Cricket:India's tour of England 2011

amolbhatia100 said:
England are not number one in the test rankings. Hence clearly not the best.

England are not the world champions in one day cricket. Hence clearly not the best.

I wonder which team is both of those things. :)
Click to expand...

What KM said minus the smilie. 20/20 is where it's at thesedays. Who cares about the one day stuff? but yeah, I stand by what I said, England are the best.
 
T20 is frankly nonsense, what did Marchi call it? Hit & giggle? Just about sums it up.

Test cricket is noble and fascinating and at least the 50 over game gives sufficient time to play a proper game of cricket and is exciting without being quite so much of a slogging match.
 
amolbhatia100 said:
England are not number one in the test rankings. Hence clearly not the best.

England are not the world champions in one day cricket. Hence clearly not the best.

I wonder which team is both of those things. :)
Click to expand...

Tbh with the vast money, resources and sheer size of the country you have it is a wonder you haven't reached this point earlier in the last two decades.

You are like the Man City of cricket. But actually slightly more successful. The Chelsea of cricket let's say.
 
Colin129 said:
T20 is frankly nonsense, what did Marchi call it? Hit & giggle? Just about sums it up.

Test cricket is noble and fascinating and at least the 50 over game gives sufficient time to play a proper game of cricket and is exciting without being quite so much of a slogging match.
Click to expand...

Agree. No doubt Test cricket in the ultimate. But I'm quite fond of one day cricket. If the wicket does a bit it provides a genuinely good contest between bat and ball and introduces an added urgency into the game. The World Cup for me has always been and will always be the most important prize in the game.

T20 is a farce. Unlike ODI's it kills the essence of the game.
 
phelans shorts said:
Shhh, everyone knows it isn't important unless India are the best, you should know that by now Spoons!
Click to expand...

I prefer it over the 50 over stuff, to be honest, but I'm not really a fan of either. And even though TM cricket is the true and best form of the game, it's almost dead outside of England and possibly Australia.

...I wonder how D/N tests will pan out.
 
Wouldn't laugh at the Indians just yet. Their batters are more than capable of making 600 or more. While England have better bowlers they can be unpredictable.

I think this one will be a draw.
 
Ole's_toe_poke said:
Tbh with the vast money, resources and sheer size of the country you have it is a wonder you haven't reached this point earlier in the last two decades.

You are like the Man City of cricket. But actually slightly more successful. The Chelsea of cricket let's say.
Click to expand...

Are you having a laugh?

We've become no.1 and World Champions because of the quality of players we have. We haven't bought our way to success because that's something you can't do in cricket. The Australian side of the last two decades would still dominate us because of their sheer quality. That's one thing I like about cricket. You actually can't buy success.

If anything England are the ones trying to 'outsource' success with the Irishman and South Africans all throughout the team.
 
Ole's_toe_poke said:
Tbh with the vast money, resources and sheer size of the country you have it is a wonder you haven't reached this point earlier in the last two decades.

You are like the Man City of cricket. But actually slightly more successful. The Chelsea of cricket let's say.
Click to expand...

:wenger:
Err yeah then you guys are the Man City of football. Vast money and resources. Retarded comparison.
 
Spoony Youngblood said:
I prefer it over the 50 over stuff, to be honest, but I'm not really a fan of either. And even though TM cricket is the true and best form of the game, it's almost dead outside of England and possibly Australia.

...I wonder how D/N tests will pan out.
Click to expand...

That's very strange. I thought you were more of a purist. When the ball does a bit one day cricket provides a great contest between bat and ball. Look at how the Pakistani spinner bowled (Ajmal I think) in the WC semi against us. Almost unplayable. T20 is just swinging at everything in sight. It makes players Yusuf Pathan giants of the game.
 
KM said:
:wenger:
Err yeah then you guys are the Man City of football. Vast money and resources. Retarded comparison.
Click to expand...

