India's 18 test wins since Aus' last tour

India's 18 test wins since Aus' last tour

Post by Southpa » Thu, 09 Oct 2008 10:55:40


MoM count

13 for bowling/all-round performance [4 for Pathan incl. 3 vs. Zim/BD,
3 Kumble, 2 Harby, 2 Zaheer incl. 1 vs. BD, 1 Sreesanth, 1 Murali
Kartik]

4 for batting [2 Dravid, 1 Ganguly, 1 Sehwag]

1 for the opposition [Ashtrayful]

Ridiculously lop-sided, no? I know bowlers win matches and all, but
that's a bit of a myth also, since batsmen are supposed to set the
bowlers up by putting up big scores. I'm sure historically batsmen
have had as much or more to do with Indian test wins than bowlers.

-Samarth.

 
 
 

India's 18 test wins since Aus' last tour

Post by Mike Holman » Thu, 09 Oct 2008 19:36:27


tapped the keyboard and brought forth:

Quote:
>MoM count

>13 for bowling/all-round performance [4 for Pathan incl. 3 vs. Zim/BD,
>3 Kumble, 2 Harby, 2 Zaheer incl. 1 vs. BD, 1 Sreesanth, 1 Murali
>Kartik]

>4 for batting [2 Dravid, 1 Ganguly, 1 Sehwag]

>1 for the opposition [Ashtrayful]

>Ridiculously lop-sided, no? I know bowlers win matches and all, but
>that's a bit of a myth also, since batsmen are supposed to set the
>bowlers up by putting up big scores. I'm sure historically batsmen
>have had as much or more to do with Indian test wins than bowlers.

How about looking through the scorecards of those matches?

If you do, you will spot that in most of the wins, no single batsman
did outstandingly well while a single bowler took a lot of wickets.
Typically there is a plethora of half-centuries and one bowler who
takes nine or ten wickets in the match, so if you are looking for a
single individual to give an award to, it's going to be the bowler.

Cheers,

Mike
--

 
 
 

India's 18 test wins since Aus' last tour

Post by Andrew Dunfor » Thu, 09 Oct 2008 21:06:51


Quote:

> tapped the keyboard and brought forth:

>>MoM count

>>13 for bowling/all-round performance [4 for Pathan incl. 3 vs. Zim/BD,
>>3 Kumble, 2 Harby, 2 Zaheer incl. 1 vs. BD, 1 Sreesanth, 1 Murali
>>Kartik]

>>4 for batting [2 Dravid, 1 Ganguly, 1 Sehwag]

>>1 for the opposition [Ashtrayful]

>>Ridiculously lop-sided, no? I know bowlers win matches and all, but
>>that's a bit of a myth also, since batsmen are supposed to set the
>>bowlers up by putting up big scores. I'm sure historically batsmen
>>have had as much or more to do with Indian test wins than bowlers.

> How about looking through the scorecards of those matches?

> If you do, you will spot that in most of the wins, no single batsman
> did outstandingly well while a single bowler took a lot of wickets.
> Typically there is a plethora of half-centuries and one bowler who
> takes nine or ten wickets in the match, so if you are looking for a
> single individual to give an award to, it's going to be the bowler.

I imagine Samarth is aware of that.  The question is why this spread of
runs/wickets has become the typical pattern for an Indian win.

Andrew

 
 
 

India's 18 test wins since Aus' last tour

Post by Luke Curti » Fri, 10 Oct 2008 03:59:06



Quote:
>MoM count

>13 for bowling/all-round performance [4 for Pathan incl. 3 vs. Zim/BD,
>3 Kumble, 2 Harby, 2 Zaheer incl. 1 vs. BD, 1 Sreesanth, 1 Murali
>Kartik]

>4 for batting [2 Dravid, 1 Ganguly, 1 Sehwag]

>1 for the opposition [Ashtrayful]

>Ridiculously lop-sided, no? I know bowlers win matches and all, but
>that's a bit of a myth also, since batsmen are supposed to set the
>bowlers up by putting up big scores. I'm sure historically batsmen
>have had as much or more to do with Indian test wins than bowlers.

>-Samarth.

These are the MotM awards in England wins for the last 4 years:

Strauss
Hoggard
Tres
Hoggard
Flintoff (for both)
Flintoff (for both)
Flintoff (for both)
KP
Harmy
Younis Khan
KP
Pansar
Chanderpaul
Ambrose (for batting)
Sidebottom
Panesar
Anderson
KP

That boils down to

6 for Batting

7 for Bowling

3 for All-rounder

plus

Younis Khan
Chanderpaul
both for batting

Quite a big difference from India - probably a case that India has had
a very strong batting lineup and if they get on top then there will
frequently have 2,3 or even 4 players getting big scores, England will
rarely have more than 1 big score per inings, most of our wins have
been through the bowlers working as a team.
-
XBox 360 GT: Broton69

--
ButIstillneedtoknowwhat'sinthere! Thekeytoanysecurity
systemishowit'sdesigned! Thatdependsonwhyitwasdesigned!
Ihavetoknowwhatwhoeverdesigneditwastryingtoprotect!
(Blakes 7, City on the Edge of the World  - Vila in typical panic mode)

 
 
 

India's 18 test wins since Aus' last tour

Post by Southpa » Fri, 10 Oct 2008 13:31:39


Quote:



> > tapped the keyboard and brought forth:

> >>MoM count

> >>13 for bowling/all-round performance [4 for Pathan incl. 3 vs. Zim/BD,
> >>3 Kumble, 2 Harby, 2 Zaheer incl. 1 vs. BD, 1 Sreesanth, 1 Murali
> >>Kartik]

> >>4 for batting [2 Dravid, 1 Ganguly, 1 Sehwag]

> >>1 for the opposition [Ashtrayful]

> >>Ridiculously lop-sided, no? I know bowlers win matches and all, but
> >>that's a bit of a myth also, since batsmen are supposed to set the
> >>bowlers up by putting up big scores. I'm sure historically batsmen
> >>have had as much or more to do with Indian test wins than bowlers.

