• Check out the relaunch of our general collection, with classic designs and new ones by our very own Pissog!

The Cricket Thread Part Deux

Status
Not open for further replies.
Oh does anyone else think Jayasuryia should call it quits now? I know he is targeting the 2011 WC but it's unlikely at this point (unless he finds form again). The whole playing him in the middle order is not gonna work. I mean there was a reason he was promoted to open in the first place xD.

The Asia cup which is held in SL would be the perfect time to say goodbye imo.
 
Probably would lol...no doubt he was a great player. De Silva + Jayasuriya was one of the deadliest opening pairs at its peak, rivaling even Sachin and Sehwag.
 
Jayasuriya + Kaluwitharna was the great opening pair. Jayasuriya's days are over. Earlier, in ten matches, he fails twice but now it is the other way round. Now, he should only bother about his political career.

@ Flame Blade About Pollard

Have a look at his statistics

BATTING


ODIs

Matches - 25
Innings - 22
Runs - 404
Average - 18.36(Meagre, isn't it?)


T20Is

Matches - 20
Innings - 17
Runs - 190
Average - 12.67(HUGE!)


BOWLING


ODIs

Matches - 25
Wickets - 22
Average - 6.39(Extremely economical, right?)

T20Is

Matches - 20
Wickets - 11
Economy - 8.37
Seeing all this, it is evident that this man is mediocre in both batting and bowling. Don't give this lame excuse that he has just started his international career. Graeme Swann has been doing very well with the bat and ball. Pollard will never perform.
 
Taxie said:
Jayasuriya + Kaluwitharna was the great opening pair. Jayasuriya's days are over. Earlier, in ten matches, he fails twice but now it is the other way round. Now, he should only bother about his political career.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I thought De Silva was a consistent opener for a while. My bad.

That's a bit harsh about Pollard though. I had no idea his career stats were so shocking lol. Hope he doesn't turn into one of those wasted talents.
 
Pollard's only use is that he's an impact player. He has that potential to play a match winning innings in the smaller formats (especially T20). Thats all there is to him.

Thats actually why I dislike T20's. IMO, to change the outcome of a game single-handedly in a Test, you need to produce a marvel of an innings, the kind of innings you produce once or twice in your life, a double hundred or a 5-6 wicket spell or something.

In an ODI, its a bit easier to produce such an inning, it could just be a 100 or 3 quick wickets or something.

Now, in T20's its like you are seeing such innings constantly.. Bowl a 3 run over? YOU JUST CHANGED THE GAME! Hit 15 of 4-5 balls? WHOA, THATS CHANGED EVERYTHING. Too much luck, too easy to produce "miraculous" innings IMO.
 
Very true. Pretty much all there is to T20 is pick up a bat, get to the crease and start swinging away, hoping to connect, as there's pretty much no time to settle. You don't see much touch play in T20, which is what real class is. Although batsmen like Tendulkar, Jayawardene and Hussey have shown that there is a touch side to T20 cricket as well, and you can be successful if you play proper cricketing shots.
 
Shiv, what you've said is absolutely right and that is the reason why I like T20. You can hardly see a test or an ODI game ending in an upset. Even in ODI, it occurs at times but I've never seen it occur in tests. I'd say that England, Australia, Sri Lanka, South Africa, New Zealand and unfortunately, India are all on par with each other. But on the other hand, I hardly see teams like West Indies or Bangladesh or the Netherlands winning matches. In T20, that doesn't happen. Nothing can be taken for granted. In World Cup(50 over), generally, in group stages the contest is "which test playing nation comes first and which test playing nation comes second". I was wrong in only one prediction, ie Ireland vs Pakistan(being an India hater, I definitely predicted Bangladesh to win).

So, I like T20 because it is almost like football. No result is certain. Most people consider England winning the T20 World Cup was a huge upset(which I don't, obviously).
 
Did you even read what I wrote? I said give him a year or two and then check his stats. Not to mention he bats so low down the order that it's hard to make an impact. WI are doing to Pollard what India did to Yusuf Pathan. I'm not a huge fan of Pathan but if you guys expect a 20 ball 50 from them batting@ 6 or 7 then good luck. Oh and Swann has been doing well in test matches. We aren't talking about test matches. Just T20's and ODI's. Oh btw his Eco rate in ODI's is 5.38 not 6.38. Acceptable considering he is a medium pacer.

I also agree with Shiv. However I still like T20. Just that I would give a lot more credit to the guy who changed the game in a test match than a T20.
 
I read it fully. Moreover, asking time seeking time to settle in international cricket is nonsense because, here also a bowler bowls with a ball and a batsman bats with a bat. International cricket is not something special. This is the reason why Graeme Hick was regarded as a bad player. Let me give you another batsman's statistics who comes in the same position. However, he has never played T20I.


MICHAEL BEVAN

ODIS
Innings - 196
Runs - 6912
Average - 53.58

Now, don't say that his strike rate is not good enough because when he played, the T20 culture was absent and thus, the rate at which he strikes was more than enough.

