What's new

Are Yashasvi Jaiswal and Rishabh Pant the next hype machines for India?

cricketjoshila said:
And then you will see Pakistanis glory fying abdul qadir
Click to expand...
Abdul Qadir was surely good enough to be recognized like this (236 test wickets in 67 matches) but this thread is about Jaiswal and Pant so please stick to that.
 
mominsaigol said:
Indians 100% fall into this trap. Its just that quality wise their > others even with a loss in form.

India throughout its test history has only produced 3 ATG test batters (Sachin, Dravid and Sunny possibly Sehwag as well tbf), One ATG test pace bowler (Bumrah) and thats it. Zero atg test spinners.

Similarly in odi theyve produced a few more gems like but the number is still 5 to 10 Max.

Everyone else gets put into this weird bracket and the term ATG gets thrown like pancakes, or some weird terminology like Indian great, crises man and what not.

Kohli, Dhoni, Laxman, Rohit, Ravi Shastri, Sanjay Madraka, Azhruddin, Pujara, Ganguly and many others are all decent.

They are good test batters and the likes of kohli gets way too much hate in test cricket but Indian fan boys have a need to toss the word the Greatest, Legend, indian great and god knows what else to make it seem like their sample pool is larger then what it actually is.

India and England are the 2 most dissapointing cricketing nations in terms of talent pool since a 1.3 B population + the literal investors and progenitor of cricket should have produced more talent then SA and Australia whos main focus isnt even cricket.

Yet aus and SA lead the charts in terms of talent( Key word talent, not trophy count, Granted Australia seems to be declining after a 100 years since their current upcoming crop aint good)
Click to expand...
If you consider only Murali and Warne as ATG spinners then yeah we haven’t had one of their quality.

The problem is that your criteria is too rigid if only two players qualify for it.

Post 1970s, the third best spinner is definitely an Indian, it could be Kumble or Bedi or Ashwin.
 
jeeteshssaxena said:
If you consider only Murali and Warne as ATG spinners then yeah we haven’t had one of their quality.

The problem is that your criteria is too rigid if only two players qualify for it.

Post 1970s, the third best spinner is definitely an Indian, it could be Kumble or Bedi or Ashwin.
Click to expand...
This comment was made on June 19 before my heel turn on introduction forumn with you and @Ab Fan :vk2
 
jeeteshssaxena said:
If you consider only Murali and Warne as ATG spinners then yeah we haven’t had one of their quality.

The problem is that your criteria is too rigid if only two players qualify for it.

Post 1970s, the third best spinner is definitely an Indian, it could be Kumble or Bedi or Ashwin.
Click to expand...
Indian spinners rarely deliver outside Asia - unlike say Nathan Lyon or Daniel Vettori
 
saimayubera said:
Those guys are not Asian. Their entire style is different.

Foreign pacers rarely deliver in India - unlike Indian pacers.
Click to expand...
I have seen foreign pacers win test matches in Asia ( Dale Steyn , Walsh , Anderson )

Yet to see an Indian spinner win India a test in SENA
 
saimayubera said:
Those guys are not Asian. Their entire style is different.

Foreign pacers rarely deliver in India - unlike Indian pacers.
Click to expand...
And these spinners (Lyon, Vettori etc) are much worse in Asia, compared to Indian spinners. Even the great Shane Warne averaged 40+ in India.

Hardly a stick to bash Indian spinners with.
 
NishanKonar said:
I have seen foreign pacers win test matches in Asia ( Dale Steyn , Walsh , Anderson )

Yet to see an Indian spinner win India a test in SENA
Click to expand...
Chandrashekhar's 6/38 against England, Oval, 1971

Chandrashekhar again -- 12/104 against Australia in Melbourne, 1977

Jadeja -- 5/131 Gabba, 2021
 
NishanKonar said:
I have seen foreign pacers win test matches in Asia ( Dale Steyn , Walsh , Anderson )

Yet to see an Indian spinner win India a test in SENA
Click to expand...
Anderson only has supporting roles in Asia tbh.

