Battle of the Batting Orders

[subshakerz]

It's silly to let him play as an Opener in SA when he struggled to do so and actually did much better in the MO, Yes. Let him Open in SC and AUS ofcourse.

He is also notably better in that role in SC, where around 3/8 of the matches are to be played in, yes. Also equal in Australia and WI, yes.

Take up your issue with Ganguly.

And it's funny you will give him points as opener in SC and then for SA/NZ/Eng wave it off by insisting he is a middle order bat.

 

[Bitmap]

Which batting orders provide the most for an average team?

Sehwag, Dravid, Tendulkar and Laxman or G Smith, Amla, Kallis and ABD?

Haynes, Greenidge, Viv, Richardson, Lloyd or Langer, Hayden, Ponting and Waugh brothers?

Gavaskar, Vishwanath, Vengsarkar, Amaranth or Anwar, Inzi, Yousuf and Salim Malik?

Hobbs, Sutcliffe Hammond and Jardine or Brown, Morris, Bradman and Miller or Worrell, Weekes, Walcott and Sobers?

India
Very close, Aus just
India
England

 

[capt_Luffy]

Take up your issue with Ganguly.

And it's funny you will give him points as opener in SC and then for SA/NZ/Eng wave it off by insisting he is a middle order bat.

I never waived it off. I said he sucked opening in. SEN, so I won't let him to LoL.

 

[subshakerz]

I never waived it off. I said he sucked opening in. SEN, so I won't let him to LoL.

What about SC?

 

[Thala_0710]

I don't think I remember every collapse both line-up and can't be arsed to do so.

When the quartets played together:
Ind totals below 200: 34 out of 137 innings
Sa totals below 200: 28 out of 118 innings
Don't see much difference tbh

 

[capt_Luffy]

What about SC?

He will open is SC, AUS and WI, and bat in the MO in SEN. I always included him in my teams, be it draft or AT India XI, with this caveat.

 

[Johan]

Sehwag doesn't make my India ATXI

 

[subshakerz]

He will open is SC, AUS and WI, and bat in the MO in SEN. I always included him in my teams, be it draft or AT India XI, with this caveat.

It doesn't work that way and you do you.

 

[capt_Luffy]

It doesn't work that way and you do you.

It does for me. I will say though, yeah it's closer than I initially thought. It's relatively Close. But not enough for me to seriously consider the Saffas over India

 

[Bolo.]

When the quartets played together:
Ind totals below 200: 34 out of 137 innings
Sa totals below 200: 28 out of 118 innings
Don't see much difference tbh

How does this look on away records?

 

[subshakerz]

It does for me. I will say though, yeah it's closer than I initially thought. It's relatively Close.

That's all I asked. Good chat.

 

[subshakerz]

When the quartets played together:
Ind totals below 200: 34 out of 137 innings
Sa totals below 200: 28 out of 118 innings
Don't see much difference tbh

Obviously they are playing in different home settings. Would be interested to see away.

And I will also say, every below 200 score doesn't mean a collapse by default.

 

[BazBall21]

And the fact that India folded much more often than SA in their time shows that too.

And the best team is measured on the ability to thrive everywhere.

 

[BazBall21]

None of them are clearly as Brilliant in all conditions like Sachin. Dravid in SA and Kallis in England are about Equal, and both sucked in SL. So I don't think Dravid had more pronounced weaknesses. Laxman wasn't all conditional like Amla, but he certainly didn't sucked necessarily anywhere. And I don't think Smith was decent at Home against Good teams. All in all, don't think just going by checklist is going to convince me they were close.

South Africa being a tighter unit isn't a checklist argument. It's a broad and fairly basic point.

 

[capt_Luffy]

South Africa being a tighter unit isn't a checklist argument. It's a broad and fairly basic point.

And I don't think they are a tighter unit. Period. The checklist argument is Amla or De Villiers being really close to Dravid for scoring runs in certain places et such.

 

[subshakerz]

And I don't think they are a tighter unit. Period. The checklist argument is Amla or De Villiers being really close to Dravid for scoring runs in certain places et such.

You need to look more on how they did as a unit

 

[capt_Luffy]

You need to look more on how they did as a unit

Yeah, and I think SA's "advantage" is significantly to do with their bowling and some pretty weak attacks, including that of Australia.

 

[subshakerz]

Yeah, and I think SA's "advantage" is significantly to do with their bowling and some pretty weak attacks, including that of Australia.

Weak attacks which India also faced.

 

[BazBall21]

And I don't think they are a tighter unit. Period. The checklist argument is Amla or De Villiers being really close to Dravid for scoring runs in certain places et such.

South Africa were more reliable and multifunctional as an overall quartet. Thus, I believe they have the higher floor. I think that's the more significant detail when they themselves have monstrous maximum thresholds.

 

[capt_Luffy]

South Africa were more reliable and multifunctional as an overall quartet. Thus, I believe they have the higher floor. I think that's the more significant detail when they themselves have monstrous maximum thresholds.

I think they have the lower floor very Arguably. The only place I think they have a fair chance is in NZ and England, but I won't right off India complete there as well. Think overall India got it pretty convincingly.