Vengsarkar - Father of all FWB's
DBVfan
Dilip Balwant Vengsarkat was the father of all FWB's. No doubt about it.
Some of his noteable achievements :-
1. At the age of 25 he failed in Aus and NZ in 1981.
2. At 26 he failed to negotiate Imran in 1982-83.
3. At 26 he failed to come up to terms with WI pace attack in 1983.
4. Never scored a 100 in Aus,WI,Pak,NZ despite many trips. Heck, I can't even
remember him playing one inning of character in countries mentioned.
He was good only in India in mid 80s and in England.
Yet he is considered great, just bcos he is from Mumbai.
arun...@hotmail.com
--opinions deleted---
To continue the DBV in Pak and WI debate. Here are more facts.
DBV was second to Mohinder in terms of runs scored in WI 1983.
M I NO Runs HS Avg 100s 50s Ct St M Amarnath 5 9 0 598 117
66.44 2 4 3 - N Kapil Dev 5 8 2 254 100* 42.33 1 1 4 - RJ
Shastri 5 8 2 236 102 39.33 1 - 1 - Yashpal Sharma 5 9 2 242 63
34.57 - 2 4 - DB Vengsarkar 5 9 0 279 94 31.00 - 2 2 - SM
Gavaskar 5 9 1 240 147* 30.00 1 - 4 - BS Sandhu 4 6 2 91 68
22.75 - 1 1 - AD Gaekwad 5 9 0 200 72 22.22 - 2 3 -
In what was a low scoring series for both teams, the highest avg was
C.G.Greenidge's who had 70 odd. Richards had an average of 47 ( our bowling
attack had Kapil, Sandhu, Madan, Venkat, Siva, Maninder and Mohinder - who
rarely bowled). Mohinder was hailed as the best batsman against pace at this
point in time.
1st test
Jamaica
WI won by 4 wickets largely due to Richards' 61.
India 1st innings SM Gavaskar c Dujon b Marshall 20 AD Gaekwad c Dujon b
Holding 1 M Amarnath c Dujon b Garner 29 DB Vengsarkar c Richards b
Roberts 30 Yashpal Sharma c Haynes b Garner 63 RJ Shastri c Dujon b
Holding 1 *N Kapil Dev c Marshall b Roberts 5 +SMH Kirmani c Dujon b
Marshall 5 BS Sandhu c Garner b Roberts 68 S Venkataraghavan b Roberts
0 Maninder Singh not out 3 Extras (b 1, lb 15, nb 10) 26 Total (all out,
87.4 overs) 251
WI got 254
India 2nd innings SM Gavaskar b Holding 0 AD Gaekwad c Greenidge b
Marshall 23 M Amarnath c Garner b Marshall 40 DB Vengsarkar c Garner b
Marshall 20 Yashpal Sharma c Gomes b Holding 24 RJ Shastri not out 25
India all out 174
2nd test POS, Trinidad ; Match drawn
India 1st innings
SM Gavaskar c Dujon b Holding 1
AD Gaekwad run out 0
M Amarnath c Lloyd b Roberts 58
DB Vengsarkar c Holding b Marshall 7
Yashpal Sharma not out 11
RJ Shastri c Gomes b Marshall 42
Total 175
India 2nd innings SM Gavaskar c Dujon b Garner 32 AD Gaekwad c sub(SFAF
Bacchus)b Gomes 35 M Amarnath lbw b Richards 117 DB Vengsarkar c Dujon
b Roberts 45 Yashpal Sharma b Roberts 50 RJ Shastri lbw b Holding 9 *N
Kapil Dev not out 100 +SMH Kirmani run out 30
Total 469
3rd test : Georgetown, Guyana
Match drawn - rain affected ( Guyana of course, :-))
India 1st innings
SM Gavaskar not out 147
AD Gaekwad c Dujon b Holding 8
M Amarnath c Richards b Marshall 13
DB Vengsarkar c Richards b Garner 62
Yashpal Sharma not out 35
Total 284/3
4th test. Barbados. WI won by 10 wickets
India 1st innings
SM Gavaskar c Dujon b Holding 2
AD Gaekwad c Marshall b Roberts 3
M Amarnath c Dujon b Marshall 91
DB Vengsarkar c Marshall b Holding 15
Yashpal Sharma c Richards b Roberts 24
RJ Shastri c Richards b Roberts 29
Total 209
India 2nd innings
SM Gavaskar c Roberts b Garner 19
AD Gaekwad b Holding 55
M Amarnath c Dujon b Roberts 80
DB Vengsarkar lbw b Holding 6
Yashpal Sharma c Greenidge b Roberts 12
RJ Shastri c Lloyd b Marshall 19
BS Sandhu lbw b Roberts 4
*N Kapil Dev c Lloyd b Marshall 26
+SMH Kirmani run out 33
Total 277
5th test : Antigua Match Drawn India 1st innings SM Gavaskar c Dujon b
Marshall 18 AD Gaekwad c Richards b Roberts 3 M Amarnath c Lloyd b
Davis 54 DB Vengsarkar c Davis b Marshall 94 Yashpal Sharma c Gomes b
Roberts 3 RJ Shastri st Dujon b Gomes 102 *N Kapil Dev lbw b Holding
98 +SMH Kirmani c Greenidge b Davis 2 S Madan Lal not out 35
Total 457
India 2nd innings
SM Gavaskar c Dujon b Davis 1
AD Gaekwad lbw b Marshall 72
M Amarnath c Logie b Davis 116
DB Vengsarkar c Dujon b Marshall 0
Total 247/5
To sum up, DBV had scores of 30,20,7,45,62, 15,6,94,0. He got out to Malcolm
Marshall 4 times, twice each to Roberts & Holding, once to Garner.
In ODI's. He had the foll record;
ODI 1 : India 163/7 in 39 overs ( DBV 27, Amarnath 27 - highest scores)
ODI 2 : India 282/5 in 47 overs [ DBV 18* ( came at No 6)]
ODI 3 : India 166 ao in 44 overs ( DBV 54 highest, Yashpal 25 second highest)
I hope that puts DBV's performances in WI and Pak in better perspective. I do
not think the word "great" applies to DBV in an international arena. No less
that it would apply to Mohinder or GRV. However, in terms of Indian cricket,
he can be considered "great" the same way the other two were. The same way
Polly Umrigar, Vijay Manjrekar & Lala ji would be.
SMG, Kapil, Merchant could then safely be labelled as "legends of Indian
cricket". :-) Old timers tend to include Lalaji and Vinoo in this list :-)
SMG's father, Manohar Gavaskar for one, thinks that Lalaji is the best
cricketer India has ever produced. ( SMG had written an article about Lalaji
in Sportstar last year)
We tend to look at cold stats and do not get the "performance criterion" into
focus. For instance, in his classic " Wickets in the East", Ramchandra Guha
has called Ghulam Ahmed one of the best off spinners that India had ( second
only to Pras). His average may surprise statisticians. Guha goes on to
explain that Ahmed would bowl 30-40 overs in a match get 2-3 wickets giving
you the impression that he was ordinary. If you *saw* the match however, you
would notice that the Hyderabad/Indian players would drop at least 4-5
catches during those 40 overs.
Hence, those of us who *saw* DBV, think he was a great. People who may look
at his average in WI, without placing it into proper perspective, will think
he was awful against pace. He wasn't!
Cheers
Arun
Cheers
Arun
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
Uday Rajan
arun...@hotmail.com writes:
> I hope that puts DBV's performances in WI and Pak in better perspective. I do
> not think the word "great" applies to DBV in an international arena. No less
> that it would apply to Mohinder or GRV. However, in terms of Indian cricket,
> he can be considered "great" the same way the other two were. The same way
> Polly Umrigar, Vijay Manjrekar & Lala ji would be.
OK, I haven't seen Polly or Vijay or Lala bat. My impression,
from what I've read, is that most Bombay journalists/commentators
rate Vijay *very* highly. Of those I've seen, my opinion only, but
Mohinder and GRV were a distinct notch above Vengsarkar. The stats
you've posted from the WI again point to his failures there. One
innings of 94, in the 5th Test, on a pretty flat pitch there. That was
his highest in the WI, IIRC, in 3 tours.
> Hence, those of us who *saw* DBV, think he was a great. People who may look
> at his average in WI, without placing it into proper perspective, will think
> he was awful against pace. He wasn't!
Not at home. Hmm...perhaps we can relive this argument w.r.t. Azhar
10 years down the road. I don't think Vengsarkar (or Azhar, BTW) was
"awful" against pace. I do think the record shows that Vengsarkar never
succeeded against pace outside India. "Never", in a career of his length,
is over a period of some 60-odd Tests, perhaps.
A.M.Narayanan
Uday Rajan (ura...@andrew.cmu.edu) wrote:
: arun...@hotmail.com writes:
: from what I've read, is that most Bombay journalists/commentators
: rate Vijay *very* highly. Of those I've seen, my opinion only, but
: Mohinder and GRV were a distinct notch above Vengsarkar. The stats
Yup, You couldn't have said it better. SMG, GRV and M Amarnath
are clearly ahead of DBV and Azhar.
: you've posted from the WI again point to his failures there. One
: innings of 94, in the 5th Test, on a pretty flat pitch there. That was
: his highest in the WI, IIRC, in 3 tours.
: > Hence, those of us who *saw* DBV, think he was a great. People who may look
: > at his average in WI, without placing it into proper perspective, will think
: > he was awful against pace. He wasn't!
: Not at home. Hmm...perhaps we can relive this argument w.r.t. Azhar
: 10 years down the road. I don't think Vengsarkar (or Azhar, BTW) was
: "awful" against pace. I do think the record shows that Vengsarkar never
: succeeded against pace outside India. "Never", in a career of his length,
: is over a period of some 60-odd Tests, perhaps.
Actual problem with Azhar bashers is they point out Azhar failing
against Kasper's bouncer but fail to acknowlegdge his heroics
against Donald and co when others failed quite badly. Selective memory :-)
Wasn't Donald firing bouncers at him.
Secondly I don't think someone is did well just because
he was second best perfromer in a series.
That aside I think u have made a correct acessment on DBV's batting
in Pak. Yes GRV, DBV and Patil did quite badly that series.
But DBV's batting in Indian soil was GREAT.
--
Standard Disclaimers Hold
Harish Chandramouli
In article <6iksdh$7...@pavan.india.hp.com>,
A.M.Narayanan <amn@PROBLEM_WITH_INEWS_GATEWAY_FILE> wrote:
>Actual problem with Azhar bashers is they point out Azhar failing against
>Kasper's bouncer but fail to acknowlegdge his heroics against Donald and
>co when others failed quite badly. Selective memory :-)
It has nothing to do with selective memory, and everything to do with
consistency. Take away the Calcutta innings, and the Cape Town slog
fest (I am not saying that you necessarily should, either, but the
fact remains is that both those knocks were more the exception than
the rule - and thus its a trifle silly - IMHO - to keep citing them
as genuine "counter-examples"), and what you have left is a 14 year
record that more often than not, masks the fact that the man has not
only had more than his share of difficulties against genuinely quick
bowling (ie especially outside the subcontinent) any sort, but even
worse, has at times (The WI tour of '89 readily comes to mind) been
accused of lacking the simple courage to stand up to it.
And if any of what I write above, qualifies as blind bashing of any
sort, then go ahead - feel free to add me to your "list".
>Secondly I don't think someone is did well just because
>he was second best perfromer in a series.
Fine. However, having said that, would you, by the same token, then
suggest that a man who has 648 runs from *30* completed innings in
RSA, WI and Australia combined, at the staggering average of 21.60,
is *wholly* beyond criticism either? ie when it comes to performing
against attacks that are predominantly, pace-oriented.
Cheers,
Harish.
--
"Oww, isn't there something on *this* thing, to get *that* thing"?
