"><$MTEntryTitle$>

<$MTEntryExcerpt$>

">Read more

Sampath, easy man, you are going over the top. I think he meant limited technique, and he's succeeded despite that.

Hayden is a flat track bully? Give that man his due too. How about I say Tendulkar is a flat track bully. Check out Tendulkar and Lara's ODI records of Australia in Australia (specially before the CB series), SA in SA, NZ in NZ, which are supposed to be decent tracks for fast bowling. You see that Tendulkar isn't at all good. Which means?

Hayden when he started and Hayden now aren't the same. You seem to be so fond of statistics, find out Hayden's and Tendulkar's averages in Tests against threadbare attacks (say BD, WI, NZ, Zimbabwe). Sachin's take a leap. What does that mean? Your last sentence makes no sense. I presume you made an error while typing it.

I fail to see any Eurocentric perpective in this article. You just invented one. And lastly, being objective is not comparing statistics. Hayden has better statistics than Lara, for eg. which doesn't mean a thing

I dont agree with you. For over eight years now hayden is laying the foundation for the likes of ponting to dominate.he is a great batsman who likes to play in a different manner than a lot of cricketers who like to play in a traditional manner.

We Indians are way too passionate about class and timing. What about the mental ability to comeback in a test match after an year and score two back to back centuries, both in completely different circumstances.

If you would have seen Sourav Ganguly playing in venues like Gawhati, Rajkot etc you would have realised that it requires more than class to comeback and play at highest level when everyone thinks that you are past your prime.

Sehwag has acheived what only two men has acheived ever since the scores were recorded in written in test cricket and for me that makes him far more greater in cricketing abilities and physical fitness than anyone who has played the game for India so far

well said... especially the last part... laxman definitely is a better batsman than sehwag but its time we started respecting one of our finest openers- sehwag...

That's an interesting article on gritty cricketers.. How 'bout, if possible, a cpverage on other Equally Gritty Small town boys like RP Singh, Chawla, Raina, Ishant, Sreesanth, Pathan, Zaheer, L.Balaji who've made it in spite of hurdles galore?

U cant digest that sehwag is the best..u blow malik

As an Aussie I was bemused and amazed that Sehwag did not play in the Melbourne and Sydney Tests. I was particularly upset he did not play in my native Melbourne as every cricket lover fondly remembers his first day heroics in 2003 and we were all hoping for a replay.
In any case, it is a lot more than coincidence that India did not lose either of the 2 Tests he played and his magnificent effort on the last day of the Adelaide Test ensured a very rare draw in Australia.
If you were selecting a team to play Mars surely Sehwag must open. His attacking play, strokemaking and general presence at the crease make him one of the most feared batsmen playing the game.

Mr. Ashok Malik is interesting in his commmets about Ponting and Hayden You can bet That Hayden is better than Ponting. Better believe it. Ponting is poor agianst calls spin and as Mr. Sharma showed not so great against really tru high speed bowling or the moving ball. Hayden causes problems fro every bowler the way he bats, more like Clive Lloyd in taking the length out of the bowler.

The way Sehwag bats - he is batting at the same pace as Bradman for most of his 100s if not faster than the Don, 4 runs an over. He is very capable of another 300 score if not more. And in Stint #2 he is more patient and more brutal in shot selection and much better batsman than before he was dropped.

Undoubtedly the best opening bat along with hayden since sunil gavaskar retired. But geatness requires winning in teh 4th innings something that has not been the case with either Sehawg or Sachin as leaders in this area.

Looks like this guy has no knowledge of cricket and cricketers and he's talking about nuances? Why is Cricinfo even publishing this guys idiotic comments?

No wonder this column has zero comments posted as the comments are monitored by the blog owner. Wouldnt want to post negative comments on your own blog, ha?

[Ashok responds ... Being new to blogging, I made a silly mistake and deleted all the comments! I assure you it won't happen again. Negative comments are welcome, always have been]

I have been reading your comments with interest but strangely not many responses. I hope lots of people will be writing soon but Ashok, writing a new thread every few hours is not going to help.

No doubt entertaining innings by Sehwag but this match is heading nowhere but towards a draw and that makes test cricket boring. As commented on http://legslip.com/ The grounds men need an award for conjuring up a pitch where really potent bowlers like Ntini and Steyn have been rendered impotent.

After Sehwag and Dravid departed, the two bowlers really showed their class by wrapping up the innings quickly.

Tendulkar V Sehwag V Lara

I’ve watched Sehwag for some time now and it is as clear as day that he modelled his batting style on Tendulkar. Well he could do a lot worse. But as he reached his 2nd triple ton yesterday I wondered how come he manages to score such big hundreds and Tendulkar has never managed a triple. Although he based his batting on the Tendulkar model, he is far more attacking. Out of Sehwag’s 14 test tons 10 have been 150+. That’s some going. Tendulkar has scored a record 39 test tons and 17 have been 150+. Lara ended his career with 34 tons with 19 being over 150. Sehwag’s percentage of 150+ tons is an amazing 71%, Lara’s is 56% and Tendulkar’s is 43%.

Does this suggest that the greater flair or risk in Lara and Sehwag’s batting rather than the more text-book Tendulkar, can often produce more incredible results? Of course the flair and riskier shot making comes at a price, just ask Sehwag how he felt when he was dropped last year, but he still averages over 51!!!!

So let me get back to Sehwag’s triple ton. Overnight he was on 309, needing another 91 to break Lara’s 400* record. They would have been the hardest 91 runs he ever made. The final hurdle is always the hardest. Just ask Jayasuriya who was 326* overnight in 1997 with just 50 more runs to break Lara’s old record of 375. Jayasuriya didn’t make it. The scenario was slightly different with other recent triple ton scorers, Inzi, Jayawardene, Hayden and Gayle. Their respective scores overnight were 159*, 224*, 183* and 184*. They didn’t have the pressure of sleeping on the possibility of glory like Sehwag and Jayasuriya did.

Then we have Lara. He was on 320* overnight still 46 runs sort of Sobers’ 30 year old record 365*. He did it. And then 10 years later he was 313* overnight still 68 runs behind Hayden’s 380 record. He did it and went on to 400*. That is why I consider Lara’s second record breaking knock the greatest single batting feat ever. It takes huge balls to hold your nerve and cross the finish line, Lara showed he had them twice, something Sehwag doesn’t quite have yet. I’d go for Sangakkara as my best bet to get to 401.

And my last point. Since Sehwag scored his second triple all we have been hearing is that he is only the third player ever to do so after the Don and Lara. Correct me if I am wrong. Tons are called tons, double tons are called double tons and triple tons are called triple tons. Lara has scored 1 triple ton. Surely we do him a disservice to call his 400* a triple ton????????

Eddy

Hi Ashok,

I think its not right to compare Sehwag with Ravi Shastri. With due respect to Shastri, he had a game which suited his era and complemented Kris Srikant who is a dasher like Sehwag. Shastri had played very few innings, one like the 200 in Australia, which had anything to do with grittyness.

Please define grittyness in the context of the game. He never took the game away from any team or played very few memorable innings, though he played as a opener for quite a period of time.

But I agree with your second thought about VVS and Sehwag. VVS is always a steady cricketer than Sehwag. VVS is classical and Sehwag is entertaining.

Bring back Mukul....this Malik guy is zzzboring!!!

I think Lara batted for Lara (his 400!), he should have declared. Sehwag batted for India and a possible result. Hayden and Sehwag, a dream combination. Give Dravid some credit he played the perfect supporting role.

Sehwag is the best? What are you? A nihilistic numbskull fed on excessive amounts of MTV and kellog's chocos? The fact that sehwag has a test average of over 50 is just another quirk of our age of flat pitches and ineffective bowlers.

