Re: whtever
by Subir Nag on Dec 07, 2009 02:56 PM
thanks for the interesting piece of information. i did not know boycott was an aussie. btw, why did he play for england then?
Re: whtever
by Subir Nag on Dec 07, 2009 02:56 PM
thanks for the interesting piece of information. i did not know boycott was an aussie. btw, why did he play for england then?
Michael Holding to Geoff Boycott, 1981. I saw what Boycott was doing at the Oval in London. Not moving his feet. He stood stiff when the first ball was bowled. In the third ball he got a stupid top edge and was out. Gavaskar was one and all technique. He was moving his feet most of the time. He left the Holding away swingers onetime. Holding him self was a vey good bowler. Even this morning I walked down from Oval cricket ground to the Underground station. The situation was lots of clouds, cool, little rainy like 1981. Mr.Varma
Re: TOP 10
by Varma on Aug 02, 2009 03:05 AM
According to James a West-Indian cricket wrier, “ take Kanhai as the high peak of West Indian cricketing development. West Indian cricketing had reached such a stage, that a fine cricketer could be adventuresome, and Kanhai was adventuresome…People felt that it was more than a mere description of how he batted; it was something characteristic of us as cricketers. They felt that it was not only a cricketing question, because Kanhai was an East Indian(Hindustani), and East Indians were still somewhat looked down upon by other people in the Caribbean. But I stated that here was a cricketer who was doing things that nobody else was doing, and I was very pleased when he became the captain of the West Indies side.” Writing critically about cricket and cricketers, or any cricket for that matter, is a difficult discipline. The investigation, the analysis, even the casual historical or sociological gossip about and great cricketer should deal with actual cricket, the way he bats or bowls or fields, does all or any of these. You may wander far from where you started, but unless you have your eyes constantly on the ball, in fact never take your eyes off it, you are soon not writing about cricket, but yourself (or other people) and psychological or literary responses to the game. This can be and has been done quite brilliantly, adding a little something to literature but practically nothing to cricket, as little as the story of Jack and the Beanstalk (a great tale) adds t
Technic is only one of the aspect of batting.Temprament,attitude, mental toughness and adaptaion are also significant for success of any batsman. In all these terms Gavaskar was a miles ahead to Boycott. He carried more burden and responsiblity on his shoulder compare to Boycott, as in those days India was not a great test team.There were very few batsman of calibre. He did not have the luxury of reasonable reliable batsmans as England had at that time with good fast bowling attack. Gavaskar performed his role commandbly and carried the burden of expectations to Fifteen years with success. Boycott can't even think about it threfore his comparison to Gavaskar is only a stunt and this is a habit of englishmen.
My clone here has made some lofty statements about technique or the lack of it.He is suggesting that Sehwag has less technique than the following though his record is better than all of them-Laxman,Vengsarkar,Amarnath and Gundappa Viswanath.He avoids answering my challenge to substantiate that.All we can say is that he seems to ahve a definition of his own for the term "technique"
Re: Nonsense!
by Sensei on Jul 29, 2009 03:06 PM
understand one thing... a 40 by chanderpaul and a 40 by hayden or sehwag has a big difference.... the stats are only suggestive.... they cant give you the real picture.. any innings of any significance by sehwag is purely diabolic... to the opponents....what sachin did in his peak for 1-2 years sehwag's been doing it for 8 years straight... and he is also majorly responsible for india's most significant wins in this decade.. along with rahul dravid..
Re: Re: Nonsense!
by Gaurav Kapoor on Jul 30, 2009 01:16 PM
u might not be aware that my dad is in the army!! and he is a colonel and i am proud of him!! he could have joined any big association and earned millions but yet he chose not to!!He had been asked to join many companies but he refused! why ? because he loves his country!! i have to stay away from my dad because he is posted here and there every now and then!!! while you are sleeping without any tension of getting invaded it is my dad and several other dads working out their away from their families protecting you guys!! My dad is an inspiration to me !!! he had chosen to serve his country over the millions he could have earned easily!! my grand father, now a retired army officer was their during the independence war!!! My dad has to go to mission aboard and in the country!!! every second passes and we are always thinking about him!! whether he is alive or not is he ok or not!!! if my dad had chosen earning millions we wouldn't be thinking about him every now and then he would be with us!! very occasionally do i get to meet him!! i lost my uncle in a war!! he was also in the army and he had served the country well!! but now he is gone trying to save the country!! he was shot in the chest and so bravely he took the bullets!! he gave his life and left his family!! we couldn't even identify the body it was so damaged!! then through DNA test did we get to identify his body!! now he rests in the soil that he has rightfully earned to call his own!! Mr Anurag am i still talking big!
