The Real Pioneer?

[Senile Sentry]

Yeah but they were in Australia, NZ from the early 80s after England put 9 fielders on the boundary v the Windies to stop them hitting a 4. Rules weren't uniform until 1992. I remember NZ playing ODIs in England in 1990 which were 55 overs not 50. Also Aus, NZ etc had coloured clothing but many other countries wore whites at home for ODIs (including 75, 79, 83, 87 CWCs).

Thanks.

So anything before 92 really cant count as pioneer or something as those weren't in response to a particular rule.

Martin Crowe. What a ****ing legend was he.

 

[h_hurricane]

Not entirely true.
Viv scored 85 % of his odi runs in the decade of 80s
Viv 46 avg 92 sr
Kapil 27 at 102, 131 innings
Abbas 51 at 87, 46 innings
Salim malik 33 at 86, 97 innings

These strike rates are insane for that era and these players were well ahead of the time in their team roles, but there is no way you would establish a trend in a decade based on 4 players. Falls in samplesizelol category.

 

[Victor Ian]

Wasnt the thing about Sri Lanka that All the batsmen went bat**** fast early on? That is what is different from other examples with just one opener scoring briskly. And it wasnt just about the openers. I recall 50 off the first 15 being described as doing well, until Sri Lanka turned 'well' into 75.

 

[Burgey]

Exactly. Even if they lost an early one, they kept at it

 

[honestbharani]

Wasnt the thing about Sri Lanka that All the batsmen went bat**** fast early on? That is what is different from other examples with just one opener scoring briskly. And it wasnt just about the openers. I recall 50 off the first 15 being described as doing well, until Sri Lanka turned 'well' into 75.

Exactly. Even if they lost an early one, they kept at it

Nah, it was really only Jaya and Kalu who did that. Aravinda is a naturally free scoring player and just played his game. I am pretty sure the role of Gurusinha, Mahanama and Ranatunga was to provide insurance for collapses as well, which happened in the semi. People forget SL were not in all that commanding a position even when Aravinda was dismissed.

 

[h_hurricane]

That Aravinda innings in semis is one for the ages. Displaying such command, authority and class when the team loses both attacking openers in the first over. Lost count of how many times he threaded the field with precision. Killer innings...

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Did they pioneered "double your score after 30 overs" also?

 

[h_hurricane]

Boycott and Brearley would be the pioneers of hoping to double it after 40 overs in a 60 over match. Look at the way they batted in 1979 WC final. Chasing 286, 129 for no loss after 38 overs, lol.

 

[srbhkshk]

In a way Viv and Sachin weren't really pioneers, they were just a lot better than anyone else in their era - other batsman could have tried to emulate them and they would have only managed a miserable failure.

 

[stephen]

Yeah, Sachin can't be considered a pioneer of anything because he was a freak talent. He was simply excellent and nobody really tried to emulate him because they couldn't.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Boycott and Brearley would be the pioneers of hoping to double it after 40 overs in a 60 over match. Look at the way they batted in 1979 WC final. Chasing 286, 129 for no loss after 38 overs, lol.

More or less, the likes of Kallis and Dravid were doing the same and called it "Anchoring". Fake Bevans.

 

[h_hurricane]

More or less, the likes of Kallis and Dravid were doing the same and called it "Anchoring". Fake Bevans.

It is blatant lack of match awareness I would say. No planning or clarity of vision. Even worse than the infamous 36* from Gavaskar, considering the great stakes here. There is no way England would have been in the game after such an indifferent start.

Kallis and Dravid weren't great at planning an ODI innings either, but definitely better than Boycs and Brearley.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

It is blatant lack of match awareness I would say. No planning or clarity of vision. Even worse than the infamous 36* from Gavaskar, considering the great stakes here. There is no way England would have been in the game after such an indifferent start.

Kallis and Dravid weren't great at planning an ODI innings either, but definitely better than Boycs and Brearley.

Gavaskar can not be blamed, it was a hopeless match and he took it as an opportunity for batting practise.. or some kind of protest.. whatever, it didn't affect the match result. Kohli and Rohit Scoring 20 runs in 10 overs while chasing 340 or so in a WC match.. easily a bigger crime.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Gavaskar can not be blamed, it was a hopeless match and he took it as an opportunity for batting practise.. or some kind of protest.. whatever, it didn't affect the match result. Kohli and Rohit Scoring 20 runs in 10 overs while chasing 340 or so in a WC match.. easily a bigger crime.

You spew some absolute nonsense at times but this takes the cake. Gavaskar's innings was the single most gutless/selfish (take your pick because it has to be one of the two) display in ODI history. Unless you're literally Sunil gavaskar so I don't blame you for defending yourself.

 

[harsh.ag]

The most gutless remains the underarm

 

[honestbharani]

You spew some absolute nonsense at times but this takes the cake. Gavaskar's innings was the single most gutless/selfish (take your pick because it has to be one of the two) display in ODI history. Unless you're literally Sunil gavaskar so I don't blame you for defending yourself.

Given his posts about Sachin in the other thread, this cannot really be ruled out. Maybe even an Agarkar or worse, a Manjrekar.

 

[OverratedSanity]

The most gutless remains the underarm

Rather be gutless to ensure you win than ensure you lose.

 

[h_hurricane]

Given his posts about Sachin in the other thread, this cannot really be ruled out. Maybe even an Agarkar or worse, a Manjrekar.

I thought he was Kapil Dev. But then, I am one as well.