I would have liked to see sehwag play with that technique against lillee and marshall and holding. In fact, he never even played against donald , akram, younis or ambrose in their prime. We'll all be discussing his inadequacies as a batsman if and when he plays steyn at durban.
and yeah, kindly don't even insinuate that sehwag is better than vvs. You only display your ignorance and hubris.

Koymen singh,
your comment is similar to the sour grapes response of Ponting. Lara batted for the purity of cricket. do you remember the result of hayden's 380, or sobers' 365*? Pray tell, what was the result of Sehwag's 319? Had he not gotten out , would he have stopped short of the record? Would you have wanted him to, even if it GUARANTEED a draw?

I bet you remember watching the 400* though, and you probably also have it on DVD (like so many purists). Incidentally, Lara declared and , with better bowling commitment, could have won the game.

By the way, imagine if you will, what his records would look like if he had been transposed to India's or Australia's No. 3 position with batting support(dravid, ganguly, laxman) or bowling support(warne and Mcgrath). No hold's barred, he would have crossed 20,000 runs by the end. Put that in your pipe and SMOKE IT!!

i would feel proud if anyone of u can present statistics on Indian Hockey like the way u ve put here...btw, never ever in my cricket book, Tendulkar can be compared to Waughs , Lara , Ponting , Inzy ....he is only good @ scoring against BD,ZIM,WI...or on flat dead tracks...when it matters, he has never produced...

an interesting discussion to follow...just want to reiterate awas's suggestion earlier...ashok it might work better if your threads are fewer and more spread out!

Ashok,

Let me congratulate you on starting this interesting new blog. As I commented on Mukul's last post, it is very important to have a blog dedicated solely to Indian cricket.

Sehwag played a memorable innings but sadly for India it could not produce a victorious result. There should be some sort of measure of how flat a pitch can be, it should be regulated by independent ICC assessors. Although in practice perhaps it will prove difficult to implement.

Perhaps you and the BB (Blues Brothers!) bloggers can check out http://legslip.com/ for alternative discussion on the current issues in Indian cricket.

By the way, I agree with Awas that perhaps you should give some time to bloggers to actually comment on your articles. Employing a scatter gun approach and creating a new thread every day will not attract many posts on any given topic. But you probably already realise this.

Once again, nice to see your blog and all the best to you!

Sehwag - Shastri ......
RP Singh - Madan Lal.....
Yuvraj Singh - Yashpal Sharma
Dhoni - Ashok Malhotra.

This will keep you busy for 3-4 months.

A response to Koymen singh."I think Lara batted for Lara (his 400!)"

1st -Anyone who has ever watched Lara bat would say he batted in an attacking, and entertaining way. He didnt leave the tailenders to sort themselves, he farmed the strike from the bowlers, hence his tiny 6 not outs, compared to a difference attitude shown by S Waugh or any number of English, Australian or Indian Batsman.

2nd West Indies were 0-3 to England in the series and facing their first ever home whitewash and you expected Lara to declare!!!!! Your love for Indian cricket is fine but you do a disserivce to Lara.

Shiv - bring back Mukul..
guess you should be one of our selectors. Tend to write off peopple very soon!!

Joel - Lara would have scored 20000 runs eh? You, a la Nostradamus. And you are talking about Sachin having a support cast. Mind you, sachin started out in 89 and never did he have settled team but for brief periods. Infact we still dont have an established opening pair. It could also be argued that Sachin could have scored 20000 had he not having to share his runs with Dravid, Laxman, Ganguly etc. Guess it would be fine to base discussions on facts for a healthy discussion..

Archish - it's all easy to say sachin's record is not good at decent tracks.. can you substantiate it?
Eddy - Is Lara's 400 a triple? Amazing thought, dude.

