When will India become Number Uno?

[Son Of Coco]

America and Gridiron?

 

[Cricket_God]

I get the feeling the Indian team relies on one or two brilliant batting/bowling performances too and that mindset extends to match losses; if there was an awesome ton or a brilliant bag of 5, it's almost a win morally. Realistically, though, the only teams who apparently don't follow this line of thought are Australia and South Africa, where winning the match and series is paramount and anything less than that is a failure (an attitude which has it's own costs if they do lose or start too look like they're about to lose, though). Even England, after winning against Aus in 2005, barely won a series afterwards. The job was done in their eyes.

The sad part is, the professionalism needed to win at home and away had been starting to take hold over the last couple of years with fewer slugs in the field, bowling in partnerships, quick singles, hitting the gaps instead of relying on 4's. Etc. Just get the feeling they'll have to start all over again when the Fab 5 go.

i think you have got it wrong this indian team wins nowadays by teamwork ,this is the change that is most heartning,tailenders do not through their wickets,

india never had high quality fastbowlers,there were guys like nehra,agarkar,balaji
who would give a four ball every over and lacked control which is not a problem now

with yougsters coming through the fielding will go up so teh future is bright

 

[Top_Cat]

i think you have got it wrong this indian team wins nowadays by teamwork ,this is the change that is most heartning,tailenders do not through their wickets,

Maybe they can teach the top-order to do the same, then. Not just talking about the first Test, the Indian batsmen have been lacklustre for a while now.

Any team with the sheer talent available that India does will be able to put together the occasional good team performance and, away from home, they've taken the odd Test from Aus, SA, etc. which is an improvement from the fairly woeful 90's. It's winning series consistently that they've struggled with. The team as a whole has under-performed, aside from the last series in Aus.

Anyway, India have always had tail-enders who can bat, better than the current lot sometimes. Kumble, AA has a Test ton, Srinath could bat too.

with yougsters coming through the fielding will go up so teh future is bright

Heard it all before. All of the blokes who are older now were younger once and considered good fielders too (Ganguly, Dravid, Laxman, Sachin were always excellent fielders). There's more to it but, of course, we'll have to wait and see. The batsmen in waiting are eerily reminiscent of players past; brilliant technically, look good for the first 30 runs, capable of blowing a team away with a run-a-ball ton but not good enough to play long innings'.

From my perspective, Yuvraj is the poster-child for the next Indian batsmen; world-beater in shorter forms of the game, woefully inept in Tests. Would be delighted to be proven wrong because an India team that does their thing individually and wins Tests/series would be awesome to watch. As I said, we'll see.

Strangely, India don't seem to be producing decent spinners any more either. A harbinger of what's to come?

 

[Johnners]

Harsh on Chawla and the other chap who played in the Presidents XI game one feels.

 

[morgieb]

They won't. Too many batsmen are quitting in the near future, and I'll be suprised if the others become as good as them. Heaps of bowling, though.

 

[SJS]

I am looking at the positives, and as new faces and new generation comes in and brings in new ideas and new ways of doing things, things well only improve .... if any team that has the resources to be number one then its India

Thats very interesting indeed. So the young blood is supposed to improve the way of playing cricket.

I think India should put an upper limit of 19 years for national coaches.

 

[Arjun]

Strangely, India don't seem to be producing decent spinners any more either. A harbinger of what's to come

They don't get enough chances. Rather, they don't get a chance at all. It's been all Kumble and Harbhajan all along. When they play abroad, it's only Kumble or Harbhajan. In ODIs, it's only Harbhajan, who still has a few years left in him. The spinners are not in the scheme of things so much now, especially in Tests abroad or in ODIs. Moreover, we still see bits-and-pieces rubbish in ODIs when a frontline (or at least stock) spinner could have been called on.

There are, however, some decent spinners in India, and surely better than most international frontline spinners in action. Amit Mishra is due a national debut (for Tests, or recall in ODIs) at this stage. Rajesh Pawar is one of the smarter bowlers around, and is also capable of holding his own in one-dayers. Chawla is quite young, but he's improving, and while he still has some way to go as a frontline spinner, he's proven himself as a utility player. While the shoes of the Subhash Gupte, Jasu Patel, the famous Spin Quartet and Anil '600 and Beyond' Kumble are large to fill, the Indians are still a lot better off here than most other teams, bar Sri Lanka. The spinners just need the chances.

