"I don't think India are worthy of being #1 in Tests" : Michael Holding

[DRsohail]

Whether Bangladesh deserved to win that match or not isn't the matter of concern here. Fact is Australia got beaten by a low level team like Bangladesh and got whitewashed by another low level team like SL.

This just shows that beating Australia isn't a big deal. Anyone can do this. I'll only consider SA as the no 1 if they can beat India in India.

Yes you are right but what i was trying to say that even Aus is a beast at home and decent now outside .I think that team which toured Srilanka was just a handicapped one and When they brought younsger to the team They won two test in Asia and drawn one.
And yes you are right Sa is better.

 

[RainMan_]

Yes you are right but what i was trying to say that even Aus is a beast at home and decent now outside .I think that team which toured Srilanka was just a handicapped one and When they brought younsger to the team They won two test in Asia and drawn one.
And yes you are right Sa is better.

But i don't consider SA as the better team and ICC ranking agrees with me.


Last time sa toured India they got destroyed in every single test. If sa can overcome that, compete against India in their next tour and draw a couple of matches, only then they can be considered as the no 1 team. Untill then I think we should take the help of ICC test ranking to know who's the real no 1

 

[soso_killer]

You cant prove that. Its just what you believe. Beliefs dont count. SA have historically competed well in India. Even in the series they were whitewashed in. If anything that should give us a hint that they will compete better than what India is doing in SA.

When was SA whitewashed in India?

 

[aloo paratha]

So which is the side that is capable of winning home and away?
I think it is South Africa. They lost to India and lost badly too. But when they lost to India, the bowling was not what it is now."


Is it?

Philander goes missing in India. Always gets injured.
Steyn can retire. He hardly can play anymore.
Morkel played in India.
Rabada played in India.
Lungi's pace will be useless in India. He will be carted to all parts of the ground.

Sorry, but you need spinners to win in India. SA have none. Maharaj is economical. Nothing threatening.

Explains why he averages 25 without even playing a match in Asia. Give Maharaj a turning track like Ashwin or Yasir Shah get and see what he'll do.

 

[Nitya85]

Yes you are right but what i was trying to say that even Aus is a beast at home and decent now outside .I think that team which toured Srilanka was just a handicapped one and When they brought younsger to the team They won two test in Asia and drawn one.
And yes you are right Sa is better.

Wow wat excuses ths man putting to defend Australia..Bravo

 

[Buffet]

We were talking about home dominance and it not just India who is home dominant.AUS is more.

Nah, Indians have dominated more at home in the last 10 years.

India W/L - 7
Aus W/L - 4

Difference is too large to even argue this.

 

[soso_killer]

Aus lost a test to BD in BD. That was like few months back. Aus got washed in SL and UAE.

SA havent won a series in Asia as well for sometime. So no they are no better.

SA won their last tour to Lanka actually, 4 days were washed out in Bangladesh. Good tourist are South Africa, it's not even up for debate. They've bullied everyone in their backyard.

 

[troodon]

Holding obvioulsy is thinking of the mighty WI from 70's and the Aussies of 90's and 2000's who could pretty much win every where.

Modern day Test teams are different. Nobody has time to go 1 month in Advance and prepare. Boards can easily sneak in another tour and mint money. its all about profits. Cricket is a business with millions of dollars involved.

Holding always comes as a bitter man when it comes to shorter forms of the game. He seems to have an agenda and criticizes T20 and how WI players are not faithful to their countries. Its his opinion. Indian fans need to move on.

 

[soso_killer]

Australia lost test match to BD and got washed by SL, beating them will not make SA the number one side.

Australia drew against Bangladesh, lost in Lanka having won in their last tour. Beating Australia home or away is equivalent to India beating Misbah's side home or away. There's a lot of credibility beating opposition familiar with your home conditions, especially when they are strong. I could argue this Australian side is stronger than Misbah's team in conditions familiar to them.

You can imagine Australia not playing SA or England if they were virtually at war. Pakistan didnot do much outside UAE during Misbah's time except the England series.

Exactly, Australia not playing a strong England and SA side would devour them of any credibility. Convict or Gilly wouldn't be able come on this forum and ask who has a better home record than Australia when they are not playing appropriate opposition for their conditions. It would be worse if they manage to lose and draw series against these sides from time to time as well.

 

[troodon]

Explains why he averages 25 without even playing a match in Asia. Give Maharaj a turning track like Ashwin or Yasir Shah get and see what he'll do.

Philander does not give away too many runs. He ends up with figures like 2/50 after bowling 30 overs. That is not a match winning performance. Its a good performance and thats about it. He is no where as dominant in India as he is in SA.

Steyn is their true match winner in India. But he is close to retirement and always injured.

Rabada was handled easily in India.

Morkel is average in India and Lungi will be hit out of the attack in India.

As per Maharaj, he will not do much. Indian players will demolish him if he plays on tracks that England played. If Maharaj plays on tracks that Aus and SA got, he will be successful. But Indian spinners will outbowl him and it will not be a contest. SA does not have a 2nd spinner either like Jadeja or Kuldeep.

 

[soso_killer]

Nah, Indians have dominated more at home in the last 10 years.

India W/L - 7
Aus W/L - 4

Difference is too large to even argue this.

What is England, Australia and South Africa's record against Asian sides at home (last 8 years, 1 Jan 2010)?
Like wise what is India's record against SENA countries in India?
I think this will be a fair measure of "home dominance".