India have a monopoly on the game, though....and aside from the last few years they've been pretty mediocre in the cricketing arena. Amol's right though success can't be bought, however you're able to afford the best facilities in the cricket world thanks to the cash India generates and with a massive fanbase...well it's probably closer to a religion, it puts you in a strong position to put it mildly. And what is it? something like 90% is generated in India or by India? I can see you lot dominate from many years to come....especially in the one day arena. Thing is, will the public over there get bored if it happens?
 
amolbhatia100 said:
That's very strange. I thought you were more of a purist. When the ball does a bit one day cricket provides a great contest between bat and ball. Look at how the Pakistani spinner bowled (Ajmal I think) in the WC semi against us. Almost unplayable. T20 is just swinging at everything in sight. It makes players Yusuf Pathan giants of the game.
Click to expand...

Well yes, which is why I only like test cricket, but I find one day cricket boring...especially the middle overs, 20/20 condenses it.
 
Spoony Youngblood said:
India have a monopoly on the game, though....and aside from the last few years have been pretty mediocre in the cricketing arena. Amol's right though success can't be bought, however you're able to afford the best facilities in cricket world thanks to the cash India generates and with the massive fanbase...well it's probably closer to a religion, you puts you in a strong position to put it mildly. And what is it? something like 90% is generated in India or by India? I can see you lot dominate from many years to come....especially in the one day arena. Thing is, will the public over there get bored if it happens?
Click to expand...

By that logic shouldn't England be winning things in football then. Their League is the richest in the world. The facilities there are great. The infrastructure is great. The fanbase there is massive.

I get your point about India making the most money, but the facilities weren't really that good say like 5 years ago and I would say that we're still lagging behind facilities wise from countries like Australia and England

The comparison to Man City was retarded in the sense that the huge amount of money only started to pour in, once our team got a bit successful. After winning the T20 WC, BCCI saw the potential of T20 and it all took off from here.

As for the getting bored comment, I pretty much think that yeah people are generally get bored from cricket especially IPL now. This season's IPL was a farce. I really couldn't see it surviving for more than three years.
 
Spoony Youngblood said:
Well yes, which is why I only like test cricket, but I find one day cricket boring...especially the middle overs, 20/20 condenses it.
Click to expand...

T20 is like the last 5 overs of one day cricket four times over for two innings. I can't stress how much against it I am. And the IPL is just an awful sporting event.

Btw, there's a new regulation in one day cricket (or possibly forthcoming) to ensure that powerplays are taken in the middle overs because that's where the game usually slows down. Teams have been prone to taking it very early (bowling side) and very late (batting side) so this ensures the middle overs, which are the ones where scoring is slower, are more exciting.

To be honest I just want ODI and test cricket on nice bowler friendly (or at least partly so) tracks. As long as I get that, with or without these innovations, I'm happy.
 
amolbhatia100 said:
Agree. No doubt Test cricket in the ultimate. But I'm quite fond of one day cricket. If the wicket does a bit it provides a genuinely good contest between bat and ball and introduces an added urgency into the game. The World Cup for me has always been and will always be the most important prize in the game.

T20 is a farce. Unlike ODI's it kills the essence of the game.
Click to expand...

I actually think ODIs are good for cricket. The problem with test cricket is that it doesn't have the capacity to produce "feck yeah!" moments. It is like watching art and sport rolled into one. Sports needs those moments, like when you're watching your club play and they score a goal. ODIs provide this, while providing a long enough platform for players to build an innings, retaining a part of the magic from test cricket's essence.
 
KM said:
:wenger:
Err yeah then you guys are the Man City of football. Vast money and resources. Retarded comparison.
Click to expand...

India should be able to afford the best facilities, coaches etc. Not to mention considering most of the kids play the sport the talent should have a steady stream. Really you should've produced a great team far sooner. The fact that a team with such resources relies on one great fast bowler is a bit pathetic.

While you can't buy players you can't deny that India has a huge advantage.
 
