki
Hall of Fame Member
True. However, I guess we differ here. I acknowledge he got very lucky with decisions but I realise Laxman has undoubtedly had decisions go his way too. I am not one for not counting runs scored after being dropped/let off.
But I admit you are quite right. Taking away Symonds' successes recently drops his average tremendously. I've overlooked that. I'm inclined to agree with you now.
Edit: the underlined above is actually wrong. I calculated incorrectly. Symonds, even when you take out this series averages 49.77 at an SR of 66.76. Still better than Laxman.
Last edited:
eglezdzdiyd
School Boy/Girl Captain
Australia is quite easily better. Tendulkar is not the player he once was. Ponting and Hussey and Hayden have, over the last 2 years, done better than any indian batsman imo. Symonds gets lambasted by many of you technique nazis, but, the reason that he is effective is that, the odd mishap, he's usually coming in at 4 for 300+ and is looking to take the initiative away from the opposition with a quick fire innings. If we had a **** top order, i'd think he'd be replaced by a more technically sound batsman, but he does a very specific job at 6 and also, in my opinion, seems to set the tempo for the fielding effort.
Surely batting line up is the entire batting potential not just the actual recognized batsman in the team. Australia's 7-11 is better then India's 7-11. I think you need to compare test av, FC av and consistency. Mitchell Johnson is a shot of having the top av in the series and could conceivable average over 100 for the series but only a moron would say he was the best batsman.
Jono
Virat Kohli (c)
And that's why this man is such a legend.
He's not the player he once was, and yet after 16+ years of gruelling cricket, he's scored 327 runs @ 65.40 with one century and two fifties.
What would Sachin in his pomp be doing then
