VMMM, how are batsmen going to survive

[Salamuddin]

I think the bowling attack of India is being a bit underestimated .

I'd agree with that. Over the last couple of years, India have won tests in the West Indies, Australia, South Africa, England and Sri Lanka.
They need to find a spinner to replace Kumble
but with an attack of Zaheer, Ishant, Munaf, Sree, RP harbhajan/Ojha and hopefully Mishra I'd be fairly confident of continuing to being competitive bowling wise away from home.

 

[Migara]

I wish I could be contradicted by facts. In fact, I'd be first to blow my head off!

Since inception at highest level of Cricket, Sri Lanka has failed to win even a single Test match in Australia, South Africa or India. 'Nuff said. Reason's been simple. Absence of quality backup to one man army Muthiah Muralitharan. And spin backup in form of Mendis alone wont do am afraid.

How much did India manage in their first 25 years of test cricket for a comparison?

 

[Richard]

It took India 35-and-a-half years from their elevation to Test status before they won their first Test outside the subcontinent. This despite their being a fair challenge for most at home in this time.

Whereupon they promptly won 5 in 3-and-a-half years, then for the next 30 years they won another 5 (excluding 2 defeats of a Packer-scarred Australia in 1977/78 which can't be called genuine).

Only from 2001 onwards, 69 years after gaining Test status, have India started to win outside the subcontinent regularly.

 

[Precambrian]

How much did India manage in their first 25 years of test cricket for a comparison?

It took India 35-and-a-half years from their elevation to Test status before they won their first Test outside the subcontinent. This despite their being a fair challenge for most at home in this time.

Whereupon they promptly won 5 in 3-and-a-half years, then for the next 30 years they won another 5 (excluding 2 defeats of a Packer-scarred Australia in 1977/78 which can't be called genuine).

Only from 2001 onwards, 69 years after gaining Test status, have India started to win outside the subcontinent regularly.

Boys! By that logic, the message is that Lankans are "entitled" to lose games outside Lanka till (1982+69) 2051, on a consistent basis??? Talk sense man! India hardly took the game seriously until 1983 WC.

The point I am making is that Sri Lanka needs to bolster its away batting performances, to supplement the efforts of Mendis and Murali. Even the most premier batsmen, Mahela and Sanga have an average differential of over 10 in their batting averages. But I am confident that all it will take is just one win. Take it from a SL fan.

 

[Mahindinho]

Boys! By that logic, the message is that Lankans are "entitled" to lose games outside Lanka till (1982+69) 2051, on a consistent basis??? Talk sense man! India hardly took the game seriously until 1983 WC.

The point I am making is that Sri Lanka needs to bolster its away batting performances, to supplement the efforts of Mendis and Murali. Even the most premier batsmen, Mahela and Sanga have an average differential of over 10 in their batting averages. But I am confident that all it will take is just one win. Take it from a SL fan.

Heh, I definitely can't wait 'til 2051!

Seriously though, those comparisions just aren't valid. A tour to WI or Aus 50 years ago would have been one hell of a culture-shock, even for an experienced sportsman -- nowadays, a trip halfway across the world isn't quite as unusual. Plus, there are so many ODI tournaments going on that even young players shouldn't get overwhelmed by an overseas tour.

Perhaps that's the problem with Bangladesh? On the one hand, it becomes obvious sooner that "here's a side that's close to Test standard"...but then, they don't have the years of consolidation/struggle that SL had, giving touring sides a bloody good game but not getting Test status. Perhaps it's those years that allowed SL to grow strength in depth (relatively speaking) rather than just one or two good players?

A definite problem is series length -- if all a team gets in foreign conditions is three warm up games (one of which gets rained off anyway!), they're going to lose the 1st Test. If it's a three Test (or even shorter) series, where's the come back from that? Too much pressure on the youngsters, who go a few steps backwards as a result.

SL's last series in England was great fun -- if only there were two more Tests in it! I honestly thought they'd go on from there to beat the overseas problem, but it's not quite happened. Closer, though.

It makes a nice change having SL described as needing to find more batting depth, mind.

 

[honestbharani]

How much did India manage in their first 25 years of test cricket for a comparison?

how many times during that period were India's bowling attack hailed as the strongest and best in the world and as something that batsmen can't survive against?






It is true that this Sri Lankan attack has heaps of potential but it is also true that the real gems seem to be only in the spinning department. I don't think anyone is exactly convinced of Sri Lanka's pace battery as yet..... Give them some time and we will see how good they are. I am sure they will have the best spin attack in the world for the next 2 years at least, but I am afraid, that may just simply not be enough away from the subcontinent.... Some of their pacers need to step up and show that they can match their performances to their potential. Same with their batters. In that case, it will end up being an extremely strong side...

 

[SJS]

It took India 35-and-a-half years from their elevation to Test status before they won their first Test outside the subcontinent..

I think people ought to know that in those 35 years India played a grand total of 33 test matches outside the subcontinent, winning the 34th.

Its important to keep in mind how little cricket was played.