Spoony Youngblood said:
India have a monopoly on the game, though....and aside from the last few years they've been pretty mediocre in the cricketing arena. Amol's right though success can't be bought, however you're able to afford the best facilities in the cricket world thanks to the cash India generates and with a massive fanbase...well it's probably closer to a religion, it puts you in a strong position to put it mildly. And what is it? something like 90% is generated in India or by India? I can see you lot dominate from many years to come....especially in the one day arena. Thing is, will the public over there get bored if it happens?
Click to expand...

Sure, obviously it helps if there is money put into the game. But A) it's up to other countries to match that and B) it doesn't ensure success at all. England are bonkers about football and have the greatest league in the world (easily IMO) but what have they won in the last 45 years? Point is international sport does provide a level field. If countries can produce quality players, and it's their responsibility to, then they'll do well. If they can't, they won't.

We are reaping the success born by a huge passion for cricket and subsequently brilliant players coming through. If that isn't the right way to be successful then I don't know what is.
 
KM said:
By that logic shouldn't England be winning things in football then. Their League is the richest in the world. The facilities there are great. The infrastructure is great. The fanbase there is massive.

I get your point about India making the most money, but the facilities weren't really that good say like 5 years ago and I would say that we're still lagging behind facilities wise from countries like Australia and England

The comparison to Man City was retarded in the sense that the huge amount of money only started to pour in, once our team got a bit successful. After winning the T20 WC, BCCI saw the potential of T20 and it all took off from here.

As for the getting bored comment, I pretty much think that yeah people are generally get bored from cricket especially IPL now. This season's IPL was a farce. I really couldn't see it surviving for more than three years.
Click to expand...

Well, England has more competition, and that's the difference, KM. But yes, we ought to be much better at the sport(football). And I think Ole's was yanking your chain regarding the City comparison but everything's set in place for India to dominate for many years to come, but the IPL point you made is an interesting one. We'll see how overkill affects the game in the country.
 
Ole's_toe_poke said:
India should be able to afford the best facilities, coaches etc. Not to mention considering most of the kids play the sport the talent should have a steady stream. Really you should've produced a great team far sooner. The fact that a team with such resources relies on one great fast bowler is a bit pathetic.

While you can't buy players you can't deny that India has a huge advantage.
Click to expand...


All the facilities has been improved in the last 4-5 years. It takes time to improve the whole system. We've been perennial under-achievers in world cricket(bit like England in football) but things are looking up, atleast.
 
Northstand said:
Regarding the first incident, KP appealed the decision because he believed he hadn't touched the ball. This was borne out by the absence of a "hotspot" on the replay.

On the Morgan one, I suspect he claims he thought he'd hit the ball out of sheer embarrassment because he realises he should have appealed!
Click to expand...

Maybe but am sure one of the england players think it was jimmy anderson who said that if batsman put vaseline on the edge of the bat then hotspot cant pick it up.

zing said:
Seriously. We're all right here.

We'll draw this. I don't think they'll bowl us out twice in 2 days.
Click to expand...

Three days but like i said if the sun stays out then no excuse if we dont get close to the target.
 
Ole's_toe_poke said:
India should be able to afford the best facilities, coaches etc. Not to mention considering most of the kids play the sport the talent should have a steady stream. Really you should've produced a great team far sooner. The fact that a team with such resources relies on one great fast bowler is a bit pathetic.

While you can't buy players you can't deny that India has a huge advantage.
Click to expand...

You're talking proper nonsense now. Well done. You do realize India is not a developed nation and has wide spread corruption rampant in every corner? Despite that, producing players like Sachin, Dravid, Sehwag, Ganguly, Kumble and so many greats is a fine achievement IMO. It's a testament to the passion people have for this country and the aptitude as well.

I'm sorry this huge advantage bullshit doesn't hold up. The resources are there because of our own efforts. And for that we should be given credit rather than it taken away. And if passion alone was enough England should be doing great at World Cup's rather than crumbling under pressure.

We recently became I think the first country to win the world cup at home. Taking the pressure on that lot to win it infront of their own fans it was a brilliant achievement. And we deserve it.
 
