Page 7 of 67 FirstFirst ... 567891757 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 105 of 997

Thread: England can beat India "every day of week": Gough

  1. #91
    Cricket Web Staff Member gvenkat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,609
    The fact of the matter is England can't bat spin bowlers to save their lives. They will be eaten for breakfast, lunch and dinner alive by the Indian spinners if the series were to happen in India.

    If England claim they are better at fast bowling than India, Look what happened to South Africa in Durban. Any day of the week Zak, Sreesanth and Ishant are better than the English bowlers. Of Course Sree needs to get his head examined. That is a different Issue altogether.

    And Darren Gough has a big mouth and he runs it like a madman. England will be beaten to pulp in India and India would be hard to beat in English conditions. Gough can put that in his pipe and smoke.

    That is what I meant to say when I said England have not beaten India Since 1996 at home and 1984 away.

  2. #92
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    India
    Posts
    4,456
    Quote Originally Posted by Marcuss View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by GingerFurball View Post
    Bunkum.
    Harris is mediocre and Swann is very good, but we are talking about Dale freaking Steyn here. Anderson is good, but he is nothing on Steyn. Nothing. Plus there are as many question marks about Anderson in unhelpful conditions as there are about Sehwag and Gambhir in unhelpful conditions.
    Last edited by Blaze 18; 30-12-2010 at 12:01 PM.

  3. #93
    Hall of Fame Member Furball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Justice For The 96
    Posts
    19,149
    Quote Originally Posted by silentstriker View Post
    Haha, well I suppose we'll just disagree on this point then. I don't think it's close, and I suppose you feel the same way from the other side.
    You're right, it's not close. You're just picking the wrong attack.

    The difference between Steyn and Anderson this year has been negligible, and over the past 3 years the difference is between a potential ATG bowler and a world class bowler. That's far smaller than the difference between Swann, a world class spinner, and Harris, a barely Test standard spinner.

  4. #94
    International Coach Shri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    10,828
    Quote Originally Posted by Marcuss View Post
    Technically we were 2 wickets away from that scoreline, one in each Test.
    Small difference in the fact that when South Africa were in that situation they couldn't get us out... Australia were illegitimately denied a wicket which would've won them the Test and drawn the series when they had India 9 down.
    How dense van you be Markarse? Aus wouldn't have got to 9 wickets in the 1st place if it was not for 2 wrong decisions.
    This was a serious post:

    Quote Originally Posted by Blocky View Post
    As for Sharma, sorry but he's the only Indian bowler outside of Khan who has consistently managed to take wickets away from home and trouble good batsman. Shami looks highly promising but India don't have better seam options than Sharma at the moment in test cricket. Quite simple.
    RIP Craigos. Owe you a beer.:(

    http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/2186298-post7381.html


  5. #95
    Hall of Fame Member Marcuss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Above you
    Posts
    15,217
    Quote Originally Posted by silentstriker View Post
    I don't buy this 'weakest link' theory. Going by that, considering Ishant Sharma and Sreesanth, India should be ranked #8. Being good vs. great in an area matters, and it can (and does) make up for other deficiencies - you can't just look at the weakest link and frankly, I don't think it's even the most important place to look,
    Yeah, I think a few have been taking it a bit too literally in this thread but I don't think it is a bad indicator of a team's strength.

    But yeah, you think Harris and Swann is closer than Steyn and Jimmeh, lol.

  6. #96
    Hall of Fame Member Marcuss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Above you
    Posts
    15,217
    Quote Originally Posted by Shri View Post
    How dense van you be Markarse? Aus wouldn't have got to 9 wickets in the 1st place if it was not for 2 wrong decisions.
    I've never disputed that ffs. Go read my post again and pay special attention to the words "when India were 9 down".

  7. #97
    Hall of Fame Member Furball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Justice For The 96
    Posts
    19,149
    Quote Originally Posted by Blaze 18 View Post
    Harris is mediocre and Swann is very good, but we are talking about Dale freaking Steyn here. Anderson is good, but there is nothing on Steyn. Nothing. Plus there are as many question marks about Anderson in unhelpful conditions as there are about Sehwag and Gambhir in unhelpful conditions.
    Anderson's answering those questions in Australia. He's putting in the best series performance by a visiting quick to Australia in a long, long time.

    How exactly is the difference between excellent and very good greater than the difference between very good and mediocre?

  8. #98
    The Wheel is Forever silentstriker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    37,357
    Quote Originally Posted by GingerFurball View Post
    You're right, it's not close. You're just picking the wrong attack.

    The difference between Steyn and Anderson this year has been negligible, and over the past 3 years the difference is between a potential ATG bowler and a world class bowler. That's far smaller than the difference between Swann, a world class spinner, and Harris, a barely Test standard spinner.
    Anderson has had a great year, but you're asking who I'd pick overall. Steyn can bowl anyone out, anywhere. If conditions are right, and suit Anderson, the difference is smaller. But that's not what we're asking. I don't see it as remotely close. Harris isn't being asked to, and isn't being set the same fields as Swann. Much of that is due to quality but not all of it. He has done just fine this series for example, and done pretty much what they asked him to do.
    Quote Originally Posted by KungFu_Kallis View Post
    Peter Siddle top scores in both innings....... Matthew Wade gets out twice in one ball
    "The future light cone of the next Indian fast bowler is exactly the same as the past light cone of the previous one"
    -My beliefs summarized in words much more eloquent than I could come up with

    How the Universe came from nothing

  9. #99
    International Coach Shri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    10,828
    Quote Originally Posted by Marcuss View Post
    I've never disputed that ffs. Go read my post again and pay special attention to the words "when India were 9 down".
    Oops. My defense is...well, I am Shri.