Similar is:

Ashwin MCG 2020
Jadeja MCG 2018

Also India has much better pacers now so spinners can only do supporting roles.

In the earlier days with poorer pacers Indian spinners did win matches outside as spinners had to do a lot of the work.

Kumble was great in Headingley 2002, Adelaide 2003, Kingston 2006 with 5fers in the latter 2.

Bhajji also had a 5fer in Kingston 2006 as well as in Hamilton 2009.

Chandra the best - 5fers in wins in Oval, Auckland, Port of Spain, Melbourne
 
bunda_bindaas said:
Chandrashekhar's 6/38 against England, Oval, 1971

Chandrashekhar again -- 12/104 against Australia in Melbourne, 1977

Jadeja -- 5/131 Gabba, 2021
Click to expand...
Jadeja's effort was definitely not matchwinning. Chandrasekhar was well before my time. Also that 1977 test was against Australia's B team ( their A team was playing Kerry Packer's WSC )

But this actually proves my point. Indian spinners never win us overseas test matches
 
Kumble -- 4 for 95 and 3 for 55 against West Indies at Antigua, 2002

Harbhajan -- 5 for 13 against West Indies at Kingston, 2006
 
NishanKonar said:
Jadeja's effort was definitely not matchwinning. Chandrasekhar was well before my time. Also that 1977 test was against Australia's B team ( their A team was playing Kerry Packer's WSC )

But this actually proves my point. Indian spinners never win us overseas test matches
Click to expand...
Jadeja's efforts are as good as Anderson's in India. Support role basically.

And I like how you ignored all the other examples I gave.
 
NishanKonar said:
Jadeja's effort was definitely not matchwinning. Chandrasekhar was well before my time. Also that 1977 test was against Australia's B team ( their A team was playing Kerry Packer's WSC )

But this actually proves my point. Indian spinners never win us overseas test matches
Click to expand...
Even in the limited formats, only Kuldeep has won us something and is statistically best of his generation.
 
NishanKonar said:
Jadeja's effort was definitely not matchwinning. Chandrasekhar was well before my time. Also that 1977 test was against Australia's B team ( their A team was playing Kerry Packer's WSC )

But this actually proves my point. Indian spinners never win us overseas test matches
Click to expand...
How was that India's problem?

You deny at least 4 instances of India's spinners winning us overseas matches, outside Asia, and keep on harping about Indian spinners not winning us overseas Test Matches?

How many matches have SENA countries won in India because of pace?
 
saimayubera said:
Naah. Jadeja and Ashwin were great in CT 13.

Ashwin and Bhajji also good in 2011.
Click to expand...

mention the match winning spells.

2013 CT was an anomaly. In odis, Jadeja averages 35 while Ashwin averages 33. Kuldeep is India's best-ever LOI spinner.
 
RyanRyan10 said:
mention the match winning spells.

2013 CT was an anomaly. In odis, Jadeja averages 35 while Ashwin averages 33. Kuldeep is India's best-ever LOI spinner.
Click to expand...
If you reject everything that doesn't support your argument as an "anomaly" obviously you will win the argument.

Ashwin was great in the QF.

Harbhajan took out Umar Akmal when he had got going and then Afridi in the SF.
 
saimayubera said:
If you reject everything that doesn't support your argument as an "anomaly" obviously you will win the argument.
Click to expand...
It’s an anomaly because such occurrences were rare. I also mentioned that statistically, Indian spinners have not been as good as World's bests. You ignored that part. Ashwin averaged 33 and Jadeja 35, and it was painful to watch them bowl through series after series without impact.

saimayubera said:
Ashwin was great in the QF.

Harbhajan took out Umar Akmal when he had got going and then Afridi in the SF.
Click to expand...

Taking 2 wickets in a 10 over quota isn’t a match winning performance. It can only be considered game-changing if those wickets came in a short burst. Otherwise, these are pretty low standards. Sri Lanka used to choke teams in a way India never could, at least not until recently. Even par -timers often outbowled India’s strike spinners.