-- Homer Simpson, desperately trying to pick up the telephone
with the TV remote.
suresh_...@hotmail.com
In article arun...@hotmail.com wrote:
> not think the word "great" applies to DBV in an international arena. No less
> that it would apply to Mohinder or GRV. However, in terms of Indian cricket,
> he can be considered "great" the same way the other two were. The same way
> Polly Umrigar, Vijay Manjrekar & Lala ji would be.
>
> SMG, Kapil, Merchant could then safely be labelled as "legends of Indian
> cricket". :-) Old timers tend to include Lalaji and Vinoo in this list :-)
Although, I agree with the spirit of the letter; I must take objection to
two things. One is labelling Merchant as great. Vijay Merchant only played
10 tests for India; not all of them as an opener. I believe this is too small
a sample to use to consider a player great. Think of Manjrekar or Azharuddin
after their first 10 tests. They would be branded great if they had retired
after the first 10 tests. But they did not; and now that they have faced
variety of attacks under all kinds of circumstances, we know that they are
simply average and good respectively. I am not saying that Merchant would
have gone the same way; I'm saying we will never know.
2 other players who have had "great" but short careers are Mohan Apte (seven
tests, 5 *in* WI as an *opener*, 50+ avg!) and Piloo Mody. Interestingly,
all three - Merchant, Apte, Mody - got out of test cricket because they all
belonged to rich families; and playing test cricket wasn't lucrative enough!!
But my 2nd objection is a stronger one: ommision of Vijay Hazare from this
list. Vijay Hazare, is by far the best middle order batsman India ever
produced. His average over 10 years of cricket is about 47; higher than
Vishwanath, Mohinder, Vengsarkar, Umgrigar, Jr and Sr Manjrekars, Umrigar,
Lala Amarnath, and all rest of them!!
And even these great stats do not tell the whole picture. Hazare played (and
briefly skippered) for India at a time when Indian cricket was hardly
competitive in the international arena. He, however, was considered one
of the best of his time by critics the world over and lent prestige to Indian
batting order.
And frankly, with due respect to Sr Sr Gavaskar, simply check Lala's numbers
before branding him "good", let alone "great"! (-:
Suresh
Sundarraman Subramanian
amn@PROBLEM_WITH_INEWS_GATEWAY_FILE (A.M.Narayanan) writes:
>
> But DBV's batting in Indian soil was GREAT.
I would say fantastic. What a great 100 he scored in
Delhi against the quartet in full flow in 1983. That
was one hell of a knock. A very courageous batsman
against express pace bowling.
The bastion of Indian batting in 1986 in England
and at home against the West Indies in 1987.
Sundar Subramanian
> --
> Standard Disclaimers Hold
arun...@hotmail.com
In article <6ilf9a$17k$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>#1/1,
suresh_...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> Although, I agree with the spirit of the letter; I must take objection to
> two things. One is labelling Merchant as great. Vijay Merchant only played
> 10 tests for India; not all of them as an opener. I believe this is too small
> a sample to use to consider a player great.
I kinda agree with Uday and Suresh here. However .............
This was in no way a comprehensive "Indian legend" list. If it was, I
wouldn't dream of leaving Chandra, Gupte & Hazare out :-) I simply indicated
that the choice of the words, "great", "good" and "godawful" have to be put
in proper perspective :-)
To quote Sir Garfield Sobers " If the word "great" is applied to David Gower,
we would have to create another word for Sir. Don Bradman"
I think when we express our opinions in favour of or against cricketers, more
often than not, we tend to be subjective. It arises out of our experience of
having seen players in a particular context. For instance, I simply adore
Azhar's batting. However, I think he has completely lacked moral fibre in SA
( barring one inning) and WI. I'm not saying that he was afraid. I am simply
indicating that his attitude was that of one who was not confident of his
technique against bounce in their home territory. (Note I said bounce, not
pace). However, I would label Azhar as an Indian 'great', even if I can't put
him in an all time India XI
For the 70's generation, there were no better spinners than Bedi, Pras and
Chandra. People who look at Pras' stats might raise an eyebrow at his 187
wickets. However, those who saw him and those cricketers who played him (
like Ian Chappell & Sunil Gavaskar - who were the best player of spin bowling
of their generation) consider him to be 'great'.
Regarding Lalaji being labelled as the "best Indian cricketer" by Mr. Manohar
Gavaskar ( SMG's dad). Well, it is said that for his generation, Lalaji was
the quintessential competitor. One who refused to kow tow to the princes and
the burra sahibs. One who appealed when Bradman was at 99, but was the first
one to applaud when he hit his 100th run ( in Aus 1948, I've seen footage of
this inning & Lalaji's antics). To them Lala was the chap who used the
choicest Punjabi abuse at fielders who dropped catches, since he himself gave
100% on the field :-) He was the most colourful cricketer of a generation
which needed character, since they had few heroes to choose from. Remember,
India had just won Independance and they needed icons in the cricketing
arena. So Indian cricket fans of the 30's and 40's think of Lala as an icon.
Again, I never said DBV was better than Vishy ( who remains my all time fav
batsman) or Mohinder (who is my #1 choice for the No. 3 spot in an all time
India XI).
That is what I meant by opinions being subjective. We shouldn't look at cold
averages alone. If we do, we can simply rank the 100 top cricketers in terms
of wickets taken or runs scored. It wouldn't be fun would it?
For one, rsc would be out of business :-)
Ciao
Devadatta Mukutmoni
In article <6ilf9a$17k$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com> suresh_...@hotmail.com writes:
>
>Although, I agree with the spirit of the letter; I must take objection to
>two things. One is labelling Merchant as great. Vijay Merchant only played
>10 tests for India; not all of them as an opener.
True. But, all these tests were played against England over a long
period of time (due to the war). Then, you need to look at his
first class average.
>2 other players who have had "great" but short careers are Mohan Apte (seven
>tests, 5 *in* WI as an *opener*, 50+ avg!) and Piloo Mody.
Madhav Apte.
And you are confusing Piloo Mody (an obese and now dead Indian
politician) with Russi Mody.
>
>But my 2nd objection is a stronger one: ommision of Vijay Hazare from this
>list. Vijay Hazare, is by far the best middle order batsman India ever
>produced. His average over 10 years of cricket is about 47;
Absolutely agree. And besides, he played his first test match way
past his prime.
>And frankly, with due respect to Sr Sr Gavaskar, simply check Lala's numbers
>before branding him "good", let alone "great"! (-:
Lalaji's numbers are pathetic. But he was an interesting commentator.
Why don't we hear of him anymore? Maybe because he is dead.
suresh_...@hotmail.com
In article arun...@hotmail.com wrote:
> That is what I meant by opinions being subjective. We shouldn't look at cold
> averages alone. If we do, we can simply rank the 100 top cricketers in terms
> of wickets taken or runs scored. It wouldn't be fun would it?
> Arun
Very well said, Arun. It is very tempting to brand one's favourite player
"great" simply because we tend to remember his best knocks. For a player to
be "great", he must have very good numbers for his *entire* career, away as
well as home, and under adverse conditions. That's what makes the likes
of Gavaskar and Hazare so special. Among openers, Apte (avg 51) and
Merchant (avg 49) simply did not play enough test cricket. Same is true for
Piloo Mody (avg 47) in the middle-order; and Mohinder, Vishwanath, Vengsarakar
etc. *did* have great years, but did not have great careers; simply very good
ones. The title *great* has to be used very carefully.
Your point about Lalaji's spirit is well taken, and he did score a ton
on his debut. However, to be honest, his career was definately not great.
Suresh
suresh_...@hotmail.com
In article mu...@panix.com (Devadatta Mukutmoni) wrote:
>
> In article suresh_...@hotmail.com
writes:
> >2 other players who have had "great" but short careers are Mohan Apte
(seven
> >tests, 5 *in* WI as an *opener*, 50+ avg!) and Piloo Mody.
>
> Madhav Apte.
> And you are confusing Piloo Mody (an obese and now dead Indian
> politician) with Russi Mody.
Sorry, for using wrong names. Madhav Apte had a prodigous younger brother
who many thought was better than Madhav. He never played beyond Kanga league,
again because he was busy running family businesses. Was his 1st name Mohan?
And calling Russi Mody Piloo is unforgivable. Piloo Mody was this socialist
who never weighed his thoughts before blurting them out, and never weighed
himself before sitting down for a meal! I doubt if piloo could walk between
wickets; let alone run.
My apologies to Russi in perticular and all cricket fans in general!
Suresh
A.M.Narayanan
Harish Chandramouli (ch...@cs.utexas.edu) wrote:
: In article <6iksdh$7...@pavan.india.hp.com>,
: A.M.Narayanan <amn@PROBLEM_WITH_INEWS_GATEWAY_FILE> wrote:
: >Actual problem with Azhar bashers is they point out Azhar failing against
: >Kasper's bouncer but fail to acknowlegdge his heroics against Donald and
: >co when others failed quite badly. Selective memory :-)
: It has nothing to do with selective memory, and everything to do with
: consistency. Take away the Calcutta innings, and the Cape Town slog
: fest (I am not saying that you necessarily should, either, but the
: fact remains is that both those knocks were more the exception than
: the rule - and thus its a trifle silly - IMHO - to keep citing them
: as genuine "counter-examples"), and what you have left is a 14 year
: record that more often than not, masks the fact that the man has not
: only had more than his share of difficulties against genuinely quick
: bowling (ie especially outside the subcontinent) any sort, but even
: worse, has at times (The WI tour of '89 readily comes to mind) been
: accused of lacking the simple courage to stand up to it.
Point accepted. But Azhar and Azhar alone is picked for an eg. of flat wicket bully.
He is not the first and will not be the last. Already Ganguly seems to be
creating some doubts. Coming back to Azhar. Why do people pick
Azhar when we had likes of DBV, RJS, SVM.(I am leaving out the talented Kambli who
was competing with Raju in WI Vs Ind Series).
Was Azhar only pathetic bat in WI series in '89.
In all the innings in which Azhar batted DBV did worse.
But he was entitled to bash Azhar as he had glorious achievement
away from home. RJS was pathetic but for that 100.
Hmm shade above Azhar that series, thanks to that
meaningless 29* in the Georgetown Test(where it usually rains).
That's why I wrote to say second best 4 th best etc etc is
rubbish. Azhar besides that has done better in NZ against Hadlee.
In 1990 when DBV was not selected there was so much hue and cry
as he had made 50 against Gujarat and 100 against Saurashtra etc
during the time when Azhar was making 100 and some 50s in Pak.
Remember Sialkot was a GREEN Top. Azhar had a 50. Thanks to
Pak fielding though(even SVM has to thank Pak's fielding
that series). DBV made duck on comeback in NZ(first ball gone).
I have never heard anybody bashing DBV for his batting away from home.
Batting in Pak is no joke BTW. Ask GRV, DBV, Patil, Srikkanth and many
others. For all the bashing, Azhar did well there.
Some days back I read an article that Azhar finished the caeer of
Kapil(what a joke), RJS, Prabhakar and More.
Kapil :- 180 wicxkets in last 70 Tests. He was very good till 1984.
But between 1990 and 1994 he was a liability.
RJS:- For his wonderful batting against Davis at Home(remember no Marshall that series)
he should have been kicked out in 1988. He went to Wi where he had
tonnes of problms against Bishop. Between 85 ans 89 his avg was 30.
All rounder is't he. 150 wkts in 80 Tests. I am not sure
how many batsmen in the world have managed to play 80 Tests with
avg of 35.
Prabhakar: He was decent. But I don't see him play much longer
than he did with batting avg of 33 and 96 wkts in 39 Tests.
After that Pak series he too didn't do much with the ball.
More:- Isnt Mongia a better batsman esp in ODIs.
When it comes to captaincy Azhar has done much better than
most others. People talk of designer tracks. As if it wasn't before
and after all SL didn't prepare designer tracks for Indian
in 1993(remeber we couldn't beat them at all recently).
