Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456
Results 76 to 85 of 85

Thread: Yuvraj Singh

  1. #76
    International Captain Swervy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    An Aussie with a Lancashire accent living in Keighley,West Yorks
    Posts
    7,360
    Originally posted by Prince EWS
    Hayden would play exactly the same way if he was batting at number 6. Hayden is a very good player, but he is not an opener. He is killing teh openign batting position by making it exactly the same as batting at number 6. Havent you noticed the way langer normally takes most of the strike when teh ball is swinging and seaming? Hayden is only good because of the good (which are actually bad) pitched that are produced here. The dont seam, or spin. The have bounce. But thats it. Hayden is killing opening batsman (real ones like Attapattu, Chopra nad Gripper), and groundsmen are letting him do it.
    I see your point...however, if its successful dont knock it.
    If Langer takes the strike vs seam,then thats them playing to the strengths of the team..and that has happened throughout history. The opening position isnt sacred...but success is. Its just part of the evolution of the game, we may well see more players like Hayden opening the batting. He enables Australia to seize the initiative straight away..which is surely the job of the opener.hayden just does it in a more aggressive way..he bullies and intimidates the opposition and seizes the initiative more often than not.
    rave down, hit the ground


    MSN: djjacksono@hotmail.com

  2. #77
    Cricketer Of The Year Arjun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Mumbai, India
    Posts
    8,369
    First it's Bob Willis, now it's Matthew Hayden.....

    Anyway, I doubt if Yuvraj is really a good batsmen against Test quality attacks, even in one-dayers. I have seen him struggle in the county matches, then he had a tough time in his only Test match, then a bad one-day series in India, then a slightly-better-than-average series in Australia, with a 50 against Hero Hondo and his heroes, and a hundred against Australia's one-day specialist bowlers, and nothing else noteworthy. He can't play spin at all, which is not at all good, given he's playing in an Indian team (all Australians, even a few English and South African batsmen can play spin better), and he's not that good against a powerful pace attack, especially the tearaway quicks.

    That said, he is one of the best fielders around. That direct hit in Perth to run Carlisle out is evidence of the fact that Sidhu's Pied Piper of Punjab is at the top there, with Ponting, and better than Gibbs. Jonty Rhodes is an exception, since he's at the Mount Everest in fielding. His running between the wickets is also quite good, which cannot be said about the Indians' more illustrious batsmen. Skipper, take note. His bowling may not even be of club standard and a move to bring him on a risk, but it is still quite effective. What he lacks in quality, he makes up for it in utility.

    Bangar's not great, but he's sure as hell better than a load of tail-enders!
    Like whom? Ashish Nehra? James Anderson? Stuart MacGill? Anyone in international cricket can bat better than them. Even Vasbert Drakes is a better batsman!

  3. #78
    International Captain Swervy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    An Aussie with a Lancashire accent living in Keighley,West Yorks
    Posts
    7,360
    Jimmy Anderson isnt that bad

  4. #79
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Originally posted by Arjun
    Anyway, I doubt if Yuvraj is really a good batsmen against Test quality attacks, even in one-dayers. I have seen him struggle in the county matches, then he had a tough time in his only Test match, then a bad one-day series in India, then a slightly-better-than-average series in Australia, with a 50 against Hero Hondo and his heroes, and a hundred against Australia's one-day specialist bowlers, and nothing else noteworthy. He can't play spin at all, which is not at all good, given he's playing in an Indian team (all Australians, even a few English and South African batsmen can play spin better), and he's not that good against a powerful pace attack, especially the tearaway quicks.
    Test-quality attacks in one-dayers... interesting one, there, Arjun! He struggled last season, no doubt whatsoever about that - typical Headingley is the sort of wicket batsmen like him have nightmares about. He's nowhere near good enough to play for us, sadly, but he'd do well at some counties methinks. For me, though, in ODIs he's a good player. The attacks in the VB Series mightn't have been that good, but plenty did worse than him, and you're no worse than your most recent series. Anyway, as has been discussed in the Graeme Smith case, if all the attacks are the same, then it doesn't matter if they're all poor or good - you're just as likely to have success or failure!
    Like whom? Ashish Nehra? James Anderson? Stuart MacGill? Anyone in international cricket can bat better than them. Even Vasbert Drakes is a better batsman!
    Absolutely no way. Drakes is an upper-tail-ender at best. Bangar may not be much of an all-rounder, but he is one, certainly better than Drakes with the bat and about equal with the ball if you ask me.
    Yes, anyone can bat better than Nehra, MacGill and Anderson. But anyone can also bat better than Harbhajan, Zaheer Khan and Pathan. They're all basically useless tail-enders, and Bangar is an authentic batsman. He's better than the lot of them put together.
    RD
    Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourth
    (Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.
    chris.hinton: h
    FRAZ: Arshad's are a long gone stories
    RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006