Between their first Test match and the 1946 series to England, India played just three Test matches. That is three Tests (plus the inaugural one) in 14 years (of which five went to the war).

Today with so much more cricket, you shouldn't be talking of how many years it took then. It is completely out of context.

 

[Richard]

I know. It isn't an entirely fair question for the reasons Mahinda pointed-out - I was merely answering it.

 

[Richard]

Boys! By that logic, the message is that Lankans are "entitled" to lose games outside Lanka till (1982+69) 2051, on a consistent basis??? Talk sense man!

I was, as I said above, merely answering the question. There are no exact timescale mirror-images involved. However, this:

India hardly took the game seriously until 1983 WC.

is patent nonsense. If India "hardly took the game seriously" they'd not have been a remotely useful cricketing nation. Yet not merely did the game draw considerable crowds (so considerable that certain people lamented the fact that they'd declined post-1983) but India were almost always a very strong force to be reckoned with at home.

 

[Uppercut]

Don't forget both SL and India toured Australia the same season last year, and only one came out winner.

Which team was that then?

One team lost 2-1, the other 2-0. India's batting is vastly superior to Sri Lanka's, so that's to be expected.

I think the bowling attack of India is being a bit underestimated here just due to a series loss in Sri Lanka. I believe while they they did have a bad outing in one of the innings, ie, the First Test, in the others they did fairly well, barring Anil Kumble. He was below par. And worst thing was he did not recognise that and over bowled himself, denting India's overall bowling figures. Ishant Sharma is only 19 and is looking better every series, and Zaheer Khan is a late bloomer. Harbhjana Singh finally seems to have found his flight back. I'd say India needs to breed another spinner and preferably a left arm spinner, either Ojha or the tried and trusted Murali Kartik.

Well yeah, it's a strong enough attack.

I'll put it this way. If Vaas, Malinga (presuming fitness), Mendis, Murali were to face the same batting lineup tomorrow as Zaheer, Sharma, Harbhajan, Kumble, I'd fancy the former to take more wickets for sure.



One more thing. The general feeling, amongst the majority in world cricket and indeed this forum, that Vaas is now useless at test level is hugely exaggerated. Just to go back one or two series, he was very effective against both the West Indies and England. He'll retire pretty soon i guess, but I wouldn't be writing him off just yet.

 

[Precambrian]

Which team was that then?

One team lost 2-1, the other 2-0. India's batting is vastly superior to Sri Lanka's, so that's to be expected.

Erp, the CB series.

 

[Migara]

One more thing. The general feeling, amongst the majority in world cricket and indeed this forum, that Vaas is now useless at test level is hugely exaggerated. Just to go back one or two series, he was very effective against both the West Indies and England. He'll retire pretty soon i guess, but I wouldn't be writing him off just yet.

The strange thing about Vaas is when people starts to write him off, he produces that surprise burst with the bat or the ball to silence them.

 

[tooextracool]

Ironically, the emergence of Mendis might hasten the retirement of Muralitharen.

Murali no longer has to carry the attack by himself. They have found him a successor, and he may be thinking that he can hang up his boots now with the team's spinning department in good hands.

One could also argue that the the emergence of Mendis might ease the burden on Murali and allow him to play longer which might well be the case. Its fairly obvious that there is no bowler outside of Mendis in SL capable of outsing Murali from the side so I dont see why he wouldnt want to play longer and help make SL a dominant force in tests.

As far as Mendis is concerned, I am still unconvinced about him and he got visibly easier to bat in the final test as the Indian players started to play him better, but its still early days in his career.

 

[tooextracool]

More than anything I'd say his treatment by selectors since the World Cup has been disappionting, and he can feel quite hard done by. The Sri Lankas were under-done before the Australian series and although he scored a pair of 40's and looked good in Brisbane Silva wasn't able to score many and couldn't convert his starts at home against England. He went to domestic cricket and scored 50, 7, 25 and 49 and also a half-century against the Guyana President's XI, but was overlooked for the 1st Test in the West Indies. Called up for the next Test he responded well, putting together a vital partnership with Dilshan to drag Sri Lanka to 278 in the 1st innings. I think it is fair to say his lack of ODI scores in 2008 led to his exclusion from the recently concluded series, which is a real shame.

Yeah, been impressed from what I have seen of Chamara Silva, but hes yet to kick off his test career. Nonetheless, this match performance has to be one of the best in a debut test series:
http://www.howstat.com.au/cricket/Statistics/Matches/MatchScorecard.asp?MatchCode=1840

 

[SpaceMonkey]

Because it ain't as simple as "ah I want a leg-spinner, let's find one!"

Someone who possesses the skill first has to exist. And not very many do.

Nonetheless, Mishra and Chawla both have their promise.

If only it was No country has put more effort and money over the last 10 years into producing Leg-spinners than England. Its almost bordering on an obsession right now. Although its definitely resulted in more young leg spinners coming through into county teams, a true world class leg-spinner is born with the skill. No amount of coaching / money is going to change that.