Joel,
Yeah I should have written declared earlier. Disagree with my comment if you wish, it is your right. You are however, one sad sack mate... The ridiculous "SMOKE IT" comment is a giveaway.

Eddy,
Fair enough eddy, I still believe that Lara should have declared (earlier)in that game and given his team a bigger shot at victory. Stumps day 2 WI 5/595 Lara 313*, they were never going to lose from there. Never doubted his talent, but he was not a team player. Steve Waugh had many big partnerships with tailenders without farming the strike...guess it depends on the quality of the tailenders.

Koymen, my fellow cicket fan, i'm sorry if I offended you with my "SMOKE IT" comment. It is a WI saying and usually meant in jest; I assumed wrongly that you were more urbane. My bad.
However, you never said what you think I'm wrong about. I've gone over my previous post and the only article of opinion that it contained (and I believe it carries merit, Shankar ;) ), was the one about Lara making 20000 if he were in 10dulkar's position. everything else was fact.
Let's say he had support (assume 10dulkar made a century) and India were on 750 (WI score when lara declared), and he had not gotten out on 319, would you have supported sehwag to go for lara's record? you don't have to answer to me, just don't lie to yourself, because that would be the greatest deception of all, and unforgivable.
don't get me wrong , sehwag is a good batsman, but one swallow does not a summer make. India alone has four better batsmen than him, currently.

Pronoy Sircar

Sehwag may not have played against Lillee or Marshall, or Donald or Wasim. But he has played against McGrath, Lee, Clark, Gillespie and Warne when he's played Australia, and done very well too. Against South Africa, he's faced Pollock, Ntini, Nel and Steyn- all very handy bowlers- and succeeded agaisnt them too. He's also had some success against Pakistani quicks such as Shoaib Akhtar, Umar Gul, Mohammed Asif etc.

So while he may not have had the opportunity to face the greta bowlers of yesteryear, he's more than proved himself against the best pace-bowling attacks in the world today.

Marcus

With all due respect to the bowlers you named in your list, none of them ever seemed as effective as "them". It might also be due to the fact that pitches are tailor made for batsmen nowadays. That is why playing Steyn on a quick pitch would be a challenge, and frankly I don't believe Sehwag is upto it.

Sehwag is a flat track bully, and the proof of the hypothesis that cricket is not a fair game for both batsmen and bowlers is the fact that Sehwag has stats to die for. In a fairer age, Sehwag would have been known to posterity as exactly what he is. A pinchhitter.

Unfortunately, we don't live in a fair age. Ergo, whatever I say here can be torn to pieces using statistics. Watch him play though, and you'll know the difference.

A REPLY 2 SHANKAR. 'Eddy - Is Lara's 400 a triple? Amazing thought, dude.'

Obviously you didnt understand what i was writing. Bradman, Sehwag and Lara are the only three batsman to have scored triple tons twice. My point is that Lara has only scored one triple.
Just because no-one else has reached 400 yet doesnt mean his score should be classed as a triple! It is the first quadruple.
UNDERSTAND NOW???

Hey Eddy, apologies if i had come out to be sarcastic. What I intended was a genuine compliment to you for bringing out the quadraple into picture. It is indeed a disservice to the legend to call it a triple.

Pronoy

Fair enough, it is a batsman's age, absolutely. But I've seen plenty of him play against Australia, and even if Lee, Clark, Johnson and other bowlers he's faced previously aren't as good as Lillee, Marshall et al, they're still good bowlers in their own right, and personally I feel that Sehwag could have some success whoever he faced. He may not be the most orthodox batsman, but neither was Viv Richards, and he was one of the most successful batsmen of all time.

@ Archish 'Hayden has better statistics than Lara'

wow Archish how did you work that out?
Lara has more runs, more 50's more 100's, 200's etc, greater high score, greater first class score. Oh you must mean the 0.63 run average advantage Hayden holds over Lara. Ok when/if Hayden plays another 65 innings (232innings) then we'll see who finnished with the higher average.