 

[Sachin136]

When was SA whitewashed in India?

Close enough, and would've been a whitewash if not for rain.

 

[Sachin136]

What is England, Australia and South Africa's record against Asian sides at home (last 8 years, 1 Jan 2010)?
Like wise what is India's record against SENA countries in India?
I think this will be a fair measure of "home dominance".

There are only two strong Asian sides, Pakistan and India. There are 4 strong non-Asian teams. I hope you can see why this wouldn't be a fair comparison.

 

[soso_killer]

And what will these seamers do in India? Jack.

Your batsman will find it near impossible to negotiate Jadeja Ashwin and Kuldeep on Indian pitches. Philander wont find grass and better bowlers than Ngidi and Rabada have come to India and gone back home empty handed.

I will leave premonitions to the fortune tellers. What I do know however is that on numerous occasions South Africa has humiliated India in India with much weaker teams.

 

[R3verse Swing]

No team currently is worth of #1 status in Test. Battering teams at home or minnows abroad is not worth of #1 status.

West Indies of 70s/80s or Australia of 90s/00s were the last teams worthy of #1 rank in Tests cos they were winning away for fun verses ALL teams.

Anyone who understand how rankings work will understand how ranking can be manipulated. India hammering teams at home and minnows abroad is simply described as abusing the ranking system. Same goes for Australia of today.

Win away consistently then talk about #1 ranked team.

 

[soso_killer]

Anonymous posters like you and me know jack about cricket since we have never played nor can ever dream of playing at the highest level. Learn to respect people who have achieved much more than you ever could.

I don't agree with this logic though, else a guy like Roy Keane would have better analytical skills than say José Mourinho or Joachim Löw. That's not the case at all.
Playing the game at the highest level doesn't automatically make anyones opinion superior.

I've always said professional (or ex) cricketers don't have time to watch each and every game due to other commitments. You have a better chance of having a meaningful discussion about the game/particular series on this forum than with a KP/Ponting who could have been in Dubai playing Golf. Journalists as well are pretty knowledgeable about the game, stay away from the ones who are bias though.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

His opinion and i respect it. He's a legend of the game. Though the no.1 rankings really only indicate who dominates at home and who doesn't.

 

[BaankeJi]

But India ARE number one. Where is a question of any doubt?
India do not win in South African conditions. That is also beyond doubt. But that does not mean anything as far as number one ranking is concerned.
India have been given #1 ranking because they have played well and won at home and away.

 

[soso_killer]

There are only two strong Asian sides, Pakistan and India. There are 4 strong non-Asian teams. I hope you can see why this wouldn't be a fair comparison.

Beating SENA countries in Asia is fair? Yet Australia, England and South Africa's record against each other is also fair? I don't get this logic.

So much is made about India's record at home, and they pick and choose when to play certain Asian opposition. How is that fair to South Africa, England and Australia?

My question still stands, what are SENA countries record at home against Asian teams since 2010? Likewise for India at home against SENA nations. This is the only fair measure of "home dominance".

SENA countries have stronger and stable cricket system than Pakistan and Sri Lanka (who mainly rely on talent than their cricket system). Inevitably these countries will give one another hell and beat each other on a regular basis, be it home or away. The point here is that India's "home dominance" needs perspective.

I will consider whoever wins the series between SA and Australia as the number one side in the world, and rightly so. Who else can India beat away? A meak Sri Lanka? Windies? That's not fair, other countries have it tough and are slugging it out home or away. At least beat England or even NZ away (who are the weaker of the SENA nations).

 

[Space Cat]

Kohli is a far better bowler than this Holding guy ever was.

 

[Madplayer]

The only series where SA has done better than India will be the 2000 series. Except that the series have been even stevens.

SA were virtually mauled in India. Demolished and Lungi wont change that.

So you admit SA have competed well in India with the exception of their last tour. Good.

Also your claim that Lungi wont change that is hollow and simply your opinion. You cant prove it unless it happens.

 

[cricketjoshila]

I will leave premonitions to the fortune tellers. What I do know however is that on numerous occasions South Africa has humiliated India in India with much weaker teams.

Humiliated? really? You must be dreaming this just like you dreamed up that Tendulkar LBW reprieve.

SA bowling attack will do nothing in India. Tell me what did they do on their last tour? All except ngidi have played in India.

 

[soso_killer]

So which is the side that is capable of winning home and away?
I think it is South Africa. They lost to India and lost badly too. But when they lost to India, the bowling was not what it is now."


Is it?

Philander goes missing in India. Always gets injured.
Steyn can retire. He hardly can play anymore.
Morkel played in India.
Rabada played in India.
Lungi's pace will be useless in India. He will be carted to all parts of the ground.

Sorry, but you need spinners to win in India. SA have none. Maharaj is economical. Nothing threatening.

India found Elgar "threatening" enough, just saying. If a self confessed pie-chucker is good enough for 4-22 Maharaj will fancy his chances.

 

[cricketjoshila]

So you admit SA have competed well in India with the exception of their last tour. Good.

Also your claim that Lungi wont change that is hollow and simply your opinion. You cant prove it unless it happens.

Better bowlers have come to India and gone back humiliated.

I am saying SA and India test series home and away have been even stevens. SA won the series in SA in 92, India won the series in 96. Like that.

