Author

Topic: ODI cricket and general cricketing discussion [self - mod] - page 1034. (Read 160828 times)

legendary
Activity: 3766
Merit: 1217
I am in favor of cricket inclusion in the Olympic but i would not be very excited if IOA dictating Indian cricket or BCCI (For Olympics) , they are worst kind of breed. I am afraid that they might try to propose or implement quota system in Olympic cricket team and bring more shitty politics on policies/selection etc. They (BCCI-IOA-NADA) are trying to work together tho so let's hope everything goes well.

I don't think that the BCCI needs to agree to the demands made by IOA, even if cricket becomes a part of the Olympics. We saw this during the 1998 Commonwealth Games, when cricket was included for the first time. The team selection and management was made by the BCCI, and only logistics and other formalities were done by the IOA. BCCI's main concern is about the loss of revenue and not about the administrative interference from the IOA. They believe that in case an additional global tournament occurs every 4 years, then it will lower the viewership of some of the ICC events.

Anyway, the current team at BCCI is much better than what we had earlier. Saurav Ganguly is a great administrator and he has done a lot of great reforms since he became the president of the BCCI. There are some political appointees, but they don't have any criminal background or links to match fixing, as was the case a few years ago.
legendary
Activity: 2184
Merit: 1540
When have you heard BCCI not opposing and agreeing to everything that comes on their way. People from within BCCI should support the move, there are ex cricketer like Sachin Tendulkar who want cricket to be part of the Olympics and.there are many others too. It will happen you have to wait till 2028.

Sachin's view on cricket being part of the Olympics- https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.outlookindia.com/website/amp/sports-news-sachin-tendulkar-wants-cricket-in-olympics-even-if-in-a-shorter-format/324136

Sachin is a legendary cricketer and he cares a lot about the future of the game. Participating in Olympic Games is like the biggest dream for any sports personality. But for people such as N Srinivasan and Sharad Pawar, the priorities are different. They don't have any emotional attachment with the sport of cricket and they are in the board only for their own vested interests. So they don't really care whether the popularity and globalization of cricket takes a hit or not.
I hope you guys are not expecting him to take any worthy post in ICC or BCCI. He's terrible administrator and might break emotionally or back down during any pressure situation. He's too soft or humble for any cutthroat competition as far as politics goes.

I am in favor of cricket inclusion in the Olympic but i would not be very excited if IOA dictating Indian cricket or BCCI (For Olympics) , they are worst kind of breed. I am afraid that they might try to propose or implement quota system in Olympic cricket team and bring more shitty politics on policies/selection etc. They (BCCI-IOA-NADA) are trying to work together tho so let's hope everything goes well.
sr. member
Activity: 1988
Merit: 453
When have you heard BCCI not opposing and agreeing to everything that comes on their way. People from within BCCI should support the move, there are ex cricketer like Sachin Tendulkar who want cricket to be part of the Olympics and.there are many others too. It will happen you have to wait till 2028.

Sachin's view on cricket being part of the Olympics- https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.outlookindia.com/website/amp/sports-news-sachin-tendulkar-wants-cricket-in-olympics-even-if-in-a-shorter-format/324136

Sachin is a legendary cricketer and he cares a lot about the future of the game. Participating in Olympic Games is like the biggest dream for any sports personality. But for people such as N Srinivasan and Sharad Pawar, the priorities are different. They don't have any emotional attachment with the sport of cricket and they are in the board only for their own vested interests. So they don't really care whether the popularity and globalization of cricket takes a hit or not.
hero member
Activity: 2156
Merit: 803
Top Crypto Casino
Inclusion of cricket in the Olympics will reduce their dominance over the ICC, so BCCI does not want cricket to be included in the Olympics. But cricket would have been more respected if it had been included in the Olympic games. There are a lot of people who still do not know anything about cricket. We should spread the game of cricket like football. The president of the ICC should think more about this issue.

