• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Who is the best current International Coach

Status
Not open for further replies.

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
chicane said:
It's obvious what you feel, especially about everything India.
Is it, well that's quite funny because I can't see anything that I've put that makes it obvious how I feel (and I know how I feel!)


chicane said:
Don't look at the question, look at the logic.
The logic that says a rapidly improving Bangladesh side will win a game in the next 2 years?


chicane said:
All our bowlers were injured. Zaheer had a niggle in his hamstring in Brisbane, Kumble had a shoulder problem while bowling long spells....AA was playing after ages. Pathan was a 19 year old rookie. You are going nowhere with these arguements.

So he's a rookie when it suits you and better than Harmison when that suits you.

And I ask what relevance that all has to the Gillespie situation?
 

chicane

State Captain
marc71178 said:
The logic that says a rapidly improving Bangladesh side will win a game in the next 2 years?
Yes and the same logic that says if India play an away series or two in the next 2 years they are more likely to win than Bangladesh.
marc71178 said:
So he's a rookie when it suits you and better than Harmison when that suits you.

And I ask what relevance that all has to the Gillespie situation?
He was a rookie then! 8-) He's played 5 matches now and is still a rookie but has improved massively and is really proving himself now. And yes the relevance my friend is all the bowlers had their share of problems. Even Gillespie won't cry about his injury as much as you!
 

Sudeep

International Captain
chicane said:
It's obvious what you feel, especially about everything India.

Don't look at the question, look at the logic.

All our bowlers were injured. Zaheer had a niggle in his hamstring in Brisbane, Kumble had a shoulder problem while bowling long spells....AA was playing after ages. Pathan was a 19 year old rookie. You are going nowhere with these arguements.
Australia were without Glenn McGrath and Shane Warne too.

Brett Lee was just returning from injury. I don't know about others, but I rate Lee highly (another debate?)
 

chicane

State Captain
Sudeep Popat said:
Australia were without Glenn McGrath and Shane Warne too.

Point already made by marc and TEC and debated. Read through the thread.
Sudeep Popat said:
Brett Lee was just returning from injury. I don't know about others, but I rate Lee highly (another debate?)
Read above.
 

Sudeep

International Captain
chicane said:
One good(read great) series...
Great?

These are the results:

November 2003
Victoria v Indians
25-27 Nov 2003, Melbourne Ind 266/9d & 116/2
Vic 518/8d Match drawn


Queensland Academy of Sport v Indians
29 Nov - 1 Dec 2003, Brisbane QAS 304/6d & 208/6d
Ind 208/9d & 121/4 Match Drawn


December 2003
Australia v India, 1st Test
4-8 Dec 2003, Brisbane Aus 323 & 284/3d
Ind 409 & 73/2 Match drawn


Australia v India, 2nd Test
12-16 Dec 2003, Adelaide Aus 556 & 196
Ind 523 & 233/6 India won by 4 wickets


Australia A v Indians
19-21 Dec 2003, Hobart Aus A 311/5d & 241/7d
Ind 245 & 66/2 Match drawn


Australia v India, 3rd Test
26-30 Dec 2003, Melbourne Ind 366 & 286
Aus 558 & 97/1 Australia won by 9 wickets


January 2004
Australia v India, 4th Test
2-6 Jan 2004, Sydney Ind 705/7d & 211/2d
Aus 474 & 357/6 Match drawn


One positive result out of six matches.

Yes the series was evenly fought, India showed professionalism, team spirit etc. But the end result isn't something that can be called "great." It sure was great for the spectators, but for Team India it was nothing more than "good."

- As you said, even in Brisbane, but it doesn't count because if it wouldn't have rained, strategies would have been different.

- Adelaide win by 4 wickets. Decent.

- Melbourne loss by 9 wickets. Underperformed.

- Can't pick up 10 wickets on last day at Sydney. Doesn't matter if the pitch was dead as a dodo (Siddhuism?), but if we can't pick up 10 wickets on a day, we can't say it was a great series, sorry.

As I said, a good series, sign of a new found spirit never seen before, but nothing to be too be crazy about.
 

Sudeep

International Captain
chicane said:
Point already made by marc and TEC and debated. Read through the thread.

Read above.
We've had 10 pages of this discussion? Didn't see that. Sorry.
 

chicane

State Captain
Sudeep Popat said:
Great?