> > How about looking through the scorecards of those matches?

> > If you do, you will spot that in most of the wins, no single batsman
> > did outstandingly well while a single bowler took a lot of wickets.
> > Typically there is a plethora of half-centuries and one bowler who
> > takes nine or ten wickets in the match, so if you are looking for a
> > single individual to give an award to, it's going to be the bowler.

> I imagine Samarth is aware of that. ?The question is why this spread of
> runs/wickets has become the typical pattern for an Indian win.

Exactly. The traditional home win has often involved the batsmen
piling up a mammoth score and wickets falling somewhat evenly among
the spinners, with a couple thrown in for the pacers as well. The MoM
would end up going to the batsmen because the bowlers' wickets could
be attributed to the pressure the batsmen created combined with the
help from the pitch.

Kumble, for example, a bowler who is very likely to take a ton of
cheap wickets when India wins at home, has won only 5 MoMs in the
first 15 years of his career. And then 3 in the last 3 years, when
arguably, his powers have actually waned.

The traditional away win - well, there's been no such thing. But even
on the few occasions we have won abroad, the batsmen have done as well
or better than the bowlers.

-Samarth.

 
 
 

India's 18 test wins since Aus' last tour

Post by Southpa » Fri, 10 Oct 2008 14:05:57


Quote:




> > > tapped the keyboard and brought forth:

> > >>MoM count

> > >>13 for bowling/all-round performance [4 for Pathan incl. 3 vs. Zim/BD,
> > >>3 Kumble, 2 Harby, 2 Zaheer incl. 1 vs. BD, 1 Sreesanth, 1 Murali
> > >>Kartik]

> > >>4 for batting [2 Dravid, 1 Ganguly, 1 Sehwag]

> > >>1 for the opposition [Ashtrayful]

> > >>Ridiculously lop-sided, no? I know bowlers win matches and all, but
> > >>that's a bit of a myth also, since batsmen are supposed to set the
> > >>bowlers up by putting up big scores. I'm sure historically batsmen
> > >>have had as much or more to do with Indian test wins than bowlers.

> > > How about looking through the scorecards of those matches?

> > > If you do, you will spot that in most of the wins, no single batsman
> > > did outstandingly well while a single bowler took a lot of wickets.
> > > Typically there is a plethora of half-centuries and one bowler who
> > > takes nine or ten wickets in the match, so if you are looking for a
> > > single individual to give an award to, it's going to be the bowler.

> > I imagine Samarth is aware of that. ?The question is why this spread of
> > runs/wickets has become the typical pattern for an Indian win.

> Exactly. The traditional home win has often involved the batsmen
> piling up a mammoth score and wickets falling somewhat evenly among
> the spinners, with a couple thrown in for the pacers as well. The MoM
> would end up going to the batsmen because the bowlers' wickets could
> be attributed to the pressure the batsmen created combined with the
> help from the pitch.

> Kumble, for example, a bowler who is very likely to take a ton of
> cheap wickets when India wins at home, has won only 5 MoMs in the
> first 15 years of his career. And then 3 in the last 3 years, when
> arguably, his powers have actually waned.

> The traditional away win - well, there's been no such thing. But even
> on the few occasions we have won abroad, the batsmen have done as well
> or better than the bowlers.

Among our away wins:

WI 1971 - I think Venkat was our best bowler and his best spell of the
series was 5/95 or some such.
Probably '71 Oval was Chandra more than any batsman.
1976 Auckland - SMG and Surinder Amarnath had a huge partnership.
Prasanna took 11 in the game. Don't know who "wins".
406/4 - that's because of the batsmen. We didn't get 20 wickets even.

Aus 1977-8, well the bowling sucked enough to let depleted Aus chase
350 in the 4th innings, and also gave Tony Mann a 100. Somewhere in
there Chandra took 12/104 in a test. The batsmen strung together a
couple of pretty good 4th innings chases. Despite Chandra's efforts,
from memory, the batsmen did better on this tour.

Probably Melbourne '81 was a joint bowling / batting effort, although
I know which way RK leans on this test. :-)
England 1986 - Vengsarkar ruled, all the bowlers chipped in.
Colombo 1993 - SRT/Sidhu/Kambli all got 100s, vs Kumble taking 5/90 in
the 4th innings.
Trinidad 2002 - 80+ runs in the game for all of SRT/Gangs/RSD/VVSL,
the highest wicket-taker was Srinath with 6 in the game.
Kandy 2001 - Ganguly got 98* in a 4th innings chase of 250+. Either
Zaheer or Nehra took 7 in the game, but at best this was a joint
effort, since India let Murali score 60+ in setting the target !!!
Headingley 2002 - centuries for Dravid/SRT/Gangs, no 5-fer
Adelaide 2003 - Aggy took a 6-fer, but Dravid scored 300+ runs in the
game.
Multan - 309 Sehwag.
Pindi - 270 Dravid.

-Samarth.

- Show quoted text -

Quote:

> -Samarth.- Hide quoted text -

> - Show quoted text -