BCCI has every reason to be worried. They are afraid that such a step will result in their subordination to the Indian Olympic Association (IOA). Right now BCCI is the most powerful sports body in India, and they don't want to lose that position. Last year, there was stiff opposition from the part of the BCCI, when the government asked them to agree to the terms proposed by the NADA (National Anti-Doping Agency). You can imagine what will be their reaction, if the government proposes them to work with the IOA.

When have you heard BCCI not opposing and agreeing to everything that comes on their way. People from within BCCI should support the move, there are ex cricketer like Sachin Tendulkar who want cricket to be part of the Olympics and.there are many others too. It will happen you have to wait till 2028.

Sachin's view on cricket being part of the Olympics- https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.outlookindia.com/website/amp/sports-news-sachin-tendulkar-wants-cricket-in-olympics-even-if-in-a-shorter-format/324136
sr. member
Activity: 1988
Merit: 453
Inclusion of cricket in the Olympics will reduce their dominance over the ICC, so BCCI does not want cricket to be included in the Olympics. But cricket would have been more respected if it had been included in the Olympic games. There are a lot of people who still do not know anything about cricket. We should spread the game of cricket like football. The president of the ICC should think more about this issue.

BCCI has every reason to be worried. They are afraid that such a step will result in their subordination to the Indian Olympic Association (IOA). Right now BCCI is the most powerful sports body in India, and they don't want to lose that position. Last year, there was stiff opposition from the part of the BCCI, when the government asked them to agree to the terms proposed by the NADA (National Anti-Doping Agency). You can imagine what will be their reaction, if the government proposes them to work with the IOA.
hero member
Activity: 2156
Merit: 803
Top Crypto Casino
As a cricket lover i would be very happy if i could watch cricket at the Olympic games. Almost all sports in theworld are in the Olympiv games. I don't know why the ICC havn't any interest in including cricket in the Olympics.

They probably don't want a global tournament in which they don't have much control. Previously, ECB and BCCI opposed the inclusion of cricket in Olympics, because they thought that it will have a negative impact on the viewership of the T20 World Cup. Also, the potential benefits will be directed towards the associate members, as they will get large increases in government funding. It goes against the Big 3 objective of limiting cricket to a handful of nations.

BTW, it was Shashank Manohar who showed an interest in including cricket in the Olympics. He is gone now and the power is back in the hands of those who are opposed to the globalization of cricket.
Inclusion of cricket in the Olympics will reduce their dominance over the ICC, so BCCI does not want cricket to be included in the Olympics. But cricket would have been more respected if it had been included in the Olympic games. There are a lot of people who still do not know anything about cricket. We should spread the game of cricket like football. The president of the ICC should think more about this issue.
T20 format is the only format that can increase the fan following of cricket and also encourage other countries to adopt it. I did read that cricket might get included in 2028 Olympics.

I am not sure whether it will happen or not but if at all it happens it surely create a huge buzz and other countries will surely start adopting it.
legendary
Activity: 3766
Merit: 1217
As a cricket lover i would be very happy if i could watch cricket at the Olympic games. Almost all sports in theworld are in the Olympiv games. I don't know why the ICC havn't any interest in including cricket in the Olympics.

They probably don't want a global tournament in which they don't have much control. Previously, ECB and BCCI opposed the inclusion of cricket in Olympics, because they thought that it will have a negative impact on the viewership of the T20 World Cup. Also, the potential benefits will be directed towards the associate members, as they will get large increases in government funding. It goes against the Big 3 objective of limiting cricket to a handful of nations.

BTW, it was Shashank Manohar who showed an interest in including cricket in the Olympics. He is gone now and the power is back in the hands of those who are opposed to the globalization of cricket.
sr. member
Activity: 1988
Merit: 453
There is some disappointing piece of news from the ICC.

https://emergingcricket.com/news/ec-podcast/olympics-not-an-immediate-priority-says-icc-global-development-head/

According to the William Glenwright (ICC Head of Global Development), the plans to include cricket within Olympic games have been shelved. Earlier, there were half-hearted efforts from the ICC to include it in the 2028 Olympics. The Associate nations have reacted angrily, saying that they would have received government funding worth millions of USD every year, if cricket becomes an Olympic sports.
legendary
Activity: 2184
Merit: 1540
Couple of updates on the World Cricket.

