How will the coming generation of cricketers judge themselves?

[Jono]

If Test don't mean anything then why do Yuraj Singh, Pathan feel they have achieved very little in their career, even though both have been fairly to very sucessful ODI careers.

That's such an excellent point, particularly with Yuvraj.

Yuvraj has done so much in the shorter form, is such an arrogant and narcicistic man, has so much fame and money already, yet he himself admits he hasn't even come close to fulfilling his career aspirations. He commented various times how badly he wants to play tests, and how much it hurts him sitting on the sidelines.

I dare say his ton vs. Pak earlier this year meant more to him than most if not all of his ODI and 20/20 achievements (barring winning the actual tournament, and winning the CB Series).

 

[silentstriker]

You completely missed here SS, sorry but that's just incorrect and irrelevant to the topic at hand.

What they said was because of the opposition they beat, not of what format they won in.

If they won the tests, they'd be saying the same, and tenfold too.

I hope you're right.

Part of the reason India have been so happy beating Australia (other than the fact Australia were world champions) was because of the fact that they were bold and selected a young side, and because of all the controversy that occurred throughout the summer.

Why would they play down their achievement?

Well, the fact that they value this achievement so highly is interesting.

I guarantee you Harbhajan and Tendulkar would have rathered won the test series (Sachin himself said before the tests began that if India won the test series, it'd be the greatest achievement in his career).

That's fair enough - I hope thats true.

 

[Dark Hunter]

I hope you're right.



Well, the fact that they value this achievement so highly is interesting.



That's fair enough - I hope thats true.

I think another part of the reason they value this victory highly, as well as what Jono mentioned, is because it was kind of a mini tournament. It wasn't just a 5 -Game series, but they were playing in a series with a table, and finals. Add to this that it was against the best side in the world, and as of last year, the second best ODI side in the world, i'd say they deserve to be rather proud of what they've done. They played some excelent cricket through the Tri-Series, and IMO were the best side throughout.

 

[silentstriker]

I think another part of the reason they value this victory highly, as well as what Jono mentioned, is because it was kind of a mini tournament. It wasn't just a 5 -Game series, but they were playing in a series with a table, and finals. Add to this that it was against the best side in the world, and as of last year, the second best ODI side in the world, i'd say they deserve to be rather proud of what they've done. They played some excelent cricket through the Tri-Series, and IMO were the best side throughout.

I wouldn't go that far - Australia cruised through the initial stages much easier than India. India were the best side in the finals, but lets not rewrite history here.

 

[silentstriker]

You completely missed here SS, sorry but that's just incorrect and irrelevant to the topic at hand.

What they said was because of the opposition they beat, not of what format they won in.

If they won the tests, they'd be saying the same, and tenfold too.

Part of the reason India have been so happy beating Australia (other than the fact Australia were world champions) was because of the fact that they were bold and selected a young side, and because of all the controversy that occurred throughout the summer.

Why would they play down their achievement?

IMO your post is quite irrelevant to the topic, which is what will players be aiming for in the future, money or test acheivements. Not whether they'll value winning ODIs over tests because of the format.

I guarantee you Harbhajan and Tendulkar would have rathered won the test series (Sachin himself said before the tests began that if India won the test series, it'd be the greatest achievement in his career).

Harbhajan just said this was bigger than 2001 win against Australia - and that was where he dominated the Aussies, and got a hat trick too......

 

[GotSpin]

Harbhajan just said this was bigger than 2001 win against Australia - and that was where he dominated the Aussies, and got a hat trick too......

Heat of the moment IMO

 

[Sanz]

Harbhajan just said this was bigger than 2001 win against Australia - and that was where he dominated the Aussies, and got a hat trick too......

But it is bigger than 2001 series, in terms of achievement. 2001 test series was a hard fought victory and there were some amazing performances from both sides, but it was not unusual for India to beat Australia in test series in India. India had beaten Australia quite comfortably twice in a series during the 90s and had not lost a series to Australia (@ Home) since 1970.

Whereas the Tri-Series win in Australia is a first for India and against a team that has won 3 World Cups in a row. Not only that, In Tests India-Aus contest has been even in last few years whereas in the ODIs Australia has dominated India in recent times. So no wonder it means a lot to the players to defeat Australia in a series.

I dont really believe that it was a statement made in the heat of the moment, I think they really feel this victory is bigger than 2001 series win.

 

[Dark Hunter]

I wouldn't go that far - Australia cruised through the initial stages much easier than India. India were the best side in the finals, but lets not rewrite history here.

I wouldn't say they cruised through. Against Sri Lanka, maybe, but IMO, they never had fully dominant game over India during the Series.

 

[Richard]

But it is bigger than 2001 series, in terms of achievement. 2001 test series was a hard fought victory and there were some amazing performances from both sides, but it was not unusual for India to beat Australia in test series in India. India had beaten Australia quite comfortably twice in a series during the 90s and had not lost a series to Australia (@ Home) since 1970.

Whereas the Tri-Series win in Australia is a first for India and against a team that has won 3 World Cups in a row. Not only that, In Tests India-Aus contest has been even in last few years whereas in the ODIs Australia has dominated India in recent times. So no wonder it means a lot to the players to defeat Australia in a series.

I dont really believe that it was a statement made in the heat of the moment, I think they really feel this victory is bigger than 2001 series win.

More unusual |= better \ more notable.

Even if India had not lost at home to Australia for 30 years in 2000\01, the victory was still massive, and I'd never have thought in a million years that anyone would ever put any form of ODI victory - bar a World Cup - over it.

 

[Prince EWS]

I think they really feel this victory is bigger than 2001 series win.

And this is the problem SS was alluding to.

 

[silentstriker]

But it is bigger than 2001 series, in terms of achievement.

And this is the problem SS was alluding to.

Exactly.

 

[Jono]

Where was that said?

Mind you, I don't remember us ever caring about what Harbhajan thinks. This is bigger than 2001 for him because of all the **** he went through, which really was immense and some other men may have cracked under it (it doesn't mean I respect who he is, but I respect his ability to handle the treatment and criticism he got).

Again, if India had won the Adelaide test and drew the series 2-2 after being 0-2 down, feeling that they were robbed in Sydney, and all the Harbhajan incident, than I reckon it would have at least been the equal to their 2001 win, if not better.