Spoony Youngblood said:
Well, England has more competition, and that's the difference, KM. But yes, we ought to be much better at the sport(football). And I think Ole's was yanking your chain regarding the City comparison but everything's set in place for India to dominate for many years to come, but the IPL point you made is an interesting one. We'll see how overkill affects the game in the country.
Click to expand...

This quote by Mallya summed up most of IPL team's financial situation

The owner of the RCB Vijay Mallya was asked on Times Now as to why none of the IPL teams had paid any ‘advance tax’. Replying to the question, Mr Mallya clarified that advance tax is generally deposited when one expects an income. Since the IPL teams were not expecting any income in the near future, therefore they had not bothered to deposit any advance tax. (Advance Tax is an advance against your Income Tax liabilities)
Click to expand...

It's just a bubble waiting to burst, I suspect.
 
Spoony Youngblood said:
Well, England has more competition, and that's the difference, KM. But yes, we ought to be much better at the sport(football). And I think Ole's was yanking your chain regarding the City comparison but everything's set in place for India to dominate for many years to come, but the IPL point you made is an interesting one. We'll see how overkill affects the game in the country.
Click to expand...

If everything is set in place for us to dominate then kudos to us. We've made it happen ourselves.
 
:lol: Pathetic non sense again again by bitter English and Aussies posters.

I will tell you what real advantage is. England and Australia being down right racist and having two voted to everyone's one in "Imperial Cricket Council". Even with that much undue advantage, Super England has never been able to establish it self as the best team in the world. FACT. Now when India after 15 years of under achievement and torment of Indian supporters, has finally started to perform consistently in all the arena of cricket, it is down to money and all that shit.

Who gives a feck. We are the world champions and best team in test cricket. Suck on that you bitter twats.
 
I thought the match felt like proper test cricket when it was England bowling to India's batsmen.

Do I feel this way because I enjoy watching Indian batting or does anyone else think the same? England's batsmen are mostly boring, as are India's bowlers.
 
I am glad Dhoni won that toss. If not, we'd have been bundled out for 150 and lost this match by now. Good to get the shit start out of the way like that.
 
KM said:
All the facilities has been improved in the last 4-5 years. It takes time to improve the whole system. We've been perennial under-achievers in world cricket(bit like England in football) but things are looking up, atleast.
Click to expand...

KM, people in this country have always expected too much. We were never underachievers back in the day. We simply weren't good enough to meet the lofty and unrealistic expectations. People forget that despite the love for the game, it doesn't take care of everything. We had batsman who were never provided the facilities to be able to handle foreign conditions. Barring the odd once in a lifetime genius like Sachin and subsequently others, we'd look absolutely clueless abroad. We were battered consistently in SA and AUS. That's not because we underperformed. It was because we weren't actually that good although were excellent at home.

Point is you can have all the love for the game you want but the players and talent were up against a country that has rampant corruption which was at the ened of the day still a DEVELOPING nation.

Now, on the back of stars like Sachin, Dravid etc we've tuned a corner and are at a very good place. World Champions. A lot of work has been put into it. The Dhoni of today, who will go down as one of the games great leaders, is here because of the Kapil Dev's, Gavaskar's and Sachin's that have done their bit. It's important to appreciate that we've put in a lot to get to this position rather than a country deciding it likes a sport and voila, it wins everything.
 
crappycraperson said:
:lol: Pathetic non sense again again by bitter English and Aussies posters.

I will tell you what real advantage is. England and Australia being down right racist and having two voted to everyone's one in "Imperial Cricket Council". Even with that much undue advantage, Super England has never been able to establish it self as the best team in the world. FACT. Now when India after 15 years of under achievement and torment of Indian supporters, has finally started to perform consistently in all the arena of cricket, it is down to money and all that shit.

Who gives a feck. We are the world champions and best team in test cricket. Suck on that you bitter twats.
Click to expand...
:lol:

Lovely response if I may say so myself.