-England planning to tour Pakistan for the White ball cricket soon (2021)
-WI vs NZ Test tour coming up soon. (Nov)
-SA hosting England for White ball cricket, just waiting for Gov's permission (Nov-Dec)

@JSRAW normally I do trust your posts when it comes to cricket, but this time I had to google it to make sure that England were actually planning to go and play in Pakistan. Furthermore I’m also hoping that England don’t send their B team to play otherwise it’ll be another dull series, hence do you really feel that England’s top player’s will be ready to travel and play in Pakistan?.

Source:

https://www.skysports.com/cricket/news/12123/12105116/england-considering-invitation-to-tour-pakistan-in-early-2021
This proposed white ball tour schedule at around same time as their Subcontinent tour (India tour) so i doubt if they are going to send their B team. As far as security is concern, if PCB providing them top notch security and Covid Bio secure bubble then they should visit there with out any doubt. As simple as that.
hero member
Activity: 2646
Merit: 686
Couple of updates on the World Cricket.

-England planning to tour Pakistan for the White ball cricket soon (2021)
-WI vs NZ Test tour coming up soon. (Nov)
-SA hosting England for White ball cricket, just waiting for Gov's permission (Nov-Dec)

@JSRAW normally I do trust your posts when it comes to cricket, but this time I had to google it to make sure that England were actually planning to go and play in Pakistan. Furthermore I’m also hoping that England don’t send their B team to play otherwise it’ll be another dull series, hence do you really feel that England’s top player’s will be ready to travel and play in Pakistan?.

Source:

https://www.skysports.com/cricket/news/12123/12105116/england-considering-invitation-to-tour-pakistan-in-early-2021
legendary
Activity: 2184
Merit: 1540
Couple of updates on the World Cricket.

-England planning to tour Pakistan for the White ball cricket soon (2021)
-WI vs NZ Test tour coming up soon. (Nov)
-SA hosting England for White ball cricket, just waiting for Gov's permission (Nov-Dec)
member
Activity: 966
Merit: 11
FRX: Ferocious Alpha

I would definitely say that the current situation is much better than what we had 10-20 years ago. Now even if one or two of the bowlers are injured, plenty of replacements are available. Previously that was not the case. There were quality replacements available for the batsmen, but there was not enough depth available in the pace bowling department. Check India's performance when Zaheer was out injured. 

I am not saying that the situation is not better than before.  Of course, India has improved a lot in pace bowling than before.  But this too, exactly ten or fifteen years ago, India's pace attack was not so bad.  When Zaheer Khan got injured, he was replaced by Ashish Nehra, Praveen Kumar and Munaf Patel.  But yes, now India's pace attack is much more than before.  World class players like Bumrah are now in the Indian team.  Some more emerging players are being created.  Among them Navadwip Saini, Prasid Krishna, Joydev Unadkat, Tushar Deshpande, Mohammad Siraj are some of them.  And there is no need to talk about Bhubaneswar Kumar and Mohammad Sami separately.  They are also one of the best bowlers in India.  They are also world-class bowlers.
hero member
Activity: 2646
Merit: 686
I could not agree with you because the Indian team still has world class bowlers.  Some bowlers have been injured after playing cricket for some time and this is the reason why there is a shortage of bowlers in the Indian team from time to time.  Do you think Zaheer Khan is not a world class bowler?  Irfan Pathan was not a world class bowler?  Harbhajan Singh Anil Kumble Aren't they world class bowlers?  And now Jaspreet Bhomra, Bhubaneswar Kumar, they are definitely world class players.  With Jubendra Chahal Kuldeep Yadav they are there.