Except the series in 2000 in India.

 

[cricketjoshila]

India found Elgar "threatening" enough, just saying. If a self confessed pie-chucker is good enough for 4-22 Maharaj will fancy his chances.

Maharaj "may" fancy his chances, but so did Warne and Murali. Your point?

 

[Hermoine Green]

The only series where SA has done better than India will be the 2000 series. Except that the series have been even stevens.

SA were virtually mauled in India. Demolished and Lungi wont change that.

Actually SA has always done a better job than India.

At home SA have humiliated India every time at HOME. Played 6 series, won 5 and only 1 drawn and India have won grand total of only 2 Tests in SA.

While on Tour SA have won a series comprehensively by 2-0. Drawn 2 times and lost 3 series.

So its not even stevens

 

[cricketjoshila]

Actually SA has always done a better job than India.

At home SA have humiliated India every time at HOME. Played 6 series, won 5 and only 1 drawn and India have won grand total of only 2 Tests in SA.

While on Tour SA have won a series comprehensively by 2-0. Drawn 2 times and lost 3 series.

So its not even stevens

As i said only the 2-0 series in 2000 was the one where SA did better than India. Rest India has been matching SA performance in terms of series in India.

 

[big_gamer007]

HE is right no team deserves to be number 1 right now.. All teams are home bullies, problem with India being home bullies is because it hurts when you consider all factors about cricket in India and realise we still can’t be great at it..

 

[soso_killer]

Humiliated? really? You must be dreaming this just like you dreamed up that Tendulkar LBW reprieve.

SA bowling attack will do nothing in India. Tell me what did they do on their last tour? All except ngidi have played in India.

Mate we've humiliated India in India on numerous occasions, in this universe not an alternate one. But I know how post traumatic stress affects ones memory. Let me refresh yours

http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/...-2nd-test-south-africa-tour-of-india-2007-08/


http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/...-2nd-test-south-africa-tour-of-india-1999-00/


http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/...-1st-test-south-africa-tour-of-india-2009-10/


http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/...-2nd-test-south-africa-tour-of-india-1996-97/

All of these are complete annihilations. Losing at home by an innings having been bundled out under a 100 is not humiliating? Losing by an innings on three separate occasions to a non Asian side is not humiliating?
Getting whitewashed at home by a non Asian side is not humiliating enough for you? Wow, the bar must be pretty low. But it's okay, I'm sure Sri Lanka will probably tour India for comfort in October

 

[soso_killer]

Close enough, and would've been a whitewash if not for rain.

Exactly, India doesn't get to whitewash us in their conditions. We whitewash them

 

[Sadevdesai]

This is lots of "Grapes are Sour" sort of a thing !!!!! The existing system put them at # 1 ranking .... not them !!!! So unless they get knocked off that pedestal .... learn to live with it !!!!!

 

[soso_killer]

Maharaj "may" fancy his chances, but so did Warne and Murali. Your point?

If Elgar was such a threat, so will Maharaj. That's the point. I will leave premonitions to powers that be.

 

[cricketjoshila]

If Elgar was such a threat, so will Maharaj. That's the point. I will leave premonitions to powers that be.

Warne doesnt have a fifer in India but Clarke has a 6for. Does that mean anything?

 

[soso_killer]

Warne doesnt have a fifer in India but Clarke has a 6for. Does that mean anything?

Don't know, don't care. Should it?
What's that got to do with Maharaj? Unless you have a crystal ball I see no reason to speculate about the future. It's futile really. I care about results. Results suggest that we've humiliated India, that's all that matters to me.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Mate we've humiliated India in India on numerous occasions, in this universe not an alternate one. But I know how post traumatic stress affects ones memory. Let me refresh yours

http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/...-2nd-test-south-africa-tour-of-india-2007-08/


http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/...-2nd-test-south-africa-tour-of-india-1999-00/


http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/...-1st-test-south-africa-tour-of-india-2009-10/


http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/...-2nd-test-south-africa-tour-of-india-1996-97/

All of these are complete annihilations. Losing at home by an innings having been bundled out under a 100 is not humiliating? Losing by an innings on three separate occasions to a non Asian side is not humiliating?
Getting whitewashed at home by a non Asian side is not humiliating enough for you? Wow, the bar must be pretty low. But it's okay, I'm sure Sri Lanka will probably tour India for comfort in October

The favour have been returned as well. Did SA not get out for 84 at home againist India?

Regarding SL, they are yet to win a test in India, same cannot be said about their record in SA.

As i said the only series that SA held the upper hand was 2000, rest India have always returned the favour.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Don't know, don't care. Should it?
What's that got to do with Maharaj? Unless you have a crystal ball I see no reason to speculate about the future. It's futile really. I care about results. Results suggest that we've humiliated India, that's all that matters to me.

All i am telling you is better bowler than your Maharaj have been humiliated in India and he doesnt have a chance.

Results suggest India have returned the favour except the 2000 series.

 

[soso_killer]

The favour have been returned as well. Did SA not get out for 84 at home againist India?

Regarding SL, they are yet to win a test in India, same cannot be said about their record in SA.

As i said the only series that SA held the upper hand was 2000, rest India have always returned the favour.