Kuldeep and Chahal started changing that perception, though Chahal faded away. Varun’s arrival filled that void and he had made more impact. Kuldeep deserves appreciation for maning India’s spin attack look genuinely threatening.
 
RyanRyan10 said:
It’s an anomaly because such occurrences were rare. I also mentioned that statistically, Indian spinners have not been as good as World's bests. You ignored that part. Ashwin averaged 33 and Jadeja 35, and it was painful to watch them bowl through series after series without impact.



Taking 2 wickets in a 10 over quota isn’t a match winning performance. It can only be considered game-changing if those wickets came in a short burst. Otherwise, these are pretty low standards. Sri Lanka used to choke teams in a way India never could, at least not until recently. Even par -timers often outbowled India’s strike spinners.

Kuldeep and Chahal started changing that perception, though Chahal faded away. Varun’s arrival filled that void and he had made more impact. Kuldeep deserves appreciation for maning India’s spin attack look genuinely threatening.
Click to expand...
L Siva was the highest wicket taker in the Benson & Hedges World Series in Australia. Shastri was the MOS.

Kumble took 6 for 12 in the Hero Cup Final.
 
bunda_bindaas said:
L Siva was the highest wicket taker in the Benson & Hedges World Series in Australia. Shastri was the MOS.

Kumble took 6 for 12 in the Hero Cup Final.
Click to expand...

Siva and Shastri were just benefiting from the excellent support of the pacers. Both were average spinners and averaged in the mid 30s. Siva was dropped soon after, and even in domestic cricket, he remained average. Shastri was carried for the tuktuking he did in that tournament.

The Hero Cup has no value. For a player with such a long career, averaging over 30 and having the Hero Cup victory as the biggest achievement indicates he wasn’t as great as we have been led to believe.
 
RyanRyan10 said:
Siva and Shastri were just benefiting from the excellent support of the pacers. Both were average spinners and averaged in the mid 30s. Siva was dropped soon after, and even in domestic cricket, he remained average. Shastri was carried for the tuktuking he did in that tournament.

The Hero Cup has no value. For a player with such a long career, averaging over 30 and having the Hero Cup victory as the biggest achievement indicates he wasn’t as great as we have been led to believe.
Click to expand...
Siva took the highest wickets in the final! They were not just benefitting off the pacers. That's just plain wrong.

Whether he lost form or got dropped later on is a different matter. The fact is, he was the HIGHEST wicket taker in the B&H World Series, organized in Australia. He along with Shastri were the major reasons why India took 49 wickets in 5 games!

He played another key role in Rothman's cup held in Sharjah, soon after, where India defended 125 against Pakistan (bowled them out for 87). Shastri was the MOS in that series too!

As for Kumble, please don't insult his outstanding performances in and outside India. He was a genunie great who took 5fers in South Africa, NZ and the West Indies. In fact, he was a part of 52 Indian Test wins, most of them because of his own contribution.

Also, Kumble
 
bunda_bindaas said:
Siva took the highest wickets in the final! They were not just benefitting off the pacers. That's just plain wrong.

Whether he lost form or got dropped later on is a different matter. The fact is, he was the HIGHEST wicket taker in the B&H World Series, organized in Australia. He along with Shastri were the major reasons why India took 49 wickets in 5 games!

He played another key role in Rothman's cup held in Sharjah, soon after, where India defended 125 against Pakistan (bowled them out for 87). Shastri was the MOS in that series too!

As for Kumble, please don't insult his outstanding performances in and outside India. He was a genunie great who took 5fers in South Africa, NZ and the West Indies. In fact, he was a part of 52 Indian Test wins, most of them because of his own contribution.

Also, Kumble
Click to expand...
5fer in Adelaide 2003 1st innings too.

Also key part in 2004 Pak win.
 
Good Indian bowlers in general had bad stats simply because they would be the lone hand.

Guys like Kumble, Srinath, Zaheer, Bhajji would be averaging 3-4 points less if they bowled in complete packs.