I would definitely say that the current situation is much better than what we had 10-20 years ago. Now even if one or two of the bowlers are injured, plenty of replacements are available. Previously that was not the case. There were quality replacements available for the batsmen, but there was not enough depth available in the pace bowling department. Check India's performance when Zaheer was out injured.  

@Vishnu.Reang earlier the team management was happy to rely on few individuals only, and therefore others never got a chance to get into the Indian team hence there were limited bowlers only. However under Ms Dhoni’s captaincy this changed, and it’s due his vision that the Indian team managed to create a very strong squad for all the formats.

Sources:

https://cricket.yahoo.net/news/4-captaincy-decisions-taken-ms-135952013

https://www.quora.com/What-are-best-changes-made-by-a-MS-dhoni-in-Indian-cricket-team

sr. member
Activity: 1988
Merit: 453
I could not agree with you because the Indian team still has world class bowlers.  Some bowlers have been injured after playing cricket for some time and this is the reason why there is a shortage of bowlers in the Indian team from time to time.  Do you think Zaheer Khan is not a world class bowler?  Irfan Pathan was not a world class bowler?  Harbhajan Singh Anil Kumble Aren't they world class bowlers?  And now Jaspreet Bhomra, Bhubaneswar Kumar, they are definitely world class players.  With Jubendra Chahal Kuldeep Yadav they are there.

I would definitely say that the current situation is much better than what we had 10-20 years ago. Now even if one or two of the bowlers are injured, plenty of replacements are available. Previously that was not the case. There were quality replacements available for the batsmen, but there was not enough depth available in the pace bowling department. Check India's performance when Zaheer was out injured. 
legendary
Activity: 3766
Merit: 1217
I could not agree with you because the Indian team still has world class bowlers.  Some bowlers have been injured after playing cricket for some time and this is the reason why there is a shortage of bowlers in the Indian team from time to time.  Do you think Zaheer Khan is not a world class bowler?  Irfan Pathan was not a world class bowler?  Harbhajan Singh Anil Kumble Aren't they world class bowlers?  And now Jaspreet Bhomra, Bhubaneswar Kumar, they are definitely world class players.  With Jubendra Chahal Kuldeep Yadav they are there.

Having one world class bowler, and having multiple world class bowlers is different. For sure Zaheer was of international class. But most of the time, he was supported by mediocre bowlers such as Tinu Yohannan, Ashish Nehra and Vikram Singh. Irfan Pathan was not exactly a world class bowler. He was good, but played only a few dozen test matches. So Zaheer had to take the sole responsibility of pace bowling, most of the times. The situation has changed now.
hero member
Activity: 2114
Merit: 619
The lack of match winning bowlers outside India was the main reason India had a terrible record outside India, India always had great batsman throughout history and India was always a great team in India on the strength of its spinners but over seas you need genuine pace or swing bowlers to pick wickets.

Back then no one really cared about the pace bowlers. For home test matches, India used to pick three spinners (in most cases, Kumble/Harbhajan/Murali Kartik) and just one pace bowler (usually Srinath, and later Zaheer Khan). Things started to change around 15 years ago, when more emphasis was given to winning matches abroad. During recent times, I have seen India going with 3 pace bowlers even for the home matches.

Asian country's pitch are more convenient for spinner bowler. They get some extra advantage. They can take some more wickets than pace bowlers. You will see that most of the successful bowlers of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka are spinners. It is foolish for them to have 3 pace bowlers in a home match. Because they do not have a good pace bowler like England and Australia and secondly the pitch is helpful for spinners.