No favour has been returned, you don't return favours at home you dominate. SA has humiliated India in India, and destroyed them in South Africa it's not even a contest. Two wins in what? 20 matches.
The subcontinent are foreign conditions to South Africa, they shouldn't be winning by an innings or 300+ runs on a regular basis. When has any Asian side won by an innings in South Africa?

It's more humiliating for India to lose at home by an innings than it is for South Africa in those conditions. India doesn't even come close to replicating that in South Africa, we simply bully them to submission. We even bully them in their backyard which is humiliating.

 

[soso_killer]

All i am telling you is better bowler than your Maharaj have been humiliated in India and he doesnt have a chance.

Results suggest India have returned the favour except the 2000 series.

Until he gets humiliated I render this conversation null and void.

 

[Usman Chadda]

I don't agree with this logic though, else a guy like Roy Keane would have better analytical skills than say José Mourinho or Joachim Löw. That's not the case at all.
Playing the game at the highest level doesn't automatically make anyones opinion superior.

I've always said professional (or ex) cricketers don't have time to watch each and every game due to other commitments. You have a better chance of having a meaningful discussion about the game/particular series on this forum than with a KP/Ponting who could have been in Dubai playing Golf. Journalists as well are pretty knowledgeable about the game, stay away from the ones who are bias though.

There's a world of difference between what a no-name like [MENTION=135134]CricketAnalyst[/MENTION] thinks and what Jose Mourinho or Jaochim Low think. They are also a part of professional sports setup, having either played the game at a decent level or having gone through professional courses. [MENTION=135134]CricketAnalyst[/MENTION] wouldn't even have played an 80 mph delivery ever in his life. His opinions might be worth more or less infront of you and me, but not a legend like Michael Holding.

Also yes professional cricketers do not follow the sport as much, but a discussion with them would be a lot more meaningful than on this forum. They look at every game through a technical viewpoint, having worked hard for years on their game as professional athletes. A lot of their technical views would fly above our heads completely.

In this case, Holding is a renowned pundit as well since he left his playing days behind. Has represented various TV stations as a commentator and also has his own blogs. You still think his opinion has less worth, as some Indian posters are suggesting, than a nobody on this forum who might never have picked up a cricket bat ever in his life?

 

[DRsohail]

Nah, Indians have dominated more at home in the last 10 years.

India W/L - 7
Aus W/L - 4

Difference is too large to even argue this.

ce
it was just to say everyteam does it.there may be the difference is too huge but u it does not mean that u r the real champ.

 

[DRsohail]

Wow wat excuses ths man putting to defend Australia..Bravo

i am not defending AUs it was arguments to show u people that india is not real world cahmp.beast at home ordinary outside asia that is.

 

[DRsohail]

Explains why he averages 25 without even playing a match in Asia. Give Maharaj a turning track like Ashwin or Yasir Shah get and see what he'll do.

dont make our friends feel bitter.everyone is world class in their team.

 

[troodon]

India found Elgar "threatening" enough, just saying. If a self confessed pie-chucker is good enough for 4-22 Maharaj will fancy his chances.

That was a one off test. Even Stuart Binny sometimes looks threatening on green tracks.

One of the test was washed out. SA got bundled out for under 200. It was Bangalore Test IIRC. India in reply were 80/0 or someting when rain interrupted.

Maharaj will not succeed in India. He is like Santner. Economical. Cannot get wickets.

 

[DRsohail]

But i don't consider SA as the better team and ICC ranking agrees with me.


Last time sa toured India they got destroyed in every single test. If sa can overcome that, compete against India in their next tour and draw a couple of matches, only then they can be considered as the no 1 team. Untill then I think we should take the help of ICC test ranking to know who's the real no 1

You will take it thats ur choice but i will not,,,,,will take it when a number one team win or at least draw a series outside their comfort zone and i am waiting for this right from 2010 but no one have done it except SA and they were the real number 1 .
but i have seen just one overseas fluke victory for this two time number one team .

 

[DRsohail]

Kohli is a far better bowler than this Holding guy ever was.

And holding was better bat than kohli.lolz

 

[Buffet]

ce
it was just to say everyteam does it.there may be the difference is too huge but u it does not mean that u r the real champ.

No team is real champion team right now.

 

[aloo paratha]

dont make our friends feel bitter.everyone is world class in their team.

Indians saying their batsmen would destroy Maharaj, forgetting they've crumbled to bowlers like Moeen, O Keefe, Simon Harmer

Just wait till SA tours India.

 

[aloo paratha]

Maharaj will not succeed in India. He is like Santner. Economical. Cannot get wickets.

Averages:

Santner:37
Maharaj:27

 

[Buffet]

What is England, Australia and South Africa's record against Asian sides at home (last 8 years, 1 Jan 2010)?
Like wise what is India's record against SENA countries in India?
I think this will be a fair measure of "home dominance".

SENA in India - 0.17
SENA in Asia(excluding BD) - 0.27

India in SENA - 0.11
Ind, Pak and SL in SENA - 0.16

 

[BaankeJi]

The statement that India are not worthy of being number one is not valid. Fact is that India are number one.
Now there can be 3 ways of becoming number one:-

1.) Win all away games and lose all home games.
2.) Win a few both away and home.
3.) Win all home and lose all away.

India come in 2.) - they have won in SL and WI and at home. Now for some, winning against SL and WI doesn't matter but for ICC it does. That's why India are #1.

 

[DRsohail]

Indians saying their batsmen would destroy Maharaj, forgetting they've crumbled to bowlers like Moeen, O Keefe, Simon Harmer

Just wait till SA tours India.

Before touring SA they were even destroying Philander ....

 

[DRsohail]

Maharaj guy is quality,doing well so far non spinning tracks.

 

[DRsohail]

The statement that India are not worthy of being number one is not valid. Fact is that India are number one.
Now there can be 3 ways of becoming number one:-

1.) Win all away games and lose all home games.
2.) Win a few both away and home.
3.) Win all home and lose all away.

India come in 2.) - they have won in SL and WI and at home. Now for some, winning against SL and WI doesn't matter but for ICC it does. That's why India are #1.

You would not have to put forward things like these if india are having the hope and ability to draw at least series overseas,

 

[BaankeJi]

You would not have to put forward things like these if india are having the hope and ability to draw at least series overseas,

That is beside the point I am trying to make.

 

[Rayyman]

Neither were Pakistan when they had it. Problem is, rankings aren't a clear representation of which teams are better than other.

 

[DRsohail]

That is beside the point I am trying to make.

okk.

 

[soso_killer]

There's a world of difference between what a no-name like [MENTION=135134]CricketAnalyst[/MENTION] thinks and what Jose Mourinho or Jaochim Low think. They are also a part of professional sports setup, having either played the game at a decent level or having gone through professional courses. [MENTION=135134]CricketAnalyst[/MENTION] wouldn't even have played an 80 mph delivery ever in his life. His opinions might be worth more or less infront of you and me, but not a legend like Michael Holding.

Also yes professional cricketers do not follow the sport as much, but a discussion with them would be a lot more meaningful than on this forum. They look at every game through a technical viewpoint, having worked hard for years on their game as professional athletes. A lot of their technical views would fly above our heads completely.

In this case, Holding is a renowned pundit as well since he left his playing days behind. Has represented various TV stations as a commentator and also has his own blogs. You still think his opinion has less worth, as some Indian posters are suggesting, than a nobody on this forum who might never have picked up a cricket bat ever in his life?

My point is that playing the game at the highest level does not necessarily give professional players better understanding of the game analytically. Warne was a genius, however I find him bias and subjective in his views.

There's a reason why ex great players don't make for great coaches/managers. They have a narrow view of the game, ego doesn't help either.
Why would I discuss a series that made player X great with KP when he was possibly in Dubai? Am I not better of having that discussion with you or fellow members? Do we need expects to tell us Steve Smith is the best bat going around? I think we're more than capable of figuring that out on our own.

If it comes to the technical side of things like how one should approach the game in certain conditions or situations, correct your technique as a bowler or batsman I will listen to these guys all day long. However they don't get to dictate our views on subjective matters. We'll debate that on our own. I think that is fair enough. He says so himself he doesn't watch much cricket outside of the English and South African summer.

 

[soso_killer]

That was a one off test. Even Stuart Binny sometimes looks threatening on green tracks.

One of the test was washed out. SA got bundled out for under 200. It was Bangalore Test IIRC. India in reply were 80/0 or someting when rain interrupted.

Maharaj will not succeed in India. He is like Santner. Economical. Cannot get wickets.

(Binny has a four wicket haul? Wow that's foreign to me)


That's not a fact, it's a baseless opinion that I'm not interested in. The likes of Elgar, Tahir, Hammer, Lyon and the other Australian spinner have done well in India recently. Maharaj is superior to all of them, there's a reasonable chance he'll do well.
India aren't what they used to be against spin bowling.

 

[soso_killer]

SENA in India - 0.17
SENA in Asia(excluding BD) - 0.27

India in SENA - 0.11
Ind, Pak and SL in SENA - 0.16

I'm more interested in India.

I specifically wanted to see the records i.e. W/L ratio of each SENA country against Asian teams at home.
SA W/L vs India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka (I'll be nice and exclude Bangladesh even though they get mentioned depending on a narrative). The same for Australia, England and NZ. This is a better measure of which side is dominant as per Indian standard, heck even SA won a series in Lanka against Sangakkara.

 

[CanadianG00se]

Tbh, no team is real #1. Most teams are very good in familiar conditions and will struggle as soon as they have to compete in alien conditions. SA are pretty solid side, however on spin tracks they would even struggle to beat BD. Last test between SA-BD where SA barely scored 200 odd runs when they were #1 side, luckily for them match was called off due to rain or else like Eng and Aus they too would’ve taste the defeat.

I partially agree with Holding that Indian team is not truly #1 side, but at the sametime i also dont agree that SA are real #1 untill they defeat India in India.

 

[CricketAnalyst]

There's a world of difference between what a no-name like [MENTION=135134]CricketAnalyst[/MENTION] thinks and what Jose Mourinho or Jaochim Low think. They are also a part of professional sports setup, having either played the game at a decent level or having gone through professional courses. [MENTION=135134]CricketAnalyst[/MENTION] wouldn't even have played an 80 mph delivery ever in his life. His opinions might be worth more or less infront of you and me, but not a legend like Michael Holding.

Also yes professional cricketers do not follow the sport as much, but a discussion with them would be a lot more meaningful than on this forum. They look at every game through a technical viewpoint, having worked hard for years on their game as professional athletes. A lot of their technical views would fly above our heads completely.

In this case, Holding is a renowned pundit as well since he left his playing days behind. Has represented various TV stations as a commentator and also has his own blogs. You still think his opinion has less worth, as some Indian posters are suggesting, than a nobody on this forum who might never have picked up a cricket bat ever in his life?

There is a world of difference in cricket and football. In football there is so much money and pressure that there is no prevalance of stupid tradition based thinking. No footballer will see a chance to make a killer through ball and instead make a sideways pass and then wave to the crowd because he has made 100 consecutive successful passes. But batsmen compromise team welfare to get centuries all the time.

Cricket is in the absolute stone age, which is why idiots like Holding who are just burly guys who could bowl fast are still listened to. In football this mentality and these old-fashioned guys who just want to do things the way they did in their time have been kicked out. It will happen in cricket too.

I wouldn't actually be sure that "nobody cares about my opinion" (since you don't even know who I am or what I do), but it's irrelevant. Even if nobody does care about my opinion, it's still much better opinion than Holding because I actually follow every game in every format, so I know 10 times more about what is happening, and who is good, and what the trends are then a guy who watches 15 Tests in a year, doesn't know statistics and is perpetually bitter about young cricketers making more than he did.

Holding's opinion whether or not anyone cares about is based on nothing. He was an athlete. Now that he has aged, there is nothing he can give the game anymore.

 

[CricketAnalyst]

My point is that playing the game at the highest level does not necessarily give professional players better understanding of the game analytically. Warne was a genius, however I find him bias and subjective in his views.

There's a reason why ex great players don't make for great coaches/managers. They have a narrow view of the game, ego doesn't help either.
Why would I discuss a series that made player X great with KP when he was possibly in Dubai? Am I not better of having that discussion with you or fellow members? Do we need expects to tell us Steve Smith is the best bat going around? I think we're more than capable of figuring that out on our own.

If it comes to the technical side of things like how one should approach the game in certain conditions or situations, correct your technique as a bowler or batsman I will listen to these guys all day long. However they don't get to dictate our views on subjective matters. We'll debate that on our own. I think that is fair enough. He says so himself he doesn't watch much cricket outside of the English and South African summer.

Exactly. Being an ex-player can make you an expert on bio-mechanics of cricket and nothing else. If these guys talk about how to hold a bat, technical adjustments, delivery stride etc, you don't see me disagreeing with all that.

And there's a reason analysts are beginning to get paid so much by franchises and team set-ups. It's because people are waking up to the fact that strategy and decision-making wins you games; not bio-mechanics.

And being good at swinging a piece of wood or throwing a ball doesn't improve analytical skills.

 

[Usman Chadda]

There is a world of difference in cricket and football. In football there is so much money and pressure that there is no prevalance of stupid tradition based thinking. No footballer will see a chance to make a killer through ball and instead make a sideways pass and then wave to the crowd because he has made 100 consecutive successful passes. But batsmen compromise team welfare to get centuries all the time.

Cricket is in the absolute stone age, which is why idiots like Holding who are just burly guys who could bowl fast are still listened to. In football this mentality and these old-fashioned guys who just want to do things the way they did in their time have been kicked out. It will happen in cricket too.

I wouldn't actually be sure that "nobody cares about my opinion" (since you don't even know who I am or what I do), but it's irrelevant. Even if nobody does care about my opinion, it's still much better opinion than Holding because I actually follow every game in every format, so I know 10 times more about what is happening, and who is good, and what the trends are then a guy who watches 15 Tests in a year, doesn't know statistics and is perpetually bitter about young cricketers making more than he did.

Holding's opinion whether or not anyone cares about is based on nothing. He was an athlete. Now that he has aged, there is nothing he can give the game anymore.

What are you doing behind a laptop then? If your opinion is 10 times more than Holding (who is an idiot Masha Allah by now, according to you), you should be doing something useful in or for cricket.

Yes I don't know who you are but I do know you are sitting on PakPassion discussing the game while Michael Holding is a legend who commentates and has his own blogs. Sorry but you are nobody, and your opinion matters to no one. You can make a million posts, but no one would really care about what you think about cricket or anything else related to professional sports, while people listen to the likes of Michael Holding when they talk for a reason.

By the way, majority of the coaches right now in cricket are ex-players or people who have played the game at a decent level. Isn't a coach involved in strategies and decision-making templates for various teams around the world? That's because they are the best people to analyze a game of cricket, rather than some armchair fan who has only watched the game on TV.

Ridiculous argument.

 

[CanadianG00se]

There is a world of difference in cricket and football. In football there is so much money and pressure that there is no prevalance of stupid tradition based thinking. No footballer will see a chance to make a killer through ball and instead make a sideways pass and then wave to the crowd because he has made 100 consecutive successful passes. But batsmen compromise team welfare to get centuries all the time.

Cricket is in the absolute stone age, which is why idiots like Holding who are just burly guys who could bowl fast are still listened to. In football this mentality and these old-fashioned guys who just want to do things the way they did in their time have been kicked out. It will happen in cricket too.

I wouldn't actually be sure that "nobody cares about my opinion" (since you don't even know who I am or what I do), but it's irrelevant. Even if nobody does care about my opinion, it's still much better opinion than Holding because I actually follow every game in every format, so I know 10 times more about what is happening, and who is good, and what the trends are then a guy who watches 15 Tests in a year, doesn't know statistics and is perpetually bitter about young cricketers making more than he did.

Holding's opinion whether or not anyone cares about is based on nothing. He was an athlete. Now that he has aged, there is nothing he can give the game anymore.

I also feel that some of these oldies are just bitter that young cricketers do not see playing test cricket as such a big thing anymore. They want to play league cricket to secure their future which doesnt go down well with so called Experts. Sooner we get rid off these stone age test series the better. I bet if Holding was still playing around he would be first to rush to IPL to collect the paycheck, but since he couldn’t he just lambasting at the players who are putting their financial security before playing test cricket.

Btw why does he always surface to media when India is #1 and travelling abroad? Why does he goes to hiding when overseas team are getting phainty in India?

 

[Usman Chadda]

My point is that playing the game at the highest level does not necessarily give professional players better understanding of the game analytically. Warne was a genius, however I find him bias and subjective in his views.

There's a reason why ex great players don't make for great coaches/managers. They have a narrow view of the game, ego doesn't help either.
Why would I discuss a series that made player X great with KP when he was possibly in Dubai? Am I not better of having that discussion with you or fellow members? Do we need expects to tell us Steve Smith is the best bat going around? I think we're more than capable of figuring that out on our own.

If it comes to the technical side of things like how one should approach the game in certain conditions or situations, correct your technique as a bowler or batsman I will listen to these guys all day long. However they don't get to dictate our views on subjective matters. We'll debate that on our own. I think that is fair enough. He says so himself he doesn't watch much cricket outside of the English and South African summer.

Warne's basic judgment of the game would be light-years and universes ahead of you and me. He has not just thrown the ball 22 yards and spun it, as [MENTION=135134]CricketAnalyst[/MENTION] shockingly points it (so much for analysis lol). He has got a million batsmen out by out-thinking them and by working hard on his game throughout the years. These guys are no joker's, they are the best readers of the game than a journalist sitting in the comfort of his/her cubicle or you and me sitting behind our laptops.

Never said they dictate our views. You and me can definitely have a different opinion, whether flawed or right is subjective. You can disagree with Shane Warne or Michael Holding, but their opinion holds a thousand times more than an average fan who doesn't even know what it's like out there on the pitch. Indian fans have suggested their opinion is 10 times more than a celebrated individual like Holding, and that's what I'm saying is absolutely wrong.

 

[CricketAnalyst]

Warne's basic judgment of the game would be light-years and universes ahead of you and me. He has not just thrown the ball 22 yards and spun it, as [MENTION=135134]CricketAnalyst[/MENTION] shockingly points it (so much for analysis lol). He has got a million batsmen out by out-thinking them and by working hard on his game throughout the years. These guys are no joker's, they are the best readers of the game than a journalist sitting in the comfort of his/her cubicle or you and me sitting behind our laptops.

Never said they dictate our views. You and me can definitely have a different opinion, whether flawed or right is subjective. You can disagree with Shane Warne or Michael Holding, but their opinion holds a thousand times more than an average fan who doesn't even know what it's like out there on the pitch. Indian fans have suggested their opinion is 10 times more than a celebrated individual like Holding, and that's what I'm saying is absolutely wrong.

You are incapable of presenting any logic.

The idea that someone is invited as a commentator and therefore his opinion has value is rubbish. He is famous so he's commentating. Nothing to do with his opinion having any value.

And these idiot ex-player commentators get it wrong so often that anyone can tell their competence is about being an athlete, it has nothing to do with intelligence. Shane Warne didn't get those wickets because he is more intelligent than anyone. It's because he can spin a ball and bowl accurately.

And yes, anyone who actually studies and watches the game will have an opinion 10x more valuable than a know-nothing who is invited because he was a good bowler 30 years ago.

 

[Usman Chadda]

You are incapable of presenting any logic.

The idea that someone is invited as a commentator and therefore his opinion has value is rubbish. He is famous so he's commentating. Nothing to do with his opinion having any value.

And these idiot ex-player commentators get it wrong so often that anyone can tell their competence is about being an athlete, it has nothing to do with intelligence. Shane Warne didn't get those wickets because he is more intelligent than anyone. It's because he can spin a ball and bowl accurately.

And yes, anyone who actually studies and watches the game will have an opinion 10x more valuable than a know-nothing who is invited because he was a good bowler 30 years ago.

They invite ex-cricketers to do commentary because they have played the game at the highest level and articulate those views for the million viewers watching the game. Obviously there are different agendas for different TV stations, wherein their technical viewpoints get lost within the constant praise they have to bestow on the home team.

You are incapable of comprehending the fact that you are a nobody. So, these 'idiot' ex-players can get it wrong often and you would get it absolutely right, based on your years of experiencing of watching cricket from either a 100 yards away or on a 2D screen? Get over yourself.

The sheer nonsense of this argument is incredibly hard to fathom. Some of you think really high of yourselves by posting a few comments on a message board on the internet lol.

 

[CricketAnalyst]

They invite ex-cricketers to do commentary because they have played the game at the highest level and articulate those views for the million viewers watching the game. Obviously there are different agendas for different TV stations, wherein their technical viewpoints get lost within the constant praise they have to bestow on the home team.

You are incapable of comprehending the fact that you are a nobody. So, these 'idiot' ex-players can get it wrong often and you would get it absolutely right, based on your years of experiencing of watching cricket from either a 100 yards away or on a 2D screen? Get over yourself.