@ shankar. no need to apologise, my error.
Ha nice post Salim.

BTW, guys, dont you think using averages to predict a batsman's quality a bit misleading? All it can indicate is his score BETWEEN WICKETS (not even his predicted score on walking to the middle, which is usually much lower).

In fact, if you check, Lara is the ONLY postwar player with a RPI (Runs Per Innings) over 50. In 232 innings he has 6 not outs, which has more to do with trying to push along the score due to wickets falling around him, than faulty technique.

Re the quadruple ton. Eddy, by your logic, Don Bradman didn't score 29 tons- he scored 17 tons, 10 double tons and 2 triple tons.

But does that actually make sense? The Don scored 29 tons! 12 of them happened to be double tons and 2 happened to be triple tons. But he did score 29 tons.

Similarly, Lara has scored 2 triple tons and is one of only 3 players to have done that. He is also the only player in history to have scored a quadruple ton. But, nonetheless, he has scored 2 triple tons.

First of all, let me clarify that I was responding to a chap called Sampath whose comments Ashok accidentally deleted.

Secondly,the point I was trying to get across by saying that Tendulkar hasn't performed well in ODI's in decent tracks was that just because it so happens that Tendulkar hasn't performed in ODI's in SA, NZ and Australia doesn't make him any less of a batsman.

As for Hayden having better statistics than Lara, the guy has 30 hundreds in 94 matches, whereas Lara 34 out of 131. Go figure. However, my point was that Lara is still a better batsman regardless of statistics. Having not read Sampath's post, you are reading it out of context.

By the way

"Lara has more runs, more 50's more 100's, 200's etc, greater high score, greater first class score."

All these apply to Don Bradman as well as Hayden. Which means?
Now, please people don't start telling me that I compared Hayden to Bradman. Seriously.

khansahab is right.

There has to be some regulation of the quality of the pitch. While khansahab is probably approaching it from the angle of "ensuring that a given pitch's quality falls within the boundaries of "reasonable""; I would go further and argue that the pitch needs to be "absolutely" standardized; if necessary by using an artificial surface.

The current system that allows different types of cricket to be played according to the different surfaces that are offered in each country, to the point that surfaces vary widely in quality even within a given country, is, to me, a ridiculous aspect of the historical game of cricket that should be deleted as soon as possible.

The pitch should be standardized so that both bowlers and batsmen know exactly what they are getting at the international level, throughout the world.

In fact, in the interests of standardization, I would personally prefer field hockey style water-based astroturf; i.e. perfectly standardized artificial surfaces.

understood Archish, now i see what you meant.

@ Sancho. Thats exactly my point. Sure Bradman scored 29 tons in total, 17 singles, 10 double tons and 2 triple tons. Thats all clear to see.

Lara scored 34 tons in total, 25 singles, 7 double tons, 1 triple and 1 quadruple. Now how clear is that?! Bradman and Sehwag have two triple tons each because they scored 300+ runs in an innings twice, as did Lara. But he actually went further (400+) and created a new category that only he belongs to.

If Sehwag had joined Lara this week with a scored of 400+ all of a sudden would Sehwag have become 'only the second man to have scored a quadruple' or would he become the 'only player to have scored 3 triple tons'???? or both?

I believe there should be extra colunms in players stat sheets for such things. we have 50's scored and 100's scored but not doubles or triples etc. We do a disservice to players like Bradman and Lara and Sehwag when we call their doubles just tons or there triples just doubles (ie 12 for Don 9 lara)or laras 400 a triple!

@Eddy
I don't see the confusion. If Sehwag now hits 400, he'd be the 2nd man to score a quadruple. He'd also be the first with 3 triples. In other words "both"

I didn't understand why you say it is clear that "Bradman scored 29 tons in total, 17 singles, 10 double tons and 2 triple tons" but it isn't clear when "Lara scored 34 tons in total, 25 singles, 7 double tons, 1 triple and 1 quadruple." What's the difference?