Now Indian bowlers don't even average over 30.

Since Kohli became captain, no one averages over 30. In fact many are below 25.

You have to go to Shardul, the 13th highest wicket taker to even reach a 30+ average

1759695810833.png
 
saimayubera said:
Good Indian bowlers in general had bad stats simply because they would be the lone hand.

Guys like Kumble, Srinath, Zaheer, Bhajji would be averaging 3-4 points less if they bowled in complete packs.

Now Indian bowlers don't even average over 30.

Since Kohli became captain, no one averages over 30. In fact many are below 25.

You have to go to Shardul, the 13th highest wicket taker to even reach a 30+ average

View attachment 158559
Click to expand...
It's not just that. With the WTC in place, there is a greater emphasis on making result-oriented tracks, at least in India. Pitches in India were hardly that conducive to spin in Kumble and Harbhajan's time. Scores of 500+ were common and Andy Flower used to feast on such tracks. Jimmy Adams (yeah, the default reaction is who?), scored double hundreds for fun in India and failed as a batsman thereafter.

Then there's the issue of DRS which was absent while Kumble was playing. With his accuracy, imagine how many LBWs he must have lost due to umpiring error?
 
bunda_bindaas said:
It's not just that. With the WTC in place, there is a greater emphasis on making result-oriented tracks, at least in India. Pitches in India were hardly that conducive to spin in Kumble and Harbhajan's time. Scores of 500+ were common and Andy Flower used to feast on such tracks. Jimmy Adams (yeah, the default reaction is who?), scored double hundreds for fun in India and failed as a batsman thereafter.

Then there's the issue of DRS which was absent while Kumble was playing. With his accuracy, imagine how many LBWs he must have lost due to umpiring error?
Click to expand...
Jimmy “Padams”
 
hassan918 said:
Abdul Qadir was surely good enough to be recognized like this (236 test wickets in 67 matches) but this thread is about Jaiswal and Pant so please stick to that.S
Click to expand...


Some poster said India never had a atg spinner

You completely forgot wadirs career avg of nearly 33

If qadirwas an atg. Why isn’t kumble or ashwin or jaddu
 
bunda_bindaas said:
Siva took the highest wickets in the final! They were not just benefitting off the pacers. That's just plain wrong.

Whether he lost form or got dropped later on is a different matter. The fact is, he was the HIGHEST wicket taker in the B&H World Series, organized in Australia. He along with Shastri were the major reasons why India took 49 wickets in 5 games!
Click to expand...
Pakistan were 33 for 4 in that match, with Kapil taking 3 wickets. Both Kapil and Siva took 3 wickets each, but Kapil conceded fewer runs and had a greater impact. He had put India ahead even before Siva was introduced into the attack.
bunda_bindaas said:
He played another key role in Rothman's cup held in Sharjah, soon after, where India defended 125 against Pakistan (bowled them out for 87). Shastri was the MOS in that series too!
Click to expand...
Another random tournament. BTW, are you trying to prove Shastri was a great player? 🙄
bunda_bindaas said:
As for Kumble, please don't insult his outstanding performances in and outside India. He was a genunie great who took 5fers in South Africa, NZ and the West Indies. In fact, he was a part of 52 Indian Test wins, most of them because of his own contribution.

Also, Kumble
Click to expand...

I am not insulting him but the reality is that Kumble isn't an ATG. He may have contributed to many of India's wins but when you compare him to Warne and Murali, he falls behind in almost all aspects. And here we are talking about ODIs, where not only Murali and Warne but also Saqlain was more consistent. Kumble averaged 37 in his 117 ODIs from 1999 onwards (overall average is 31). No one can justify such mediocre numbers over such a long period.

India is the second most successful white ball team in cricket history, so it's obvious that some spinners would have made contributions over time. But unfortunately, before Kuldeep's arrival, none of Indian spinners matched the world's best, except perhaps Chandra, who was an exception.
 