If things like captaincy, fielding ODI cricket etc
have to be taken into consideration Azhar would be better
than most other FWB(who are not considered FWBs though)
If I have to discard those by Azhar and look at his carer
then we also need to look at SRT's batting in Aus and RSA without
148* and 169. Brilliant. Indian batting in Aus as a whole sucked.
Many times u could hear commentators saying second 5 wickets
have contibuted more than first 5. This happened around
5-6 times. Azhar had one good knock and all the rest useless.
RJS of his 5 knocks had one good knockand other 4 useless.
SRt had 2 good knock and rest all uselss. SVM had all useless
knocks. What is the big diff. DBV had 2 good knocks and rest
useless. So was Prabhakar.
: And if any of what I write above, qualifies as blind bashing of any
: sort, then go ahead - feel free to add me to your "list".
I don't understnd this. It sounds like some personel remark.
: >Secondly I don't think someone is did well just because
: >he was second best perfromer in a series.
: Fine. However, having said that, would you, by the same token, then
: suggest that a man who has 648 runs from *30* completed innings in
: RSA, WI and Australia combined, at the staggering average of 21.60,
: is *wholly* beyond criticism either? ie when it comes to performing
: against attacks that are predominantly, pace-oriented.
No not all beyond criticizm. But when I criticize SRT's batting
based on stats it is I who get criticized by many
including u :-). Also u have to include Pak in the above list.
To me omitting Pak in the above list is a convinient
omission as batting in Pak has been very difficult
for many.
: Cheers,
Cheers
AMN
: Harish.
: --
: "Oww, isn't there something on *this* thing, to get *that* thing"?
: -- Homer Simpson, desperately trying to pick up the telephone
: with the TV remote.
--
Standard Disclaimers Hold
Harish Chandramouli
In article <6inkpl$i...@pavan.india.hp.com>,
A.M.Narayanan <amn@PROBLEM_WITH_INEWS_GATEWAY_FILE> wrote:
<snip>
>Point accepted. But Azhar and Azhar alone is picked for an eg. of flat
>wicket bully.
That might have something to do with the fact that he's the biggest
one still around, you'll find. And the comparison to Kambli isn't a
valid one. Vinod hasn't been given the umpteen chances abroad that
Azhar has, nor has he been rewarded for his general lack of grit and
courage in the face of hostile bowling, with the captaincy.
>He is not the first and will not be the last.
Of course.
>Already Ganguly seems to be creating some doubts.
I personally think Ganguly's a dead man on any track with a bit of
bounce in it, but that said, at least he hasn't been a categorical
failure in places like RSA, Aus and the WI (okay, so he was awful
in the WI, but he did get 2 70's in the same test in RSA for eg)
till now - and so does deserve the benefit of the doubt, to a
degree.
>Coming back to Azhar. Why do people pick Azhar when we had likes of
Why waste your time picking on retired players though, when the
present captain is more than fair game?
>No not all beyond criticizm. But when I criticize SRT's batting based
>on stats it is I who get criticized by many including u :-).
I am not sure what your criticism was, but no one who saw Tendulkar
bat against Australia back in 1992, or even South Africa, later in
the year, would *seriously* accuse him of not being able to stand
up to pace bowling - on or off a bouncy track.
Criticisms of Azharuddin seem a little skewed, because there *have*
been times when he has let his genius flow, and come up with the sort
of innings which people remember for eternity to come (the 106 at
Adelaide, and the 115 at Cape Town readily come to mind - the latter
being one of the best efforts I've seen myself) - but unfortunately,
and as those numbers in RSA, Aus and the WI only too clearly suggest,
those times have been only too far and too few in between, abroad, to
significantly impact the state of Indian cricket.
And more's the pity for it.
Cheers,
Sundarraman Subramanian
amn@PROBLEM_WITH_INEWS_GATEWAY_FILE (A.M.Narayanan) writes:
> No not all beyond criticizm. But when I criticize SRT's batting
> based on stats it is I who get criticized by many
^^^^^
> including u :-). Also u have to include Pak in the above list.
> To me omitting Pak in the above list is a convinient
> omission as batting in Pak has been very difficult
> for many.
Narayanan, many of your posts are good, I agree. But I have
a small point about this stats that you mention above. IMO,
you based your argument on stats only when it suited your
purpose. When stats did not support your arguments (like
for instance SRT's good average against West Indies or
Australia), you started bringing in considerations which
were solely subjective and that were based on your personal
view of the situation.
Sundar Subramanian
arun...@hotmail.com
In article <6inb1m$feh$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>#1/1,
Rusi Mody ( also spelt as Russy). Piloo, iirc was a politician.
and Mohinder, Vishwanath, Vengsarakar
> etc. *did* have great years, but did not have great careers; simply very good
> ones. The title *great* has to be used very carefully.
Agreed. What joy they've provided us! Esp Vishy. He's probably one of the
few guys around whom *everyone* loves and respects. Fans, cricketers and
contemprories included.
I recall reading an article by an English cricketer ( might've been Trevor
Bailey), some time back. He said that the word 'great' was widely misused. He
spoke about a function which was attended by current and former test players
from Eng and Aus. Present were some legends..Harvey, Miller, Bedser, Dexter,
May, Cowdrey etc. There was a huge amount of noise due to incessant chatter.
At one point, however, there was a hushed silence as everyone realised that
the Don had entered the hall. Apparently, the whole hall, to a man, stood up
and applauded His arrival. The applause went for a full 5-10 mins. Bailey
wrote " Now that is what I call 'great'"
> Your point about Lalaji's spirit is well taken, and he did score a ton
> on his debut. However, to be honest, his career was definately not great.
Lala had a pretty ordinary career. Similarly, Salim Durrani was great
potential, but his performances did not do justice to his career. But try
telling a 60's -70's guy that Durrani was ordinary, you may end up badly hurt
:-))
Old Jungle Saying " During those days, Durrani used to hit a six on public
demand!" :-)
Ciao
A.M.Narayanan
Harish Chandramouli (ch...@cs.utexas.edu) wrote:
: That might have something to do with the fact that he's the biggest
: one still around, you'll find. And the comparison to Kambli isn't a
No. Azhar was ther chosen for attack even in 1989 against WI.
Remeber Vengsarkar had a poor run. That too he had quite a bit
of weakness outside the off stump.
: valid one. Vinod hasn't been given the umpteen chances abroad that
: Azhar has, nor has he been rewarded for his general lack of grit and
Fact was Azhar went abroad as he could play fast bowlers in India.
A guy who cannot play bouncer in Bombay and shows absoultuly
no foot work in his best knock in a series(the 44 in Mumbai first innings)
against a second rate fast bowling can *NEVER* succeed away with that
technique. Unless there is some improvement in *technique* there is
no point selecting him.
: courage in the face of hostile bowling, with the captaincy.
: >He is not the first and will not be the last.
: Of course.
: >Already Ganguly seems to be creating some doubts.
: I personally think Ganguly's a dead man on any track with a bit of
: bounce in it, but that said, at least he hasn't been a categorical
Hmm. That descrtition holds mailny for Kambli IMO. Ganguly had
2 fifties in RSA. That wicket offered bounce though not
the bounciest.
: failure in places like RSA, Aus and the WI (okay, so he was awful
: in the WI, but he did get 2 70's in the same test in RSA for eg)
: till now - and so does deserve the benefit of the doubt, to a
: degree.
: >Coming back to Azhar. Why do people pick Azhar when we had likes of
: Why waste your time picking on retired players though, when the
: present captain is more than fair game?
Hmm. Those super stars were never bashed during there days.
: >No not all beyond criticizm. But when I criticize SRT's batting based
: >on stats it is I who get criticized by many including u :-).
: I am not sure what your criticism was, but no one who saw Tendulkar
: bat against Australia back in 1992, or even South Africa, later in
Gawd. Gimme a break. Just go find out how many times some 100 odd for 5 or
more wkts in Aus. U want to convince that SRT was comfortable there.
He had some 100 runs in 7 knocks besides those two brilliant 100s.
In RSA 96-97 he was uncomfortable even in India.
RSA had worked so much on his psyche during the Sharjah tourney
and Titan cup b4 the Tests began. U know in Cal he had *NO CLUE* of
Symcox. Just take a look at that dismissal. During the ODIs
Devilliers bowled on his legs the slower one and SRT spooned
a catch couple of times. After that SRT was trying lot of things like
playing like a slow opener. Nothing worked. Tests started.
He was in awful form. His form continued. At Durban much is talked about
how unluck Sachin was to be out of a briliiant catch by Kirsten.
But he had life wehn he was in. Pollock dropped a return catch.
At Captetown SRT employed Backward and across shuffle to counter pace.
Nothing wrong, many batsmen like Sobers SMG have employed it.
He was successful and he alonw with Azhar produced what is considered as
greatest thing RSA people witnessesd. That was it. His 50 in Kanpur Test
in India was far from confident. I give credit for it
as he was fighting for form though Donald didn't bowl.
Then in WI he started badly against Rose. The way he got bowled was
a bad scene. Then he made 88 where he was beaten around 10 times
outside the offstump. That 92 was a better knock and he was unfortunate to
be given out of a noball. Bucknor umpiring was bad, he gave Sidhu out
of a noball too. After that series was dull draw as matches
were rained.
: the year, would *seriously* accuse him of not being able to stand
: up to pace bowling - on or off a bouncy track.
I am sorry to disagree. But for the 100s in Aus he could not stand.
In any case he did make some runs and was better than Azhar.
But don't suggest the idea that SRT was comfortable
in in Aus barring those two knocks(his avg is 14 in the rest 7 knocks).
SRT's consistancy in Aus or RSA was quite poor.
: Criticisms of Azharuddin seem a little skewed, because there *have*
: been times when he has let his genius flow, and come up with the sort
: of innings which people remember for eternity to come (the 106 at
: Adelaide, and the 115 at Cape Town readily come to mind - the latter
: being one of the best efforts I've seen myself) - but unfortunately,
: and as those numbers in RSA, Aus and the WI only too clearly suggest,
Agreed. I have never heard Manjrekar bashing for all the numbers
he had in Aus, WI, NZ, Eng and RSA.
I have heard that Azhar won on designer tracks of India only
kinda remarks when others don't even do that.
: those times have been only too far and too few in between, abroad, to
: significantly impact the state of Indian cricket.
: And more's the pity for it.
Cheers,
Narayanan[no flames please]
: Cheers,
R. Bharat Rao
Harish Chandramouli wrote:
> Criticisms of Azharuddin seem a little skewed, because there *have*
> been times when he has let his genius flow, and come up with the sort
> of innings which people remember for eternity to come (the 106 at
> Adelaide, and the 115 at Cape Town readily come to mind - the latter
> being one of the best efforts I've seen myself) - but unfortunately,
> and as those numbers in RSA, Aus and the WI only too clearly suggest,
> those times have been only too far and too few in between, abroad, to
> significantly impact the state of Indian cricket.
>
> And more's the pity for it.
No question, that Azhar has not lived up to his awesome talent (its
strangeto call a man with the highest number of Test 100's among active
batsmen,
and a 45+ Test average an under-achiever, but I think he is). However,
I think, to some extent, in analyzing Azhar, we tend to compare him with
what we think he *could* do -- rather than what he has done. And thats
a bit unfair. (I think other artists, such as Gower, and Vishwanath --
though
amazingly Vishy escaped this knock for most of his career -- just because
they make batting look so easy, and then look ugly, very ugly, getting out,
have suffered from the same unfair criticism.) -- BTW, I think the
criticism
of Carl Hooper was justified -- not because of the way he got out/batted,
but because his average was very low for a veteran middle-order bat.
Did Azhar have the talent to go down as one of the all-time greatest Indian
bats? IMO, he definitely did. Has he come close to that standard --
unfortunately,
no. However, he still has been a very, very good bat for a very long time,
and
would make many people's all-time Indian XI -- I certainly rate him above
Vengsarkar, about even with Vishy (simply because while Vishy was great for
a while, over his entire career, he had a very long sub-par end -- if you
go
with "peak" abilities, then both Vishy and Mohindar Amarnath rate above
Azhar, but IMO Azhar has a slightly better career than Vishy, and a much
better one than the much-loved Mohindar), and a tad below Hazare as
far as middle-order Indian bats go. Needless to say (but I'll say it
anyway,
to forestall some posts) SRT comes in above all other middle-order bats.
That is why I was incredibly disappointed by his performance in West
Indies.
From those who were on the tour, Azhar seemed totally uninterested in
cricket (may recall that "I may only play ODI's from now on"), threw his
wicket away in 2 run chases coming in at 300+/4 (he should have been
at #5 -- bad tactics by SRT not to promote him in those situations), and
failed miserably in 2-3 critical situations. I almost felt like flying
over there,
grabbing the guy by his shirt-front with two hands, and shaking him hard,
while saying "This is your chance to make a mark on history. To address
the one huge blemish on your career -- your abject failure in West Indies.
At least for the sake of your place in history, try, try, try, your bloody
hardest." And he didn't -- more the pity. I'm not offering this as an
excuse; his record in WI is what it is, and while I feel its not a fair
justification of his ability (groin injury his first tour, brain damage the
second:-), it must be considered -- and yes, is a fair criticism.
However, as you point out, my objection is with those who say "Azhar
can't play pace." That opinion is clearly as ludicrous as saying "Azhar
is a great player of pace" based on 2-3 innings. I think a fairer
statement is, Azhar has shown the ability to play pace in very difficult
conditions and in pressure-packed situations a few times -- at least
often enough to show us that he can do it. However, overall he
has done all too few times, and that is a black mark on his record.
Bharat
Vittal S. Arantatmula
Please forgive me for not following the entire thread. I keep reading
Azhar's incapability to play genuine pace attack and all that.
In the last 15 years or so, SMG, SRT, Azhar played one English season
(among the frontline batsmen). Azhar did better than SRT and SMG and
scored more than 2000 runs. English leauge has bowlers from all over the
world and conditions are definitely good for fast bowling. How come a
batsman with no technique (as some people in rsc claim) against pace
attack can score so many runs?
After watching him play some breathtaking shots off Akram in 1989 in Pak,
I started liking Azhar. I have no problem in accepting him as a competent
batsman.
If run making is so easy in ODIs (as many discount Azhar's success at ODI
level), how come some of the old stars like Gavaskar struggled in ODIs?
In India, Azhar is definitely not inferior to SRT and SMG.
Vittal
Neeran M. Karnik
suresh_...@hotmail.com writes:
>Although, I agree with the spirit of the letter; I must take objection to
>two things. One is labelling Merchant as great. Vijay Merchant only played
>10 tests for India; not all of them as an opener. I believe this is too small
>a sample to use to consider a player great. Think of Manjrekar or Azharuddin
>after their first 10 tests. They would be branded great if they had retired
>after the first 10 tests.
I don't agree with this argument. Azhar and Manjrekar played their
first 10 Tests probably within a year. Merchant's 10 Tests were
over a period of 18 years -- partly because of WW-II and partly
because India played so few Tests in those early days.
If a certain number of Tests is considered necessary for labelling
someone as great, then there were no great players before Test
cricket started. And someone like WG Grace, who only scored ~1000
runs at 32, and only took 9 wickets in Tests, would not qualify.
Merchant certainly was a great opening batsman -- the second-best
ever produced by India without a doubt. If you read, for example,
Arlott or Cardus' accounts on the 1946 English tour, they often
assert that Merchant was among the top few batsmen in the game
then. And considering the wealth of batting (even openers) around
at that time, that's a significant testimonial to his greatness. In
first-class cricket of course, statistically Merchant was second to
none, except for the Don. Tales are still told of the battles
between him and Hazare for Ranji batting records.
>2 other players who have had "great" but short careers are Mohan Apte (seven
>tests, 5 *in* WI as an *opener*, 50+ avg!) and Piloo Mody. Interestingly,
>all three - Merchant, Apte, Mody - got out of test cricket because they all
>belonged to rich families; and playing test cricket wasn't lucrative enough!!
That's Madhav Apte. His brother, Arvind, also played for India. The
Aptes did not get out of cricket because it wasn't _lucrative_
enough, they got out because they *needed* to tend to their
business. Cricket simply wasn't an occupation for most Indian
players then... I haven't heard of Merchant getting out of cricket
because of his business commitments though. As for Rusi (not
Piloo) Modi, I was under the impression that he had injury/illness
problems, because of which his career was truncated.
>But my 2nd objection is a stronger one: ommision of Vijay Hazare from this
>list. Vijay Hazare, is by far the best middle order batsman India ever
>produced. His average over 10 years of cricket is about 47; higher than
>Vishwanath, Mohinder, Vengsarkar, Umgrigar, Jr and Sr Manjrekars, Umrigar,
>Lala Amarnath, and all rest of them!!
Certainly, Hazare's a very strong contender for a middle-order spot
in the all-time Indian lineup. I'm not sure I'll go with "by far
the best mid-order bat" though. I think Vishwanath and Tendulkar,
at the least, have stronger claims to that title. If "best" is a
simple statistical best, then Tendulkar beats him, and Dravid
probably will too. If it's subjective, then IMHO Vishy was the
better batsman, and there are old-timers who will swear that Vijay
Manjrekar was better too.
Incidentally, Hazare played Tests for less than 7 years, but he lost
his best years to WW-II (he was 31 when he made his Test debut in
1946).
>And frankly, with due respect to Sr Sr Gavaskar, simply check Lala's numbers
>before branding him "good", let alone "great"! (-:
Lala's Test numbers may not be good, but they do no justice at all
to his talent. He was a very, *very* good strokeplayer, and a fine
fielder in the days when the Indians regularly dropped a dozen or
more catches per Test. He was also a more-than-useful seamer. In
fact, both Lala and Hazare have unbelievably good *bowling* stats in
the Ranji trophy. Grandpa Gavaskar must have regularly seen Lala
play, along with other batting stars like Hazare, Merchant and
Modi. And he is hardly alone in ranking the Lala above all the
rest.
>Suresh
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+
| Neeran M. Karnik | #1 fan of Sachin Ramesh Tendulkar on r.s.c. :-> |
| Dept. of CompSci.| "Pele in football, Becker in tennis, Ali in |
| U of Minnesota | boxing. Sachin is in that league." - Tony Cozier |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dipak Basu
arun...@hotmail.com wrote:
> Rusi Mody ( also spelt as Russy). Piloo, iirc was a politician.
Piloo was a writer (too?) and a pretty pessimistic one at that. Here is
an extract I found on Rediff:
"Will things get any better? Consider what Piloo Mody wrote more than
fifteen years ago: 'Look at the picture of India. Does it inspire any
confidence? Does it show that there is a government in this
country?..... There is no order, there is no government, there is no
leadership, there is no prime minister. Various territories have been
captured by the local mafia, operating their rackets and holding the
populace to ransom with arbitrary law and no justice... Good men sleep,
while mob rule reigns in India.'"
He could well have been talking about selectorial politics ;-)
Dipak.
Uday Rajan
v...@gwis2.circ.gwu.edu (Vittal S. Arantatmula) writes:
>
> Please forgive me for not following the entire thread. I keep reading
> Azhar's incapability to play genuine pace attack and all that.
>
> In the last 15 years or so, SMG, SRT, Azhar played one English season
> (among the frontline batsmen). Azhar did better than SRT and SMG and
> scored more than 2000 runs. English leauge has bowlers from all over the
> world and conditions are definitely good for fast bowling. How come a
> batsman with no technique (as some people in rsc claim) against pace
> attack can score so many runs?
point. If success at county level was any indication of ability to
play pace in Tests, Hick must rank among the best players of pace
ever. Somewhere Down Under, Merv Hughes will be having a not-so-quiet
chuckle about that.
suresh_...@hotmail.com
In article kar...@cs.umn.edu (Neeran M. Karnik) wrote:
>
> >Vijay Merchant only played 10 tests for India;
> >a sample to use to consider a player great.
>
> over a period of 18 years -- partly because of WW-II and partly
> because India played so few Tests in those early days.
Yes, but he *did* skip a couple of series. Indian toured AUS and WI.
Would 've been interesting to see Merchant face Lindwall, Jones et al.
I believe we do need a bigger sample than 10 tests and 1 opponent.
> Arlott or Cardus' accounts on the 1946 English tour, they often
> assert that Merchant was among the top few batsmen in the game
> then.
Don't you think Jr. Manjrekar was "among the top few batsmen in the game"
at the end of that great PAK tour? His *career* however, is not great.
> And considering the wealth of batting (even openers) around
> at that time, that's a significant testimonial to his greatness. In
> first-class cricket of course, statistically Merchant was second to
> none, except for the Don. Tales are still told of the battles
> between him and Hazare for Ranji batting records.
>
He was one of the greats as far as Indian domestic
is concerned. But then so were Patel, A. Mankad, and Sharma! (-:
Actually, I do think that Merchant was likely a great opener. I was
just wondering if you can call him that based on the very short career (in
terms of tests and number of oppositions) he had. Otherwise, you must say
that Madhav Apte was "greater". His average is higher.
He only played 5 innings less; but he played most of his away; an opener
in WI for that matter.
> Aptes did not get out of cricket because it wasn't _lucrative_
> enough, they got out because they *needed* to tend to their
> business. I haven't heard of Merchant getting out of cricket
> because of his business commitments though.
He did. Those days, you made very little money playing cricket. So the
only ones who played were either those who needed that little money or
were the 'idle rich'. Likes the Aptes, Merchant was busy running the
Thackersey (sp?) mills.
> Certainly, Hazare's a very strong contender for a middle-order spot
> in the all-time Indian lineup. I'm not sure I'll go with "by far
> the best mid-order bat" though. I think Vishwanath and Tendulkar,
> at the least, have stronger claims to that title. If "best" is a
> simple statistical best, then Tendulkar beats him, and Dravid
> probably will too. If it's subjective, then IMHO Vishy was the
> better batsman, and there are old-timers who will swear that Vijay
> Manjrekar was better too.
Oh, I'm not basing my opinion solely on stats. I also took into
consideration good scores in "clutch situations", quality of oppositions,
record outside India, ability to succeed when rest of the team is failing,
consistency over the whole career, etc. If you look at all these factors
along with stats (which are quite important), you have to limit Mohinder,
Vishy, Umrigar etc to "very good", but not great.
(And I do hope that Tendulkar, Dravid have "great" careers; they certainly
are on their way.)
> Lala's Test numbers may not be good, but they do no justice at all
> to his talent. He was a very, *very* good strokeplayer, and a fine
> fielder in the days when the Indians regularly dropped a dozen or
> more catches per Test.
This is a half-truth. Our fielding was bad, but we *did* have excellent
fielders. Hemu Adhikari is considered one of the best outfielders ever.
Lala was great on the field as was Dattu Phadkar and Datta Gaekwad.
> Grandpa Gavaskar must have regularly seen Lala
> play, along with other batting stars like Hazare, Merchant and
> Modi. And he is hardly alone in ranking the Lala above all the
> rest.
This is exactly what I'm talking about. We tend to remember the best
years of our favorite players. Grandpa Gavaskar (I like that!) remembers
Lala's dazzling knocks, as others remember Sr Manjrekar's gutsy tons.
IMHO, that is not enough.
Suresh
Offie
>Although, I agree with the spirit of the letter; I must take objection to
>two things. One is labelling Merchant as great. Vijay Merchant only played
>small
>a sample to use to consider a player great. Think of Manjrekar or Azharuddin
>after their first 10 tests. They would be branded great if they had retired
>variety of attacks under all kinds of circumstances, we know that they are
>simply average and good respectively. I am not saying that Merchant would
>have gone the same way; I'm saying we will never know.
>
I also agree with the spirit of Arun's letter - but I must disagree vehemently
with you in the Merchant regard :-)
India just did not play many tests in the 30's and 40s - you cannot, IMHO,
judge players from that era on test numbers alone, it is a grave injustice.