Re your point that one should have extra columns for such things- I agree, it would be a good idea. But that wouldn't stop counting a 200 or a 300 also as a hundred.
A point in fact - when one considers the record for the most number of 50s - I think it's with Border with 90 50's. But that "90" actually comprises of 27 100's and 63 scores of between 50 and 100. Sachin has 88 (39+ 49). If he scores 3 more 100s,who has the record for most 50's.

Similarly Lara has 2 triples, one of which is a quadruple. But he still has 2 triples as do Sehwag and Bradman.

@ SANCHO again!! my point is this.....yep all tons are tons whether they are doubles, triples etc, but you wouldnt call a double a triple would you? so why would you call a triple a double or a quadruple a triple? Yes Lara has scored two scores of 300+ like V S and D B but by making more than 399 this triple was no-more.

Your quote 'Similarly Lara has 2 triples, one of which is a quadruple' makes no common sense, and i dont mean this to sound rude but it just doesnt make common or logical sense. Hope ive made my case.

Sir what happned to ur blogs??? from blogging every session of chennai test now maybe ahmedabad was shocket all talk of being No1 team has proved to be just that just talk !!! half the team is fighting to get fit for ... the IPL by skipping the third test so here we go... back to march april and indian cricket is back to where it was last year ..

Although Sehwag and Shastri have utilised their potential, comparing Hayden and Ponting and saying no one thinks Hayden is better wouldn't be a strong statement. Let me assure you that opening batsmen make Strong bases for the others to score. Hayden has made as good an impact as ponting on opponents.

In fact Hayden tends to be consistent throughout a series when he strikes form. It would be intersting to check how many series has Hayden and Ponting scored 400+ runs or comparing against each other. All said We all love it when Sehwag bats the way only he can!

Reference a lot of people here who are talking about VVS - I agree, he has more god-given talent than most other batsmen I have seen.

However, that is not his fault, god has dumped it on him.
Look at VVS (correct expansion, Very Very Selfish)' track record - Most of the time, he goes to a soft dismissal, no performance worth talking about....unless his own position is in danger. Then too, miniscule innings & soft dismissals for as long as he thinks he can get away with not working.
The odd 80+ innings only when even his friends in the media are unable to ensure his position in the team.

Other than an innings of 281 in 2001, he has almost no innings that impact a match result in India's favour to show for the years that BCCI has been paying him.

My view, just get rid of the guy & forget him.

I challenge his backers to tell me about the last occassion when Laxman produced 3/4 big knocks in a row. He has god-given talent, but is he interested in working ?

"Other than an innings of 281 in 2001, he has almost no innings that impact a match result in India's favour to show for the years that BCCI has been paying him."

Mr.Chetan you are absolutely correct but v.v.s. is not the lone man in that category our own so called
genius Mr.Sachin is there any way, can u give me an century which is usefull and match winning socred by sachin like that of v.v.s's 281.

presently Dravid and Shewag are the torch men for indian test cricket....Test cricket..do't confuse it with ODI-An entertainer any body can score at will...

common chethan...it seems the same god that gifted vvs all his 'natural'talent gifted you with that priceless gift any indian fan should have : short memory....how could you forget his innings in 2003-2204 australian series...the centuries at adelaide and sydney..his crucial contributions in tests that india ve won...the 69 in mumabi against aus..the half century at trinidad in 2002....the match saving century against nzealand in ahmedabad...the 79 in perth...the half century against sa in this kanpur test..the half century which set up indian win against pak in delhi. the crucial innings in last summers england tour..the 79 in perth..the man performs when it matters most...he mite not be producing the centuries that a player of his talents should ve and its annoying too..but he puts his hands up when the team needs him..n lets not forget that he is often left with the tail...a 300 on the flattest of flat tracks is all that it needs to put all these innings into oblivion...