These are the results:

November 2003
Victoria v Indians
25-27 Nov 2003, Melbourne Ind 266/9d & 116/2
Vic 518/8d Match drawn


Queensland Academy of Sport v Indians
29 Nov - 1 Dec 2003, Brisbane QAS 304/6d & 208/6d
Ind 208/9d & 121/4 Match Drawn


December 2003
Australia v India, 1st Test
4-8 Dec 2003, Brisbane Aus 323 & 284/3d
Ind 409 & 73/2 Match drawn


Australia v India, 2nd Test
12-16 Dec 2003, Adelaide Aus 556 & 196
Ind 523 & 233/6 India won by 4 wickets


Australia A v Indians
19-21 Dec 2003, Hobart Aus A 311/5d & 241/7d
Ind 245 & 66/2 Match drawn


Australia v India, 3rd Test
26-30 Dec 2003, Melbourne Ind 366 & 286
Aus 558 & 97/1 Australia won by 9 wickets


January 2004
Australia v India, 4th Test
2-6 Jan 2004, Sydney Ind 705/7d & 211/2d
Aus 474 & 357/6 Match drawn


One positive result out of six matches.

Yes the series was evenly fought, India showed professionalism, team spirit etc. But the end result isn't something that can be called "great." It sure was great for the spectators, but for Team India it was nothing more than "good."

- As you said, even in Brisbane, but it doesn't count because if it wouldn't have rained, strategies would have been different.

- Adelaide win by 4 wickets. Decent.

- Melbourne loss by 9 wickets. Underperformed.

- Can't pick up 10 wickets on last day at Sydney. Doesn't matter if the pitch was dead as a dodo (Siddhuism?), but if we can't pick up 10 wickets on a day, we can't say it was a great series, sorry.

As I said, a good series, sign of a new found spirit never seen before, but nothing to be too be crazy about.
Great for the quality of cricket played, great for the fact that we matched a great team. Sydney had a few bad umpiring decisions. We didn't exactly underperform in Melbourne, we pulverised them in the 1st day. Then they bowled very well. Ricky Ponting made 257 after we were handicapped by Zaheer's absence. And then they bowled well again to bowl us out. You don't wanna think it's a great series, good for you. Someday the team will please you by living up to your expectations.
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
chicane said:
Yes and the same logic that says if India play an away series or two in the next 2 years they are more likely to win than Bangladesh.
But they don't have one scheduled, and that was the initial point, besides, they might be "too tired" even if one is scheduled and fly off to play some $ games instead.



chicane said:
He was a rookie then! 8-) He's played 5 matches now and is still a rookie but has improved massively and is really proving himself now.
Improved he may have done, but to call him better than Harmison is blind patriotism (which apparently I'm guilty of for comparing their records and coming to the logical conclusion)



chicane said:
And yes the relevance my friend is all the bowlers had their share of problems. Even Gillespie won't cry about his injury as much as you!

I'm not crying about anything, merely pointing out that he was injured in the Second Test and that left Australia without ANY of their first choice attack (2 of which are genuine World Class and 1 is well on the way towards that) - and you tried to compare it to India's supposed injury problems 8-)
 

chicane

State Captain
marc71178 said:
But they don't have one scheduled, and that was the initial point, besides, they might be "too tired" even if one is scheduled and fly off to play some $ games instead.
If they don't have one scheduled why is it their fault? You are questioning their ability to win a series outside Asia and even think Bangladesh have a better chance of winning a test after their appalling record. Jeez!
marc71178 said:
Improved he may have done, but to call him better than Harmison is blind patriotism (which apparently I'm guilty of for comparing their records and coming to the logical conclusion)
You were comparing them based on the PWC ratings and a record which if compared logically, i.e vs Australia and Pakistan, the only two common teams they have played, says a different story.
marc71178 said:
I'm not crying about anything, merely pointing out that he was injured in the Second Test and that left Australia without ANY of their first choice attack (2 of which are genuine World Class and 1 is well on the way towards that) - and you tried to compare it to India's supposed injury problems 8-)
Supposed injuries to Indian bowlers? The best bowlers of both sides were unavailable, that's my point. And even Kumble who was playing had a shoulder problem while bowling long spells(which he did) just like Gillespie was injured and was not 100%.
 

Sudeep

International Captain
chicane said:
Great for the quality of cricket played, great for the fact that we matched a great team.
Exactly, what I meant when I said great for the spectators.

It was good, and not great on the fact that we didn't produce a result, that we can boast of as much to proclaim ourselves of having an invincible form that we can conquer any country on their battlefield.

This whole discussion was about India's chances of winning abroad after their performance in Australia, and in that context the series was what I said it was - only "good."