Merchant missed large chunks of his career - his peak years - due to the War
too. Most people who watched cricket in those days are unanimous in their view
that Merchant was the best batsman India had ever produced (until SMG, at least
- and some are not convinced SMG was even as good as Merchant :-) In *addition*
to the above, in *addition* to an awesome first-class average, Merchant,
despite missing the peak of his career etc, *still* averaged 47 over 10 tests -
and ended his test career with a ton ! If Merchant doesnt qualify as a "great"
in Indian cricket lore, IMHO *nobody* does.
>2 other players who have had "great" but short careers are Mohan Apte (seven
>tests, 5 *in* WI as an *opener*, 50+ avg!) and Piloo Mody. Interestingly,
>all three - Merchant, Apte, Mody - got out of test cricket because they all
>belonged to rich families; and playing test cricket wasn't lucrative enough!!
>
As has been pointed out, Rusi Modi :-) But it wasnt entirely due to being rich
- also many health problems etc involved for Modi I believe.
>But my 2nd objection is a stronger one: ommision of Vijay Hazare from this
>list. Vijay Hazare, is by far the best middle order batsman India ever
>produced. His average over 10 years of cricket is about 47; higher than
>Vishwanath, Mohinder, Vengsarkar, Umgrigar, Jr and Sr Manjrekars, Umrigar,
>Lala Amarnath, and all rest of them!!
>And even these great stats do not tell the whole picture. Hazare played (and
>briefly skippered) for India at a time when Indian cricket was hardly
>competitive in the international arena. He, however, was considered one
>of the best of his time by critics the world over and lent prestige to Indian
>batting order.
>
I do, however, agree entirely with you about Vijay Hazare - IMHO probably
*still* the greatest middle-order batsman India has ever produced. He is the
first name I put down in the middle order for my all-time India XI - ahead of
all the Vishwanath's, Tendulkar's, Mohinder's, Azhar's, Vengsarkar's etc.
The most amazing thing about Hazare is - he made his test debut when he was 31
years old !! He too missed the peak of his career due to the War - the years
when he was truly on song, and had those great run battles with Vijay Merchant
- when Merchant and Hazare each broke the all-time Indian score record in first
class cricket about 4 times in a couple of months, each pushing the other to
greater heights.
>And frankly, with due respect to Sr Sr Gavaskar, simply check Lala's numbers
>before branding him "good", let alone "great"! (-:
>
Again, I dont believe you can look at just numbers with such a small sample
size, and the fact that most of the great years were missed due to the War and
lack of test opportunities. How great would Lala have been in ODIs today? One
only has to look at Mohinder's success - and realize that Lala was possibly
better suited to ODI cricket than Mohinder was ! His bowling would have driven
batsmen to distraction in ODIs - Arlott claims he bowled precisely 2
half-volleys on the entire England tour in 1948 (a 3 month tour,that was :-)
But, I agree to some extent - Ive never picked Lala for the All-time India XI,
myself :-)
Sadiq [ Hazare fan ] Yusuf
>Suresh
>
Offie
> One is labelling Merchant as great. Vijay Merchant only played
>>10 tests for India; not all of them as an opener.
>
>>list.
>past his prime.
Yet another point I'd like to make here - while it is completely true that
Vijay Hazare played his first test at 31 and was past his prime, lets also look
at Merchant. His last test came at age 40, when he scored a century in his last
test and then retired ! He played 10 official tests in his career - he didnt
retire because he was rich and didnt think cricket was lucrative anymore,
surely? 40 is a good enough age to retire :-) A lot of Merchant's 10 tests also
came when he was well past his peak - and he *still* averaged 48 over his
career !
Hazare was cruelly treated by the War - his first official test came at age 31.
However, he played 30 tests and still managed to retire by age 38 - quite a
congested schedule, at a time India was getting a lot more tests.
Anyway. Those 2 and SMG are the first 3 names I put down on my all-time India
XI, so I consider all 3 equally great :-)
Sadiq [ who listened to Merchant every Sunday for years ] Yusuf
Offie
>He was one of the greats as far as Indian domestic
>is concerned. But then so were Patel, A. Mankad, and Sharma! (-:
>
Heh. Come on :-) Patel averaged like 57 in the Ranjis. Merchant averaged 98 in
the Ranjis for his career :-) Merchant in his day had the 2nd best average in
the world in first class cricket, below only The Don. He also averaged very
solidly on the England tour in 1948 in first class games - and this at a time
when he was already 37 years old ! Remember this isnt the England you think of
today - this is an England team that was much superior to all other teams in
the world, bar possibly Australia. You might consider a knock vs WI in the 80s
as being something special - in those days a knock vs WI or Pakistan was not
very much compared to a knock vs England, due to level of opposition reasons.
>Actually, I do think that Merchant was likely a great opener. I was
>just wondering if you can call him that based on the very short career (in
>terms of tests and number of oppositions) he had. Otherwise, you must say
>that Madhav Apte was "greater". His average is higher.
>He only played 5 innings less; but he played most of his away; an opener
>in WI for that matter.
>
See above. The mindset of which opponent was harder needs total revision, from
what it is today :-)
>> Aptes did not get out of cricket because it wasn't _lucrative_
>> enough, they got out because they *needed* to tend to their
>> business. I haven't heard of Merchant getting out of cricket
>> because of his business commitments though.
>
>He did. Those days, you made very little money playing cricket. So the
>only ones who played were either those who needed that little money or
>were the 'idle rich'. Likes the Aptes, Merchant was busy running the
>Thackersey (sp?) mills.
>
Not true at all, as far as Merchant was concerned at least. He was 40 years old
when he played his last test !! I mean, come on. If he was so concerned about
business, he would have retired years before that, surely?
Sadiq [ who still recalls the Arlott comments on Merchant ] Yusuf
----------
Hah ! I found the comments of Arlott on Merchant !! Thanks to Ramaswamy, from
many years ago :-)
V.M. Merchant
His 148 at Lord's was not Vijay Merchant's highest innings of the
tour, but it was his richest. The air held rain and little of the
sun, yet, English as the setting was, this Indian batsman showed
us there his best. I knew how anxious he was to make a hundred
that day and I was amazed to see his stroke-play flowering under
his anxiety.
Merchant's physical quality is neither the massive might nor the
whipcord leanness of other great batsmen. There is something softly
feline about him -- at the wicket, shirt and sweater heavy to
wrists, thick white muffler at his throat, blue-capped, he moves
pad-footed -- but the stroke, for all its control, is flash-fast
because, ignoring the bowler's hand, he plays every ball strictly
"off the pitch." An innings by Merchant grows; it sprouts no
exotic blooms but its construction is perfect to the last detail.
No chance, no ball which beats the bat, no brutishness of the
wicket, no pace or spin or swing can disconcert him.
Like Herbert Sutcliffe, until he is finally and definitely out,
Merchant is the batsman in possession, intent upon tending his,
and his team's, score. Daya after day, season-long, I watched
him, notching off each hour with thirty runs and marking the meal
intervals with his cap -- when the peak is directly over his
right ear, it is time for lunch or tea or close of play. Not only
was he the mainstay of the team's batting in terms of the runs he
made himself, but often he nursed the start of a big innings by
Modi or Mankad or Hazare, each of whom batted better in his
company. Merchant's batting technique is never violent, he seems
to have an unvarying system of ball-evaluation which controls his
batting reflexes. Bowl an over of balls two feet short of a
length and he will hit you for six certain fours to mid-wicket on
the leg side; bowl a good-length over on the middle stump and he
will play you back a maiden, and this holds good whether his
score is 0 or 100. But it is not to say that he cannot, or does
not, adjust his batting to the state of the game. If the state
of the wicket reasonably permits it, he will start to cut when he
has made about 50, and his cut is the finest in first-class
cricket today. More rarely he will use a whip-lash cover-drive.
Merchant's soundness is vividly illustrated by his methods of
dismissal during the tour. He was most frequently dismissed LBW,
the in-swinger which straightened off the pitch. That ball was
the one for which the seam bowler prays -- he can but pray, for
no man alive can bowl it at will; that rare, providential
delivery came to be regarded as Merchant's weakness -- since no
deliberately contrived ball could be relied upon consistently to
worry him. Merchant, as batsman, captain and man, is well
pictured in an incident in the match against the South of England
at the Hastings Festival. He was captain of the side, in the
ansence of Pataudi. On the third day he was in considerable pain
from strained stomach-muscles. Beleieving that changes in the
batting order often unsettle batsmen, he decided to go in first
as usual, but to get out fairly quickly. Once at the crease he
scored at twice his usual pace, but by the same strokes. His
deeply absorbed batting-sense allowed him to take a risk only in
making the ball into a punishable one, but not in playing it. On
his dismissal he returned to the pavillion in increased pain to
shake his head sadly at his inability to sacrifice his wicket.
Soft-footed at the crease, Merchant appears heavy-footed in the
outfield, but he always chases the ball to the last hope; often
over-anxious about a catch, he was yet safer than many of the
team in the deepfield. As the tour wore on he improved as a
close-to-the-wicket field and, if not in the first class there,
his short-leg catch to dismiss T.N. Pierce at Southend was
memorable. As a captain he took few risks; he maintained
discipline by his good manners, unaffected dignity and genuine
consideration for his players.
It is impossible not to like Vijay Merchant; his manners are
polished to the last degree, his consideration for others
impeccable -- and he looks you in the face when he talks to you.
His honesty is unmistakable -- he speaks out the truth, but never
crudely. His charm, like his cricket, has its roots in a
tranquility which runs deeper than the level of "temperament."
--------------------------
Offie
>I would say fantastic. What a great 100 he scored in
>Delhi against the quartet in full flow in 1983. That
>was one hell of a knock. A very courageous batsman
>against express pace bowling.
>
>The bastion of Indian batting in 1986 in England
>and at home against the West Indies in 1987.
>Sundar Subramanian
Again, Iam not trying to make much of a case here. But, since this thread sort
of began with me defending DBV with nostalgic reminences of his courage, I
thought I would look up some figures of his career as well, and try and
understand why exactly I seemed to remember him so much better than some others
on rsc.
First, a quick glance at DBV's overall stats vs teams:
vs NZ, 11 tests, 440 runs, avg 27.50
vs WI, 25 tests, 1596 runs, avg 44.33
vs Eng, 26 tests, 1589 runs, avg 42.94
vs Aus, 24 tests, 1304 runs, avg 38.35
vs Pak, 22 tests, 1284 runs, avg 44.27
vs SL, 8 tests, 655 runs, avg 59.54
So, why do I recall DBV more fondly than some? I think, after looking at his
stats, that it is probably because his career can effectively be divided into 3
different sections.
Quick tangent: this is kind of like Gatting. I recall someone asking on here
why Gatting ever played for England, leave alone as many tests as he did -
after all, his overall stats were only mid 30s, and he got so many tests. And
someone responded that his career was basically in 3 parts. He was v poor
early, took 20 tests to get his first century, was almost finished as an
international cricketer before salvaging his career in India in 85/86. Then he
did v well for a while, averaged about 40 in the middle of his career,
captained England, was v successful. And then slid at the end - leaving his
career numbers in the mid 30s.
Obviously, this isnt an exact parallel with DBV :-) But in general, this is
kind of true for DBV as well - there do seem to be 3 distinct sections to his
career.
DBV made his debut for India when very young - he was only 19 years old when he
first played for India.
The first section of DBV's career was this - his first 14 tests, spread over a
2.5 year period. He did very poorly in this section - he played 13 of his first
14 tests abroad (only test in India was vs England in 76/77 - when he scored 9
runs in 2 innings). His record in this period was :
14 tests, 25 inns, 1 not out, 660 runs, avg 27.50. 0 tons, 3 50's.
(Even among these 14 tests, there is a bit of a split - the first 6 tests, he
avg 15.2 with no 50s. The next 8 tests - 3 in Pak and 5 in Australia - he avg
36 with 3 50s).
Then came the 2nd period of Vengsarkar's career - a very long, productive
period. I have come to the conclusion that this is why I personally thought
highly of him - it coincided almost exactly with the period when I was watching
all the cricket India played :-) I didnt see as much of his lean period before
78/79 as some of the older guys on rsc have - OTOH, Ive seen more of his best
period of the 80s until 87/88 than they have, probably :-) Which would explain
both their lower opinion of DBV, as well as my higher one :-)
This second period of Vengsarkar's career can be said to have begun vs WI in
India in 78/79 - this was the series when Vengsarkar finally got his first test
ton. And this lasted until 87/88 vs WI in India - that was when Vengskar was
rated the #1 batsman in the world by C&L for a period of 3 consecutive years.
He scored a magnificent ton vs WI in Calcutta in 87/88, and then broke his
hand. He was then suspended from *all* cricket for a period of 6 months by the
BCCI - not allowed to play international, first class, or even *club* cricket !
All this for writing a column in the newspaper during the series - something
that his opposite number as captain, Viv Richards, was already doing. (I still
remember DBV complaining in an interview that he wasnt even being allowed to
play the Kanga Leagues in Bombay due to the ban). He never scored another test
ton on his comeback from the ban.
This 2nd part of Vengskar's career lasted a long time - almost 10 years, and a
period of 84 tests. Over this period, Vengsarkar's record was as follows:
84 tests, 133 inns, 21 not outs, 5596 runs, avg 49.96. 17 tons, 27 50's.
That really is a pretty remarkable record, for almost a full decade.
He was consistently good for a long time in the 80's, and topped it off with a
truly purple patch when he hit his peak as a batsman - from the age of about 29
to 32 (as, I suppose, is common with most batsmen). His performances in this
period were as follows:
vs Aus in Aus, 85/86: 3 tests, 120 runs, avg 60.00
vs Eng in Eng, 86 : 3 tests, 360 runs, avg 90.00
vs Aus in Ind, 86/87: 2 tests, 186 runs, never out, no avg.
vs SL in Ind, 86/87: 3 tests, 376 runs, avg 125.33
vs Pak in Ind, 87/88: 5 tests, 404 runs, avg 67.33
vs WI in Ind, 87/88: 3 tests, 305 runs, avg 101.66
Over this purple patch, lasting a full 3 years, Vengsarkar's record was as
follows:
19 tests, 28 inns, 10 not outs, 1751 runs, avg 97.28
with 8 tons and 6 50s.
Thats not a half bad purple patch, actually :-) Vengsarkar was rated the #1
batsman by C&L for the entire 3 years of this period - still, I believe, the
longest period a single batsman has held the #1 postition (post Don :-)
(BTW, if one includes the 8 tests immediately preceding this "2nd period" of
DBV's career - ie the series in Pakistan and Australia in the 70s - if one does
that, then DBV's 2nd period is 92 tests, 6104 runs, avg 48.44. And this is too
long a period to be a "soft" period - I think about 44 or so tests were abroad,
including 11 in Australia, 11 in Pak, 5 in WI etc). Remember, this is over 6000
runs, and 92 tests - that is a longer period than Vishwanath's entire career,
for example ! It is a long time to be doing well over.
After this, Vengsarkar faded badly - the "3rd period" of his career. After
that enforced exile from the Indian side right after the WI tour to India in
which he had averaged 101.66, he never scored a century for India again. His
record in that last period of his career is as follows:
18 tests, 27 inns, 0 not outs, 612 runs, avg 22.67. 0 tons, 5 50's.
Which finally gave him the numbers he has - 6868 runs at 42.13 - good, solid
numbers, but which dont quite reflect his performances in at least the time I
watched him over :-)
Vengsarkar is a remarkably frank person, who always seems to state his mind. He
returned from the Australian trip in 92, and immediately scored 284 in the
Ranji Trophy quarterfinals - and announced his retirement from test and first
class cricket effective at the end of the domestic season (a maximum of another
3 matches) right then. Noted cricket writer Raju Bharatan tried to talk him out
of it - asking him to at least attempt to stay on for another 132 runs so he
could hit the 7000 mark. To which Vengskar responded as follows:
"I have had a very good innings, thank you. It is a great game, it has given me
both a name and fame. There is nothing now left to play for, I failed India in
Australia and that is it. Twice during the five Test matches in Australia,
first and Melbourne and then at Sydney, I got past the half-century stage, only
to fall, each time, when 54. That means I had not one but two chances to
convert a half-hundred into a ton - the latter a landmark that acts as its own
spur at Test level. I just cant comprehend how I failed to get to at least one
hundred when so well set twice.
What were my scores, did you say, in those five tests in Australia? The
sequence was, as you point out, 5 and 0; 23 and 54; then 54 again; next 13 and
4; and finally 1 and 4. Just 158 runs from 9 test innings ! That as a follow up
to 6710 runs from 176 innings in 111 tests. After 17 hundreds for India - not
one ton in Australia ! Thank you for furnishing me with all those figures, they
only reinforce my decision to call it quits !
"Nor am I reacting", went on Vengsarkar, " to just the tour of Australia in
deciding that this is it. The slide, to be honest, began in England in 1990,
during as sunny a summer as any we had there. The motivation for me to get my
fourth consecutive Test hundred at Lord's was very much there. And I had, at
Lord's now, not one but two innings, in which to get my target. In both innings
(52 and 35), I found that I fell just when I should have been taking command.
When there was the impetus, after that 50 (in the first innings), to get my
fourth successive ton at Lord's, I had no business to fail to go on to get a
hundred. In the second innings too, I was going well at 35 when I came to be
mindlessly dismissed. This kind of thing had not happened to me before. It
needed a very good ball to get me once I was into my 30s. But now I was
beginning to lose concentration when a century was there for the taking. And
what is loss of concentration if not loss of motivation when it occurs at a
"set" stage in your innings?"
---
Clearly, Vengskar judges himself harshly - probably about as harshly as many on
rsc judge him :-) I suppose in disagreeing with some of the arguments on rsc
Iam probably disagreeing with him as well - but I continue to disagree
nonetheless :-) I just find it very hard to forget those performances in the
80s - and I have rarely seen better or more couragous batting by anyone than
that demonstrated by Vengsarkar in those 3 years in the mid to late 80s, when
he was #1 in the C&L ratings.
Sadiq [ who enjoyed looking up those stats ] Yusuf
Sundarraman Subramanian
of...@aol.com (Offie) writes:
> First, a quick glance at DBV's overall stats vs teams:
>
> vs NZ, 11 tests, 440 runs, avg 27.50
> vs WI, 25 tests, 1596 runs, avg 44.33
> vs Eng, 26 tests, 1589 runs, avg 42.94
> vs Aus, 24 tests, 1304 runs, avg 38.35
> vs Pak, 22 tests, 1284 runs, avg 44.27
> vs SL, 8 tests, 655 runs, avg 59.54
>
Averages DO NOT do justice to the way DBV performed
against the Windies quartet, in 1986 in England, and
in 1987 against Patterson in India. Note that
he was instrumental for Indian winning the series
in England (ofcourse along with some good bowling).
During that time, he was THE BASTION of brittle
Indian batting, propping it up when it needed him
most, a la Vishy in the seventies. He was an
AMAZING batsman, never mind if his average is in the
low forties. There are too many explanatory variables
and other intangible factors that need to be taken
into account before judging a batsman's overall
greatness. For example, that 65 against a fearsome
Marshall in Kanpur is much better than his 157*
against Clarke and Phillip in 1978, IMO. Also, if
he had scored at least a 50 against the same Clarke
and Phillip in Madras in one inning, it would have
been a wonderful effort. Simply looking at averages
without adjusting for these covariates, is to me,
one dimensional.
<Stuff that I agree with deleted>
>
> This 2nd part of Vengskar's career lasted a long time - almost 10 years, and a
> period of 84 tests. Over this period, Vengsarkar's record was as follows:
>
> 84 tests, 133 inns, 21 not outs, 5596 runs, avg 49.96. 17 tons, 27 50's.
>
> That really is a pretty remarkable record, for almost a full decade.
Agreed, his record was remarkable. His second part coincided
with top class bowling the World had seen in some time.
> He was consistently good for a long time in the 80's, and topped it off with a
> truly purple patch when he hit his peak as a batsman - from the age of about 29
> to 32 (as, I suppose, is common with most batsmen). His performances in this
> period were as follows:
>
> vs Aus in Aus, 85/86: 3 tests, 120 runs, avg 60.00
> vs Eng in Eng, 86 : 3 tests, 360 runs, avg 90.00
> vs Aus in Ind, 86/87: 2 tests, 186 runs, never out, no avg.
> vs SL in Ind, 86/87: 3 tests, 376 runs, avg 125.33
> vs Pak in Ind, 87/88: 5 tests, 404 runs, avg 67.33
> vs WI in Ind, 87/88: 3 tests, 305 runs, avg 101.66
>
> Over this purple patch, lasting a full 3 years, Vengsarkar's record was as
> follows:
>
> 19 tests, 28 inns, 10 not outs, 1751 runs, avg 97.28
> with 8 tons and 6 50s.
>
> Thats not a half bad purple patch, actually :-) Vengsarkar was rated the #1
> batsman by C&L for the entire 3 years of this period - still, I believe, the
> longest period a single batsman has held the #1 postition (post Don :-)
>
There it is :-) I knew that was bound to be the case :-)
The above figures are mind boggling :-) I hope that SRT
and Dravid also have their purple patches in their late
twenties.
> including 11 in Australia, 11 in Pak, 5 in WI etc). Remember, this is over 6000
> runs, and 92 tests - that is a longer period than Vishwanath's entire career,
> for example ! It is a long time to be doing well over.
Is there any particular reason for bringing in Vishy here? :-)
DBV's figures talk for themselves, sure.
<Some good stuff deleted>
> Vengsarkar is a remarkably frank person, who always seems to state his mind. He
I remember him to be quite an introvert during his playing
days. Srikkanth enjoyed a good rapport with him, if I remember
right.
> nonetheless :-) I just find it very hard to forget those performances in the
> 80s - and I have rarely seen better or more couragous batting by anyone than
> that demonstrated by Vengsarkar in those 3 years in the mid to late 80s, when
> he was #1 in the C&L ratings.
>
> Sadiq [ who enjoyed looking up those stats ] Yusuf
Sundar [who enjoyed this good post] Subramanian
Subbarao G.S.S.
> >I would say fantastic. What a great 100 he scored in
> >Delhi against the quartet in full flow in 1983. That
> >was one hell of a knock. A very courageous batsman
> >against express pace bowling.
> >
> >The bastion of Indian batting in 1986 in England
> >and at home against the West Indies in 1987.
> >Sundar Subramanian
>
>
> Again, Iam not trying to make much of a case here. But, since this thread sort
> of began with me defending DBV with nostalgic reminences of his courage, I
> thought I would look up some figures of his career as well, and try and
> understand why exactly I seemed to remember him so much better than some others
> on rsc.
I enjoyed Sadiq's article thoroughly. Probably 84-87 was the period during
which DBV made a great impression on me as well. (I started watching
cricket only after India's WC victory.). I accept he is not a very good
batsman. But I will remember him for the following things:
elegance, courage and frankness.
-Subba
PS: Thanx Sadiq for reminding me of my first cricket hero's exploits.
R. Bharat Rao
Offie wrote:
> Anyway. Those 2 and SMG are the first 3 names I put down on my all-time India
> XI, so I consider all 3 equally great :-)
Hey, what about one Kapil Dev Nikhanj!!
Merchant and Hazare make my all-time XI (or are strong contender's at least), but
the first *TWO* name I put down are Gavaskar and Kapil Dev, not necessarily
in that order. The THIRD name I put down is Vinoo Mankad, India's third
greatest player, IMHO. (Not counting active players like Tendulkar, who by
the time his career is done will top this list).