 

[Arjun]

I get the feeling the Indian team relies on one or two brilliant batting/bowling performances too and that mindset extends to match losses; if there was an awesome ton or a brilliant bag of 5, it's almost a win morally. Realistically, though, the only teams who apparently don't follow this line of thought are Australia and South Africa, where winning the match and series is paramount and anything less than that is a failure (an attitude which has it's own costs if they do lose or start too look like they're about to lose, though). Even England, after winning against Aus in 2005, barely won a series afterwards. The job was done in their eyes.

The sad part is, the professionalism needed to win at home and away had been starting to take hold over the last couple of years with fewer slugs in the field, bowling in partnerships, quick singles, hitting the gaps instead of relying on 4's. Etc. Just get the feeling they'll have to start all over again when the Fab 5 go.

New Zealand have a limited pool of talent. A lot of their players are inferior to their Indian counterparts. Yet they produce better team results. We wonder what's stopping the Indians from using practical solutions and getting optimum results from their players. It's just too obvious what's wrong with the team, and what's needed, but there's nothing done to make a change- and attempts at change are often vetoed, all the time.

 

[Goughy]

New Zealand have a limited pool of talent. A lot of their players are inferior to their Indian counterparts.

Limited talent pool- Yes. There is clearly a lack of depth.

But I wouldnt say the top NZ talent is 'inferior' to that of India. In fact in areas such as fast bowlers and allrounders, it could be argued as superior.

 

[Richard]

LOLOLOL

Ban him. Worse bait than Boobidy's.

Err... WTF?

 

[Richard]

Strangely, India don't seem to be producing decent spinners any more either. A harbinger of what's to come?

Too much emphasis on seam for mine, and not enough spin-friendly surfaces. At least, that's been the story in Tests for the last decade or so - don't really know much about the domestic level, never mind club.

 

[Uppercut]

Limited talent pool- Yes. There is clearly a lack of depth.

But I wouldnt say the top NZ talent is 'inferior' to that of India. In fact in areas such as fast bowlers and allrounders, it could be argued as superior.

Shame the top NZ talent is skimmed off to the ICL, though.

 

[Richard]

Lou Vincent and Andre Adams are top talent now are they?

 

[Uppercut]

In current NZ terms, probably. Aaron Redmond.

 

[Richard]

I think not.

In Vincent's case especially, NZ are very much better-off without IMO. Same as Pakistan and Sami. It's a good thing they've been deprived of the chance to select someone they've repeatedly shot themselves in the foot by selecting.

Adams possibly might be something of a loss but he was never given the chances he deserved anyway, so we don't really know.

 

[Athlai]

Jeeves even attempted to take care of Vincent personally.

 

[Redbacks]

T20 numero uno already aren't they

How organised is cricket in India? I was pondering my days in the junior systems of cricket in Aus today. The simple things that were filtered down and drilled into us were always walking in with the bowler, and moving quickly between overs. I pressume every nation does such things, but the lead time when CA have an intiative is very short too and can reach nearly all semi-pro player in the metro areas instantly.

We are so keen on the defined pathways, at least in SA, so we have the key times and places to identify talents and bring them to the best coaches to develop thier game's as soon as possible.

 

[ret]

Thats very interesting indeed. So the young blood is supposed to improve the way of playing cricket.

I think India should put an upper limit of 19 years for national coaches.

19 years is too high, I had 14 in mind

appears as if you didn't understand that post

 

[SJS]

19 years is too high, I had 14 in mind

appears as if you didn't understand that post

Yeah maybe. But thats okay I still had a laugh

 

[Arjun]

Limited talent pool- Yes. There is clearly a lack of depth.

But I wouldnt say the top NZ talent is 'inferior' to that of India. In fact in areas such as fast bowlers and allrounders, it could be argued as superior.

Not all of it, just a lot. They still get a lot more out of their players than the Indians do out of their own. The Indians seem to be missing more than a few tricks each time.