  10. #100
    Hall of Fame Member Marcuss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Above you
    Posts
    15,217
    Quote Originally Posted by Blaze 18 View Post
    Harris is mediocre and Swann is very good, but we are talking about Dale freaking Steyn here. Anderson is good, but he is nothing on Steyn. Nothing. Plus there are as many question marks about Anderson in unhelpful conditions as there are about Sehwag and Gambhir in unhelpful conditions.
    Steyn's incredible and Jimmeh is pretty damn awesome himself but we're talking about the world's best spinner here. Harris is serviceable but he's nothing on Swann. Nothing. Plus there are as many question marks over Harris at playing cricket as there are over Ishant Sharma.

  11. #101
    School Boy/Girl Captain ImpatientLime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    The lime tree.
    Posts
    122
    Quote Originally Posted by gvenkat View Post
    the fact of the matter is england can't bat spin bowlers to save their lives. They will be eaten for breakfast, lunch and dinner alive by the indian spinners if the series were to happen in india.

    If england claim they are better at fast bowling than india, look what happened to south africa in durban. Any day of the week zak, sreesanth and ishant are better than the english bowlers. Of course sree needs to get his head examined. That is a different issue altogether.

    And darren gough has a big mouth and he runs it like a madman. England will be beaten to pulp in india and india would be hard to beat in english conditions. Gough can put that in his pipe and smoke.

    That is what i meant to say when i said england have not beaten india since 1996 at home and 1984 away.
    awta.

  12. #102
    Hall of Fame Member Furball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Justice For The 96
    Posts
    19,149
    Quote Originally Posted by Bun View Post
    And what did England do in Perth?
    Bowled pretty well, actually.

  13. #103
    Hall of Fame Member Marcuss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Above you
    Posts
    15,217
    Quote Originally Posted by gvenkat View Post
    The fact of the matter is England can't bat spin bowlers to save their lives. They will be eaten for breakfast, lunch and dinner alive by the Indian spinners if the series were to happen in India.

    If England claim they are better at fast bowling than India, Look what happened to South Africa in Durban. Any day of the week Zak, Sreesanth and Ishant are better than the English bowlers. Of Course Sree needs to get his head examined. That is a different Issue altogether.

    And Darren Gough has a big mouth and he runs it like a madman. England will be beaten to pulp in India and India would be hard to beat in English conditions. Gough can put that in his pipe and smoke.

    That is what I meant to say when I said England have not beaten India Since 1996 at home and 1984 away.
    Huge amounts of facepalm. Give me a shout when you arrive at the present.

  14. #104
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    India
    Posts
    4,456
    Quote Originally Posted by Marcuss View Post
    Technically we were 2 wickets away from that scoreline, one in each Test.
    Small difference in the fact that when South Africa were in that situation they couldn't get us out... Australia were illegitimately denied a wicket which would've won them the Test and drawn the series when they had India 9 down.
    And they shouldn't have had India nine down in the first place. Hey, India were "illegitimately" denied a series win in Australia back in 2007-2008.

    Nah, let us ignore that. Let us just consider the arguments that favour us.

  15. #105
    Global Moderator Prince EWS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    The great state of New South Wales
    Posts
    42,669
    Quote Originally Posted by silentstriker View Post
    I don't buy this 'weakest link' theory. Going by that, considering Ishant Sharma and Sreesanth, India should be ranked #8. Being good vs. great in an area matters, and it can (and does) make up for other deficiencies - you can't just look at the weakest link and frankly, I don't think it's even the most important place to look,
    I don't buy into it as much as saying "you're only as good as your worst player" which is an overly simplistic cliche that fails to take into account several variables.

    That's different to what I'm saying though. If you put me in the England team and then compared it to Zimbabwe, England's worst player would be worse than Zimbabwe's (unless they picked Dabengwa ) and the above theory would hilariously suggest that Zimbabwe were the better team. However, Zimbabwe would still have a lot more weak areas so an analysis of the teams' weaknesses would still reveal the better team. There's a big difference between comparing the worst player of two teams, and comparing the overall weaknesses. I think that weaknesses are more important at extremely high levels of team sport (eg. Test cricket) than ridiculous strengths. The obvious argument against this would be the fact that India have achieved #1 status despite some pretty obvious weaknesses, but I'd argue that this was achieved because every team in world cricket had weak areas to exploit at the time.

    That's not to say I don't think teams can make up weaknesses with ridiculously good players to an extent; I just don't think it's quite as possible as you do and I also think it leads to inconsistency. South Africa are a good example of this.
    ~ Cribbage

Page 7 of 67 FirstFirst ... 567891757 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. The Linear Test World Champions
    By BoyBrumby in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 07-07-2012, 09:41 AM
  2. French Open predictions thread
    By Samuel_Vimes in forum General Sports Forum
    Replies: 253
    Last Post: 10-06-2008, 05:14 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •