Print

Please post once and this message will disappear! Introduce yourself, say hello, jump into a discussion...

[keep-it-cool]

...if symonds were an indian, ppl would be calling him an old, senile maharathi by now, clinging on to his place, and ask for his ouster - coz he is pushing 32!

Nope .. not if he still had an average of 48 AND a strike rate approaching 100 AND was as excellent at running between the wickets AND as brilliant a fielder as he is now.

Of course ... whether he would have had the incentive to be all of the above after 5 odd years of being worshipped as a God AND making truckloads of money through endorsements AND the knowledge that he is almost untouchable as far as selection matters are concerned (assuming he was picked in the first place) is open to question.

[pipsqueak]

...if symonds were an indian, ppl would be calling him an old, senile maharathi by now, clinging on to his place, and ask for his ouster - coz he is pushing 32!

Nope .. not if he still had an average of 48 AND a strike rate approaching 100 AND was as excellent at running between the wickets AND as brilliant a fielder as he is now.

Of course ... whether he would have had the incentive to be all of the above after 5 odd years of being worshipped as a God AND making truckloads of money through endorsements AND the knowledge that he is almost untouchable as far as selection matters are concerned (assuming he was picked in the first place) is open to question.

pssst..haven't you read enough posts asking for SRT's head on this DG despite his scintillating show in England? not just his form, his character(selfish, plays for the sponsors blah, blah AND blah) hasn't been spared either!

.....the "youth movement" in full swing!

[keep-it-cool]

...if symonds were an indian, ppl would be calling him an old, senile maharathi by now, clinging on to his place, and ask for his ouster - coz he is pushing 32!

Nope .. not if he still had an average of 48 AND a strike rate approaching 100 AND was as excellent at running between the wickets AND as brilliant a fielder as he is now.

Of course ... whether he would have had the incentive to be all of the above after 5 odd years of being worshipped as a God AND making truckloads of money through endorsements AND the knowledge that he is almost untouchable as far as selection matters are concerned (assuming he was picked in the first place) is open to question.

pssst..haven't you read enough posts asking for SRT's head on this DG despite his scintillating show in England? not just his form, his character(selfish, plays for the sponsors blah, blah AND blah) hasn't been spared either!

.....the "youth movement" in full swing!

well ... i guess those perils do exist ... another reason why Symonds may actually be better off being non Indian

[arjun]

LET ME REPEAT AGAIN FOR WHATEVER IT IS WORTH

Ganguly did not play ODIs for more than a year, SRT also missed a lot of matches during the period because of injury. Where were our Symonds hiding then?

Where was the real Symonds hiding when he averaged 23 in his first 56 ODIs??

True. Now how many matches Australia lost during that period? Had they lost as many matches as India did do you think they would have still persisted with a Symonds of 23 average?

[keep-it-cool]

LET ME REPEAT AGAIN FOR WHATEVER IT IS WORTH

Ganguly did not play ODIs for more than a year, SRT also missed a lot of matches during the period because of injury. Where were our Symonds hiding then?

Where was the real Symonds hiding when he averaged 23 in his first 56 ODIs??

True. Now how many matches Australia lost during that period? Had they lost as many matches as India did do you think they would have still persisted with a Symonds of 23 average?

Difficult to say, but my sense is that they would have. The Aussies have been in a similar situation earlier - around the time that Waugh made his debut. If you read Waugh's autobiography, he's clearly outlined how the selectors, captain and coach were thinking at that time .. that irrespective of how they fared in the immediate matches, their focus would purely be on getting the right kind of players in the team.

The related question is - with all seniors in the team, India went out in the first round of the WC; lost an ODI series against England and is currently trailing against Australia. The only series won recently is a 2-1 victory over SA. So, to what end are we delaying the transition?

[LosingNow]

LET ME REPEAT AGAIN FOR WHATEVER IT IS WORTH

Ganguly did not play ODIs for more than a year, SRT also missed a lot of matches during the period because of injury. Where were our Symonds hiding then?

Where was the real Symonds hiding when he averaged 23 in his first 56 ODIs??

True. Now how many matches Australia lost during that period? Had they lost as many matches as India did do you think they would have still persisted with a Symonds of 23 average?

Difficult to say, but my sense is that they would have. The Aussies have been in a similar situation earlier - around the time that Waugh made his debut. If you read Waugh's autobiography, he's clearly outlined how the selectors, captain and coach were thinking at that time .. that irrespective of how they fared in the immediate matches, their focus would purely be on getting the right kind of players in the team.

The related question is - with all seniors in the team, India went out in the first round of the WC; lost an ODI series against England and is currently trailing against Australia. The only series won recently is a 2-1 victory over SA. So, to what end are we delaying the transition?

We are maximizing our chances to win!!!

In the meantime, enjoy the scintillating batting performances.
--
BTW, what is with these during game injuries that show up on the field after batting for 20 overs. . Today it is the groin, yesterday it was the hamstring.. tomorrow it will be the back.. etc etc. Funnily enough they are always "minor" that recover between games but somehow flare up during the game.

[Cover Point]

LET ME REPEAT AGAIN FOR WHATEVER IT IS WORTH

Ganguly did not play ODIs for more than a year, SRT also missed a lot of matches during the period because of injury. Where were our Symonds hiding then?

Where was the real Symonds hiding when he averaged 23 in his first 56 ODIs??

True. Now how many matches Australia lost during that period? Had they lost as many matches as India did do you think they would have still persisted with a Symonds of 23 average?

Difficult to say, but my sense is that they would have. The Aussies have been in a similar situation earlier - around the time that Waugh made his debut. If you read Waugh's autobiography, he's clearly outlined how the selectors, captain and coach were thinking at that time .. that irrespective of how they fared in the immediate matches, their focus would purely be on getting the right kind of players in the team.

The related question is - with all seniors in the team, India went out in the first round of the WC; lost an ODI series against England and is currently trailing against Australia. The only series won recently is a 2-1 victory over SA. So, to what end are we delaying the transition?

We are maximizing our chances to win!!!

In the meantime, enjoy the scintillating batting performances.
--
BTW, what is with these during game injuries that show up on the field after batting for 20 overs. . Today it is the groin, yesterday it was the hamstring.. tomorrow it will be the back.. etc etc. Funnily enough they are always "minor" that recover between games but somehow flare up during the game.

Its called playing injured because you desperately want to cling on to your spot and are worried that a youngster may actually capture that spot!

[justforkix]

Nice 

Diff in avg between waugh and symo is 9

Diff in avg between RD and GG is 9
Diff in avg between SG and RU is 7

As Sivaji would say COOOOOOUUUL   

Wrong, you did not see the minnow adjusted figures did you ?

difference in average between RD & GG is 18+
difference between SG and GG would be 20

And difference between RU and SRT is 10+

COOOOOOUUUL  indeed!!

Anyways, you missed the point of the post didnt you ?

On a different note, ODI players averaging 32 are dime a dozen, ODI players averaging 40+ are rarer. The difference of 8 between Symmo and Waugh is easier to breach than the one between 32 -40. Think about that unless of course in your world, Waugh is comparable as an ODI player to SRT / SG /RD and RU / GG are Symmo in waiting.

Nope. my post was more in jest than anything else. I guess we both know where we stand on this

[Cover Point]

Nice 

Diff in avg between waugh and symo is 9

Diff in avg between RD and GG is 9
Diff in avg between SG and RU is 7

As Sivaji would say COOOOOOUUUL   

Wrong, you did not see the minnow adjusted figures did you ?

difference in average between RD & GG is 18+
difference between SG and GG would be 20

And difference between RU and SRT is 10+

COOOOOOUUUL  indeed!!

Anyways, you missed the point of the post didnt you ?

On a different note, ODI players averaging 32 are dime a dozen, ODI players averaging 40+ are rarer. The difference of 8 between Symmo and Waugh is easier to breach than the one between 32 -40. Think about that unless of course in your world, Waugh is comparable as an ODI player to SRT / SG /RD and RU / GG are Symmo in waiting.

Very interesting. So it means it is ok to 'minnow adjust' the figures ONLY when it suits the communal argument. OK message received

[prfsr]

Would he have replaced a Maharathi (like Steve Waugh) in the WC?

Symonds stats before WC2003 (matches, innings, not outs, runs, highest, average, centuries, fifties)

54  38  6   762  68*  23.81   0   2

But he did!

 

The simple answer you want: No.

What is your point (if any) here?

-P

[inoc]

I am not entering the debate with regards to AS replacing SW.

Some facts regarding the figures that have been posted.

1. SWs average is unusually bolstered by a large number of ‘NOT OUTS’.
e.g SW has 58 NO in 288 innings, while, say SRT has 37 in 389 innings.

2. His overall average hasn’t been lowered by his ‘early years’ they have been virtually the same all through his career with the occasional dips, particularly in the years he did not manage to remain unbeaten that many times.

   
3. the year he retired he averaged 31.17. his average the two years before this were better but again the NOs have to be taken into account.