I agree with you about the pitch thing that most of the pitches in subcontinent lack that extra bounce for pacers. But saying that subcontinent team don't have good pacers is absolutely wrong. Pakistan alone have a history of high quality pace bowlers whose list might be larger than that of Australia or England. some of whom even bowled faster than Aussies or english players even on Subcontinent pitches.
India too might not be able to compete with pakistan in terms of pace attack but have had some great pacers like Srinath and Zaheer khan in recent past. Moreover the pacers in the current team are incomparable even a name like Jasprit Bumrah is enough for comparison.
Moreover apart from test cricket the need for pace bowlers has actually changed today. Earlier work of pace bowlers were primarily about swinging with a new ball and reverse swinging with the old one. While now it's about protecting the team in the slog overs which is most important these days. That is why bowlers who are even not that good swingers of the ball yet are performing pretty good.
member
Activity: 966
Merit: 11
FRX: Ferocious Alpha
Quote

Few years back, the Indian team were only known for its batsmen. All the bowlers around the world fear from their strong batting line up but they lack quality bowling due to which they lost many matches. Current Indian team have improved in bowling too and now they have world class bowlers in their team.
I could not agree with you because the Indian team still has world class bowlers.  Some bowlers have been injured after playing cricket for some time and this is the reason why there is a shortage of bowlers in the Indian team from time to time.  Do you think Zaheer Khan is not a world class bowler?  Irfan Pathan was not a world class bowler?  Harbhajan Singh Anil Kumble Aren't they world class bowlers?  And now Jaspreet Bhomra, Bhubaneswar Kumar, they are definitely world class players.  With Jubendra Chahal Kuldeep Yadav they are there.
legendary
Activity: 3766
Merit: 1217
Back then no one really cared about the pace bowlers. For home test matches, India used to pick three spinners (in most cases, Kumble/Harbhajan/Murali Kartik) and just one pace bowler (usually Srinath, and later Zaheer Khan). Things started to change around 15 years ago, when more emphasis was given to winning matches abroad. During recent times, I have seen India going with 3 pace bowlers even for the home matches.
Asian country's pitch are more convenient for spinnr bowler . They get some extra advantage . They can take some more wickets than pace bowlers.You will see that most of the successful bowlers of India, Pakistan ,Bangladesh and Sri Lanka are spinners. It is foolish for them to have 3 pace bowlers  in a home match . Because they do not have a good pace bowler like England and Australia and secondly the pitch is helpful for spinners

Not all of the grounds. In India, there are grounds such as Mohali and Dharamshala, which offer enough support for the pace bowlers. Same can be said about some of the grounds in Pakistan and Dambulla ground in Sri Lanka. I was not claiming that India usually includes three pacers in all of their home matches. I was just saying that it has happened a few times. Usually India plays their home matches in turning tracks, as their main spinner (Ravichandran Ashwin) loses his venom in other type of surfaces.
legendary
Activity: 2884
Merit: 1115
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
The lack of match winning bowlers outside India was the main reason India had a terrible record outside India, India always had great batsman throughout history and India was always a great team in India on the strength of its spinners but over seas you need genuine pace or swing bowlers to pick wickets.

Back then no one really cared about the pace bowlers. For home test matches, India used to pick three spinners (in most cases, Kumble/Harbhajan/Murali Kartik) and just one pace bowler (usually Srinath, and later Zaheer Khan). Things started to change around 15 years ago, when more emphasis was given to winning matches abroad. During recent times, I have seen India going with 3 pace bowlers even for the home matches.

Asian country's pitch are more convenient for spinner bowler. They get some extra advantage. They can take some more wickets than pace bowlers. You will see that most of the successful bowlers of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka are spinners. It is foolish for them to have 3 pace bowlers in a home match. Because they do not have a good pace bowler like England and Australia and secondly the pitch is helpful for spinners.


legendary
Activity: 3766
Merit: 1217
The lack of match winning bowlers outside India was the main reason India had a terrible record outside India, India always had great batsman throughout history and India was always a great team in India on the strength of its spinners but over seas you need genuine pace or swing bowlers to pick wickets.

Back then no one really cared about the pace bowlers. For home test matches, India used to pick three spinners (in most cases, Kumble/Harbhajan/Murali Kartik) and just one pace bowler (usually Srinath, and later Zaheer Khan). Things started to change around 15 years ago, when more emphasis was given to winning matches abroad. During recent times, I have seen India going with 3 pace bowlers even for the home matches.
Jump to: