Looking at the best batsmen in Test wins, Bradman is peerless with a mind-boggling average of 130.08 (he averages a comparatively paltry 43.27 in lost Tests). Inzamam-ul-Haq (80.83) and Rahul Dravid (79.51) have fantastic averages in Tests their teams have won: an indicator of how crucial their form was to the fortune of the team. It’s quite revealing that Sachin Tendulkar, who made his Test debut seven years before Dravid, has played in just eight more Test wins than Dravid’s 30. Significantly, none of the batsmen in Waugh’s team feature in the top ten - Australia did not depend primarily on the form of a particular player.
Very good thread. I would just comment on # of win comparsion of Sachin and Dravid. During those 8 years India rarely won test matches. Either india lost or we saw those boring draws.
I was impressed to see Younis Khan name there.It was surprising. :k
Data for Younis and Smith might be skewed because of fewer matches that they have played.
Indicates that we are too reliant on one man's runs. Australia's lack of entries underscores that from 1993-2005, they were a TEAM, and not reliant on a couple of blokes, least not in batting.
Actually f&b it wasnt an observation of the "cricket guru". The last line of the first post says
"Australia did not depend primarily on the form of a particular player"
In any case Sachin's contribution or lack of is not the point of conversation right now. Dravid's ability with the bat is also beyond any doubt but this thread clearly points out that we need one man to stand agaisnt English bowler in a couple of weeks and that is Inzimam. Mohammad Yousaif with his mighty average hasnt really played a match winning test innings in a long time so if the captain and the vice captain of Pakistan lead by example we are in with a shot. England can talk about the clean sweep all they want, we certainly will go in the series as the under dogs but then again we went agaisnt the Indians as under dogs as well specially in the test series. There we drew now we gotta take a step forward and win to makr our emergence on the international scene as a threatning oppostion.
True..Their claim of 3-0 win is stupid.They are just being cocky as Macgrath did before the Ashes series. Looks like it is part of modern day cricket now. Brits will have to work hard to even win the series.I will give them a 2-1 or 1-0.
Javed Miandad averaged 59.65 in the matches that he played that Pakistan won. Better then his career average of 52.57 but not as big a difference as in case of Inzimam. I dont think Pakistan should go with spinning tracks as we really only have one genuine front line spinner in Danish Kaneria. Mushtaq hasnt played international cricket since forever and Afridi and Shoaib Malik can not really be considered front line spinners. In case of seamers we have a lot of variety. I personally think Umar Gul is a certainity in the starting XI the he has bowled in warm up and practise matches. Along with that we have Shoaib Akhtar, Mohammad Sami, Rana Naveed and Shabbir Ahmad. Shabir should definatley sit out first up and we will have to choose between Sami and Rana Naveed. We should definatley go with livley pitches so our bowling strength can have a better chance of bowling the opposition out twice. My starting XI for first test would be
Shoaib Malik
Salman Butt
Younis Khan
Mohammad Yousaf
Inzimam-ul-Haq
Asim Kamal
Kamran Akmal
Rana Naveed
Umar Gul
Shoaib Akhtar
Danis Kaneria
Ideally I'd put either Afridi or Razzaq in Asim Kamal's place but since out batting is always incosistent and fragile I'd rather go with the extra cushion. Shoaib can swing his arms with the bat as well and Rana scored a century in county so he isnt a totally clueless tailender either. Bowling options are good this way with 2 spinners and 3 seamers. If we really gotta take a chance we can put Afridi in place of Butt. Afridi is as unreliable as any other opener we have available at this time but Afridi provides a 6th bowling option and is also an outstanding fielder.
Rana has potential, but his test performances have been lacklusture to date. I know there have only been 3, so I am not judging him, but he seems to fade after a decent opening spell.
you can tell some statistical observations absolutely tell you something when you look at the result set - like this one. Bradman, Sobers, Worrel and Greg Chappal figure in the list and that proves the list is valid.
Dravid and Inzy appearing in it is frankly surprising - no inslut meant here, just that I never thought to place them in the same class as the others till this.