Pakistan were 33 for 4 in that match, with Kapil taking 3 wickets. Both Kapil and Siva took 3 wickets each, but Kapil conceded fewer runs and had a greater impact. He had put India ahead even before Siva was introduced into the attack.
Click to expand...

That still doesn't change the fact that Siva was the HIGHEST wicket taker in the tournament. In Australia, on Australian pitches that don't generally help spinners.

Another random tournament. BTW, are you trying to prove Shastri was a great player?
Click to expand...

Shastri wasn't a great player, but he had great moments (peaks) as a player. That's undeniable.

I am not insulting him but the reality is that Kumble isn't an ATG. He may have contributed to many of India's wins but when you compare him to Warne and Murali, he falls behind in almost all aspects.
Click to expand...

Yeah, compared to Warne and Murali, all spin bowlers fall behind in some or the other aspect. That makes him the 3rd best spin bowler of all time, in Test Matches. That's hardly a slight on Kumble's career.

And here we are talking about ODIs, where not only Murali and Warne but also Saqlain was more consistent. Kumble averaged 37 in his 117 ODIs from 1999 onwards. No one can justify such mediocre numbers over such a long period.
Click to expand...

In ODIs, Kumble was a part of 127 wins for India, taking 198 wickets at 23.6 with an ER less than 4. He had 6 4fers and 2 5fers in those games. His SR in wins was 35. How are these numbers mediocre?

Shane Warne, for all his greatness, took 16 more wickets than Kumble in ODI wins, with a slightly worse economy (but better SR). And he had bowlers like McGrath supporting him!
 
Adding to my previous post, just for ODIs:

Muralidaran was the GOAT spinner. No one comes close to him, not Warne in particular.

Saqlain Mushtaq had a great run as a spinner but it was short-lived. As soon as he declined, he was phased out of the team, which makes his records look better in comparison.

Ravindra Jadeja, in ODIs, has a slightly better record than Kumble, when it comes to wins for India!

Daniel Vettori is another shout out for ODIs, similar stats to Jadeja in wins, less wickets per match but highly impressive ER.

And, of course, Kumble still has one of the most impressive stats as a spinner in ODIs.

P.S. Kuldeep will beat both Kumble and Jadeja; Saqlain and Warne too, but Murali is a bridge too far!
 
bunda_bindaas said:
Adding to my previous post, just for ODIs:

Muralidaran was the GOAT spinner. No one comes close to him, not Warne in particular.

Saqlain Mushtaq had a great run as a spinner but it was short-lived. As soon as he declined, he was phased out of the team, which makes his records look better in comparison.

Ravindra Jadeja, in ODIs, has a slightly better record than Kumble, when it comes to wins for India!

Daniel Vettori is another shout out for ODIs, similar stats to Jadeja in wins, less wickets per match but highly impressive ER.

And, of course, Kumble still has one of the most impressive stats as a spinner in ODIs.

P.S. Kuldeep will beat both Kumble and Jadeja; Saqlain and Warne too, but Murali is a bridge too far!
Click to expand...
Kuldeep is already a greater white ball spinner bar anyone but Murali tbh. Has the numbers. Has the ICC tournament performances/wins.
 
bunda_bindaas said:
That still doesn't change the fact that Siva was the HIGHEST wicket taker in the tournament. In Australia, on Australian pitches that don't generally help spinners.



Shastri wasn't a great player, but he had great moments (peaks) as a player. That's undeniable.



Yeah, compared to Warne and Murali, all spin bowlers fall behind in some or the other aspect. That makes him the 3rd best spin bowler of all time, in Test Matches. That's hardly a slight on Kumble's career.



In ODIs, Kumble was a part of 127 wins for India, taking 198 wickets at 23.6 with an ER less than 4. He had 6 4fers and 2 5fers in those games. His SR in wins was 35. How are these numbers mediocre?

Shane Warne, for all his greatness, took 16 more wickets than Kumble in ODI wins, with a slightly worse economy (but better SR). And he had bowlers like McGrath supporting him!
Click to expand...
bunda_bindaas said:
Adding to my previous post, just for ODIs:

Muralidaran was the GOAT spinner. No one comes close to him, not Warne in particular.