The sheer nonsense of this argument is incredibly hard to fathom. Some of you think really high of yourselves by posting a few comments on a message board on the internet lol.

Being an ex-player means nothing.

You don't seem to have basic ability to reason from first principles.

You don't hire a taxi driver to run a transport corporation.

Similarly, someone who can throw a ball very hard doesn't have the skill-set to analyze cricket well. He can still be invited by channels because people want to listen to a famous person (or even they might not want to listen to him, but channels think they will want to listen).

Their view-points are no more or less likely to be right than the average person. And they are significantly worse than someone like me who understands statistics and probabilities and watches every game. I can remember commentators who didn't even know the names of the players they were commentating on. It's shoddy, disrespectful and these people were unqualified.

Your argument is that just because someone is a position it means he deserves to be there. Do you still live in Pakistan? If you do, I don't think you can believe this. Anyone who lives in sub-continent will know that every position of prestige is often filled with incompetent jokers who are there not because they are competent but because somebody or the other got them a job through friends etc.

So no I will not presume that Holding is competent just because he has a blog (lol) or because he is given job as a commentator.

 

[Madplayer]

Better bowlers have come to India and gone back humiliated.

I am saying SA and India test series home and away have been even stevens. SA won the series in SA in 92, India won the series in 96. Like that.

Except the series in 2000 in India.

Joshila Sahab, this is the 1st time i am seeing you making assumptions which you cant prove.

 

[aniket1911]

Holding last year during WI vs Pak match.

I don't think even a single copy of my book will be sold in India, I don't have a single nice thing to say about BCCI (one can extrapolate it to INDIA).

And yet, he is not biased against India at all, just laughable to think he is putting out his opinion without any bias.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Indians saying their batsmen would destroy Maharaj, forgetting they've crumbled to bowlers like Moeen, O Keefe, Simon Harmer

Just wait till SA tours India.

Moeens team lost 4-0
Harmers team lost 3-0
O Keefes team lost 2-1


Try again.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Joshila Sahab, this is the 1st time i am seeing you making assumptions which you cant prove.

Well better spinners than Maharaj have failed to win their side a test match in India so its highly unlikely he will. Thats my point.

 

[Slog]

Moeens team lost 4-0
Harmers team lost 3-0
O Keefes team lost 2-1


Try again.

Moeen's team won 3-1 when he took those wickets?

 

[cricketjoshila]

Moeen's team won 3-1 when he took those wickets?

We are talking of spinners bowling in India

 

[Tusker]

Being an ex-player means nothing.

You don't seem to have basic ability to reason from first principles.

You don't hire a taxi driver to run a transport corporation.

Similarly, someone who can throw a ball very hard doesn't have the skill-set to analyze cricket well. He can still be invited by channels because people want to listen to a famous person (or even they might not want to listen to him, but channels think they will want to listen).

Their view-points are no more or less likely to be right than the average person. And they are significantly worse than someone like me who understands statistics and probabilities and watches every game. I can remember commentators who didn't even know the names of the players they were commentating on. It's shoddy, disrespectful and these people were unqualified.

Your argument is that just because someone is a position it means he deserves to be there. Do you still live in Pakistan? If you do, I don't think you can believe this. Anyone who lives in sub-continent will know that every position of prestige is often filled with incompetent jokers who are there not because they are competent but because somebody or the other got them a job through friends etc.

So no I will not presume that Holding is competent just because he has a blog (lol) or because he is given job as a commentator.

Spot on. Besides this it is an open secret that Holding has a big old axe to grind against India. That alone makes his opinions not even worth the piece of paper they are written on.

And here is a example of Michael Holdings cricketing acumen ... In the 1st Test India was about 100/7 when he came in to commentate with Kepler Wessels (Another utterly biased commentator with a big chip on his shoulders) and the discussion was when should the spinner come in to bowl and Mikey responded - in the 3rd inngs and had a big laugh. Soon After Pandya and Bhuvi sent SA on a leather hunt and lo and behold Maharaj was forced to come in and bowl and guess who was commentating - Holding. Obviously no talk about when spinners should bowl came up again.

 

[Monsee]

Same people who give us lectures upon lectures on how to accept such and such player's all time XI selections, comments about a Pak player, team etc. just because it is their own opinions...now I see them wanting to maybe start burning Holding's effigies next just because he criticized their jumping up and down (like a 2 year old) captain and their phantaastic Home Bully team!

 

[dhonixi]

[MENTION=81]Monsee[/MENTION] how about ian Chappell opinion. I am sure you will agree with that. Since pakistani cares so much about ex cricketer opinions. How about tell your nowhere bully team to not visit Australia

 

[Ab Fan]

It took me some time to understand what is SENA?

 

[Monsee]

[MENTION=143761]dhonixi[/MENTION], who the hec.k is Ian Chappel and Pak team in this context...learn to take criticism and stop trying to blackmail/shoot the messenger instead!

 

[dhonixi]

[MENTION=81]Monsee[/MENTION] i never shoot messenger. I just want you to remind that opinions are not fact. Facts is what is front of us in rankings. Rankings are derived by formula. And anyone can reach no 1. In the era of home bullying india is whitewashing teams. This South africa lost to England in their home. So it's all relative. No one is truly no 1 team but in all teams india is the team which is no 1.