And I'm not the type of fan who won't appreciate a result. I did say that we played good, we proved that we're not to be taken lightly. I just think you went overboard by saying we can beat any team anywhere, which is too unpredictable.
 

chicane

State Captain
Sudeep Popat said:
Exactly, what I meant when I said great for the spectators.

It was good, and not great on the fact that we didn't produce a result, that we can boast of as much to proclaim ourselves of having an invincible form that we can conquer any country in their battlefield.

This whole discussion was about India's chances of winning abroad after their performance in Australia, and in that context the series was what I said it was - only "good."

And I'm not the type of fan who won't appreciate a result. I did say that we played good, we proved that we're not to be taken lightly. I just think you went overboard by saying we can beat any team anywhere, which is too unpredictable.
We were playing Australia who are very very tough to beat. I'm not going overboard when I say in current form we can beat ANY team and win an away series. We came very close to it in Australia though I think it will still be tough for us to win a series against them at home. The other teams are nowhere near as strong and we can beat them. Agreed it's unpredictable, that's why I didn't sy we will, I said we can, something which was not possible a few years ago.
 

Sudeep

International Captain
chicane said:
We were playing Australia who are very very tough to beat. I'm not going overboard when I say in current form we can beat ANY team and win an away series. We came very close to it in Australia though I think it will still be tough for us to win a series against them at home. The other teams are nowhere near as strong and we can beat them. Agreed it's unpredictable, that's why I didn't sy we will, I said we can, something which was not possible a few years ago.
Correction. An under-strength Australia. Their bowling.

It wasn't the same Australia that beat every (read most) country home and away.
 

tooextracool

International Coach
chicane said:
So are Micheal Clarke and Adam Gilchrist. Bu are you telling me Giddins would've used that money for charity and stuff like that? Tendulkar besides the match fees and endorsments even has his own restraunt business, but he also does a lot of charity work...
thats just pocket feed for someone like tendulkar believe me......
 

Sudeep

International Captain
Anyway, before this debate heats too much to go over the boiling point, I'll put my final opinion.

India has improved. They have qualities which past teams haven't been able to showcase. But we are not in the position to say that we can beat any country, away, based on one good series. We need to do what we did in Australia consistently for at least 2 more years to say that we can be good enough to win an away series.
 

chicane

State Captain
Sudeep Popat said:
Correction. An under-strength Australia. Their bowling.

It wasn't the same Australia that beat every (read most) country home and away.
Oh please go through the thread. The millionth time I'll say that we also didn't have our best bowlers and had AA, Kumble, and Pathan. Both teams' top bowlers were unavailable.
 

Sudeep

International Captain
chicane said:
Oh please go through the thread. The millionth time I'll say that we also didn't have our best bowlers and had AA, Kumble, and Pathan. Both teams' top bowlers were unavailable.
So Kumble isn't a top bowler?:p



Just wanted to get that cheap shot. :D
 

tooextracool

International Coach
chicane said:
Supposed injuries to Indian bowlers? The best bowlers of both sides were unavailable, that's my point. And even Kumble who was playing had a shoulder problem while bowling long spells(which he did) just like Gillespie was injured and was not 100%.
yea but australia has a very strong bowling lineup....the rest of the bowlers werent half as good as the first string bowlers. in indias case though the bowlers werent that much better than the replacements....in fact pathan was better than the bowler he replaced.
and another thing.....in the ashes series in 02-03 a largely under strength english side beat the aussies in the final test when they were without warne and mcgrath....despite the fact that gillespie and lee were at their best! no im not saying england is a better team, im just saying how handicapped the aussies are their 2 best bowlers.
 

chicane

State Captain
Sudeep Popat said:
Anyway, before this debate heats too much to go over the boiling point, I'll put my final opinion.

India has improved. They have qualities which past teams haven't been able to showcase. But we are not in the position to say that we can beat any country, away, based on one good series. We need to do what we did in Australia consistently for at least 2 more years to say that we can be good enough to win an away series.
If not for the current schedule in two years we would've played several away series. Why doesn't that Aussie summer mean anything? It will be very tough against SA at home, It will be tough against NZ and England at home. But we can beat them. There won't be anymore newspaper headlines such as 'Indian summer over' etc...I dunno what you expect from this team and I dunno whether you even saw any of the significant changes. I dunno if you understand what I'm saying. But you may just be surprised.
 

tooextracool

International Coach
chicane said:
Oh please go through the thread. The millionth time I'll say that we also didn't have our best bowlers and had AA, Kumble, and Pathan. Both teams' top bowlers were unavailable.
oh and btw australia also had another player missing...a largely underrated player whos performances in the tour of india will be crucial....have you heard of darren lehmann?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top