Saqlain Mushtaq had a great run as a spinner but it was short-lived. As soon as he declined, he was phased out of the team, which makes his records look better in comparison.

Ravindra Jadeja, in ODIs, has a slightly better record than Kumble, when it comes to wins for India!

Daniel Vettori is another shout out for ODIs, similar stats to Jadeja in wins, less wickets per match but highly impressive ER.

And, of course, Kumble still has one of the most impressive stats as a spinner in ODIs.

P.S. Kuldeep will beat both Kumble and Jadeja; Saqlain and Warne too, but Murali is a bridge too far!
Click to expand...
I think we are getting into an unending debate with too much stats filtering, so I will get straight to the point. No matter which criteria you apply, you will see that Anil Kumble or for that matter any other Indian spinner or pacer before the Bumrah-Kuldeep era lags behind the best bowlers in the world from their respective eras on most parameters. Whether Kumble was the third best spinner of his era or not is debatable, but he is certainly not in the top tier. At best, he can be called the third best of his time, and if being the third best of his era makes him the third best of all time, that means no other era produced any great spinners.

A 23.6 average in winning matches is good but not exceptional. I never called Kumble a mediocre bowler. What I said was that his performances in ODIs from 1999 onwards were mediocre, and I gave the numbers to prove that. His average of 37 plus for almost half of his career cannot be justified. The larger point I am making is that India often produces good bowlers but keeps them in the team for too long and over time, their averages worsen. Before the Bumrah-Kuldeep phase, almost all our main bowlers averaged around or above 30 in Tests and ODIs. None of them were exceptions, so they cannot be called all time greats.

You tried to project that Shane Warne was close to Anil Kumble, but with every filter you apply, Warne will still be ahead. And most importantly, Warne won Australia the semifinal where South Africa were 48-0 after seeing off the opening spell of Glenn McGrath. Warne changed the match within two overs. So he was not just dependent on McGrath for his success.

You said that Saqlain had a short-lived good run, but he averaged 15.84 in winning matches with 188 wickets in 93 games and 288 wickets in 163 ODIs overall. Those are elite numbers. Yes, he didn't have longevity of Murali but statiscally, he is far ahead of Kumble. Kumble played over a hundred more ODIs and took just 49 wickets more, with a nine point higher average.

The same thing happened with other Indian bowlers too. Harbhajan Singh’s average went from 27 to 32 plus, and in the second half of his Test career, he averaged 38. Many of our bowlers have the same story: long careers, declining impact, and at times, pointless returns. This is why we underachieve.

Bumrah and Kuldeep have shown what sustained excellence looks like. Even in the present era, Yuzvendra Chahal, who was India’s highest wicket taker in T20Is not long ago, ended up with one of the worst stats among specialist T20I spinners because we were too busy hyping up the KulCha pair when in reality Chahal was not as good as Kuldeep.

The same kind of romanticism existed during the so called spin quartet era too. Venkatraghavan for example averaged 35 and had no major achievements. Prasanna bashed a weak NZL line up and gets hyped for that to this day. We need to move past these nostalgic illusions and accept the truth. Our bowlers, historically, have not been as good as we made ourselves believe. They lagged behind their contemporaries.
 
Whether Kumble was the third best spinner of his era or not is debatable, but he is certainly not in the top tier. At best, he can be called the third best of his time, and if being the third best of his era makes him the third best of all time, that means no other era produced any great spinners.
Click to expand...

You are just spouting an opinion, which is fine by itself. Kumble's numbers, in Test cricket, do make him a part of the top tier. Ask any cricketing expert, they will tell you exactly that. Ian Chappel called him "one of the greats," Ponting described him as "one of the modern-day greats."

And in Shane Warne's own words: "The best I played against? Mushtaq Ahmed was outstanding, but it has to be Anil Kumble."