Frankly, the World Cup has given me a high I'm going to ride for years to come. I had waited for that moment all throughout my childhood. This series is great and all, but losing it won't matter to me all that much.
 
amolbhatia100 said:
KM, people in this country have always expected too much. We were never underachievers back in the day. We simply weren't good enough to meet the lofty and unrealistic expectations. People forget that despite the love for the game, it doesn't take care of everything. We had batsman who were never provided the facilities to be able to handle foreign conditions. Barring the odd once in a lifetime genius like Sachin and subsequently others, we'd look absolutely clueless abroad. We were battered consistently in SA and AUS. That's not because we underperformed. It was because we weren't actually that good although were excellent at home.

Point is you can have all the love for the game you want but the players and talent were up against a country that has rampant corruption which was at the ened of the day still a DEVELOPING nation.

Now, on the back of stars like Sachin, Dravid etc we've tuned a corner and are at a very good place. World Champions. A lot of work has been put into it. The Dhoni of today, who will go down as one of the games great leaders, is here because of the Kapil Dev's, Gavaskar's and Sachin's that have done their bit. It's important to appreciate that we've put in a lot to get to this position rather than a country deciding it likes a sport and voila, it wins everything.
Click to expand...

Amol we were under-achievers in the sense that we simply didn't had the right mentality to perform abroad. I remember getting us tonked by NZ in NZ just before the 2003 world cup, despite having a much better team. That's what I meant by under-achieving.
 
KM said:
Amol we were under-achievers in the sense that we simply didn't had the right mentality to perform abroad. I remember getting us tonked by NZ in NZ just before the 2003 world cup, despite having a much better team. That's what I meant by under-achieving.
Click to expand...

I don't know. A lot of that was down to playing in dust barren conditions at home where the ball never rose above the ankles. You grow up playing on that and then have to face 90 mile an hour bowling (which noone does here) which is passing your ears and moving all over the place, of course you'll find it very very tough. Over the last decade or more, we've begun to put into place facilities to make sure our players can handle that. In fact our pitches at home have changed. At the world cup we usually played 3 pacers and 1 spinners at home.

But we did lack a killer instinct that only came in when Ganguly became skipper. That's when India learnt how to win. So in that aspect maybe but I'd say a very small part of it was under achieving.
 
We under achieved because we were mentally weak and ALSO not that good,

Players like Azharudin and Jadeja were overrated because they were 'stylish' and 'wristy'. Not to mention other run of the mill average batsmen, whose name I can not even remember.

Then even someone like Kumble took about 12 years to finally start performing away from Indian pitches. Srinath came off age in his latter years but initially he blew hot and cold as well.
 
amolbhatia100 said:
Frankly, the World Cup has given me a high I'm going to ride for years to come. I had waited for that moment all throughout my childhood. This series is great and all, but losing it won't matter to me all that much.
Click to expand...
Who cares? That one-day crap's not real cricket.
 
amolbhatia100 said:
Frankly, the World Cup has given me a high I'm going to ride for years to come. I had waited for that moment all throughout my childhood. This series is great and all, but losing it won't matter to me all that much.
Click to expand...

:lol:

Embarrassing.

One day cricket...Jesus.

Not sure why this thread went over the bitchy line - was quite fun 'banter' (horrible word) previously.

Lets get back to begrudging respect.
 
If England win the test series, then does that mean they are going to be the #1 test side?
 
Utd heap said:
:lol:

Embarrassing.

One day cricket...Jesus.

Not sure why this thread went over the bitchy line - was quite fun 'banter' (horrible word) previously.

Lets get back to begrudging respect.
Click to expand...

Not more embarrassing than getting walloped without fail in a bilateral test series that happened every two years. :lol: Now that was proper embarrassing.

Look, the world cup is hugely important. As I've often said, Test cricket is the best format of the game. But the World Cup is it's biggest event. It's a bit like the Champions League and club football in general being better than international football but the World Cup being more important. Anyway, you're free to disagree. But to tag a widely held opinion as 'embarrassing' is in fact quite embarrassing and bitter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.