Coming to the WI fact. This is all that they're capable of.
South Africa 280/7 (48/48 ov)
West Indies 215 (44.1/48 ov)

It seems like it took them six months to secure a victory and that victory came against Zimbabwe. One thing, Pollard did quite well with the bat but again, his bowling was awful.

Flame_Blade said:
Acceptable considering he is a medium pacer
Click to expand...

No, it is not acceptable. The pace at which you bowl is no excuse for not bowling well. During his last days(World Cup 2007) Glenn McGrath was almost a medium pacer yet, he bowled so well.
 
Who said he is asking for time? The truth is WI don't have a player good enough (not yet anyway) to take Pollards place. Apart from Gayle no other batsman has done shit. So I don't see how Pollard gets all the blame. There are tons of players who make a big impact early on and then fall away the next year. So I'd rather have a guy who has the potential to contribute significantly over the next few years than a player who falls away after starting out with a bang.

Now for the Bevan part. Seriously apart from MSD and to a lesser extent Michael Hussy NO ONE has come even close to the kind of finisher role Bevan played. You can't expect someone to be as good as that just because they bat at the same position. Not to mention Pollard's game is different than Bevan's. He's a hitter whereas Bevan was more of a rescuing role. Keep in mind Bevan's didn't start out with that 53 average. He built it up over the course of his career. Which is exactly why people shouldn't be making a call about a player in there first 2 years of Int cricket.

Oh and WI are more than capable of winning. South Africa is a very good ODI team so a win isn't gonna come so easy. Having said that WI do have the players needed to win. How was his bowling awful when he only bowled 3 overs? Infact that's exactly what Pollard is required to do. Bowl 4-5 overs and if he gets a wicket great. If not it's still alright. His bowling is more part time stuff than a true all rounder. He isn't Dwayne Bravo =/

And again Pollard is no McGrath. He doesn't have the variations, line and lenth and accuracy that McGrath had. Seriously stop comparing him to previous legends of the game.
 
I'm not comparing Pollard with McGrath but I'm just saying that the speed at which a person bowls is no excuse for being a bad bowler. 2 years is something too big to ask. I'd give you an example from the team that you support. IIRC, Dhoni started performing very well from his fifth match or so. I think the innings with which he shot to fame was his 149 against Pakistan. I agree that it is quite early to say something about Pollard but I'm quite confident that he'll remain like this. Pollard is like Vijay. Play three innings, get into the limelight and then, fail miserably. It is very early to comment on both of them, but I've a strong feeling that they'll remain like this. I'd do some research work and find a player other than Bevan.
 
Taxie said:
I'm not comparing Pollard with McGrath but I'm just saying that the speed at which a person bowls is no excuse for being a bad bowler. 2 years is something too big to ask. I'd give you an example from the team that you support. IIRC, Dhoni started performing very well from his fifth match or so. I think the innings with which he shot to fame was his 149 against Pakistan. I agree that it is quite early to say something about Pollard but I'm quite confident that he'll remain like this. Pollard is like Vijay. Play three innings, get into the limelight and then, fail miserably. It is very early to comment on both of them, but I've a strong feeling that they'll remain like this. I'd do some research work and find a player other than Bevan.
Click to expand...

I recall it being 148 lol but yeah that was one brutal innings. The thing with Pollard and Vijay is that they are match-winners on their day, but that day comes too inconsistently. Consistency is pretty much what makes up a players career, and getting a score of 200 in one match and 0 in the next five is not what your team wants. The reason for Tendulkar's or Hussey's success is that they are unbelievably consistent, which players like Pollard lack.
 
Pollard is still only 23.. Lots of really inconsistent batsmen have become stars for their teams, Dilshan was pretty unreliable for an off the top of my head example..

I mean, the dude is not a great cricketer at the moment. But I dont see any evidence to support the claim he will never perform.

I dunno much about Vijay, but from what I do know, I dont think he should be written off either..

Have a nice day.
 
I agree with Hip, judging Pollard at 23 and writing him off is unfair. He is an inconsistent talent but can improve with time. 23 is very young in cricket as the Peak years is generally about 30. Dirk Nannes is a pretty good bowler at the moment and at 22 he was an alpine skier.
 
Taxie said:
I'm not comparing Pollard with McGrath but I'm just saying that the speed at which a person bowls is no excuse for being a bad bowler. 2 years is something too big to ask. I'd give you an example from the team that you support. IIRC, Dhoni started performing very well from his fifth match or so. I think the innings with which he shot to fame was his 149 against Pakistan. I agree that it is quite early to say something about Pollard but I'm quite confident that he'll remain like this. Pollard is like Vijay. Play three innings, get into the limelight and then, fail miserably. It is very early to comment on both of them, but I've a strong feeling that they'll remain like this. I'd do some research work and find a player other than Bevan.
Click to expand...
Thing is Pollard isn't that bad a bowler. What I said was his Eco rate for being a medium pacer (without the McGrath variations, accy etc) is decent. Majority of the bowlers nowadays have over 5 eco rate.

