India in Asia cup

[Nikhil]

Originally Posted by Mohsin

Atleast there are some indians who can accept that Pakis outplayed them in that match , yes pakistanis did some technical mistakes during that match but it was coz of that nobody knew that so-called world's second best team will show such poor performance,nobody has thought about saving a bonus point till the 45th over except the commentators.

-This just goes to show how poorly the Pakistani captain thinks. He has no idea of the rules and I bet Woolmer must have tried to convey it to him, but he ignored. Inzimam should be blamed for Pakistan's exit from the Asia cup, instead you guys are searching for scapegoats as usual.

Sachin is Over now ,its time for the yougsters to take his place in next two years ,believe me world cup 2007 will be a nightmare for india ,they would have players like sachin,gangully,dravid ,Kumble who will be nearing or more than 35 ,they will be a white elephant on indian team had they not introduced any capable yougsters like youvraj and kaif in place of them,Everyone can sese that tendulkar is nearing his end at rapid pace now.

Well it seems you really have a problem with Sachin. Not surprising, since Sachin is Sachin. Even if he's not at this best anymore, he's still one of the best bats in the world. Nevermind above any Pakistani batsman ever .

Donn't u think indian cricket should be shameful for not having produce a single quality wicketkeeper they have to rely on a batsman to keep wickets ,to bowl crucial overs(like Sahwag against SL in asia cup) and indeed they also have to score the runs ,why not declare it a "Batsmen Eleven" and fill it with 11 batsmen

-- Ofcourse this makes no sense. Pakistan's strenght was it's bowling. Similary, India's batting is their weapon. If you don't play to your strength, you lose.

Hope you find a better argument and not just be instigative the next time around.

[kiran]

Originally Posted by Mohsin

Atleast there are some indians who can accept that Pakis outplayed them in that match , yes pakistanis did some technical mistakes during that match but it was coz of that nobody knew that so-called world's second best team will show such poor performance,nobody has thought about saving a bonus point till the 45th over except the commentators.
Sachin is Over now ,its time for the yougsters to take his place in next two years ,believe me world cup 2007 will be a nightmare for india ,they would have players like sachin,gangully,dravid ,Kumble who will be nearing or more than 35 ,they will be a white elephant on indian team had they not introduced any capable yougsters like youvraj and kaif in place of them,Everyone can sese that tendulkar is nearing his end at rapid pace now.
Donn't u think indian cricket should be shameful for not having produce a single quality wicketkeeper they have to rely on a batsman to keep wickets ,to bowl crucial overs(like Sahwag against SL in asia cup) and indeed they also have to score the runs ,why not declare it a "Batsmen Eleven" and fill it with 11 batsmen

dude are you from pakistani media?
a poor series for india and now you are saying that india will have naightmares and players will be white elephants and all..it doesn't work like pak management..one series loss..then 7-8 players changed..captain, coack sacked..whole new team, new captain...no.
they had a poor series..agreed, but that doesn't mean its end of the world..sometimes..bowlers fail..reserve bowlers have to play..also right now the dilemma is which wicketkeeper to pick...there is a pool of talented keepers..only to balace the side dravid has to keep..
also @ bonus point its resposibility of captain,coach to keep an eye on rules that they are to follow..i mean the last overs bowled by pak were really not up to the mark..they should have finished it off..
i think pak have a very good coach in woolmer..its upto the players ow they respond to him..if woolmer can inject some discipline and professionalism in pak players it could be a very very dangerous team..
@ india they are consistantly(key) playing good..some ups and down are their..they too need to improve a lot..

[Mohsin]

i know the reality strikes and my remarks tasted bitter to u ........if anyone from any country shows the real picture of india then it doesn't mean he is from Pakistani media or something like that .......Try to realize the truth ,open mindedness is not a bad thing

[Mohsin]

Originally Posted by Nikhil

-

Well it seems you really have a problem with Sachin. Not surprising, since Sachin is Sachin. Even if he's not at this best anymore, he's still one of the best bats in the world. Nevermind above any Pakistani batsman ever .

My friend every great cricketer has its end ......you will see the End of Sachin in two years just remember my words they seem bitter at now but time will tell .......After the top of the hill its time to go Down the hill ......