You said that Saqlain had a short-lived good run, but he averaged 15.84 in winning matches with 188 wickets in 93 games and 288 wickets in 163 ODIs overall. Those are elite numbers. Yes, he didn't have longevity of Murali but statiscally, he is far ahead of Kumble.
Click to expand...

In ODIs, yes. In Tests, Saqlain took a third of Kumble's wickets before checking out. You are comparing a cricketer who took almost half of Kumble's career wickets (Tests + ODIs) to someone who ended up taking 956 international wickets!

Kumble's ODI average worsened in the latter half of his career, partly due to a significant shoulder injury sustained in 2001 that reduced his accuracy and potency. Prior to that, his ODI career included being the leading wicket-taker in the 1996 World Cup. His 6 for 12 against the West Indies is not only the best by any Indian bowler but also the best against West Indies.
You tried to project that Shane Warne was close to Anil Kumble, but with every filter you apply, Warne will still be ahead. And most importantly, Warne won Australia the semifinal where South Africa were 48-0 after seeing off the opening spell of Glenn McGrath. Warne changed the match within two overs. So he was not just dependent on McGrath for his success.
Click to expand...

We are talking about career spans and you bring up one match! Moreover, Mcgrath is a much bigger ODI great compared to Warne, on every single bowling parameter. Which bowler was better than Kumble, in ODIs or Tests, while he was playing for India? Kumble took 30% of the wickets, in Test matches, when he was playing for India.

Our bowlers, historically, have not been as good as we made ourselves believe. They lagged behind their contemporaries.
Click to expand...

The Indian Team itself lagged behind, and whatever they achieved in Test Cricket, during the late 90s to 2007, was thanks to Anil Kumble. He delivered 40,850 balls in his Test career, the second-highest by any bowler ever. He is only the 2nd bowler in the history of Test cricket to take 10 wickets in an innings. He ended up with 619 Test wickets, third highest among all spinners, again in the history of Test cricket.

He had 4 5fers and 1 10fer in Australia. Another 5fer in South Africa; 4fers in both England and NZ and 3 5fers in West Indies, when West Indies wasn't a minnow team.

Add to this the fact that the pitches he operated on weren't as spin-friendly as they are now. And the lack of DRS during his playing days, and we are talking completely out of context, with regards to his perceived greatness.

Ashwin has just retired in Test cricket and I don't want to list his achievements, which are many, and he certainly wasn't second to any of his contemporaries in Test Cricket.

This kind of blanket criticism, without context, is frankly quite reductive, if not juvenile. Anil Kumble lagged behind his contemporaries, namely Shane Warne and Muralidaran, because every spinner in the history of Test cricket lags behind them.

There is no spinner, at present, who is even remotely poised to come close to those two, or Kumble, for that matter.

Kumble is a national treasure and one of the all time great spinners in Test cricket. And, in ODIs, he would still make the top 10. Top 5, maybe.
 
To add more context to the debate: (not a personal attack, but why @RyanRyan10's arguments are wrong)

1) Kumble often operated as India's primary spin weapon without a dominant pacer taking early wickets for him. His ability to apply pressure and take wickets over long, really long and tireless spells, was a defining characteristic of his greatness and not a function of a star-studded attack.

2) The argument that if a bowler isn't the absolute best of their era (e.g., Kumble being potentially third behind Warne and Murali), they cannot be an "all-time great." This ignores the concept of a "golden age" where multiple generational talents can actually co-exist. The presence of Warne and Murali does not diminish Kumble's achievements, and greatness is certainly not a zero-sum game.

3) Cherry-picking of statistics to prove a point while ignoring the bigger picture: Kumble's career average in ODIs was impacted by a significant shoulder injury sustained in 2001. Acknowledging this provides a more accurate view of his performance. Similarly, Saqlain's shorter career and his incredible numbers in winning matches are used to dismiss Kumble, but this ignores Kumble's greater volume and Test performance, compared to Saqlain.

4) The spin quartet's era saw India transform from a team that often played for draws into a winning side, securing historic victories overseas. This was literally real-life inspiring art (in the future), as in the movie Lagaan. We literally created upsets that would have odds of at least 100:1, today.