  5. #80
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Mr Mxyzptlk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Trinidad and Tobago (Trinidad)
    Posts
    36,795
    Originally posted by Richard
    about equal with the ball if you ask me.
    Amazing deduction Richard.

    Drakes 33 Test wickets @ 41.27, 1x5w
    51 ODI wickets @ 25.35, 3x4w, 2x5w
    614 FC wickets @ 26.16, 28x5w, 2x10w
    277 OD wickets @ 26.18, 8x4w, 4x5w

    Bangar 7 Test wickets @ 49
    7 ODI wickets @ 54.85
    118 FC wickets @ 39.76, 2x5w
    45 OD wickets @ 47.77

    Clearly Drakes only just manages to be equal with Bangar. :rolleyes:
    Sreesanth said, "Next ball he was beaten and I said, 'is this the King Charles Lara? Who is this impostor, moving around nervously? I should have kept my mouth shut for the next ball - mind you, it was a length ball - Lara just pulled it over the church beyond the boundary! He is a true legend."


  6. #81
    Global Moderator Prince EWS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Moving to Somalia
    Posts
    43,749
    Drakes is obviously superior with the ball.

    And with the bat, Ide rather have Drakes go out there than Bangar is 40 runs were required, but Ide rather Bangar is 150 were required.

    But really, Drakes is a far better player than Bangar.
    ~ Cribbertarian ~

    Rejecting 'analysis by checklist' and 'skill absolutism' since December 2009

  7. #82
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Originally posted by Mr Mxyzptlk
    Amazing deduction Richard.

    Drakes 33 Test wickets @ 41.27, 1x5w
    51 ODI wickets @ 25.35, 3x4w, 2x5w
    614 FC wickets @ 26.16, 28x5w, 2x10w
    277 OD wickets @ 26.18, 8x4w, 4x5w

    Bangar 7 Test wickets @ 49
    7 ODI wickets @ 54.85
    118 FC wickets @ 39.76, 2x5w
    45 OD wickets @ 47.77

    Clearly Drakes only just manages to be equal with Bangar. :rolleyes:
    If you ask me Drakes would be more equal if he played in India too.
    South Africa is a much better place for seam-bowling in general than India.
    Like I have always said, don't judge differences in bowling stats without looking at conditions. Watch\analyse the bowlers first and analyse the conditions first.

  8. #83
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Originally posted by Prince EWS
    Drakes is obviously superior with the ball.

    And with the bat, Ide rather have Drakes go out there than Bangar is 40 runs were required, but Ide rather Bangar is 150 were required.

    But really, Drakes is a far better player than Bangar.
    If there were 40 off 20 balls I'd prefer Drakes than Bangar.
    In a similar situation, I'd prefer Drakes to Dravid.
    However, as Drakes himself has found-out, Bangar's no mean player in such a situation.
    Basically, I'd prefer Bangar with the bat in almost any situation.
    And ball, already discussed. See above.

  9. #84
    Eyes not spreadsheets marc71178's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    England
    Posts
    57,793
    Originally posted by Richard
    If there were 40 off 20 balls I'd prefer Drakes than Bangar.
    Didn't Bangar play a couple of really quick knocks last winter?
    marc71178 - President and founding member of AAAS - we don't only appreciate when he does well, but also when he's not quite so good!

    Anyone want to join the Society?

    Beware the evils of Kit-Kats - they're immoral apparently.

  10. #85
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Yeah, I did mention those!
    Originally posted by Richard
    However, as Drakes himself has found-out, Bangar's no mean player in such a situation.
    I was referring to the West Indies ODIs in which Bangar pasted the WI attack on a couple of vital occasions.

Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Posting Permissions

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