Year   M   Inns   NO   50s   100s   HS   Runs   Avg
1986   23   19   5   4   0   81   514   36.71
1987   24   24   8   2   0   *83   581   36.31
1988   15   12   2   2   0   68   327   32.7
1989   18   16   4   1   0   *53   377   31.42
1990   22   19   5   1   0   64   326   23.29
1991   14   12   5   1   0   *65   217   31
1992   18   15   2   1   0   55   280   21.54
1993   17   16   3   1   0   64   365   28.08
1994   24   22   4   5   0   86   620   34.44
1995   10   10   1   1   0   58   245   27.22
1996   21   21   3   7   1   *102   777   43.17
1997   19   19   1   4   0   91   471   26.17
1998   24   21   1   4   0   71   586   29.3
1999   27   22   4   3   1   *120   634   35.22
2000   23   20   6   3   1   *114   577   41.21
2001   18   13   3   4   0   79   485   48.5
2002    8     7    1    1    0    62    187    31.17

[justforkix]

Inoc: Nothing to do with the topic,but just your post. Why must not-outs be taken into account ?!? lower order players get less no. of overs to bat, a disadvantage compared to top order batsmen, while comparing averages. This is somewhat compensated by them having more number of not-outs than top order batters. The not-outs are either because the match is won or the 50 overs are up or the batsman is left stranded and te team is all out.

PS: Are you Teddy 

[gouravk]

Hehe ... exactly what I was going to say TEDDY ALERT !!! 

[inoc]

Inoc: Nothing to do with the topic,but just your post. Why must not-outs be taken into account ?!? lower order players get less no. of overs to bat, a disadvantage compared to top order batsmen, while comparing averages. This is somewhat compensated by them having more number of not-outs than top order batters. The not-outs are either because the match is won or the 50 overs are up or the batsman is left stranded and te team is all out.

PS: Are you Teddy 

i didnt say not outs shouldnt be taken into account but that they should be borne in mind since they form an important basis for calculating averages in cricket.

if you look at it another way the top order batsman have to face the new ball with attacking fields, no way of getting into stride with easy singles on offer. while the late order players often bat out overs in inconsequential situations, old ball, batting out on a well built platform.
there are advantages and disadvantages of both scenarios.

what you suggest make for a lower average for a later order batsman and i agree to that for average batsmen in that position, but an unusual number of not outs inflate the average to look like something which is not true. a per innings average in those two years for SW would be in the 29 and 37 respectively which would indicate respectability but not much more.

In case of quality batsmen in that position e.g. Bevan ,who came in one spot lower than SW and averaged 54, Hussey in more or less the same position averages 58 the reverse is true. they also have not outs to bolster the  average but then the average is usually more than a top order batsman of similar capability.

no i am not teddy.

[inoc]

KIC

In reply to two of your posts (part quoted)

Now, are you saying that a batsman should be dropped after one series (8 matches) especially when he has averaged 200 (50 counting the not outs as outs) in the previous series?

Especially when, of those matches, he
-did not bat in one
-was run out in another
-top scored in a low score in one (62 in 198) – the gangulyesqe effort
- second highest scorer in another
- was not out in another (22 in 19 balls)
- third highest scorer (second among batsmen; Brett Lee top scored)

I can see how “everyone would be baying for the blood” of selectors had this happened in India.

SG

- scored the highest in 4 innings
- the second highest in 2 innings
- the third highest in 5 innings

out of a total of 19 innings (11 out of 19) and we won 8 of the 11.

some are baying for his blood arent they?

The related question is - with all seniors in the team, India went out in the first round of the WC; lost an ODI series against England and is currently trailing against Australia. The only series won recently is a 2-1 victory over SA. So, to what end are we delaying the transition?

before your suggested sequence when one or more Maharathi was absent we lost

1-4 to WI
lost in malaysia
lost ICCCT at home
lost 0-4 to SA.

With the Maharathis in as you have pointed out but in more detail

won 3-1 WI
won 2-1 SL
Lost WC first round
won 2-1 SA
Lost 3-4 Eng (the poor team which just beat SL in SL)
Down 1-2 Aus.

Which run would you prefer? Of course a better performance in the WC was necessary but how long can be hold on to that.

PS this is not a post to say that we should hold on to the Maharathis but just an answer to yours.

[keep-it-cool]

Inoc, when talking about sequences (the second part of your post), why are you starting at the 1-4 loss to WI?

Lets look at the entire data

won 6-1 (SL)
won 2-2 (SA)
won 4-1 (Pak)
won 5-1 (England)
won 1-1 (Pak)
lost 1-4 to WI
lost in malaysia
lost ICCCT at home
lost 0-4 to SA.

followed by

won 3-1 WI
won 2-1 SL
Lost WC first round
Won 2-1 SA
Lost 3-4 Eng (the poor team which just beat SL in SL)
Down 1-4 Aus

I dont see any big difference in the results really. I wouldnt mind an inferior run provided that is because we are investing in building a team rather than stagnating.

As to the first part of your post, I dont get the point. I never said that no one should be asking for Waugh to be dropped, did I? I, in fact, support Waugh being dropped in favour of Symonds. That was just a response to CLR's post.

[Blwe_torch]

Inoc, when talking about sequences (the second part of your post), why are you starting at the 1-4 loss to WI?

Lets look at the entire data

won 6-1 (SL)
won 2-2 (SA)
won 4-1 (Pak)
won 5-1 (England)
won 1-1 (Pak)
lost 1-4 to WI
lost in malaysia
lost ICCCT at home
lost 0-4 to SA.

followed by

won 3-1 WI
won 2-1 SL
Lost WC first round
Won 2-1 SA
Lost 3-4 Eng (the poor team which just beat SL in SL)
Down 1-4 Aus

I dont see any big difference in the results really. I wouldnt mind an inferior run provided that is because we are investing in building a team rather than stagnating.

As to the first part of your post, I dont get the point. I never said that no one should be asking for Waugh to be dropped, did I? I, in fact, support Waugh being dropped in favour of Symonds. That was just a response to CLR's post.

Even GC believed so, but the pressure was too much for him to bear............had to abandon his experiment mid-way.

[keep-it-cool]

Would he have replaced a Maharathi (like Steve Waugh) in the WC?

Symonds stats before WC2003 (matches, innings, not outs, runs, highest, average, centuries, fifties)

54  38  6   762  68*  23.81   0   2

But he did!

 

The simple answer you want: No.

What answer I want is immaterial. But, the simple answer is the correct answer in my view.

What is your point (if any) here?

-P

a) its not all about stats
b) its not all about what is the best option short term

[Blwe_torch]

Would he have replaced a Maharathi (like Steve Waugh) in the WC?

Symonds stats before WC2003 (matches, innings, not outs, runs, highest, average, centuries, fifties)

54  38  6   762  68*  23.81   0   2

But he did!

 

The simple answer you want: No.

What answer I want is immaterial. But, the simple answer is the correct answer in my view.

What is your point (if any) here?

-P

a) its not all about stats
b) its not all about what is the best option short term

then what is it about..............whims and fancies or personal agendas?

[prfsr]

Would he have replaced a Maharathi (like Steve Waugh) in the WC?

Symonds stats before WC2003 (matches, innings, not outs, runs, highest, average, centuries, fifties)

54  38  6   762  68*  23.81   0   2

But he did!

 

The simple answer you want: No.

What answer I want is immaterial. But, the simple answer is the correct answer in my view.

What is your point (if any) here?

-P

a) its not all about stats
b) its not all about what is the best option short term

No it is not all about stats or the best short term option. However, the argument I think you are making is dangerous. Just because Atapattu/Symonds bloomed late, we should give every youngster that gets selected a long run. Given that one in x youngsters that are mediocre initially actually bloom into a star, how many youngsters will you take? Let's make the reasonable assumption x = 5; in reality x = 10 or 15, I think. So I submit that you cannot fill your team with such mediocrity (and I use this very generously -- remember Atapattu's initial scores). You do have to optimize for the medium term and afford one or at most two such youngsters in the XVI. Just like one invests in risky stocks ....
-P 

[keep-it-cool]

Would he have replaced a Maharathi (like Steve Waugh) in the WC?

Symonds stats before WC2003 (matches, innings, not outs, runs, highest, average, centuries, fifties)

54  38  6   762  68*  23.81   0   2

But he did!

 

The simple answer you want: No.

What answer I want is immaterial. But, the simple answer is the correct answer in my view.

What is your point (if any) here?

-P

a) its not all about stats
b) its not all about what is the best option short term

No it is not all about stats or the best short term option. However, the argument I think you are making is dangerous. Just because Atapattu/Symonds bloomed late, we should give every youngster that gets selected a long run. Given that one in x youngsters that are mediocre initially actually bloom into a star, how many youngsters will you take? Let's make the reasonable assumption x = 5; in reality x = 10 or 15, I think. So I submit that you cannot fill your team with such mediocrity (and I use this very generously -- remember Atapattu's initial scores). You do have to optimize for the medium term and afford one or at most two such youngsters in the XVI. Just like one invests in risky stocks ....
-P 

I agree .. Atapattu is another good example. And, I agree, it cannot be ad hoc. But I also think that we need an environment where a captain / coach / selector can back a hunch. Unfortunately, with so much focus on each and every result, we do not have such an environment. An Andrew Symonds would never have replaced Steve Waugh for a tournament such as the World Cup, were he Indian.