In conclusion, this is a classic example of historical revisionism seen through a reductive lens. The debate is flawed when it discards context, ignores systemic differences between eras, and cherry-picks data to support a predetermined narrative.
 
bunda_bindaas said:
To add more context to the debate: (not a personal attack, but why @RyanRyan10's arguments are wrong)

1) Kumble often operated as India's primary spin weapon without a dominant pacer taking early wickets for him. His ability to apply pressure and take wickets over long, really long and tireless spells, was a defining characteristic of his greatness and not a function of a star-studded attack.

2) The argument that if a bowler isn't the absolute best of their era (e.g., Kumble being potentially third behind Warne and Murali), they cannot be an "all-time great." This ignores the concept of a "golden age" where multiple generational talents can actually co-exist. The presence of Warne and Murali does not diminish Kumble's achievements, and greatness is certainly not a zero-sum game.

3) Cherry-picking of statistics to prove a point while ignoring the bigger picture: Kumble's career average in ODIs was impacted by a significant shoulder injury sustained in 2001. Acknowledging this provides a more accurate view of his performance. Similarly, Saqlain's shorter career and his incredible numbers in winning matches are used to dismiss Kumble, but this ignores Kumble's greater volume and Test performance, compared to Saqlain.

4) The spin quartet's era saw India transform from a team that often played for draws into a winning side, securing historic victories overseas. This was literally real-life inspiring art (in the future), as in the movie Lagaan. We literally created upsets that would have odds of at least 100:1, today.

In conclusion, this is a classic example of historical revisionism seen through a reductive lens. The debate is flawed when it discards context, ignores systemic differences between eras, and cherry-picks data to support a predetermined narrative.
Click to expand...
I don't want to derail this thread any further, so I will make a short post, and this will be my last on this topic.

My criticism wasn't aimed at all the members of the spin quartet but mostly at Venkat, who was a beneficiary of political games. Prasanna's career had its peaks and lows, with some external factors involved. Chandra and Bedi were genuine greats.

And, I don't consider Kumble mediocre. You're not understanding me.
 
7TH TEST HUNDRED BY YASHASVI JAISWAL - 23 YEAR OLD SUPERSTAR .

Ohh wait he is overrated according to wannabe fan's

:klopp :kp
 
Jaiswal is playing his 26th Test today.
2356 runs. Average: 52.35, SR: 66

Let's look at where other great openers were at this stage of their career.

Hobbs: 2260 runs (Average: 56.50)
Sutcliffe: 2366 (65.72)
Hutton: 2229 (55.73)

Gavaskar: 2337 (51.93)
Greenidge: 2147 (45.68)
Haynes: 1490 (37.25)
Boycott: 1597 (42.03)
Gooch: 1401 (33.36)
Kirsten: 1724 (38.31)
Hayden: 1919 (45.69)
Anwar: 1860 (43.26)

Graeme Smith: 2350 (57.32)

Like you can see, this is the best start an opener has had to his career in 20+ years. Yashasvi is not 24 years old. ATG in the making.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

BouncerGuy
[VIDEO] Meet the new Mr. Butterfingers: Yashasvi Jaiswal
Replies
41
Views
1K
BouncerGuy
BouncerGuy
Cricket Warrior
[VIDEO] DRS Drama at Edgbaston: Ben Stokes vs Umpire Over Yashasvi Jaiswal Review Controversy
Replies
30
Views
1K
BDfanforever
B
Ball Blazer
[VIDEO] Rishabh Pant throws ball in anger as massive controversy erupts
Replies
45
Views
1K
Snowflake
S
Mamoon
Has Rishabh Pant exposed the mediocrity of MS Dhoni?
2 3
Replies
166
Views
7K
mominsaigol
mominsaigol
BouncerGuy
[PICTURE] Power of Hype: How is it that Sachin Tendulkar gets more adulation than Steve Smith?
Replies
67
Views
956
NishanKonar
N
Back
Top