If you still think my imagination about the great tendulkar is a bit pesimistic then wait for two more years ...Tendulkar will not be in indian team of 2007 world cup provided that team is selected by some good selector

[Nikhil]

Originally Posted by Mohsin

If you still think my imagination about the great tendulkar is a bit pesimistic then wait for two more years ...Tendulkar will not be in indian team of 2007 world cup provided that team is selected by some good selector

I'm certainly ready to wait and watch. I have no obsession with Sachin. If he doesn't perform, he should be axed.

Btw, this couple of years thing is a little too heavy to digest for me. I mean he's about 32 and will be 34 in a couple of years. For a batsman, that's not an age to retire. Most play till well above 35. If there are some other things, which your clairvoyant eyes can see, then that's another matter.

If your argument was based on some concrete data, I would have accepted it, but it seems you are merely predicting something out of the top of your head. This kind of thing can not be accepted.

On the contrary, I can prove using recent stats, he is one of the top batsmen in the world, which inturn implies, he will not retire soon.

[Rachael]

That the very idea that Tendulkar is "past it" could be entertained strikes me as bizarre: we are talking about the ONLY player of the last 30 years who unquestionably belongs with the games all-time greats (Brian Lara being the only other who arguably belongs in that class). Even as a player past his best.. he'd STILL, on any sane judgement of class (though perhaps not effectiveness), be so far ahead of the likes of Hayden, Inzi, Laxman and Vaughan that comparison seems insulting.

That said... I see no reason to think he's past his best: great batsmen appear to hit their prime in their mid-late 30s... and he's still got that to come.

It's possible that Tendulkar's celebrity cannot be sustained (let's face it, he's been the next best thing to a God to many millions for more than a decade even now)... but one thing is for sure: he's not maintaining his place in the world's top flight (and as of 2 tests ago a stunning PWC rating of 847) by virtue of performances in the dim and distant past.

Any and all decline is relative... and Tendulkar could decline a lot further and STILL be an automatic selection for a World XI and the batsman you'd be most willling to entrust with your life: let's hope he's not in decline, though, and that he goes on to accomplish more in the next decade than he did in the last - it's quite posssible!

[Nikhil]

Originally Posted by Rachael

That said... I see no reason to think he's past his best: great batsmen appear to hit their prime in their mid-late 30s... and he's still got that to come.

It's possible that Tendulkar's celebrity cannot be sustained (let's face it, he's been the next best thing to a God to many millions for more than a decade even now)... but one thing is for sure: he's not maintaining his place in the world's top flight (and as of 2 tests ago a stunning PWC rating of 847) by virtue of performances in the dim and distant past.

Any and all decline is relative... and Tendulkar could decline a lot further and STILL be an automatic selection for a World XI and the batsman you'd be most willling to entrust with your life: let's hope he's not in decline, though, and that he goes on to accomplish more in the next decade than he did in the last - it's quite posssible!

Statistically, Tendulkar had a bad year in 2003, when he scored at an average of around 17 in 5 test matches. However, in 2004 so far he has scored over 500 runs in six innings at an average of about 180. This is not a sign of a batsman on decline, is it? Add to it, he was the player of the WC'03 and was one of the best batsmen (I think he was the best), in ODI cricket in 2003.

Well, as Rachel has pointed out his PWC rating is 847, which by no means is a mean achievement.

Sachin's celebrity status is on a decline. That's for sure. After being a demi-god for most Indian fans, now it's a good thing that the fans are making it easier for him, which is still not easy by any means. He still can not get out of the house at normal hours and so on.

I just hope he stays fit and then plays for about 5 more years. That would be some record to break then.

[eng fan]

Originally Posted by Rachael

That the very idea that Tendulkar is "past it" could be entertained strikes me as bizarre: we are talking about the ONLY player of the last 30 years who unquestionably belongs with the games all-time greats (Brian Lara being the only other who arguably belongs in that class).

What abt Warne? or were u just speaking of batsmen?

[Ernest]

IMHO not so Rachael,Tendulkar is not super human,and I can't see where you get the Idea that most batsmen reach thier prime in thier mid to late 30is,fact of life Rachael IMO,once toy have passed the 32-35 mark,a player seems to make a sharp downturn,vision is not as good as a young man,concentration,seems to wane.
They are still good players,but that certain something has gone,Brian Lara is a good eg,he gets the odd large score,but he seems easy prey to a bowler with any pace and bounce,he must be seeing it later

Dont get me wrong,the Tendulkers and the lara's of this world,even though past thier best,are still better than 95% of ordinary players.

Wasim Akram seemed to go on forever,I was a big supporter of Wasim,he did lots,and then more for Lancs,but you could see him slowing down.

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by eng fan

What abt Warne? or were u just speaking of batsmen?

OK.. I should have said batsmen: once you move on to 'keepers and bowlers things get more complicated. I assume anyone who really understood cricket would agree that Warne is the most obvious candidate of the modern era for an all-time great listing... but is he alone?

Ambrose surely warrants a mention: I know he was prone to mindless short-of-a-length rubbish in his younger days (and only to vividly recall thinking how much watching him really sucked)... but in his 30s he strikes me as having become as complete a bowler as anyone could ever have wished to see: I'd need some convincing to buy the argument that ANY bowler (ever) would have cast him into the shadows.

In terms of true greatness (Tendulkar level) I guess Warne and Ambrose might have to be the only unquestionabe nominations of the last few years. That said, Muralitheran strikes me as a third who would principally be contested by *******s: I could accept that if you set the standards so high that you take Tendulkar, have to think about Lara and leave Dravid then maybe Muralitheran misses out.. but it's surely a close call (same would go for Mcgrath and Pollock: both let down only by the fact of being too quintessentially "modern" - defensive bowlers who have very rarely actually gone LOOKING for wickets).

Strikes me, though, that where Ambrose (and before him, Marshall, pushed by Imran Khan, Hadlee and the like) have been pushed hard by lesser lights to show just why they were so special.. Tendulkar has not, really, faced much competition: Lara has stood out.. but has anyone else?

Strikes me that you'd have to look as far back as Viv Richards for someone in the same league in terms of effectiveness.. and quite a bit further back than that for anyone who was quite so complete a player as Tendulkar (could you say even Viv Richards was in the same league as Tendulkar when not seeing the ball that well? When finding runs hard to come by? I'm not the person to make that call: it may be that you could. My instinct, however, would be that an out of form Tendulkar would be hugely preferable to an out of form Viv Richards).

Originally Posted by ernest

IMHO not so Rachael,Tendulkar is not super human,and I can't see where you get the Idea that most batsmen reach thier prime in thier mid to late 30is

Sorry, I'm not taking the bait on this notion of guys routinely being past it by their mid 30s - I'm trusting that's just a wind up and you don't really believe it. You are, after all, old enough to have followed (amongst others) both Gooch and Steve Waugh.. and well enough versed in the greats of the past to be unaware of the achievements of, say, Len Hutton.

Even you, as the great advocate of the well timed bludgeon, must appreciate that the art of batting is first and foremost to do with excercising the judgement (which generaly improves with age) as to what shot you (given the form you are in, how well you are seeing the ball, the field placings you face and the match situation) SHOULD execute to a given ball (and managing that effectively, even if it is a "leave" with you bat behind your pad, an ugly improvisation or a percentage shot, Hoggard-style, defending a line and length to a ball you haven't been able to read) rather than with what you COULD do to a given ball (which is an envelope of possibility that any great batsmen might reasonably find themselves limiting at ANY age, especially when not "in the zone" - as Thorpe was not this morning).

Originally Posted by ernest

Wasim Akram seemed to go on forever,I was a big supporter of Wasim,he did lots,and then more for Lancs,but you could see him slowing down.

Maybe he slowed down. If so.. big deal: it may have limited what he COULD do (that's prety debatable given that he never really lost the variation and disguise that were his most potent weapons).. .but as with Ambrose... he understood (brilliantly) that what mattered was what he (given his range of options) SHOULD do. That's why even today he would have been a preferable option to Harmison or Flintoff: he would have had the wit to use his abilities to the greatest effect.