My all-time Indian XI (using either Career value or Peak value)
Career/Peak [in 5 cases there is some difference]
Gavaskar
Sidhu/Merchant
Vinoo Mankad
Tendulkar
Hazare/Mohindar Amarnath
Azharuddin/Viswanath
Kirmani/Engineer
Kapil Dev
Srinath (OK, who's your second paceman, then? Ghavri??)
Bedi/Prasanna
Chandra
The incomparable Bishen Bedi misses out in the Peak XI,
because once Mankad plays, you need only two more spinners, and
Mankad-Pras-Chandra make a more balanced attack than Mankad-Bedi+1;
But I'm willing to be convinced otherwise, and would drop Prasanna for Bedi,
based just on career statistics.
Bharat
pbsa...@bluestone.com
Hi,
I do not know if my previous 4 attempts at posting to this thread
succeeded or not. If they did, i do apologise for taking extra
bandwidth.
Anyway, I want to jump into the discussion on Indian Legends
nominating these 7 players for starters from 1930s.
(DB Deodhar, KM Mistry, Duleep, Ranji have to wait).
CK Nayudu : The Father of Indian Cricket
Lala Amarnath : The Stormy Petrel
Merchant & Mushtaq : Prose & Poetry
Of course Thunder & Lightening ( Nasser & Amar Singh)
& DD Hindelkar.
I would start with deeds of an Indore born sportsman (not Dravid, his
spiritual grandfather).
CK played first class cricket for first time in 1919 with Cooch Behar 's XI
and graduated to quadrangular where he was a regular member of the Hindus
side. In 1926, he foiled a ploy by Hindu captain Vithal and saved a career
of a chap he had met for first time. ("Are you the ramaswamy of madras,
whatever happens, you are padding up to bat").
Ramaswamy scored a ton then and 14 years later was to add 73 in 48 minutes
with CK vs Voce & Farnes at their fastest.
In 1932, in face of stiff opposition from section of team , he lead with
dignity and saw a fledgling Indian XI to 11 first class wins under him.
Scored 1600 at 40 and bowled adequately.
in 1936, humiliated by previous patron and saw a trusted colleague send
home on trumped up charge, with skipper offering test caps to those who would
abuse him, he still averaged in 40s (he was 40 years of age),
his bowling drew admiration from certain Wally Hammond and coming at crucial
junction when 2nd test still could be lost added the said 73 in 48 minutes.
in 3rd test, with india facing innings defeat, hit on chest by an allen
bouncer which did'nt rise, he valiantly struck out for 2 hours scoring
86 in his swan song, on off , he lead india last time in 1939
vs ceylon and also lead an Indian XI to first win over international side
in 1931 when India defeated Ceylon ( Navle & Naomal added 150 for
opeing wicket.)
Still, colonel 's greatest achievemnt was in 26 when he blasted the MCC
attack for 11 sixes and scored 153 in even time.
Shunned by test authorities, returned home in 1946 (at age of 50)
to develop a Ranji side which went to next 6 ranji finals winning him trophy
3 times. retiring in 1953, he was called bya developing weak association
to lead them. At age of 62, he took the challenge and took them
(UP) to semifinals scoing 22 & 52 while taking 3 wickets in each innings
including those of Apte, Umrigar, Ramchand.
He defeated Indian snooker, billiards, chess champions of his time and
extended the squash champion, there is rumour that he beat the tennis champion
("Are you Ramaswamy of madras") once too.
His life long friend and compatriot DB Deodhar said that but for smoking which
caused his early death at age of 72 (DB himself scored a century in life:-)
he was the quintennsial sportsman.
The grateful Indians remember the Father of cricket with only statue ever put
up of a cricketer in India (prob. world)
Son was lala amarnath the punjabi prodigy whose 118 delighted the spectators
so much that rich ladies in member's stands showered jwellery on him
as he returned with his partner in crime a certain CK with whom he
added 184.
Next season saw him score 3 tons against Ryder 's Australians ,
including 144 in 4 hours for Moinud Dowla XI (the best representative side
of its times). Then he would score 3 more vs Tennyson 's including 2 in test
matches (low scoring) in 1937.
1936, he was heading the batting and bowling averages on english tour when he
was send back. He had recently scored 100 & 130 (India 184 all out)
and took 7 wickets vs Essex.?
in 1939-40, MCC 's chosen side for offical tour of india was far weaker than
Tennyson's XI and fate intervened in WWI.
Destroyed the jardine's services and lankans in war time when Australian
Services arrived lead by Hassett, boasting Miller et al.
After 2 tests, Amrnath bowled hassett 3 times in 3 innings.
in 3rd test,Lala started with 113 in 2 hours and 4 wickets to destroy
aussies and won india the test & series.
Russy mody helped too witha 203 :-)
In 1946, he was india 's primary bowler at age of 35, and despite
lumbago, india's reserve keepr, Nimablkar having injured himself.
in first test, took 5 wickets in only english innings.
in second test, took 5 wickets again starting with 4/13 spell which
accounted for Hutton, Washbrook, Hammond.
In second innings took another 3 of 5 to fall.
in 3rdt test, on spinning pitch, english only lost 3 wickets.
Lala took 13 of 28 english test wickets in that series.
he also scored runs in his imperious style and kept wickets on & off.
Ina match vs hampshire, with lot of time lost that hamp captain
had agreed to cancel innings intervals, he ran through side and bowled
last one , hamps automatically followed on and with next ball
he got the same batsman again, getting a batsman out in first class cricket
out twice within a minute.
Then when Merchant 's injury propelled him to skippership to Australia ,
he enjoyed a great tour not albiet in tests and his leadership skills were
commented on by Don himself.
He started off with 144 & 94* vs South Australia where india chasing
287 had simmered down to 16/4 when lala and mankad added 200 , india
finishing with 235/5
Or vs Victoria as lala walked into at score 0/3 (Hazare, Mankad, Adhikari)
and scored 228 out of 403 (6 indians scored ducks) , this innings was
chosen as Innings of 1948-61 period by Times of India for their 150th
celebrations.
Furthermore, Don enjoyed the strategic battles with lala (lala & he both send
tailenders to open at times in the series) and the spirit of friendship
in which the series took place.
Returning, he lead india out of 3 consec. positions of defeat to draw,
in calcutta took up the challenge of scoring 431 in a day and 110 minutes,
fates and dew conspired to rob him of 60 minutes on last day as India 66/0
overnight added 270 in 5 hours with he himself going hammer & tongs at 58*
when match was called off India 330/3.
Even in the final test, Indian keeper was injured and lala took up gloves ,
took 4 catches and set up victory target of 360, when both openers fell
cheaply on 4rth evening, he walked in very angry & furious (mushtaq ali
recalled later ) and smashed 37 runs in 28 balls , Modi, Hazare then took
over (both commenting on lala 's innings as inspiring) and with
8 down at 320 (rememeber keeper could not bat), Phadkar smashed windies
to reach 355 with windies delaying tactics like 6 drinks breaks &
keeper walcott dropping his gloves and runing to boundary to collect the ball
saving their bacon.
anyway, he got into a fight with management again to not included over next 2
years and then Vizzy making up with him, returned as Indian captain &
won the first offical series for India vs pakistan, himself starting the
ball rolling with 4 wickets in a furious spell (hanif, kardar et al)
at age of 42.
In second test, with india nearing defeat, (7 rookies in side),
he smashed fzal & khan mohammed to score unconquered 61.
retired from cricket, he was called back to lead india vs commonwealth xi
in 1957 age of 46 and lead india to win (this was to celebrate india 's
silver jublee in tests). Umrigar did good by 2 tons too.
retired soon after taking 4 wickets for 0 runs in Ranji in 1958.
Served as Indian chairman of selectors and trusted kenny and took a gamble in
Patel which saw one of the greatest indian wins all time at kanpur 1959.
of course, 2 of the sons added to the splendour of the name of Bhardwaj.
(Like KapilDev, his name is Amarnath, lala being a nick name, surname
is Bhardwaj)
Then we come to the holy ghost, Vijay Merchant
started with 19* & 67* vs jardine 's MCC who called him india 's solidest
bat, had precisely 23 first class matches when he went to UK where he played
23 more , scoring 1700 runs at 52. carrying bat in both innings of match etc.
with a 36 in first test (on a minefield), 114 adding 203 in 135 minutes
with Mushtaq india 368 runs behind or 52 in 3rd test.
He had a bad time vs tennyson's team scoring only 97 in 9 innings (captaincy
was not the problem, breakup with mentor LP Jai was the cause)
scored 137 & 36 vs wickramsinge 's ceylon but had another bad moment on death
of his buddy Amar Singh, he was 32. (amar & vijay named their first sons
after each other)
scored 200 (including 98 in a session) vs Jardine's services.
Hit 2 valiant tons to save 1st 2 tests includinga massive 155* vs australian
services, he was robbed of captaincy to england but played still scoring 2400
runs in 27 matches. including a marvellous 128 on wet wicket in 3rd test.
Injury forced him out of next two years of cricket.
On return, he lead india in first 2 test vs CXI when he got injured again,
Hazare took over winning 2 tests and scoring 675 runs.
He lead india vs second CXI and scored well and best was 107 on last day of
series on a horrible wicket.
In next test, scored 154 vs Howard's englishmen, in fielding, his injury
reoccured and he left test cricket for good.
His career spanned 18 years of which 6 were lost to war & 4 to injury.
In 1963, another blow in ICC ruling took place robbing him of test captaincy
record and cutting his career from 25 tests to mere 10.
Lala 's career too was cut by this ruling from 34 to 24 tests.
Their rivalry was legendary Merchant was later called unofficial captain of
india by lala but this not prevent him from giving chance to young Mohinder.
As selector this guy gave us Chauhan, Vishwanath, Mohinder Amarnath,
Solkar, Madan Lal & Gavaskar.
Not to mention his social work for various charities.
Vijay makes it to the list in a canter. (Also, the first indian cricketer
whose fame as cricketer fetched him a wife. Pratibha Merchant wrote to him in
1951 asking why he was'nt playing anymore and intrigued, Vijay met her &
rest is a bollywood tale:-).
3 other interesting stories :
when a certain lady delivered the first kiss on indian cricket ground to
a certain handsome debutant centurion in 1959, Merchant remarked
"what were the girls doing when i was scoring my tons."
Pat came the reply ( i think from lala), "Prob. asleep".
In 1949, Duleep was chairman of selectors and was roughed by crowd
(in calcutta ) demanding mushtaq be included in the indian side. Duleep
spotted Mushtaq smiling deviously in a corner. Mushtaq was included and
scored a ton.
1 year later, india chasing 261 on a difficult wicket and mushtaq was
retired due to finger injury and situation worsening, Duleep came into the
dressing room and gave a dresssing down to Mushtaq who went out, scored a ton
and india won by 3 wickets. He thanked Duleep for it. Next year, vizzy became
chairman of selectors and mushtaq played just one more test.
Thanking You
Pranshu B Saxena
T. Srinivasa Raghavan
Agree with you totally on Gavaskar and Kapil being at the very top of
the list. Here is mine (just going to change your post for convenience).
> Gavaskar
> Merchant (Would use Srikkanth for 1-dayers)
> Vinoo Mankad
> Tendulkar
> Hazare/Mohindar Amarnath
> Azharuddin/Viswanath (prefer Azhar due to fielding)
> Kirmani
> Kapil Dev
> Srinath (agreed)
> Bedi
> Chandra
Sundarraman Subramanian
"T. Srinivasa Raghavan" <tsra...@ix.netcom.com> writes:
My all time Indian XI will have
Vishy, Kaps, SRT, SMG, SMHK, Javags and Chandra
(in no particular order).
The other positions can be filled in as appropriate with
particular attention being given to DBV, Jimmy and Azhar.
Sundar Subramanian
Oracle
Sundarraman Subramanian wrote:
>
> "T. Srinivasa Raghavan" <tsra...@ix.netcom.com> writes:
>
> My all time Indian XI will have
>
> Vishy, Kaps, SRT, SMG, SMHK, Javags and Chandra
> (in no particular order).
M:: Mankad (Vinoo), though did not have the statistics, does merit a
mention for any Indian line-up. I agree that SMHK is the greatest keeper
ever to play for India (ahead of Mongia who is also pretty impressive
with keeping as well as batting)
My XI
Merchant
Gavaskar
Hazare (Dravid???)
Mohinder
SRT
Mankad
Kapil
SMHKirmani
Srinath
Venkat(Average didn't do justice to him)
Chandra/Kumbles
Regards,
M
>
> The other positions can be filled in as appropriate with
> particular attention being given to DBV, Jimmy and Azhar.
>
> Sundar Subramanian
--
From Conan O'Brien's "In the year 2000"
Light will slow its speed down from 186,000 miles per second to three
miles per second. But that'll still be enough to kick sound's ass
A real-life angel will be born in Louisiana. Unfortunately, his parents
will sell him to the carnival where he'll be billed as "Ringhead, the
Hideous Bird Boy."
John Glenn's record as the oldest man in space will be broken when an
exploding amplifier sends Keith Richards hurtling into the stratosphere.
Mail : ma...@wam.umd 'dot' edu
Oracle
pbsa...@bluestone.com wrote:
<a very interesting article appreciated, snipped>
> 3 other interesting stories :
> when a certain lady delivered the first kiss on indian cricket ground to
> a certain handsome debutant centurion in 1959, Merchant remarked
> "what were the girls doing when i was scoring my tons."
> Pat came the reply ( i think from lala), "Prob. asleep".
M:: Was it Abbas Ali Baig? I thought he scored his only century in
England! In fact, he has said that his greatest cricketing moment was
the smooch (source: unknown! sportstar??). I am not sure if we are
talking about the same event.
Regards,
M
Offie
>I do not know if my previous 4 attempts at posting to this thread
>succeeded or not. If they did, i do apologise for taking extra
>bandwidth.
>
They didnt - but this one did. Thanks for it - very interesting post.
>Anyway, I want to jump into the discussion on Indian Legends
>nominating these 7 players for starters from 1930s.
>(DB Deodhar, KM Mistry, Duleep, Ranji have to wait).
>
>CK Nayudu : The Father of Indian Cricket
>Lala Amarnath : The Stormy Petrel
>Merchant & Mushtaq : Prose & Poetry
>
Glad someone mentioned all these players. Of these, I personally have only
Merchant in my all-time XI myself - for tests, of course :-) For ODIs, I
suppose Lala would have been perfect - maybe even ahead of his son.
>
>Son was lala amarnath the punjabi prodigy whose 118 delighted the spectators
>In 1946, he was india 's primary bowler at age of 35, and despite
>lumbago, india's reserve keepr, Nimablkar having injured himself.
>
>in first test, took 5 wickets in only english innings.
>in second test, took 5 wickets again starting with 4/13 spell which
>accounted for Hutton, Washbrook, Hammond.
>In second innings took another 3 of 5 to fall.
>in 3rdt test, on spinning pitch, english only lost 3 wickets.
>Lala took 13 of 28 english test wickets in that series.
>
>he also scored runs in his imperious style and kept wickets on & off.
>
More descriptions from Arlott of this tour of 1946 - thanks again to Ramaswamy
:-)
------------------
L. Amarnath
Merely by seeing him walk you knew he was an athlete: he might have
been a footballer or a boxer, moving with the rhythmic jaunty
certainty that springs from the close mental and muscular sympathy
of the born games player.
He was jaunty with the jauntiness of certainty, not of cocksureness.
"I'll tell you in July if I'm going to get my 100 wickets," he said
to me in early June. By July he realised that he would neither take
a 100 wickets nor complete a 1000 runs. He accepted this fact
philosophically, although he knew that, in India, great things were
expected of him as one of the two greatest figures in Indian cricket
of the past decade (Merchant is the other).
Whereas many of his teammates has strokes in common almost to the
last detail, it was only necessary to see Amarnath play one ball to
identify him. Sometimes he would play a purely defensive stroke with
a complete follow-through, a moment later he would drive a ball for
four with no follow-through at all. Always he played extremely late
in defence, conveying the impression of time to spare. No innings
played by him could be uninteresting because his active mind never
allowed him to make an automatic response to any ball.
It was as a bowler that Amarnath impressed most on this 1946 tour.
There was no more accurate bowler in England, probably not in the
world. More than once he bowled with a silly mid-on, 2 short legs,
2 slips, gully and silly mid-off, while the wicket-keeper stood
close to complete 3 parts of the circle round the batsman, Amarnath
himself following through to almost close the ring -- and only 2
men, mid-on and cover-point, outside the tight circle. In the game
at Taunton, Harold Gimblett whom, through a long spell, Amarnath had
tied down as few bowlers can do, said "Don't you ever bowl a
half-volley?" "Oh yes," said Amar, "I bowled one in 1940."
It was difficult to see that he ever bowled a bad ball. With a
short, four-stride run-up, he delivered on a trip so that he
appeared to bowl off his wrong foot. The arm curved, the wrist was
loose, the ball barely arced at about medium pace -- faster than it
looked from the ring. His stock ball was the in-swinger, swinging
very late, so late that the batsman was forced to wait anxiously
lest it came through straight or lest, even more disconcertingly, it
was his cut leg-break. This delivery, pitching on the leg stump and
hitting the top of the middle-and-off, he bowled with an action
almost indistinguishable from his in-swinger: it was with it that he
clean bowled a well-set Hammond in the Test match at Lord's. Like
Mankad, Amarnath finished an over very quickly but he never bowled
automatically: there was thought behind every ball, faultless length
above all. He would redden a patch the sie of a soup-plate on the
wicket with his immaculate pitching of the new ball on the length
spot. Something of his accuracy is reflected in his bowling figures
which show that more than 36 percent of the overs he bowled were
maidens and that an average of less than 2 runs per over
was scored off him.
Some critics have attempted to argue from these figures and the fact
that he took only 56 wickets on the tour that Amarnath "bowled the
batsman in." This is a view to which no one who played with or
against him, or who had watched him closely, would subscribe. had
all the catches offered from his bowling been taken he would have
taken more than a hundred wickets; the catches were often sharp ones
but first-class close fielders would have taken them. It was
Amarnath's ill fortune that he had no such fieldmen to support him.
Again Amarnath was so accurate, so subtly varied, that few batsmen
dared take liberties with him; he forced most of them completely on
the defensive. Often, as when he bowled to P.A. Gibb in the Lord's
Test, to Jack Davies and Arthur Fagg at Canterbury, he morally
bowled batsmen out 2 or 3 times in an over, and little short catches
flew from the edge of a half-hyponitized dead bat to scurry past his
fieldmen; it was then that one appreciated his superlative
excellence. Runs might be scored from his bowling but aggression
against him was impossible.
A man of exceptional strength of character, it was impossible to
remain indifferent to him; all who met him reacted violently. As a
raconteur, explosive with gesture, laughter implicit in every part
of his body, he was magnificent. Under all lay the cold thought and
the strength.
------------------------
Sadiq [ ah, the good old days ] Yusuf
Offie
>> 3 other interesting stories :
>> when a certain lady delivered the first kiss on indian cricket ground to
>> a certain handsome debutant centurion in 1959, Merchant remarked
>> "what were the girls doing when i was scoring my tons."
>> Pat came the reply ( i think from lala), "Prob. asleep".
>
>M:: Was it Abbas Ali Baig? I thought he scored his only century in
>England! In fact, he has said that his greatest cricketing moment was
>the smooch (source: unknown! sportstar??). I am not sure if we are
>talking about the same event.
>
Actually, the person who made that statement, as far as I recall, was the one
and only AFST (AFS Talyarkhan), who was commentating with Merchant at the time.
And it *was* Abbas Ali Baig, in Brabourne stadium, but not after his ton. India
was struggling to save a test vs Australia, and on the last day Abbas Ali Baig
scored an unbeaten 50. It was when he reached his 50 that a woman ran out to
the middle and kissed him.
This incident led many many years later to one of the better cricket-related
passages you'll ever see in fiction - in Salman Rushdie's "The Moor's Last
Sigh" - where the mother of the hero of the story is one of India's greatest
painters, and is inspired by this incident to paint the famous piece entitled
"The Kissing of Abbas Ali Baig". In the story, this painting leads to protests
and riots 30 years later in the religiously charged political atmosphere of
Bombay in the 1980's :-) (for those who might follow politics in India - this
was a remarkable piece of prescience from Rushdie. Because, a year later, there
was a protest against MF Hussain's painting, for reasons that, while not
exactly the same, were indeed sort of similar and had to do with religion and
politics).
Sadiq [ who read it twice, and plans on another read real soon ] Yusuf
>Regards,
>M
Ramaswamy
On 12 May 1998 01:21:44 GMT of...@aol.com (Offie) wrote:
>>> 3 other interesting stories :
>>> when a certain lady delivered the first kiss on indian cricket ground to
>>> a certain handsome debutant centurion in 1959, Merchant remarked
>>> "what were the girls doing when i was scoring my tons."
>>> Pat came the reply ( i think from lala), "Prob. asleep".
>>
>>M:: Was it Abbas Ali Baig? I thought he scored his only century in
>>England! In fact, he has said that his greatest cricketing moment was
>>the smooch (source: unknown! sportstar??). I am not sure if we are
>>talking about the same event.
>>
>
>Actually, the person who made that statement, as far as I recall, was the one
>and only AFST (AFS Talyarkhan), who was commentating with Merchant at the time.
It was...
>And it *was* Abbas Ali Baig, in Brabourne stadium, but not after his ton. India
>was struggling to save a test vs Australia, and on the last day Abbas Ali Baig
>scored an unbeaten 50. It was when he reached his 50 that a woman ran out to
>the middle and kissed him.
As I recall it was his 2nd 50 of that Test, Contractor having scored 108
in the first innings. It was one of those dour partnerships needed to
save the test, with Kenny who ended up a 50 too. The kiss was in fact a
peck on the cheek, unusual nevertheless -- I think it was part of a bet.
>This incident led many many years later to one of the better cricket-related
>passages you'll ever see in fiction - in Salman Rushdie's "The Moor's Last
>Sigh" - where the mother of the hero of the story is one of India's greatest
>painters, and is inspired by this incident to paint the famous piece entitled
>"The Kissing of Abbas Ali Baig". In the story, this painting leads to protests
>and riots 30 years later in the religiously charged political atmosphere of
>Bombay in the 1980's :-) (for those who might follow politics in India - this
>was a remarkable piece of prescience from Rushdie. Because, a year later, there
>was a protest against MF Hussain's painting, for reasons that, while not
>exactly the same, were indeed sort of similar and had to do with religion and
>politics).
Interesting. And nothing about the I.S.Johar venture anywhere, eh?
Cheers,
Ramaswamy
Ramaswamy
On 10 May 1998 05:03:10 GMT of...@aol.com (Offie) wrote:
>Sadiq [ who still recalls the Arlott comments on Merchant ] Yusuf
>
>----------
>
>Hah ! I found the comments of Arlott on Merchant !! Thanks to Ramaswamy, from
>many years ago :-)
Ah yes, the Arlott commentary. I don't consider him given to hyperbole,
but I was struck by a line in his profile of Merchant in "100 Greatest
Batsmen" --
"... his movements seemed soft but heavy-footed. He was, however,
perfect in footwork, had a sharp eye, and, especially off the back foot,
he was a heavy scorer; he cut square and late, hooked with utter safety
and drove off his legs skillfully. He was, too, an absolutely infallible
punisher of the loose ball, putting it away for four as certainly as
anyone except, perhaps, Don Bradman."
The last I heard, the other Vijay was doing well for an 83 year-old; the
last him he played, at 75, he managed a 50 in a friendly.
Cheers,
Ramaswamy