Best against the best

[Blaze 18]

You're the man, Howe_zat.

Threads like this one are like whorehouses. You know you really should avoid them, but you just can't help sneaking a peek!

 

[sehwag fan]

I think you're confusing net practice record with test match record

Bowling attack wins you game. Did you watch Ashes 2010-11? How after restricting OZ to low score England piled on Australian attack.

 

[Howe_zat]

Howe_zat WAG

I'm well on my way to becoming to graphs what Spikey is to gifs.

If the word "average" is not your cup of tea you're on the wrong forum TBH

Just need to ration them out. Use our resources wisely.

 

[Blaze 18]

Says a massive lara fan.

Pietersen , Laxman , Vaughan and Sehwag all have pretty good record against Mcgrath in limited opportunity they have got.

Lara's most of the runs came in WI. Pretty sure Sehwag would have certainly bettered lara in home condition

Sorry but a massive @ mentioning Pietersen, Laxman, Vaughan and Sehwag in the same breath as Lara (with all due respect to the lot, especially Pietersen who I rate quite highly).

 

[salman85]

Bowling attack wins you game. Did you watch Ashes 2010-11? How after restricting OZ to low score England piled on Australian attack.

No.I was watching How I Met Your Mother.

 

[Ikki]

Harbhajan won it. Why did you ignore my earlier post.

Ahh, ok. I thought when you stated that he got MOTS in the only series he faced Aus with their best attack you were referring to the attack of Gillespie, McGrath and Warne - because that is when we had our best attack during our reign. Which is why I was confused as to how Tendulkar would have won the MOTS. In 99 he also faced a pretty strong attack with Fleming instead of Gillespie, but not as strong or long-lived as the above attack.

 

[Blaze 18]

No.I was watching How I Met Your Mother.

So, when did it happen?

 

[sehwag fan]

Sorry but a massive @ mentioning Pietersen, Laxman, Vaughan and Sehwag in the same breath as Lara (with all due respect to the lot, especially Pietersen who I rate quite highly).

Lara top 3 scores all dull boring draws flat wickets

Sehwag top 3 scores innings victory 2 draw 1.

It is insult to compare a player who has 5 of the 10 fastest 10 double century to a player whose most runs came in dull boring draws.

 

[sehwag fan]

No.I was watching How I Met Your Mother.

Looks like you have not forgotten what he did to Gul.Get over it.

 

[vcs]

sehwag_fan, you are just killing a potentially interesting thread with your aggressive posting.

 

[honestbharani]

sehwag_fan, you are just killing a potentially interesting thread with your aggressive posting.

vcs, to continue what you posted earlier in the thread, I surely think the bowling attack Aussies brought here in 2008 was MUCH worse than the attack we faced in 2004 in Australia..

 

[vcs]

vcs, to continue what you posted earlier in the thread, I surely think the bowling attack Aussies brought here in 2008 was MUCH worse than the attack we faced in 2004 in Australia..

I meant the attack we faced in Australia in 2007-08 TBH.. Lee when he had worked out how to bowl in Tests, an upcoming Johnson, Stuart Clark etc. That wasn't a great attack by any stretch but a pretty decent one. Still I believe we should have batted better and drawn the game at Sydney. The one in India in 2008 was pretty ordinary, no question.

Also one thing to be kept in mind about the 2004 series is that Australia's batting was magnificent (Ponting especially) and the scoreboard pressure made that attack look a bit more challenging at the time than it seems in hindsight.

 

[Ikki]

Was also looking at the 99 series. How did Tendulkar get the MOTS in that one? I never really follow these things (MOTS) enough to remember but looking again at the figures he was outscored/outaveraged by several batsmen in a series where India were comfortably beaten in all 3 tests - in all 3 Tests Australia declared and in the 3rd only needed to bat once. Ponting averaged 125 for the series.

 

[vcs]

It was a debatable decision, but really there was such a vast difference in the quality of bowling faced by Australia and India in that series, so as to render any average comparisons virtually meaningless. India's bowling in that series was minnow-standard, and I'm not exaggerating.

Personally, I'd have given it to McGrath.

 

[sehwag fan]

Was also looking at the 99 series. How did Tendulkar get the MOTS in that one too? I never really follow these things (MOTS) enough to remember but looking again at the figures he was outscored/outaveraged by several batsmen in a series where India were comfortably beaten in all 3 tests - in all 3 Tests Australia declared and in the 3rd only needed to bat once. Ponting averaged 125 for the series.

3 umpiring decision comes to mind .

And Australian bowling was way better than Indian.

Srinath+prasad+Agarkar+kumble is no way comparable to what Australian bowling had got.

 

[honestbharani]

I meant the attack we faced in Australia in 2007-08 TBH.. Lee when he had worked out how to bowl in Tests, an upcoming Johnson, Stuart Clark etc. That wasn't a great attack by any stretch but a pretty decent one. Still I believe we should have batted better and drawn the game at Sydney. The one in India in 2008 was pretty ordinary, no question.

Also one thing to be kept in mind about the 2004 series is that Australia's batting was magnificent (Ponting especially) and the scoreboard pressure made that attack look a bit more challenging at the time than it seems in hindsight.

It was a debatable decision, but really there was such a vast difference in the quality of bowling faced by Australia and India in that series, so as to render any average comparisons virtually meaningless. India's bowling in that series was minnow-standard, and I'm not exaggerating.

Personally, I'd have given it to McGrath.

Agree with both.. And the bad decision reason is laughable.. Both that series and the one Lara got MoS in Australia it was because there were so many Aussies competing that no one stood out and in the opposition, these two guys stood out EASILY.

 

[Ikki]

Yeh, but to be fair to Lara he scored a ridiculous amount of runs. Especially in the 99 series. He scored 3 hundreds (one a double hundred) and a 50 in 4 matches. And because of him WIndies drew the series. I'm sure Tendulkar stood out too, from what I recall his teammates were dreadful. But he didn't score that many runs of affect the games much at all.

 

[bagapath]

The best batsman against australia at its peak was tendulkar. The best batsman against windies at their peak was gooch. Anantha narayanan has got the dates wrong, imo. He shuld stick to 80 (post nz series) to 94 (the aussie series) for windies, the period when they never lost. And 99 (post sri lanka) to 08 (india) for aussies, the period sandwiched by 16 wins on the trot at either end .

 

[hang on]

in the analysis, there is a bowling quality index that adjusts the runs scored, isn't there? was sure there was....don't think that the runs scored are weighted equally.

while not having reached quite the same heights as lara in his rampages against warne and mcgrath (the best australian attack), his overall consistency (not having plumbed the same depths as lara against the australian attack) migh perhaps be what elevates tendulkar to the top of that list?

 

[sehwag fan]

Yeh, but to be fair to Lara he scored a ridiculous amount of runs. Especially in the 99 series. He scored 3 hundreds (one a double hundred) and a 50 in 4 matches. And because of him WIndies drew the series. I'm sure Tendulkar stood out too, from what I recall his teammates were dreadful. But he didn't score that many runs of affect the games much at all.

Yeah such a shame whenever he got going Australian umpires cut his innings short.

He won a man of the match too in that series in MCG.

2nd Test: Australia v India at Melbourne, Dec 26-30, 1999 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo