phantom005

I just watched a very boring but interesting test played between england vs india at mumbai.
Might had been a fixed match, played on a dead pitch wicket. A slow turner made it look good cricket. Indian spinners bowled some good spin bowling, but england's alistair cookies batsmen should had played better. Some fielders of england seemed to me like part time tall tourists. Indian batsmen too performed very badly signifying the degrading years of modern cricket. I checked that monty panesar did received the 'Wisden Cricketeer of the year award' from nowhere. He did took many wickets of indians. Mr swann was impressive in his off-spin bowling taking his wicket tally to 200.
I wonder why fast bowlers can't take wickets on dead wickets!!! I think any batsman should've had scored 300 runs then!

phantom005

England surprisingly won the third test against india. This test match should have been a draw! I remember the days when steve waugh was about to retire from cricket and he was too having difficulties while batting. So atleast sachin tendulkar should had scored 50 runs!?

Or maybe since years have passed and most of the teams have included new players in their side. So sachin tendulkar might be feeling indifferent playing with new comers, where he finds unsuitably no game and wouldn't like to succeed either!

phantom005

There have been many wonderfull batsmen who played their own game. I studied imran khan's book about batting and he has discussed most of the basic strokeplay which is played in modern cricket. Such batting skills were displayed by even sachin tendulkar throughout his career. But all batsmen batting skills are not alike. Many show unorthodox batting techniques but still become successful. So in my view there are very few batsmen who play perfect batting technique, other than imran khan, sachin tendulkar...as i think perhaps hansie cronje, nasser hussain, graham gooch, brian lara (left handed), steve waugh. Many would say mark waugh should be reckoned as best stroke playing batsman, but i feel his batting too seems unorthodox. Might be that mark waugh and batsmen like daryl cullinan could be categorized as semi-orthodox batsmen. Batting is not learnt in a coaching club, many batsmen learn batting all by themselves they just improvise. Just a unorthodox batsmen hitting a big six or making a hundred doesn't makes him world class!
So typically bowlers can be many in the world, but batsmen who correct their own batting styles are very few. I like to watch michael artherton english batting instead, if people say cricket was first played in england, then i can assume his batting style to be orthodox!!???
Cricket could be ranked even by judging the batting...
1) England.
2) Australia.
3) Pakistan.
4) India.
5) West Indies.
6) South Africa.
7) New Zealand.
8) Zimbabwe.
9) Sri Lanka.
Michael Atherton 108 vs South Africa 2nd test 1999/00 - YouTube

In the ongoing test series of england vs india, indian spinners bowl loop deliveries towards middle-leg of english batsmen!! So my querry is why don't england batsmen tend to work the ball towards the leg side / off side instead of hitting on the up??? The pitch even looks short.

phantom005

Oh! england has won the test series against india.
In 1993 england cricket team who had played test series against india seemed very energetic athletic cricketeers. Like as if england team were like USA cricket 93' team!

phantom005

T20 match between england vs india.
England played new seam bowlers who bowled good line and length taking many wickets. England team has new faces thin tall players who all look alike. Their fielding is also good and strokeplay is also fine. England cricket could improvise as a cool cricket team for the future. Just that other teams like sa, nz, australia...etc should also play good cricket.
While indian cricket lacks bowlers, even medium pace bowlers who could take wickets.