Why are you bringing Vijay into this? He isn't a T20 player. End of story. Vijay is one of the players who will get a spot in India's test line-up when Dravid, VVS, and/or Sachin decide to retire. He's already got a few test matches under his belt (that too against strong teams) and has a good domestic record.
 
IronBullet93 said:
Consistency is pretty much what makes up a players career
Click to expand...
QFT.

This is the major reason why Windies are in a major slump right now. Chanderpaul, Sarwan, Deonarine, and pretty much everyone in the WI top order (bar sometimes Gayle) just can't get it together. WI's glory days are definitely over in my opinion. They have failed to come together as a team one time too many. As for Pollard, he's one of the bright sparks that Windies have, but he too is inconsistent. This doesn't mean that he's not worth it. On their day, WI can be a devastating team. Ever since the strike back in summer '09, WI haven't gelled as a team.
 
Flame_Blade said:
Majority of the bowlers nowadays have over 5 eco rate.
Click to expand...

When you say, "Majority" it is wrong. If you say many, then it is right. If I've to immediately pick out two bowlers with economy rate below 5, it is Mitchell Johnson and James Anderson.

@Draco Zephyr

I agree with you on the WI part. Many bright sparks like Pollard have diminished so quickly and Pollard would be yet another one.
 
W.Indies seriously need to get their act together if they want to stay alive in the series. SA are looking pretty solid, with nearly everyone in good touch. I don't know why they aren't going with Charl Langelveldt though.
 
I really think Vijay/Raina/Sharma have huge potential. Unlike many other "new" batsmen, they have a a touch of "class" about their batting. That, I feel, is something you just "have" and if groomed right, can lead to greatness.

About T20's, just wanted to clarify, I don't dislike them but that is what I dislike about them. Also, Taxie, you mean to say you like T20's because there is LESS skill involved and whoever gets luckier on the day wins? Because thats what I understood from your post.

On the subject of Vijay again, you guys do not know his potential. Seeing him in T20's and try to judge him off that is stupid because he is primarily a test player. He has great technique and great potential, its actually very recently that he discovered he can hit the ball big too. Watch him in a few Test/ODI fixtures before you pass any judgement on him.

As for the finisher role, I really think MSD is overrated and a bit of a glory hound. If anyone thinks a bit more clearly about the situation, you'll see that he always promotes himself up the order when the team is in a comfortable/good position and will always send out Raina or other such young bucks as soon as the team is in a bad position. Thats why his average etc stays so good. He is either only batting when all is well or if its bad, he's batting really low down the order so there isn't much time he spends in the middle.

Bevan was just in a different league altogether.
 
Well, a team with more skill need not mean that they'll never be lucky. It definitely needs skill but it doesn't need as much skill as one needs in ODI. A few incidents of luck can change the match.

Now, coming to your "Touch of 'class'", not every player who has this "Touch of 'class'" mean that he is a good player and if a player doesn't have it, then it doesn't mean that he is a bad player. Take Michael Clarke. A great player with class, but is highly inconsistent, too defensive, etc whereas Dhoni is consistent and unorthodox. I did see him in a few test fixtures and he wasn't bad but there are several other better players who do not get chance because of Kris Srikkanth's bias.
 
Shiv said:
As for the finisher role, I really think MSD is overrated and a bit of a glory hound. If anyone thinks a bit more clearly about the situation, you'll see that he always promotes himself up the order when the team is in a comfortable/good position and will always send out Raina or other such young bucks as soon as the team is in a bad position. Thats why his average etc stays so good. He is either only batting when all is well or if its bad, he's batting really low down the order so there isn't much time he spends in the middle.
Click to expand...

Are you talking about T20's or ODI's? Or both? Because if it was T20 I would agree with you but not in ODI's. MSD is kind of the backbone of Indian batting. So if the team is in a bad position he will save himself for the last 20-25 overs. When the team gets a good start on occasions he might come up the order (at times he does it to keep the left/right hand combo going). The thing with MSD is that he isn't someone who can hit the ball first up. He needs time to settle in and then launch. So coming in early gives him more time to play the big innings and then the Yuvraj's and Raina's can hit those quickfire 40-50's at the end of the innings.

@Taxie- I seriously hope that your only talking about T20's when you say Michael Clarke is inconsistent and too defensive.
 
Michael Clarke's in a slump. It's as simple as that. He just needs one good innings to come back into form. He's a class player, and a pretty good captain from what I saw in the T20 world cup. Can't wait for Punter to pick up his bat again though.
 
@Flame_Blade

In tests, he is consistent. But that comes down in ODI as he'll score somewhere around 50 off 70 balls and then, to increase the run rate, he'll try big shots and get a top edge and goes back to the pavilion. In T20, you've to play aggressive cricket throughout and it doesn't suit Clarke at all. Making Cameron White the captain is probably the best decision ever made by CA.
 
Isn't Clarke still T20 captain? True, he's not an aggressive player, he's more about class. He's more about anchoring the innings, which he does well in ODI's and Tests.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top